Non-members, non-posting members and general coyness

[J.R.]

WOW !

I've been off the site for 24 hours and all hells broken loose.

Boring old f@rts ??

Old Fogeys ??

I might be in my 60's, but I definitely don't consider myself either of the above.

Acidic ? - Yes

Humorous ? - Definitely.

Just for the record, I'm off to Imber Court next Thursday as Chairman of a newly formed under 18's girls footy team so I think that qualifies me as a 'young' boring old fogey/f@rt !

[Angela Woodford]

Claws semi-retracted!

[Jeeves]

I have met a few members from the forum. One example I was pleasantly surprised and the other meeting was frankly disappointing as their personality was nothing like their forum character.

However, back onto topic... I get the feeling that new posters/members may feel isolated by the clique of regular posters, not that this bothers me too much. I do not post regularly as very few topics take my interest, or I feel that I do not have anything to contribute to them. On the other hand, I don't mind reading these topics. I also do not want to get involved with the Hertford related articles as there seems to be a strong bitterness that the school no longer exists (not that I have anything against the people involved).

I wonder if those forum members liked you "Jeeves"? If few topics take your interest, you could always introduce something that does interest you?

I'm always delighted when male Old Blues are interested in our life at Hertford. I found the tone of your post unpleasantly condescending. Please, please don't get involved with "Hertford related articles"!

Angela Woodford

I couldn't care less if these forum members 'liked' me. I liked one of them, didn't particularly like the other, is that really such a big deal? It wasn't you in either example, so why should you care? Condescending, I think not, unless you take it as a personal attack, which it is definitely not. Do not worry, I will not get involved with your Hertford articles as you clearly seem to regulate who is and is not allowed to post in them. I did recently post something that interested me (recently removed by myself) that others could have contributed to, but why bother? As a regular reader and occasional poster I've had enough of this cliquey forum, it's no wonder some people don't get involved.

[gemmygemmerson]

I have to say that I was a 'Guest' for about a month before I actualy created an account and even then I felt like I was taking the liberty by even making one since I wasn't an Old blue or anything. It did seem like a very enclosed community and that was bonded through shared experiences and memories. Thankfully this forum is also very welcoming to newcomers.
The hidden members are probably those who like me feel that they just won't be able to relate.

[kerrensimmonds]

Jeeves.. I am sorry that you have taken offence. I am sure no offence was intended.....
As Gemma says we are in fact a friendly bunch - most of us have not met many other members of the Forum but the Foundation of CH (whether London, Hertford or Horsham) is our common bond.
I hope that you will decide to stay on board - and maybe even join in from time to time. For me, it's a 'bit of fun' which alleviates moments of either boredom or extreme tension (I have a demanding job) and although I do not stay online for very long, I find that interacting with my fellow Old Blues is refreshing and helps me carry on with the day job....
So please stay with us?
Kerren

[Ajarn Philip]

I'm sorry, Kerren, but I'm going to stomp all over your mollification...

Was there a Wodehouse novel entitled "Oh, Come Off It, Jeeves?"

James, you must surely have realised that your posting would spark a response, and you got one! You got a few, actually, but all of them were positive except one, and you focussed on that and spat out the dummy! Your posting was rather condescending and "supercool..."

I have met a few members from the forum. One example I was pleasantly surprised and the other meeting was frankly disappointing as their personality was nothing like their forum character.

What's all this about? Clearly they'll remember meeting you, and I doubt they'll have much difficulty working out who you're talking about. The fact that you said you were pleasantly surprised suggests in itself that you were expecting to be disappointed.

However, back onto topic... I get the feeling that new posters/members may feel isolated by the clique of regular posters, not that this bothers me too much.

Why doesn't it bother you? It's the main point of this thread. We want to make people feel welcome! You, of course, are included in the "we".

I do not post regularly as very few topics take my interest, or I feel that I do not have anything to contribute to them.

Fair enough.

On the other hand, I don't mind reading these topics.

You don't mind? YOU DON'T MIND? Couldn't you have have stretched yourself to; "I quite enjoy?"

Frankly, James, you managed to make yourself sound smug and self-satisfied to the nth degree. You pretty much got away with it, probably because the whole point of this thread was to work out why more people weren't joining, rather than lose members we have. You got a hint of criticism and threatened to stomp off in a huff, taking your recent interesting posting with you.

James, if you dish it out, you have to expect to get it back! Now that my cage is less rattled, and my feathers almost unruffled, I'd very much like to hear a response. And see your withdrawn posting.

[kerrensimmonds]

I think it's time I went to bed and buried my head under the pillows. I seem to have offended more than I sought to pacify....
OOOh Dear....
I've gone behind the parapet....

[Ajarn Philip]

[kerrensimmonds]

It's alright for you Phil, in Thailand, blooming miles away from West Sussex!

[cj]

I've always felt that the forum was there to be used when I felt like it, to dip in and out of, not to respond to every posting with an inane comment or simply to be be polite. Sometimes it's too late or I'm not in the mood and then the moment passes. I've written what I consider to be some witty and pithy postings which have elicited no response from others, but to feel that I was being ignored or not included would say more about my own insecurities than the reality of the group, which I have found to be welcoming and generous.

[cj]

I also do not want to get involved with the Hertford related articles as there seems to be a strong bitterness that the school no longer exists (not that I have anything against the people involved).

I think you have misunderstood the Hertford postings. CH has in the past been very Horsham-centric and I think that is what the Old Girls were commenting on.

