Great Western Coffee Shop

I find myself out of step with the administrators and moderators of many of the Facebook groups and forums that I'm a member of. Whilst there is a need to provide some sort of framework on the activity and direction of the board, I can't help feeling that many board's teams are far too controllingly active, and spend their time applying rules (and sometimes changing rules) to pressure the group / board / forum in their direction and in line with their views.

I've been told off for posting a link to Well House Manor on the Dog Friendly Holiday (Chat) Facebook group (and had my post deleted), when advertising isn't allowed there, in response to a post asking for places 2 hours from Warwick. Advertising (and that means links to your own place) is only allowed in the Dog Friendly Holiday (Accommodation) group. Not the first time I've been told off on Facebook either - one of the HST Enthusiast Group administrators deleted my picture of an HST running the "Weymouth Wizard" because I added a comment that it was running for the next 3 weeks, and apparently that was advertising the train service and not recording pictures of past runs. The "Four in a Bed" fan club group has been getting pretty heated too, with admins telling people off and requesting they be nice left, right and centre - even though the members are simply mirroring what was a pretty nasty show last week.

I suppose this kind of controlling activity is natural. In order to provide good admin / moderator coverage, there's a need for a team with a significant number of members, and if any one member of that team decides to delete / modify / censor a post then that decision reflects on and defines the group's activity as a whole. And sometimes it requires a deep drawing of breath to say "I REALLY don't agree with that view" but to let it stand, without "correction" and perhaps even without comment from an admin who's views - by the very fact they're the admin (and an actively altering one) are the official group view that must be followed. Sadly, some groups will chuck you off for "arguing with an admin" and "arguing" can mean expressing a different view to theirs, or asking why a decision was made.

It's so easy to stand in a greenhouse and throw stone ... I hope I'm not seen as doing so in this post. I think we have an exceptional team here, and whilst we can (and do) react individually to urgent circumstances, we also have active links between us to share and discuss issues, and an ability that's perhaps missing on Facebook to park a topic in private while we consider it, restoring it if appropriate, Our "groundrules" too, if you want to call them that, naturally provide a "stable state" which lessens the need to intervene to drag things back onto a designated line - there are no gaping holes in our structure through which people will (commercially or out of interest) try to charge.

Over the years, you'll have noted a drift in my approach to posting - certainly not a U turn, and not totally "mission creap" although mission tactics have been reviewed over time. The long term strategy of retaining an appropriate TransWilts rail service modifies as it becomes increasingly clear that the service appropriate to the flow is at the upper end of forecasts, and that the presence of a service itself helps to create further demand. Other changes such as phenomenal housing growth in Chippenham, Melksham, Trowbridge, Dilton Marsh and Wilton encourage further traffic, and the withdrawl of many bus services outside the middle of the day help strong rail growth at commuter hours, and also early and late. And strategy also changes as I seem to have moved from a lone amateur voice considered a bit of a nuisance, and uninformed, into someone who at times talks a bit of sense and who's views / ideas might just be worth listening to, and energy tapping. With this change comes a responsibility on me to be all the more careful what I say / suggest in public. It doesn't stop me flying kites and exploring options in certain other ways, nor does it put any limits what so ever on others flying kites, expressing views on the Coffee Shop. In fact it's quite the reverse as far as I'm concerned - such wideness of views add strength and provide hooks for comment, saying (at times) things that I might or might not think, but cannot say.  And it can/does provide informed input too.

Just for the record, I'd like to say that - as an infrequent poster but frequent reader - this is one of the best-run, well-managed forums around. There is little or no trolling or flaming and the subject matter is a pleasant mix of solid GWR-related discussion and good, intelligent off-topic humour.

Keep up the good work. It's appreciated.  :)

Hear, hear ! Said into an oil tank at Inchindown Scotland where apparently the echo lasts 75 seconds ! ::).

I've been reminded of this thread twice today. Once on a group where the answer to anyone doing anything that the admins don't like is to intervene (and if no rule has been broken, to add one to try to avoid the same thing happening again. And the second time when I see a bit of bickering about who posted what when, on this forum; observed, but no public action necessary.   There are more important things to do - like getting all my ducks in a row for important presentations and meetings from Thursday through Saturday,  on encouraging a wide variety of posts to inform member and guests, and in keeping things running along in a tolerant and friendly vein.

You, or the person who reported it, call it bickering. I call it correcting an error. :D

EDIT: Wrong smiley initially. I wasn't really rolling my eyes at the suggestion of bickering. I was mildly amused. ;D

And if I was the 'other side' if BNM's correction post, I have no problens with his post either. I hate third parties complaining when the originators have no grumble!