Acle B.N.P.

[D46]

54 minutes ago, VetChugger said:

There is the possibility that there are some among us who just can't be bothered to argue the toss! I only read this thread every few days now as it is not at all difficult to predict what will be here! Bored? You bet I am!

And yet until I posted that you said nothing 

[D46]

35 minutes ago, YnysMon said:

I’m bored too. Worse, I feel this thread, and others like it will put people off NBN. It’s just relentless. Same old. You are not doing yourselves any favours in potentially engaging new people in a serious topic. 

I don't understand why others can't have their say on what it's a serious subject .

Dozens of time theads get completely hijacked  by a certain few individuals but no one complains about that  .

Thing is that could just as easily turn people off .

 

[D46]

If certain people are bored there's an answer don't read the thread it's literally that easy .

I'll guarantee this thread is closely watched by the mod team who haven't intervened , so as much as it's a bit like a tennis match it can't be classed as outside of the rules , in all cases of 2 party's not agreeing there will be text etc such as on this thread that's human nature .

If people don't want to view it then don't look at it it's really that easy .

[ExSurveyor]

Not really adding anything new after 6 weeks and 43 pages, just splitting hairs and covering everything that has previously been posted.

[D46]

9 minutes ago, psychicsurveyor said:

Not really adding anything new after 6 weeks and 43 pages, just splitting hairs and covering everything that has previously been posted.

So why are you reading it then ??.

Incidentally some of the recently discussed information hadn't happened 6 weeks ago .

[grendel]

6 hours ago, batrabill said:

 

Yes.

 

Next question.

 

5 hours ago, batrabill said:

Great.

Lets carry on then.

 

Watch how a local business is trolled for trying a bit of promotion

 

 

now who is engaging in  - this is just tedious distraction activity.

I would expect posts on here to be to the point and contain comments of value, or new information followed by a couple of post discussing that, all i am seeing is the discussion being forced into pointless circular arguments and reiterations of the same points time after time. i bet if we looked at the posts and cleaned out all the pointless comments and such, this thread could be winnowed down to just a few pages of actual informative posts. sandford / section 62 is just a distraction from the original topic as are many side discussions, and yes I am as guilty as others of falling for these distractions and diversions that are just keeping this debate in the forefront of attention.

I think its time I backed out of the thread and just responded to posts relevant to the original topic.

perhaps the side topics and discussions should be split out to their own topics.

[Paladin]

1 hour ago, grendel said:

 

now who is engaging in  - this is just tedious distraction activity...

...perhaps the side topics and discussions should be split out to their own topics.

That’s an excellent idea. Then, perhaps, this thread could be kept on somewhere near the topic.

[batrabill]

I’m afraid I can’t agree that the unpleasant trolling of a local hotel is off topic at all. 

It’s the same issue as the signs. 

 

[Paladin]

21 minutes ago, batrabill said:

I’m afraid I can’t agree that the unpleasant trolling of a local hotel is off topic at all. 

It’s the same issue as the signs. 

 

If it’s the same issue, it isn’t trolling.  Nor is posting a genuine complaint.

“Trolling is defined as creating discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people by posting inflammatory or off-topic messages in an online community.”

[ChrisB]

What a business choses to adopt as it's corporate identity has no right to be commented on by those on here persuing an agenda. If I were the owner of the establishment I would not be happy. If companies thought the National Park Brand did not help promote them they would not use it.

Arguably the largest provider to Broads visitors and the one who would suffer the most when the navigation closes is more than happy to us the National Park Brand on the first page of their web site.

 

[Paladin]

11 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

What a business choses to adopt as it's corporate identity has no right to be commented on by those on here persuing an agenda. If I were the owner of the establishment I would not be happy. If companies thought the National Park Brand did not help promote them they would not use it.

Arguably the largest provider to Broads visitors and the one who would suffer the most when the navigation closes is more than happy to us the National Park Brand on the first page of their web site.

 

No right? Whatever happened to the right of freedom of expression?

[batrabill]

Gawd, I can’t be bothered to even get into a discussion on the definition of trolling, shall we just stick with “unpleasant”?

 

And Chrisb, I was wondering if anyone here, or on Protect The Broads we are not a National Park has the courage to take on Richardsons. 

My prediction - not a chance. But some hotel they don’t go to? Pile on! 

[rightsaidfred]

23 minutes ago, ChrisB said:

What a business choses to adopt as it's corporate identity has no right to be commented on by those on here persuing an agenda. If I were the owner of the establishment I would not be happy. If companies thought the National Park Brand did not help promote them they would not use it.

Arguably the largest provider to Broads visitors and the one who would suffer the most when the navigation closes is more than happy to us the National Park Brand on the first page of their web site.

 

We all know that advertisers use poetic license when promoting a product that doesn't mean they can do so and then remain above being taken to task over it, stick to the truth and no one will question it stray from it for what ever reason and you leave yourself open to criticism.

