Can I get a refund?

[Baj]

I think I've said everything I need to say on this thread. We will continue to try different approaches to matchday. Thanks.

[Gingeletiss]

Is that not a 'Private' message........................:smt083

 

 

 

Cripes..........there..........and gone.

Edited 7 March, 2009 by Gingeletiss
Someone nicked Stanley

[Mole]

Is that not a 'Private' message........................:smt083

 

It's gone now, i don't understand how that happened.

[Gingeletiss]

Should change your name to Paul!!!

[lordswoodsaints]

Not at all. If St Marys ticket office computer functioned perfectly well all week (when not busy) but crashed on a matchday due to the amount of customers it would be criticised. If the same problem occured regularly it would be unacceptable. This is a football site and therefore it should cope when football is being played. If the site failed to perform and it was a one off then that'd be fair enough, but the situation is ongoing with no sign of improvement. I've been critical but i think this is what is needed because this site charges and is therefore a business. Although it might not be a business designed to make money it's still charging for a service it doesn't deliver when it matters. If the ticket offices performance was as bad on a matchday would you not complain?

 

yes i would complain if the ticket office failed to deliver as SFC is a multi million pound business that should have the resources to cope with demand but this site is just an amateur forum run by volunteers.

although i dont always agree with the way it is run or the decisions made,i do applaud the efforts of the people behind the scenes and i think a few of you are going a bit overboard on the criticisms........it seems that a few of you have replaced lowe with Baj.

 

i am more than happy with the service i get for £5,ok it sometimes gets a little slow but i dont get inundated with pop-ups and adverts and the idiots that sometimes used to infect the previous forums seem to be put off by the £5 fee.

 

some of you need to ask yourselves if you could do a better job than the mods and admin............i suspect the answer would be yes but the reality would be the opposite.

[Mole]

Should change your name to Paul!!!

 

Please explain as you've lost me there.

[Mole]

yes i would complain if the ticket office failed to deliver as SFC is a multi million pound business that should have the resources to cope with demand but this site is just an amateur forum run by volunteers.

although i dont always agree with the way it is run or the decisions made,i do applaud the efforts of the people behind the scenes and i think a few of you are going a bit overboard on the criticisms........it seems that a few of you have replaced lowe with Baj.

 

i am more than happy with the service i get for £5,ok it sometimes gets a little slow but i dont get inundated with pop-ups and adverts and the idiots that sometimes used to infect the previous forums seem to be put off by the £5 fee.

 

some of you need to ask yourselves if you could do a better job than the mods and admin............i suspect the answer would be yes but the reality would be the opposite.

 

AwaySaint1 has spoken about the problems encountered and from the way he talks he seems to know what he's on about. I believe the problem is not a financial problem, but a lack of expertise in this field. Getting someone like him on board could help.

[Micky]

Baj, why are your responses so aggresive in nature?

 

I get the feeling you've tried everything and are now stuck hence the defensive agression. Is this a fair assessment?

 

Can't see too much agression there personally - frustration maybe, but by my book the guy did his best. Your continual questioning is toutamount to harassment - which would drive me to close the whole effin site.

 

From what I've experienced here, this is one of the best football forums that I have seen. There is a small fee to use all of it's facilities, you choose to pay that at your discretion. But even with the few problems that have been experienced - the guys running this site still give good value for money.

 

If you really have serious issues with the running of this forum, why not go to forever saints as you tried to get other to do. Its free and I have been monitoring it now for about 2 hours - there is only 1 user on line - must be me then!!

[Gingeletiss]

Please explain as you've lost me there.

 

Daniels, as in 'that's magic'...........

[Mole]

Can't see too much agression there personally - frustration maybe, but by my book the guy did his best. Your continual questioning is toutamount to harassment - which would drive me to close the whole effin site.

 

I've been critical and have offered some good advice. That is called constructive criticism.

[Micky]

I've been critical and have offered some good advice. That is called constructive criticism.

 

What - good advice, like go to a forum with - errr no people on it. I can't see too many other snippets of constructive criticism either. By all means - make a point that the services was not particualarly good, but let's not go overboard. The site is run by volunteers - let's not drive them away.

[saintjay77]

My view, FWIW, is that some on here are being very harsh.

