Wallace and Gromit

Dunno. I really liked the movie too, Jude. My kids loved it. We had to buy the book, too, natch.

Hmmm...so could I BBF and one of them was mine. So much for Tony's ideology of a censorship free forum eh? Some people just can't control themselves when given a bit of power and a button!

*sigh* no I'll cop to it. I put up a reply that I regretted, and then just decided that I regretted replying to the whole damn thing in the first place. It would have looked strange if you were making snide and unhelpful remarks to no-one, camus, so I did yours too.. So sorry. First time. Last time. Snark away if you want. Fire me. It wasn't about power; just about being sick of getting sniped at by various folks. It's hard to get tone of voice right in these posts; what I wrote in a joking way must have sounded like blowhard Yank to you, then I get the wrong end of the stick, then you do, etc.

I would have been quite capable of editing my post myself if I were so inclined, as for my remarks being 'snide and unhelpful' you're right, but then you are also right that they were in response to your air of superiority in reply to Jude. However I'm sure that if every editor deleted posts that they felt 'sniped' at them in some way then the forums would be pretty sparse, I'm also sure that on many occasions your posts has pissed folks off aplenty but no-one censored you did they?

It wasn't an 'air of superiority', dearie, but a joke, and I'm sure you're right about the rest of it. I own it, alrighty, and I'm sure I do piss plenty of people off. As I said, it was an impulse, and, a bit like heroin, something I've never intended to do. So sue me.

Sue you? Is there any point in sueing someone that works for a local council? Probably not...I suggest you take Tim's advice and get a grip. Dearie!

Fair enough, camus, fair enough. I'm working on the grip; had a bad day, obviously. Consider me chastened. Now, can we talk about Wallace and Gromit?

Archergirl's an editor? Posts are being deleted? Is this why the forums have been so quiet recently?

*did I miss something?* Twas the curse of the twitchy finger Jude.

i have spent sometime reading this discusion. i'm not really sure what happend. if an editor does not like what someone has said, should they not delete it? the internet can be a weird place, if someone was using bad language or saying bad things then they should get deleted i think. perhaps the edtior was trying to help you know? most forums are censored this way and i'm glad this one is too i don't want to read horrible things all day. so i think you should not jump to conclusions about why the edtior did this thing. takes guts i think.

Jon - anyone can edit their own posts.

And had you read clearly, Tim, you would see that there was, indeed, no 'censorship' intended, in any way; I don't believe in censorship; you will recall, maybe, that I was one of Jasper's most vocal (and maybe, only) defenders. No, my deletions didn't come out of an attempt to censor- it was a perhaps futile attempt to remove myself from what was likely to turn out to be a very nasty, sarcasm filled thread. I had had enough of snipping and sarcasm from other posters that day; I removed my snippy and sarcastic reply to a snippy and sarcastic reply; while I was at it, I deleted my -original- post, which some mistakenly felt to contain a holier-than-thou attitude (it didn't, but it's a cultural thing- nothing like self-confidence to piss a Brit off). Since that left the snippy, sarcastic reply to my orignal post dangling in the ether with no reference point, other than my name and some vitriol, I decided to spare others the questions that would raise, and deleted it as well. -Then- I attempted to steer the posts back to the orginal question, perhaps foolishly, by pretending my original posts (and nasty reply) never existed. It is a sad statement on the world and people's cynicism to assume that every time something is done, it is done maliciously, when that isn't always the case. But there are many people on this forum who seem to be the most bitter, cynical, unhappy people, and they just can't help but figure that everyone else out there should be, as well. And if they aren't, well, there are all sorts of attempts to either make them toe the line, or they are hounded off this forum, or are made subject to a constant battering of sarkiness. Surely that, in itself, is a form of censorship... As it is, Tony knows what I did; he makes the decisions, and if he decides that this was a malicious breach of trust on my part, I'll accept the consequences, as I don't want to dirty the water any more than it already has been. Thanks, ag

There is the whole question of 'trashing other people's posts' to contend with, Tim, as I read it, from you and from others. I'm simply stating my case. It's easy to target me, I think, because a) I'm mouthy, and b) I'm a Yank and c) I made a poor decision. And yes, thanks, it is slow today, mostly by choice.

