BBC DID privatise the forums!

[hatlady28]

In the spirit of curiosity I went and had a look at Digital Spy and the Strictly Come Dancing Facebook site. Now aside from not finding the sites nearly as nice as this one, I discovered something interesting. The thread set up for ITT on the Facebook site had this as its first post:

BBC Strictly Come Dancing Yes, good news everyone - Strictly's spin off show It Takes Two will be returning to our screens on Monday 4th October... right after the very first weekend of live shows! The fantabulous C.l.a.u.d.i.a Winkleman will once again be bringing you all of the very latest Strictly insider gossip, news and information. It's totally unmissable!

Why not use this thread to make suggestions for It Takes Two? C.l.a.u.d.i.a and the ITT production team will be regularly scanning this board and will be using suggestions and asking you on here for your questions and comments.

There were only 12 posts total on the thread......so I guess that isn't working very well for them?

But it does mean that the BBC did indeed privatise the forums by moving them to Facebook.

[Pink Pinot Girl]

In the spirit of curiosity I went and had a look at Digital Spy and the Strictly Come Dancing Facebook site. Now aside from not finding the sites nearly as nice as this one, I discovered something interesting. The thread set up for ITT on the Facebook site had this as its first post:

BBC Strictly Come Dancing Yes, good news everyone - Strictly's spin off show It Takes Two will be returning to our screens on Monday 4th October... right after the very first weekend of live shows! The fantabulous C.l.a.u.d.i.a Winkleman will once again be bringing you all of the very latest Strictly insider gossip, news and information. It's totally unmissable!

Why not use this thread to make suggestions for It Takes Two? C.l.a.u.d.i.a and the ITT production team will be regularly scanning this board and will be using suggestions and asking you on here for your questions and comments.

There were only 12 posts total on the thread......so I guess that isn't working very well for them?

But it does mean that the BBC did indeed privatise the forums by moving them to Facebook.

Interesting Hatlady. I don't understand enough about how the messageboards were financed - I know it was always used as an excuse to close them down though!

The cynic in me thinks that they found the SCD boards pretty much impossible to control over the last couple of years. There were SO many threads and some rather nasty stuff mixed up with the banter which could possibly have caused legal problems? I'm thinking specifically about the anti Alesha threads. I'm still missing them but I'm glad we've got this board.

[133-230-44039-18180-800]

I'm still missing them but I'm glad we've got this board.

How glad ?

[Pink Pinot Girl]

I'm still missing them but I'm glad we've got this board.

How glad ?

Not that glad so put it away.

[hatlady28]

PPG, there are a HUGE number of threads already on those sites, but no real "Table of Contents" that we have here and the Magic Twosome who kindly move things that start up in the wrong chapters. By the end of this SCD series, I imagine they are going to be pretty unwieldy.

[133-230-44039-18180-800]

Not that glad so put it away.

Pah. And I'd warmed the lube.

[David Tee]

PPG, there are a HUGE number of threads already on those sites, but no real "Table of Contents" that we have here and the Magic Twosome who kindly move things that start up in the wrong chapters. By the end of this SCD series, I imagine they are going to be pretty unwieldy.

The Magic Twosome? I think they're already unweildy. Unworldly too. Who are they?

[Mslightfoot]

I don't really understand much of any of this, but I did read somewhere on other, somebody suggesting that the boards had been infiltrated by the tabloids so that they could fire up unpleasant quotes that they could then lift and use in their articles, I presume it's a bit like money laundering, once somebody else has said it and you can identify that source you are as pure as the driven and have no liability, responsibility or accountability. Nice work if you can get it !

Anyway, I'm glad that this board has started up and I suppose we will all have to be vigilant in watching out for lazy tabloid scum or WUMs

[133-230-44039-18180-800]

Anyway, I'm glad that this board has started up and I suppose we will all have to be vigilant in watching out for lazy tabloid scum or WUMs

Nah - you just get on an post. Finding the stirrers and impostors i my job.