 

I was as frustrated as everyone else, but I do appreciate that people are managing this site in their 'spare' time and for no money.

 

If I was paying £100 a year for this service, I'd be VERY upset but, get real, it only costs us a fiver and the guys are doing their level best to make things better.

 

Let's cut them some slack, eh?

 

:clappysmileyemoteythingy:

 

And as for some peoples good advice that has been given???? :Laughingsmileyemoteythingy:

[Kadeem Hardison]

Perhaps you should take tips from Forever Saints. That place always seemed to run smoothly. I would implement the following systems immediately:

 

1. Limit the total forum members to no more than 5 (those may possibly include people with multiple logins).

2. Have threads on which only one person posts, descending slowly into mentalness as they talk to themself about their own brilliant obsessions.

3. Delete any posts/members that don't agree with your genius and forward-thinking ideas.

[lenwilkins]

I've been critical and have offered some good advice. That is called constructive criticism.

 

To be fair I think you've been pushing the Bajjer a bit.

 

He's only got defensive because he feels threatened by superior techy net-beings like yourself therefore he gets aggressive to deflect criticism. It's a natural reaction.

 

btw although it's brave to use your own pic as an avatar do people ever stop you on the street and say you look like Lord Lucan?

[Mole]

Perhaps you should take tips from Forever Saints. That place always seemed to run smoothly. I would implement the following systems immediately:

 

1. Limit the total forum members to no more than 5 (those may possibly include people with multiple logins).

2. Have threads on which only one person posts, descending slowly into mentalness as they talk to themself about their own brilliant obsessions.

3. Delete any posts/members that don't agree with your genius and forward-thinking ideas.

 

Point 3 has already been implemented.

[Mole]

What - good advice, like go to a forum with - errr no people on it. I can't see too many other snippets of constructive criticism either. By all means - make a point that the services was not particualarly good, but let's not go overboard. The site is run by volunteers - let's not drive them away.

 

Who's going overboard. When the chat was first launched i commented on it being old fashioned and basically crap. This was met with defensiveness. My comments were the truth and i went on to explain how it was far inferior to a chat we had on 4es ages ago. Saintandy666 confirmed that i was correct.

 

I understand the chatroom would have taken a few minutes to set up here so i'd be ****ed off if i'd done it and it was criticised, but i'd also like to think i'd recognise that it was crap and would take the advice given onboard.

[Atticus Finch of Maycomb]

FWIW, I am happy with the service and i definitely think it has been worth the money I have spent on it.

[Micky]

Who's going overboard. When the chat was first launched i commented on it being old fashioned and basically crap. This was met with defensiveness. My comments were the truth and i went on to explain how it was far inferior to a chat we had on 4es ages ago. Saintandy666 confirmed that i was correct.

 

I understand the chatroom would have taken a few minutes to set up here so i'd be ****ed off if i'd done it and it was criticised, but i'd also like to think i'd recognise that it was crap and would take the advice given onboard.

 

The idea of a chatroom was good - the execution, I grant you, poor. That said when I logged onto it Baj was in there trying to administer it - he was asking users if they were experiencing problems. He then recognised that the chatroom was eating server resouces and closed it - thus restoring normal service on here. As for the advice given - I think Baj explained why he declined some of it at the time.

 

You continually seem to cite what you had on 4ES - if it is/was that good - why is it not here today...????

[Mole]

The idea of a chatroom was good - the execution, I grant you, poor. That said when I logged onto it Baj was in there trying to administer it - he was asking users if they were experiencing problems. He then recognised that the chatroom was eating server resouces and closed it - thus restoring normal service on here. As for the advice given - I think Baj explained why he declined some of it at the time.

 

You continually seem to cite what you had on 4ES - if it is/was that good - why is it not here today...????

 

Why is it not here today you ask, well there's many reasons for that. Poor modding from myself, too small a market when up against a big site like this, and many other reasons. It had three periods and in the end i basically couldn't be arsed with it just like everyone else who'd run it. I was involved at the start then called it a day and then at the end. I challenge anyone to try and do better though against such strong competition and you won't be able to do it. When S4E shut down i even let Baj and co advertise TSF's opening on there which i had no problem with. Baj wouldn't tolerate this sort of thing when the boots on the other foot though, but hey we're all different and speaking personally i never have really given a fook.

