This discussion has been closed.
Posted by Lady Macbeϯh - not without mustard (U550479) on Tuesday, 12th May 2009
Tue, 12 May 2009 20:09 GMT
Isn't it about time these were updated? Some date from before The Great Migration and no longer post AFAIK.
Basia and Rosie T feature - but where is Eliza? irene? Sharpers? et al
in message 1
, in reply to message 2.
Posted by Campbell-in-Clogs (U8123405) on Wednesday, 13th May 2009
but isn't that just the point Lady Mac was making rosie? I only know you and Basia from this list of people.
Spot on, Lady M. Where do I sign the petition?
Additional to which, why can't we have a system that allows users of the MBs to send personal messages to each other?
I'll find out for you.
best.
A
Four of those are still posting regularly (one with a name change) and two or three others still appear occasionally.
I make it nine altogether, Mike, and as nobody can keep track of all the name changes that may be an underestimate. As I recall, Keri stopped doing them because once there were more than a few hundred people registered to post it was just not appropriate any more. It used to be a rite of passage for everyone who knocked up more than 1000 posts (which the old MB software showed).
Thu, 14 May 2009 13:33 GMT, in reply to L40)
Once upon a time it was an Honour offered to those past a thousand posts - until that became run-of-the-mill. Lots of name changes, as Draggers says [I make it six still posting regularly, six occasional visitors and one or two who might be posting under screen names for all I know!¬]
Also a number of posters who were offered and refused - and one who went through the interview but wasn't published [that's one who declared it on board, no idea how many refusals or discards there were over the years.] We're all much more privacy conscious since a [small] series of unfortunate events. And no automatic reason why any of the posters we're nosey about would /want/ to be profiled.
Fun to see the range of people who both listen to the programme and post on here though.
Thu, 14 May 2009 13:41 GMT, in reply to Blodwyn-Pig
We do - we have several systems, including h2g2, e-mail exchange via Keri, via other posters or the Facebook pages, the Lock-in and Peet's. No shortage of channels if you want to talk to someone outside a discussion thread or off-board, provided that they agree to the contact.
If you are asking why the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú doesn't support private messaging as an adjunct to the MBs I don't see any reason why they should, given the volume of traffic there is already.
if only they had kept up the reach a thousand posts and get a listener'sprofile spot back in the food old howerd2 days, i could have had at least fifteen goes!
to Dragonfly in message 8
yes, I recognise 11 mostly-regulars, and 2 occassional posters.
Also, we don't know whether or not some of the people were asked, and refused the chance to do a profile.
, in reply to message 12.
Posted by Campbell-in-Clogs (U8123405) on Thursday, 14th May 2009
but their screen names aren't mentioned, so how can those of us who have never been to meets 'recognise' them?? That's why you and Basia are the only ones I have heard of.
Thu, 14 May 2009 19:13 GMT, in reply to Campbell-in-Clogs
When the profiles were written, many posters used their own names, all messages disappeared into the ether after two weeks and there was no 'Your Discussions' so stalking or data gathering was unusual. When the system changed so that all messages are kept forever a lot of posters cleaned up their act, especially those with children.
If you read carefully, you should be able to spot a few more - one screen name is understood in the text, several more if you have been paying attention or can think laterally. There is only one Meenister afaic.
BTW I suspect that only three (four if you count Mike} of those profiled go to public meets anyway - that's not obligatory either.
Nothing to do with meets, C-in-C - I've never been to a meet. Most of those profiles were put there in 2001 or 2002 when the people concerned were using their real names (mostly) and a few of us who were around then happen to know the names they post under now.
, in reply to message 14.
Posted by Campbell-in-Clogs (U8123405) on Thursday, 14th May 2009
<<>>
---
I haven't read all those reams of text! Just looked at the pics and the given names. I suspect I just don't have the perseverance necessary to become an axe murderer
Thu, 14 May 2009 19:56 GMT, in reply to Campbell-in-Clogs in message 16
CiC - I'll give you one clue: Oi Squire!
Hardly reams of text - just a couple of paras in each one. Not sure you can expect sympathy for not recognising anyone if you can't be bothered to actually read the profiles. A couple are from before my time too, but a five or six started posting during my years in Mustard.
I think you are supposed to read the Listeners' Profiles and be amazed by the range of Archers listeners, not treat them as Hallo You Two! magazine. [Or even Accountant's Wives.]
, in reply to message 17.
Posted by rosietonthemove (U2260932) on Thursday, 14th May 2009
petal jam in message 17
Or Accountants husbands and Partners.
Thu, 14 May 2009 20:08 GMT, in reply to rosietonthemove in message 18
Thought Partners were now Rymans.
[coat]
, in reply to message 19.
Posted by rosietonthemove (U2260932) on Thursday, 14th May 2009
Accountants Husbands and Rymans/Rywomans, then!
Picky!
I haven't a clue what h2g2 is, whlst the exchange of emails via Keri seemed cumbersome and reliant one individual. Lock-in and Peet's? Is that supposed to mean something?
No, you wouldn't. I only pay my license fee and receive bugger all for it.
Thu, 14 May 2009 22:18 GMT, in reply to Blodwyn-Pig in message 21
The Lock-in and Peet's are off-board boards associated with ML. Details may be found in the Messageboard FAQs section for Peet's
I'm afraid I don't understand your point about paying your license fee: afaik the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú License Fee does not cover an e-mail directory of. In any case, the current systems are only cumbersome becuase they rely on two people agreeing to exchange details.
h2g2 is an integral part of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú website which provides an individual page for each poster and allows you to post your own e-mail address. Try putting it in the search box.
, in reply to message 17.
Posted by Campbell-in-Clogs (U8123405) on Friday, 15th May 2009
<<>
---
I'm not looking for sympathy petal (wee pause for me to grin at me saying 'petal' in this twee way I would never use IRL I was just commenting on the fact that the names given mean nothing to me. If they did, I would go on to read the profiles, like wot I did with Basia and Rosie. Because I 'know' them and was interested. If I don't know who I'm reading about it means absolutely nothing. I have no patience for guessing games and no desire to trawl through the texts looking for clues.
Mr Keri says "watch this space".
A
if in communication with mr. k, anna, do pass on best wishes for a speedy recover and the thread that is all about concern for his health. only fair he knows, that some of us dont always bash on endlessly a bout alan rickman being in t.a. for example.
Oh, good, he's surviving Gnurse Gnomey's ministrations.
, in reply to message 26.
Posted by Achilles Grytpype-Thynne (U2328687) on Friday, 15th May 2009
Fri, 15 May 2009 14:06 GMT, in reply to Marigold in message 26
Gnurse Gnomey's ministrations.Â
Is that what they're called. I've often wondered.
Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
This messageboard is now closed.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú © 2014 The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.