To be fair to the BBC they have had some pretty unpleasant times with message boards in the past, with all sort of loonies joining them. The old 5Live boards were regularly visited by people from the main political parties but became the target of a concerted BNP attack in 2005, as did the Today boards.

The worst of all however was the fiasco of the South Asian cricket forum which went in a direction that I suspect those thinking that last year's strictly forum was rude and aggressive would simply not believe. And in several languages too. That one made the international press so bad did it get.

[Mslightfoot]

I will relax then and leave it in your capable hands, feel better already, you don't do private sessions do you, apparently I may need some therapy in getting over my loathing of La Hardy, but it's early days and I haven't opened my supply of SCD wine I've been collecting since the show finished last year, maybe a glass or seven will make her a bit of a blur !

[David Tee]

It's understandable why the BBC didn't open the boards up this year. I can remember wondering that with all the flak they were getting last year whether they felt it was worth it. Obviously not. The shame is that there are good people, enjoying themselves, making friends etc. and the whole thing invariably gets railroaded by those either too gobby, rude or intransigent for their own good, or those with vested interests. And yes, I believe the media manipulate these things to suit themselves.

606 isn't much better, Numbers. I dipped a toe in the waters of discussing South Asian cricket some time back. Never, ever again. It was like walking out into a typhoon. Horrific.

[133-230-44039-18180-800]

606 isn't much better, Numbers. I dipped a toe in the waters of discussing South Asian cricket some time back. Never, ever again. It was like walking out into a typhoon. Horrific.

Compared to the old TMS boards 606 is a beacon of tolerance. I didn't get all the Urdu insults but I have enough Tamil to get the full force of some of them. My mum's a terrorist whore apparently, which will come as news to my Dad who had always thought that she was a teacher.

[fiftynotout]

I found the WUMs a nuisance last year and the vindictive posters just beneath contempt (they'd never be brave enough to say it to your face) but on the whole I just avoided them. It never occurred to me that the media might be exploiting the whole thing but then I'm pretty naive. All in all I suppose I'm just jolly glad I found this site and hope it doesn't degenerate.

[133-230-44039-18180-800]

I found the WUMs a nuisance last year and the vindictive posters just beneath contempt (they'd never be brave enough to say it to your face) but on the whole I just avoided them. It never occurred to me that the media might be exploiting the whole thing but then I'm pretty naive. All in all I suppose I'm just jolly glad I found this site and hope it doesn't degenerate.

It won't. Well it might but we should be on the case quickly.

I ha a particular dislike for the drive by stirrers last year who'd open up an argument and then bugger off, usually one that had already been put to bed.

[Pink Pinot Girl]

It won't. Well it might but we should be on the case quickly.

I ha a particular dislike for the drive by stirrers last year who'd open up an argument and then bugger off, usually one that had already been put to bed.

With added sm-il.ies to show how nice they were!

It's a fine balance I think - if we were all fluffy and told each other how gorgeous we were all day then I might back away slowly but likewise hardcore nastiness is upsetting.

[fiftynotout]

Morning (((PPG)))

There's a difference between a dis-agreement and an argument though isn't there. I might sometimes have a different opinion to you but because we're mature and reasonable we don't fall out over it. Some people seem to think that the only way to win an argument is to shout the loudest or hurl the biggest insults and are only happy if everybody agrees with their point of view.

So there! Wanna make something of it? Eh?

[Pink Pinot Girl]

Morning (((PPG)))

There's a difference between a dis-agreement and an argument though isn't there. I might sometimes have a different opinion to you but because we're mature and reasonable we don't fall out over it. Some people seem to think that the only way to win an argument is to shout the loudest or hurl the biggest insults and are only happy if everybody agrees with their point of view.

So there! Wanna make something of it? Eh?

Outside - now!

(((FNO)))

[fiftynotout]

You wouldn't hit an old lady - in glasses - would you?