Fred

[batrabill]

5 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

We all know that advertisers use poetic license when promoting a product that doesn't mean they can do so and then remain above being taken to task over it, stick to the truth and no one will question it stray from it for what ever reason and you leave yourself open to criticism.

Fred

Mr Richardson is a member here. Are you going to take him to task?

[ChrisB]

18 minutes ago, Paladin said:

No right? Whatever happened to the right of freedom of expression?

I have no problem with freedom of expression. However I have a real problem when it becomes a "Snide" comment about a business using a legitimate marketing tool to further a few members vendetta against a man and the organisation he heads.

Sadly all I now see is: What was a forum of like minded boaters turning into a pressure group making mischief. Sadly the other stage, once the spiritual home of these protagonists has shrunk to such an extent that their venom has found a new home here. 

In the words of Forrest "That is all I have to say about that" but I think this forum is moving the wrong way onto melting ice.

[ExSurveyor]

Any commercial business using the tag line is surely using it for marketing.

[rightsaidfred]

3 minutes ago, batrabill said:

Mr Richardson is a member here. Are you going to take him to task?

As a poster in this thread I havn`t called any individual business or group out just stated the obvious and I doubt that admin would appreciate a sponsor being dragged into it on open forum, as for me personally if I was in a face to face conversation with him and the topic arose then yes I would discuss the subject.

This thread is about the BA misusing its authority placing what would appear to be illegal road signs in inappropriate places which as far as I am aware we are still awaiting a definitive answer on, all the attempts to distract attention from this are why the thread has dragged on.

Fred

[rightsaidfred]

14 minutes ago, psychicsurveyor said:

Any commercial business using the tag line is surely using it for marketing.

Just because its marketing is not a license to mislead.

Fred

[JennyMorgan]

Bill, wasn't it you, you naughty man, who revealed the identity of the hotel in question on this forum? I'd blocked out it's name so don't blame me!!

All that aside, until something new emerges, as it probably will:

 

[ExSurveyor]

37 minutes ago, rightsaidfred said:

Just because its marketing is not a license to mislead.

Fred

I can't see a better definition of marketing, that is the only use it has been approved for.

The use of it on street signs, in the area, is a different matter altogether.

[Paladin]

We're not allowed to.

1 hour ago, batrabill said:

Mr Richardson is a member here. Are you going to take him to task?

We're not allowed to. Contrary to the Tos.

But I think he would be able to confirm that he did receive some critical emails when the company started using the BNP expression, even though its use is compliant with the stated reason for the re-branding (marketing). But I think that may have been a bit before your time.

I can't quite see how wearing a pin badge for viewing by customers who have already arrived (presumably most having booked beforehand) can be seen in the same light as promotional 'literature' which seeks to encourage potential customers to 'buy' your product.

[Paladin]

1 hour ago, ChrisB said:

I have no problem with freedom of expression. However I have a real problem when it becomes a "Snide" comment about a business using a legitimate marketing tool to further a few members vendetta against a man and the organisation he heads.

Sadly all I now see is: What was a forum of like minded boaters turning into a pressure group making mischief. Sadly the other stage, once the spiritual home of these protagonists has shrunk to such an extent that their venom has found a new home here.

I am now totally confused. What have the posts made on the Protect the Broads FB page got to do with the members on here? I’m not a member of that group and rather resent the implication that I have made any snide comments. Who was it introduced the Norfolk Mead Hotel into this thread?

This is just one of 17 threads on here to which posts have been made in the last 48 hours. Plenty of other things to read and talk about, then.

[ChrisB]

Did I mention you. No

Did I mention Facebook, a platform I have never used. No

But if you think the hat fits!

[Paladin]

1 hour ago, ChrisB said:

Did I mention you. No

Did I mention Facebook, a platform I have never used. No

But if you think the hat fits!

My confusion deepens. batrabill posted a link to something that was happening on Facebook. Until that point, the premises in question had never been mentioned in this thread. You then post:

"What a business choses to adopt as it's corporate identity has no right to be commented on by those on here persuing an agenda. If I were the owner of the establishment I would not be happy."

Followed by:

"I have no problem with freedom of expression. However I have a real problem when it becomes a "Snide" comment about a business using a legitimate marketing tool to further a few members vendetta against a man and the organisation he heads."

Perhaps you would explain precisely how the activities on Facebook have any connection with members on here? Even if those involved are members here, what they do elsewhere isn't, or shouldn't be, any concern of ours. And why should you suggest I, as a member here, am a part of that activity? If you’re not referring to me, to which members are you referring?

[ChrisB]

Paladin, why are you going on about facebook? 

My general observations are nothing to do with face book or what others have posted except for the comments about a business that is proud to use the NP logo for marketing and promotion.

There was a time when this sort of nasty, unhelpful dialogue was the preserve of "The Official" Broads outlet and this was a "Friendly" group of boaters. 

Sadly with Speakers Corner this is no longer the case, which, I for one find regrettable.

I hope that makes it clear, except for you I am pretty sure everyone else got it.

That is it, as far as I am concerned.