[sejintenej]

I think you have misunderstood the Hertford postings. CH has in the past been very Horsham-centric and I think that is what the Old Girls were commenting on.

I suggest that that is a question of statistics (which in this extraordinary case are not "lies, d**n lies"). There were +/- 850 boys at Horsham and AFAIK 250 girls at Hertford for over 400 years prior to the merger after which everything was about Horsham.
850 should produce more posts than 250. Simple. It is not a case of being deliberately Horsham-centric.

I see no problems about there being Hertford specific threads but I wonder if there are pre-Horsham specific threads; on that measure one could raise the charge of Hertford-centricity though I see no harm in that as it is at present.

David Brown

[Jeeves]

I'm sorry, Kerren, but I'm going to stomp all over your mollification...

Was there a Wodehouse novel entitled "Oh, Come Off It, Jeeves?"

James, you must surely have realised that your posting would spark a response, and you got one! You got a few, actually, but all of them were positive except one, and you focussed on that and spat out the dummy! Your posting was rather condescending and "supercool..."

I have met a few members from the forum. One example I was pleasantly surprised and the other meeting was frankly disappointing as their personality was nothing like their forum character.

What's all this about? Clearly they'll remember meeting you, and I doubt they'll have much difficulty working out who you're talking about. The fact that you said you were pleasantly surprised suggests in itself that you were expecting to be disappointed.


However, back onto topic... I get the feeling that new posters/members may feel isolated by the clique of regular posters, not that this bothers me too much.

Why doesn't it bother you? It's the main point of this thread. We want to make people feel welcome! You, of course, are included in the "we".

I do not post regularly as very few topics take my interest, or I feel that I do not have anything to contribute to them.

Fair enough.

On the other hand, I don't mind reading these topics.

You don't mind? YOU DON'T MIND? Couldn't you have have stretched yourself to; "I quite enjoy?"

Frankly, James, you managed to make yourself sound smug and self-satisfied to the nth degree. You pretty much got away with it, probably because the whole point of this thread was to work out why more people weren't joining, rather than lose members we have. You got a hint of criticism and threatened to stomp off in a huff, taking your recent interesting posting with you.

James, if you dish it out, you have to expect to get it back! Now that my cage is less rattled, and my feathers almost unruffled, I'd very much like to hear a response. And see your withdrawn posting.

I don't think that there was a Wodehouse titled "Oh, Come off it, Jeeves" but it is a good title. My post was intended to spark a response and highlight the reasons why I read regularly but post occasionally. My post was not intended to cause offence, as you seem to think.

Since others had mentioned their experience of meeting other forum members I decided to mention two of my experiences. How do you know that I haven't met more forum members? I have not named anyone here, or made any particular details clear. In the first instance whereby I was pleasantly surprised... yes, I did expect the worst as I wasn't overly enamored by their forum character, however, this person was completely different in the flesh, a great person. What I am highlighting here is that you can't easily judge personality through writing, although there can be exceptions. I am sure that you have made accurate/incorrect assumptions about me due to the perceived 'condescending' and 'supercool' nature of my latest posts.

We want to make people feel welcome, hopefully this will happen. What I meant was, it doesn't bother me too much that there are a group of people that could potentially isolate readers and future members, hopefully it doesn't bother anyone else too much. If people want to get involved then they will.

I am sticking with the line 'I don't mind reading through the posts' as this is true. I enjoy some posts, although I'm not too keen on some of them. And contrary to your opinion, I'm not finding this topic particularly enjoyable.


Smug and self-satisfied to the nth degree, condescending and supercool - you seem to think so. Sorry it came across that way.
All I said was, "I've had enough..." this doesn't mean that I've stormed out of the forum never to be read again.

My removed posting was under Non-CH stuff. The topic was about record collecting (my hobby) which would have encouraged other members to write about their rare finds, used record shop recommendations etc. I realised that I didn't really want to share these interests as it is likely that very few would be interested. After all there are forums for that kind of thing and I'd rather discuss it with close-friends or in person. Not on an open internet forum.

Peace, Jeeves

Edited to remove the random underlining and to tidy up the quote section.

[englishangel]

Not being picky or anything ("picky moi?")

AFAIK except for the period 1904-1985 at least some of the boys, and the girls were in the same place be it Newgate Street or Hertford(and another couple of places along the way), but obviously in those years (when the majority of us here were at CH) we were apart and the boys certainly seemed to get the long end of the stick in terms of facilities, space and profile.

Those were the times though and it's no use moaning about it.

[cj]

I think you have misunderstood the Hertford postings. CH has in the past been very Horsham-centric and I think that is what the Old Girls were commenting on.

I suggest that that is a question of statistics (which in this extraordinary case are not "lies, d**n lies"). There were +/- 850 boys at Horsham and AFAIK 250 girls at Hertford for over 400 years prior to the merger after which everything was about Horsham.
850 should produce more posts than 250. Simple. It is not a case of being deliberately Horsham-centric.

I see no problems about there being Hertford specific threads but I wonder if there are pre-Horsham specific threads; on that measure one could raise the charge of Hertford-centricity though I see no harm in that as it is at present.

David Brown

I didn't mean that the forum was Horsham-centric, but that the organisation had been in terms of the spread of money, facilities and public persona. Not many 'outsiders' were aware of a separate school for girls in Hertford. It's not written as a criticism here, just an observation.