(He he, not if my two Dobes were standing in front of me!)

[vonee21]

Scuse my ignorance - what are WUMS?

[Pink Pinot Girl]

Scuse my ignorance - what are WUMS?

Wind Up Merchants

[vonee21]

Scuse my ignorance - what are WUMS?

Wind Up Merchants

Thanks

[Inanna]

I don't really understand much of any of this, but I did read somewhere on other, somebody suggesting that the boards had been infiltrated by the tabloids so that they could fire up unpleasant quotes that they could then lift and use in their articles, I presume it's a bit like money laundering, once somebody else has said it and you can identify that source you are as pure as the driven and have no liability, responsibility or accountability. Nice work if you can get it !

Anyway, I'm glad that this board has started up and I suppose we will all have to be vigilant in watching out for lazy tabloid scum or WUMs

Cant remember which thread it was but yes....someone did admit to being from the press and was posting wind-ups so that they could get quotes to put in the papers and said that there was also another couple of posters doing the same thing........I started posting two years ago and there was soooooooo much nastiness towards Lisa & Rachel....when I asked other posters they said that this year was the first year that the boards had been so nasty....previous years the boards were really nice and friendly......and last year was just horrific

However I dont think it had anything to do with the cost or how hard the boards were to use....I personally think it was all that nastiness towards Alesha/Anto.n/Brucie everyone's favourite presenter Forsyth. So we can thank ALL those vicious people - who thought it was their right to bash Alesha (especially) on every aspect of her existance - for getting the boards closed down and ruining our fun...... ....I think some of your remember that there were relations of the celebs/judges posting over the past couple of years and I wouldnt be surprised if they had complained about it.

However got to agree this forum is great......and long may it continue

[dancingsunshinequeen]

I joined the beebs strictly forum in 2007 that was the year that Alesha & Matt won the series, with runners up Matt & I want to break free & in third place Gethin & Camilla.

I can tell you it got really nasty even back then. I supported all of the above couples, but my favourites were Matt & I want to break free to win, the under dogs because he had those moments of forgetting his next move & he'd slipped, but IMO I thought they had the chemistry & he really did learn to dance, having started as a complete non dancer

But I still supported the other two couples, but the Gethin group actually got at me, when I popped into his fan base to wish him & Camilla good luck for their dance. I was actually told to get back to my Matt & I want to break free thread & just go away...it was horrible.

Then the following year peeps got irate at Lisa & Brendan, really nasty towards her...then of course there was the anti John Sargeant...I didn't support John, but would never get at someone else who enjoyed him being on the show. The 'get Housewives choice out' debacle of last year. The anti feelings towards Brucie everyone's favourite presenter Forsyth Forsyth...the complaints about the way Tessa speaks, the moans about the Goddess Claudi all hail her name's hair...jeepers it went on & on

Thank goodness for this fab-u-lous forum, where people can post their comments, without the fear of being slammed in the back of the neck, for having an opinion...long may it remain a happy & friendly forum for all strictly fans

[hatlady28]

I love this forum.

Using Facebook means that the BBC can gather a HUGE amount of information about some of their audience. Think for a moment about all the stuff on a profile page. If a person becomes a "friend of Strictly", they are giving that material to the BBC. Their statistical people are having a field day! It costs them NOTHING. AND if it all gets nasty over there, the BBC can throw up their hands and say "Nothing to do with me mate"

After all the hooha of last year.....it is no wonder that the BBC have used this option

[RedShoes]

Hi,

On the say hello thread (can't rememember what it is called) I was asked if I posted on the BBC site before. I didn't because I was shocked to see there was so much nastiness, so I just lurked now and then. This seems a much better place, hope it stays that way. What I don't understand is why if the media wound up that site the same coud not happen here and why the BBC would not also look here to see how the audience is reacting? But as I say, I am new to all this.

[Sponsored content]