[bridge too far]

Why is it not here today you ask, well there's many reasons for that. Poor modding from myself, too small a market when up against a big site like this, and many other reasons. It had three periods and in the end i basically couldn't be arsed with it just like everyone else who'd run it. I was involved at the start then called it a day and then at the end. I challenge anyone to try and do better though against such strong competition and you won't be able to do it. When S4E shut down i even let Baj and co advertise TSF's opening on there which i had no problem with. Baj wouldn't tolerate this sort of thing when the boots on the other foot though, but hey we're all different and speaking personally i never have really given a fook.

 

Thank goodness Baj and Steve can be arsed to keep this one up and running then

[Mole]

Thank goodness Baj and Steve can be arsed to keep this one up and running then

 

To be fair their job is easy as they are both just the people who sort out the technical stuff - this is the easy part believe it or not. The real people who keep this forum running are mods like ponty that mod it. This is not having a dig, it's the truth of the matter.

Edited 7 March, 2009 by Mole

[Micky]

Why is it not here today you ask, well there's many reasons for that. Poor modding from myself, too small a market when up against a big site like this, and many other reasons. It had three periods and in the end i basically couldn't be arsed with it just like everyone else who'd run it. I was involved at the start then called it a day and then at the end. I challenge anyone to try and do better though against such strong competition and you won't be able to do it. When S4E shut down i even let Baj and co advertise TSF's opening on there which i had no problem with. Baj wouldn't tolerate this sort of thing when the boots on the other foot though, but hey we're all different and speaking personally i never have really given a fook.

 

I really cannot believe that you typed any of that. So after all the criticism that you have levelled here, you (allegedly) are more than aware of the time, effort, commitment and sheer hard work that goes into trying to maintain a successful web presence. Yet you folded it because you basically couldn't be arsed - brilliant.

 

That is of course your perogitive, but we have people here who (at their own expence) can be arsed, and many more who are grateful for their efforts, therefore they should get all the support that we can offer.

 

As for your assumption that Baj wouldn't tolerate you advertising your wares on his patch - I would beg to differ:

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=11031

 

BTW - please tell me that you are not SF76....?????

[Mole]

I really cannot believe that you typed any of that. So after all the criticism that you have levelled here, you (allegedly) are more than aware of the time, effort, commitment and sheer hard work that goes into trying to maintain a successful web presence. Yet you folded it because you basically couldn't be arsed - brilliant.

 

That is of course your perogitive, but we have people here who (at their own expence) can be arsed, and many more who are grateful for their efforts, therefore they should get all the support that we can offer.

 

As for your assumption that Baj wouldn't tolerate you advertising your wares on his patch - I would beg to differ:

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=11031

 

BTW - please tell me that you are not SF76....?????

 

I received a pm about that, but Baj would rather that wasn't mentioned.

 

On the original point i couldn't be arsed because i decided to post on here. With TSW up and runnying there was no point.

[hypochondriac]

Whilst I understand that people may be a little annoyed at the matchday service here, I have to say that when you look at the overall services that this forum provides, at £5 a year it equals excellent value for money.

Yes there have been some issues but the Administrator have not hidden and have tried to resolve them quickly while keeping us in the picture. For that I personally would like to thank them.

 

As for Stanley and his site - his heart maybe in the right place or he may just be pimping for customers to a forum that, although free, hardly comes anywhere near this one - and when I last checked today had 3 people on line and the most ever was 76.

 

I'm sorry, but for the price of a 'pie and a pint' - I still think that the annual subscription rate to this forum is well worth the money.

 

There - can't see me getting too many infraction points from here on in...!

 

What about before when it was free?

[hypochondriac]

btf. they wont cut slack because they believe that the 1.3p a day they pay entitles them to corporate levels of customer service. We are doing our best, it may not be good enough for them, and for that I apologise.

 

FFS it has nothing at all to do with the amount of money.

[Micky]

What about before when it was free?

 

Sorry - but the question is lost on me mate - what about when it was free? It was free, and dare I say a damn good free site too. You also have the option not to pay the subscription if you so wish.