"(it didn't, but it's a cultural thing- nothing like self-confidence to piss a Brit off)." "and b) I'm a Yank" We don't all judge people on where they come from. I happen to think self-confidence is a strong characteristic, but arrogance is a completely different ball game, though AG I am quick to point out that I don't see you as arrogant, so please don't start on me. Censorship is wrong, (I was wondering why my work hadn't been appearing on the discuus writing thread, must be the censoring, I thought it was just cause it was crap). Anyway back to censoring, it was obviously a mistake on your part that you seem sorry about. Lets all be friends, no matter what nationality, creed or religeon we are. Harry Kerdean

Er, can you read? Clearly not, or you're just reading what you want to out of it. Surely if anyone has a complaint, it's camus, but I think and hope she's moved on already, as I really meant her no ill will at all. You have nothing to do with it. Why are you still here, arguing away? Don't you have anything better to do than keep on milking this little snafu for everything it (isn't) worth? Hmm? I'm not playing a victim card. There -are- cultural differences, and personality differences, and communication style differences, etc. ad infinitum. I don't hide behind anything; I am, very obviously, who I am. Some like me, some don't. That's life. Really, enough now. Have a nice cup of tea. Calm down. Play with your kid. Or talk about Wallace and Gromit. Poor jude's enthusiastic thread has now been ruined by squabbling.

And sorry, Harry, that last post was directed to BBF, not you! I can assure you that work not appearing on a discussion thread has nothing to do with censorship; maybe just a few overworked editors with too much to do...ag

Suit yourself, love.

I was joking about my work being censored. Harry Kerdean

Ha ha! There, see...

Well, I missed all this due to house hunting this weekend.. sounds interesting. One thing I will say is that, while there have been a fair few posts of my own over time that I'd regretted after posting them (especially the one where I seemed - due to my own lack of word skills - to castigate fellow UEA scholars, when in fact I wouldn't dream of doing so) I wouldn't dream of taking them off. The main reason is that every time I provoke a reaction I didn't intend it teaches me to be more careful with my words. But, I don't know what went on here, so I can't really comment.

Oh and I loved that waving rabbit too... And how surreal was the Wallace/rabbit hybrid... really frightening, yet funny. And how can those model makers do so much with Gromit's eyebrows? He's the best actor in film today. I think he should be swapped in any film where Jude Law is the lead. Film Gold, that would be.

I think Ferg has a valid point there, putting aside the fact that Ag removed my post, (which incidentally I admit was sarcastic but was in no way nasty), I think that her admission to removing her own posts raises a few questions in itself about her ability to fulfill the role as editor fairly. I kept quiet yesterday, not because I had accepted the situation, but because I was shocked at the bickering between two editors especially as I felt that BBF was making a valid point rather than attacking for the sake of it...the only thing that I have left to say on the whole editorial thing is...no wonder Liana gave up and buggered off!

camus, why shouldn't I admit to removing my own posts? The post in question wasn't particularly nasty, and neither was yours; but I could see clearly that it would likely head in a direction I just didn't feel was either appropriate or was of any relation to jude's original post (and I agree about the Gromit- Jude Law substitution- he's rubbish). I have absolutely no interest in getting into a shit-fight with anyone on this site; I came here to improve my writing, and I have generally tried to avoid the snarky side of posts when I could. The fact that I removed my posts (and yours, too, camus, as a casualty) in no way reflects my abilities as a *volunteer* editor, or as a writer or reader or general poster, and I don't feel the need to defend myself and my abilities to anyone. As far as I'm concerned, the fact that people get overly upset about this or that post being removed is making a mountain out of molehill. Entire threads have been erased by the powers-that-be, when it was judged that the thread was moving in a direction not very conducive to inviting new writers to the site, and there have been several in the past few months who have come and gone due to the relentless bickering and nastiness that sometimes pervades these forums. Fergal, you were very unfairly attacked for the whole UEA thing, which I thought was just another stupid catfight caused by people who seem to enjoy taking umbrage to fairly innocuous comments, or take themselves way, WAY too seriously. I mean, this is a site for people honing their writing skills, isn't it, and not the Salman Rushdies of the world. Potential Salmans, maybe! The fact that people choose to leave the site after long service to it has nothing to do with me, and everything to do with them and the space they're in. There have been far, far worse goings-on on this site, far more abuse. This whole thing is stupidly unimportant in the big picture, and it's too bad that people get so caught up in the drama that they lose sight of that. And I loved Lady Hottentot's (or whatever her name was) hair! If I could wear a wig like that to work, I'm sure I'd be far more productive.

