End of Nopesport?

[DaveK]

I'm also appalled at this as some sort of stated 'strategic' aim. I usually think that BO often gets an (unfairly) bad press on here (who/what is BO anyway?), but this type of statement makes me wonder .

Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells

[lucy]

Ya know how Darts just had the BDO and then along came the PDC well....................

[andypat]

"Revistalise" I could accept but close down... Jeez.

Speaking as someone who's in the past had to ban a couple of users from the SOA facebook page for issues that might have been acceptable to discuss on here, I dont really think they've thought that through.

Given that a lot of the stuff on here is critical of BOF do they really want that exposed to the general public on their own FB page?

Yes but they will be able to remove all that from their own page where as they don't have control over what is discussed here.

Yes but unless they employ someone full time to do it it's a hell of a job for a volunteer!

[DavidJ]

I am not sure that I have ever e-mailed Mike Hamilton before but this has changed that. I have just sent him a short e-mail expressing my concern. I hope others will as well.

[daffdy]

This thread would be an excellent example of why British Orienteering might seek a better online forum... We're on the second page of a thread [edit: actually I suppose we're exactly on topic, given the title of the thread, which is another point in itself...] about a document that's consumed countless hours, loads of effort and is full of pretty exciting things about the next few years of orienteering, and we're fixated on one small part of it.

Just about the only post about the other 50 or so points in the strategic plan is this one:

This is disgraceful, particularly re. Nopesport but also the disparaging remarks about 'volunteer resistance' as being a potential problem. Who the hell do these people think they are?

Which is an understandable response to a brief summary point about a fairly complex issue. If you drill down to the actual objectives it references, which are :

4.1 (Implement a formal recognition scheme for all volunteers to reward them and show that British Orienteering is appreciative of their efforts)

4.2 Introduce a consistent and simple training programme/ development pathway for all volunteers, supporting clubs in its delivery

4.3Establishment of a network of regional volunteer co-ordinators

You'll hopefully agree that 'resistance' in this case refers to things like, e.g. club officials thinking that members are so obligated to volunteer that they don't need to be valued or thanked, who might not embrace with open arms a British Orienteering scheme to value volunteers more. (It's definitely not a "those stupid members don't know what's good for them, how dare they resist us" sort of thing).

[lucy]

Yes I agree it's a pity its been spoilt by including an attack on its very own members who contribute so so much to the sport. Named that forum and told them you are going remove their platform and replace it with a second rate solution.

Nice way to recognise all those volunteers connected with nopesport.

[Mrs H]

....and exactly how does BOF intent to replace nopesport when it has no control or ownership of it?...........unless it proposes some Trumpesque type measures to bring that about. As I recall there was some kind of BOF membership forum and no one went there. Nopesport and the growth of urban orienteering (the two things are not unconnected obviously) are about the only things keeping the sport going!

(I bet these volunteer rewards will be certificates!)

[Scott]

Just about the only post about the other 50 or so points in the strategic plan is this one

That's a little unfair - I did say I thought the rest of the plan was pretty good - but in general if you put out a plan proposing that an online forum should be "removed", it's perhaps not entirely unpredictable that discussion on said forum will be particularly focused on that aspect of it.

I also think that having "resistance to change" highlighted as a risk is perfectly reasonable, although it could have been more diplomatically worded than

Member resistance to change may impede strategic objectives

[DM]

I'll be giving the document a thorough read tonight (doing some volunteering work today to maintain a POC) so that I can't be accused of making uninformed comments.

In the meantime, some comments/questions for Daffdy.

First. If a volunteer goes along to the EGM because they feel strongly about it and afterwards makes an offer of unpaid help with anything to ease the load on the central office and does not even get a reply or acknowledgement, do you think they will be rushing forward to volunteer again?? Is this what is meant by volunteer resistance.

Second. Mrs H is spot on, Nopesport is independent and survives because people see a need for it and continue using it. If BO introduce a replacement and it wins out on merit and responds to issues quickly then maybe it will by natural competition replace Nopesport. A side issue to this is that a forum run by a body that is often let's say being talked about, is prone to being censored with adverse comments being hidden, not good for open discussion.

Third. Is there any reason why 2 pages of minutes took 3 months to appear? Not very immediate is it?

[Electrocuted]

....and exactly how does BOF intent to replace nopesport when it has no control or ownership of it?...........unless it proposes some Trumpesque type measures to bring that about. As I recall there was some kind of BOF membership forum and no one went there. Nopesport and the growth of urban orienteering (the two things are not unconnected obviously) are about the only things keeping the sport going!

(I bet these volunteer rewards will be certificates!)

T-shirts are suggested with milestones on them like parkrun.

[Electrocuted]

"Revistalise" I could accept but close down... Jeez.

Speaking as someone who's in the past had to ban a couple of users from the SOA facebook page for issues that might have been acceptable to discuss on here, I dont really think they've thought that through.

Given that a lot of the stuff on here is critical of BOF do they really want that exposed to the general public on their own FB page?

Yes but they will be able to remove all that from their own page where as they don't have control over what is discussed here.

Yes but unless they employ someone full time to do it it's a hell of a job for a volunteer!

Maybe one of the "volunteers resistant to change" will offer their services.

[plain lazy]

[quote="Paul Frost"]Do Facebook discussion pages allow you to search back over the last 13 years of discussion?

I find I frequently search posts to remind myself of something discussed years ago. There is a lot of useful information about how to do certain things. Whereas I find it hard to find anything on facebook more than a few days old.[quote]

Facebook is not designed as an online forum, it's terrible for ongoing discussion, referencing old comments or (as is often in my case) arriving late into a topic discussion and tracking back through the thread...

I need to take some time to read the Strategic Plan for myself but immediate reaction to reading this thread isn't good regarding the threat to Nopesport.

Bog Off BO!!

[Paul Frost]

This thread would be an excellent example of why British Orienteering might seek a better online forum... We're on the second page of a thread [edit: actually I suppose we're exactly on topic, given the title of the thread, which is another point in itself...] about a document that's consumed countless hours, loads of effort and is full of pretty exciting things about the next few years of orienteering, and we're fixated on one small part of it.

But as you point out, we are not discussing the whole document, we are discussing the targeted attack, with termination as the desired result, on this independent/public forum.

As others have said, develop your own forum, and if it's any good people will use it out of choice and Nope with wither on the vine and you will finally have control of the message. But I suspect that you may have given Nope a shot in the arm and raised it's profile, and those difficult people who don't toe the line will become more active and make Nope a even bigger platform for the sport.

[graeme]

....and exactly how does BOF intent to replace nopesport when it has no control or ownership of it?.

Just produce a better service and nope will vanish just like this did.
Which does also show how much work is needed to keep ahead of the spammers. If nope closes, ravinous will have an equivalent up within days directing traffic to the CompassSport site.

BOF getting too big for its own boots? Or just a single rogue person managing to throw in a personal hobby-horse of theirs?

Or a clever piece of viral marketing by the nope cartel?

[Gnitworp]

How dare they frustrate my ambitions for deification like graeme