 

The fact that the site experiences a few technical difficulties now and then is not uncommon. I have had much worse problems with major corporate sites such as Sky and the BBC - so a few minor hitches here is hardly the end of the world.

 

Yes we were told that the server specification would be updated to cater for matchday demand, and that has happened. The fact that we are still experiencing problems is, I'm sure, not down to the fact that the volunteers running this site have done a runner with our subscription money.

 

I pay Sky £50 a month and still have issues with their service so for the 5 quid a year that I have subcribed to TSF I find the LoS to be excellent.

[Micky]

What about before when it was free?

 

FFS it has nothing at all to do with the amount of money.

 

Sorry...!!!! ??????

[Mole]

Sorry - but the question is lost on me mate - what about when it was free? It was free, and dare I say a damn good free site too. You also have the option not to pay the subscription if you so wish.

 

The fact that the site experiences a few technical difficulties now and then is not uncommon. I have had much worse problems with major corporate sites such as Sky and the BBC - so a few minor hitches here is hardly the end of the world.

 

It's not just now and then though is it. It's everytime Saints play a game of football, i.e the most important time. The whole point of paying £5 was to sort these problems out. I'm not having a go here, just correcting you.

[Micky]

I received a pm about that, but Baj would rather that wasn't mentioned.

 

On the original point i couldn't be arsed because i decided to post on here. With TSW up and runnying there was no point.

 

Then why mention it - I too would have PM'd you about it, I would probably have deleted or at least closed your advertising post - Baj chose to do neither and left it on the main board.

 

Sounds to me as well that you are just a little jealous that this site has the lions share of saints fans attention. Perhaps in your quest to get people back to 4ES, you should learn some lessons from this site, acknowedge its professionalism and try to emulate or better it on 4ES - then perhaps you might attract some punters.

[hypochondriac]

Sorry...!!!! ??????

 

The amount of money is irrelevant. We pay the money for a service which currently is not being provided. People who say "well it's only a fiver" are missing the point.

[hypochondriac]

Then why mention it - I too would have PM'd you about it, I would probably have deleted or at least closed your advertising post - Baj chose to do neither and left it on the main board.

 

Sounds to me as well that you are just a little jealous that this site has the lions share of saints fans attention. Perhaps in your quest to get people back to 4ES, you should learn some lessons from this site, acknowedge its professionalism and try to emulate or better it on 4ES - then perhaps you might attract some punters.

 

This site is so popular mainly because of the legacy of S4E. Now there was a good site before it went downhill towards the end.

[Mole]

If bandwidth is an issue would help if pointless subforums were removed?

 

Overseas saints/supporters groups - pointless

 

Saints away supporters - pointless

 

SFC news on demand - pointless

 

England/Hants cricket - pointless

 

Southampton IFC - pointless

 

The motoring forum - pointles

 

pubs and beer - pointless

 

Arcade games - pointless

 

Arcade chat - pointless

 

Hardware/software issues - pointless

 

Computer games - pointless

 

Buy/sell - pointless

 

Films,music and literature - pointless

 

photography - pointless

 

Southampton city forum - pointless

 

forum suggestions - pointless

 

The only forums worth keeping are the main board, the lounge and the muppet show imo.

[Mole]

Then why mention it - I too would have PM'd you about it, I would probably have deleted or at least closed your advertising post - Baj chose to do neither and left it on the main board.

 

Sounds to me as well that you are just a little jealous that this site has the lions share of saints fans attention. Perhaps in your quest to get people back to 4ES, you should learn some lessons from this site, acknowedge its professionalism and try to emulate or better it on 4ES - then perhaps you might attract some punters.

 

No, i don't want 4ES to rise again, it's over and that's how i want it to stay. I posted the link to provide a service because saints were playing and there was no match thread.

[Ludwig]

If bandwidth is an issue would help if pointless subforums were removed?

 

Overseas saints/supporters groups - pointless

 

Saints away supporters - pointless

 

SFC news on demand - pointless

 

England/Hants cricket - pointless

 

Southampton IFC - pointless

 

The motoring forum - pointles

 

pubs and beer - pointless

 

Arcade games - pointless

 

Arcade chat - pointless

 

Hardware/software issues - pointless

 

Computer games - pointless

 

Buy/sell - pointless

 

Films,music and literature - pointless

 

photography - pointless

 

Southampton city forum - pointless

 

forum suggestions - pointless

 

The only forums worth keeping are the main board, the lounge and the muppet show imo.