Slightly off the point but something that has jarred with me lately is around who the editors are. As far as I knew, according to the homepage, they are: Neil the Auditor Archergirl Fergal Chimpy No mention of Tim in there (not that I have any objection to him being an editor, in fact I would positively encourage it). I may have missed a thread or something (I've only been 'dipping' in and out recently), but I also was unaware that Liana had ever been made editor (again, no objections) or, indeed, had left (I hope that's not true). Enzo.. www.thedevilbetweenus.com

Enzo, up until this morning Tim was on the editorial page, I will leave him to explain if he feels the need to do so. Liana was indeed an editor, you probably never knew because she never felt the need to shout about it. I knew Liana a long time before I started using Abc myself, and I know that she lived and breathed this site, and it was down to her that I ever put pen to paper in the first place. In respect of reading recently added pages and flagging, commenting on work I feel that Liana was always completely fair and unbiased, she took Abc very seriously indeed. It is not for me to say why she has left the site, but left she has...like several other excellent writers and contributors before her, which in my eyes is a huge loss to all of us.

Liana had editorial freedom for quite a long time, apparently. I didn't know this, either, until I asked Tony. Tim was also recently given editorial access, I think.. I would personally prefer that they not go, as they are both well-read and talented people, and certainly contributed a great deal to the Discuss Writing from ABC forums. But people come and go from this site with regularity. Sometimes they come back later on, after a break. Your list is correct, Enzo, although Neil the Auditor is now neilmc. Chimpy only shows up occasionally, but we all do what we can when we have time, which is what Tony needs from us.

Yes, I know who Neil is..and I even know who Chimpy is, despite his very sporadic appearances. I have stopped posting my own work up, apart from a couple of bits that I don't really care about. It's hard to explain why, but I guess the bottom line is I felt that if the person who happened to read it liked me - BANG, cherry and comments galore - and if they didn't like me or know me there was nothing. And I see it in other pieces that get cherried too: the author's name is popular, the piece is average. That for me is not what it's about. Individual opinions are good, and are to be taken in context, but flagging becuase of the name of the author...that I am not so sure about. And if favouring was ever going on (and I'm NOT suggesting Liana, I'm just saying broadly), I'd like to know who was favouring who, and not have the editors kept 'secret'. I would suggest adding to the piece on the site which editor read it. Enzo.. www.thedevilbetweenus.com

I personally don't 'flag-by-author', as I (perhaps thankfully) don't know anyone personally on this site. I cherry what I like, whether other editors or writers consider it 'good' or not. I have a sorry tendency to flag up more poetry than stories; I have a short attention span, and some short stories, aren't very, but good writing is good writing whatever the format. The editors can see who's cherried who (that sounds rather pervy); I think the addition of an ' *editor* has cherrrypicked your story' in the cherrypicking robot' might not be a bad thing. I think fergal suggested this before.

I said 'personally' twice in one sentence. Great use of English, archergirl.

I think several good ideas have been suggested recently and then ignored not just that one Ag.

I'm quite sure Tony and Co are doing what they can, when they can. The site is a continual work in progress...it's not perfect, but nothing ever is.

Regardless, I'll still hang round the forums, but I'll await some changes in management of the way stories are flagged / cherried / commented on before I begin posting my own work again regularly. Look around the 'discuss' forum - there's rarely anything that actully gets fully discussed anymore and I think it's a shame. There's a load of new members that want people to comment on their work so flag up anything; and while I'm all in favour of as many worthy pieces as possible being flagged, I just don't feel that one comment saying 'Liked this' really adds any value. But that's a discussion that's been had over and over, so I'll leave it there. Enzo.. www.thedevilbetweenus.com

Tim - that's a shame. I didn't notice you'd been added, I must admit. I trust your opinion a lot, and losing you as an editor is clearly a loss to the site. I hope even if you're not editing you'll still be posting? Enzo.. www.thedevilbetweenus.com

Enzo, I think it's a real shame is you stop posting your work, as I have said several times before I really like your stories, My Brother Sebastian and That's what an owl would do are two of my favourite pieces (and pointed out to me by Liana I may add when I first joined.) I haven't actually ever noticed any flagging up of popular names, there have been times when I have thought 'christ that's shite' but have just put it down to the subjective nature of cherrying and flagging, after all we can't all like the same things.

Enzo, not every piece of work you submit will get cherried or even flagged up; that doesn't mean they aren't good, however some are probably stronger pieces than others. But you have to consider the sheer volume of work the editors have to read; some people (newbies, generally) bombard the site with, say, 20 poems or 7 short stories all at once. There is a real risk of editor/reader-burnout when that happens. That is not to say that the eds shouldn't or don't notice when a piece of work is really good, but I think that honestly, with the volume of work on here at the moment, the piece either has to be really extraordinarily good, or the editor doing the reading at that time (we're not all on here at the same time) has to have a personal affinity with it. It may not be entirely egalitarian, but it seems to me that that's how it works at the mo'.

