The Founders Trail

[maineflyer 0]

I cant understand the thinking behind not advertising across as many outlets as possible at all. I'm not deliberately calling anyone into question, but is it an absolute fact that offers to spread this were turned down? It has been known for things to get blown out of proportion on occasion, afterall.

I wouldn't like to get involved in who did or didn't offer what and to whom. I'm just making the observation that the Founders Trail isn't promoted on all Rangers websites and asking why. It just seems strange is all.

 

MF, do you mind my asking why you dont post on FF? did you have an experience? I have been on there 10 years now and dont recall your name, although obviously that means absolutely nothing. Just interested, nothing more

I posted on FF for many years but became increasingly uncomfortable when the unexplained bannings grew commonplace and it became obvious that those running the show had a party line and wanted it toed. Multiple bannings and identities later I gave it up for a bad deal and moved elsewhere in search of some sort of free speech. The fact was (and remains) that there is a choice these days that wasn't always there. There are now much better places to debate and gain information. Besides which, I prefer Rangers websites where I believe the membership is made up of Rangers supporters and the admin don't act like gestapo propagandists. Given the numbers that have left these last few years, I'm obviously not alone.

[rbr 1,256]

[QUOTE=Northampton_loyalist;205946]I cant understand the thinking behind not advertising across as many outlets as possible at all. I'm not deliberately calling anyone into question, but is it an absolute fact that offers to spread this were turned down? It has been known for things to get blown out of proportion on occasion, afterall.

MF, do you mind my asking why you dont post on FF? did you have an experience? I have been on there 10 years now and dont recall your name, although obviously that means absolutely nothing. Just interested, nothing more

 

There is a thread on RM at present which will help shed some light on what the history has been , and maineflyer has made a very helpful suggestion as did Frankie , it will be interesting to see if their idea's are taken up .

[OnlyOneAmoruso 0]

I wouldn't like to get involved in who did or didn't offer what and to whom. I'm just making the observation that the Founders Trail isn't promoted on all Rangers websites and asking why. It just seems strange is all.

 

 

I posted on FF for many years but became increasingly uncomfortable when the unexplained bannings grew commonplace and it became obvious that those running the show had a party line and wanted it toed. Multiple bannings and identities later I gave it up for a bad deal and moved elsewhere in search of some sort of free speech. The fact was (and remains) that there is a choice these days that wasn't always there. There are now much better places to debate and gain information. Besides which, I prefer Rangers websites where I believe the membership is made up of Rangers supporters and the admin don't act like gestapo propagandists. Given the numbers that have left these last few years, I'm obviously not alone.

 

Agree with most of what you say there to be honest.

 

The fact FF is still comfortably the largest Rangers site on the internet must mean they are doing something right though.

[maineflyer 0]

Agree with most of what you say there to be honest.

 

The fact FF is still comfortably the largest Rangers site on the internet must mean they are doing something right though.

 

I'm not so sure it's comfortably the largest website at all and I seriously doubt it's represents a majority of the online community. I have several identities on the FF membership list, all banned, none active, but all counting. I reckon there are currently thousands of similarly defunct FF accounts and that, while still large, the current active is nowhere near what it is claimed to be.

[OnlyOneAmoruso 0]

I'm not so sure it's comfortably the largest website at all and I seriously doubt it's represents a majority of the online community. I have several identities on the FF membership list, all banned, none active, but all counting. I reckon there are currently thousands of similarly defunct FF accounts and that, while still large, the current active is nowhere near what it is claimed to be.

 

It's certainly the most active forum even with the many, many banned accounts.

 

A quick scan and comparison of RM and FF's front pages tells you that.

 

There are threads that were last replied to 3 days ago still on RM's front page.

On FF, the last thread on the front page was last replied to at 11:38 today.

[rbr 1,256]

I'm not so sure it's comfortably the largest website at all and I seriously doubt it's represents a majority of the online community. I have several identities on the FF membership list, all banned, none active, but all counting. I reckon there are currently thousands of similarly defunct FF accounts and that, while still large, the current active is nowhere near what it is claimed to be.

 

I have to agree with you maineflyer I was looking for someone a few days ago and the number of registered users that have never posted etc is incredible

[rbr 1,256]

It's certainly the most active forum even with the many, many banned accounts.

 

A quick scan and comparison of RM and FF's front pages tells you that.

 

There are threads that were last replied to 3 days ago still on RM's front page.

On FF, the last thread on the front page was last replied to at 11:38 today.[/quote]

 

But there is a massive difference between quality and quantity , the number of answers and replies that consist of very little content is massive , also there is very little debate as such

[OnlyOneAmoruso 0]

It's certainly the most active forum even with the many, many banned accounts.

 

A quick scan and comparison of RM and FF's front pages tells you that.

 

There are threads that were last replied to 3 days ago still on RM's front page.

On FF, the last thread on the front page was last replied to at 11:38 today.[/quote]

 

But there is a massive difference between quality and quantity , the number of answers and replies that consist of very little content is massive , also there is very little debate as such

 

Very little debate on Follow Follow? I'd say theres probably too much if you look at the financial threads

[Frankie 8,529]

FF is still by far the busiest forum.

 

Obviously the quality of the debate can be, erm, debated but dubious accounts or not, their traffic is still higher than the rest of the community combined.

[Guest Northampton_loyalist]

FF is still by far the busiest forum.

 

Obviously the quality of the debate can be, erm, debated but dubious accounts or not, their traffic is still higher than the rest of the community combined.

 

I dont think the size can be doubted and I would hazzard a guess that the number of 'warmers' (trying to learn your quaint jock speak ) is pretty much proportional to the number of users. There are some absolutely fantastic contributers on every site in terms of energy for fund raising and input for debates but FF, IMO, has a greater number owing to the fact it has a wider pool. The flip side is that there are undoubtably a far larger number of 'rockets' () too. Debate on FF quite often is dominated by the latter but after a while you learn who to listen to and who to ignore, once you do the debates can be fascinating and these last few months bear all of that out.