Thanks for the compliment! Just for the record, I'm not trying to make a statement here, it's purely selfish; I don't think the current way this site works offers me much in terms of improving my work, so I've stopped posting it. As I've said to others in the past, if all you want is an online storage area (Jaques), then this isn't the place to be. Still, you've brought a smile Camus. Thanks. Haven't seen Wallace and Gromit. Enzo.. www.thedevilbetweenus.com

"Enzo, not every piece of work you submit will get cherried or even flagged up; that doesn't mean they aren't good, however some are probably stronger pieces than others. " I hope when you use 'you' you mean 'one'...'one submits'. I don't need a pep talk. If you thought I was bitter because someone didn't comment on my work, or flag it up, I've explained myself badly. What I am saying is, people's work is often flagged up arbitrarily, in order that the flagger can have their own work flagged. (overuse of 'flag', I know). Enzo.. www.thedevilbetweenus.com

I just screwed that up somewhere - the irony: Can someone delete all but one of those please? Enzo.. www.thedevilbetweenus.com

No, I meant 'you', but I also meant 'one'. I wasn't giving you a pep-talk, and I know what you meant. It is arbitrary, I suppose, the selection process. I've cherried some work which others doubtless felt was 'shite', as camus puts it; but cherries aren't intended just to go to the best of the best of the best, but to those writers who are showing improvement in their writing. What's the point of continually cherrying the same old excellent writers, who know their work is good, at the expense of those whose skills aren't so well-honed, but who are really trying to improve? Don't they deserve some accolades for their efforts, too, or is this an elitist site where only the finest get recognition? That wasn't my understanding of the editorial system.

That is so weird, I got logged out and my name still showed I was logged in. I posted a reply and it vanished...twice. Jude, what I said was something like, "Crikey, you mean you've only just seen the film? I saw it back in October in the States with my kids. They loved it, and I loved the sexual innuendos that were tucked in amongst the visual gags." This was misconstrued by some to be some kind of Yank-with-a-superiority-complex thing, which it absolutely wasn't. It was intended as a ribbing of the lateness of your viewing of this most excellent film. And that's how the whole blessed thing got started. I'm very sorry for diverting your thread to something completely unrelated! I *did* try to steer it back on course, but others weren't having it at that particular time. So here we are!

And seeing it back up here, it strikes me as just how very, very inane the whole episode really was...

Getting logged out: Same thing happened to me AG, that's why I ended up posting a message 6 times, I think. Enzo.. www.thedevilbetweenus.com

So much to answer and so little time. I am very sorry that Tim and Liana have chosen to depart - I hope it is only temporary. They have both contributed enormously to ABC over the years and I am very grateful to them. I do read most of the posts, I do listen to what you all say. We are constantly trying to upgrade the site and the way it works. It does cost time and money to run and those are both in short supply at the moment. In an ideal world I would have all sorts of different features on ABC but I have to rely on the goodwill of others to do stuff here and it often takes a long time for change to occur. As for the nature of the Editor's role and what does and does not get cherrypicked - that is and always will be subjective. Known names often find it harder to get a cherry than those who have just arrived. A cherry is not a hard and fast reward - it is given for 'improvement', 'interesting subject matter', 'fine writing' and many other reasons. Some days you just feel more generous than others. That is inevitable. We set out not to censor - and we have almost universally lived up to that. Posts do get erased when they are libellous or just plain very nasty but my attitude has always been that you are grown-ups and can sort out your differences in whatever way you choose. It isn't up to me to smack your bottoms and put you to bed. I didn't do that with my children so I'm not going to start with you! Maybe we could go back to having some fun and not treating every word as a matter of life and death.

I was sooo hoping for a smacked bottom, preferably with a stick of celery.

BBF or tc, don't walk away from the site. I'm fairly new but have always noticed your involvement in abc. Regarding the discuss writing forum I'm one of those guilty of probably just saying I liked this, I'm trying to say more but am not confident enough with my own work to critically analise other peoples, when I am I will. The reason I eneter the forums is because I like to try and get involved, (I have socialising difficulties and am clumsier in normal conversation so I'm just trying). If you go off I think it will bhe a huge loss to the site, that includes Enzo. How are people like myself going to improve without people like your encouragement. I was told about abctales years ago when I was starting to write, (I was in prison at the time and being encouraged by a few good people) and told it would be a way for me to improve. It is only recently I have had the confidence to post my work. It would be a shame if people went away. If the site's not as good as it used to be, then make it as good. Harry Kerdean