 

If you dislike the way this place is run, why not set up your own si-... oh.

[Micky]

It's not just now and then though is it. It's everytime Saints play a game of football, i.e the most important time. The whole point of paying £5 was to sort these problems out. I'm not having a go here, just correcting you.

 

Well I wouldn't say everytime Saints play - I have noticed it during the last two matches and I will concede that the Level of Service was poor. The chatroom didn't work - but if memory serves me it was muted as a trial - therefore it was bound to throw up gremlins. All of that said admin were on the case trying to restore the service and trying to update us as they worked - what more do you want? Yes the subscription was meant to try to assist in trying to sort the problems, but nothing is guaranteed, and I'm sure that the admin are looking into the problems.

 

My point is that, forget the money - 5 pound is naff all for what you are getting here - this is a very very good football forum. It is run by unpaid volunteers - who deserve our thanks for their efforts - not smart arse comments when things don't go quite as planned.

[Mole]

If you dislike the way this place is run' date=' why not set up your own si-... oh.[/quote']

 

Er, i'm making suggestions to make the site work at busy times. Baj has already acknowledged that my suggestion to block guests during peak times is one that may happen for example. You miss the point completely. removing these forums may do nothing much, but i'd suspect removing the news feed facility might help more than the others.

[Mole]

Well I wouldn't say everytime Saints play - I have noticed it during the last two matches and I will concede that the Level of Service was poor. The chatroom didn't work - but if memory serves me it was muted as a trial - therefore it was bound to throw up gremlins. All of that said admin were on the case trying to restore the service and trying to update us as they worked - what more do you want? Yes the subscription was meant to try to assist in trying to sort the problems, but nothing is guaranteed, and I'm sure that the admin are looking into the problems.

 

My point is that, forget the money - 5 pound is naff all for what you are getting here - this is a very very good football forum. It is run by unpaid volunteers - who deserve our thanks for their efforts - not smart arse comments when things don't go quite as planned.

 

It's been slow for considerably longer than the last two matches. It's a common theme now. I agree £5 is nothing, but it was supposed to fix the problem.

[hypochondriac]

Well I wouldn't say everytime Saints play - I have noticed it during the last two matches and I will concede that the Level of Service was poor. The chatroom didn't work - but if memory serves me it was muted as a trial - therefore it was bound to throw up gremlins. All of that said admin were on the case trying to restore the service and trying to update us as they worked - what more do you want? Yes the subscription was meant to try to assist in trying to sort the problems, but nothing is guaranteed, and I'm sure that the admin are looking into the problems.

 

My point is that, forget the money - 5 pound is naff all for what you are getting here - this is a very very good football forum. It is run by unpaid volunteers - who deserve our thanks for their efforts - not smart arse comments when things don't go quite as planned.

 

And my point was that we got a forum very very similar to this for free a couple of years ago. If nothing improves (and it ISN'T better than S4E) then why are they charging at all (I gave voluntarily to S4E but making people pay to a fiver to use the forum properly is totally different.)

[Micky]

The amount of money is irrelevant. We pay the money for a service which currently is not being provided. People who say "well it's only a fiver" are missing the point.

 

No - I'm not missing the point - you get what you paid for - £5 is hardly a great deal of money for a years subscription to this site. Of course if you are not happy you could go to S4E.

 

This site is so popular mainly because of the legacy of S4E. Now there was a good site before it went downhill towards the end.

 

So this site has modelled itself on a site that errr gets no hits and went downhill. Or did the punters on S4E see that there was another option...???

[Ludwig]

Er, i'm making suggestions to make the site work at busy times. Baj has already acknowledged that my suggestion to block guests during peak times is one that may happen for example. You miss the point completely. removing these forums may do nothing much, but i'd suspect removing the news feed facility might help more than the others.

 

Why don't you PM Baj such suggestions, so only he has to try and ignore them and not all of us?

[Mole]

Looking at the stats for now it is:

 

(54 members and 84 guests)

 

Just block guests full stop.

 

That would fix the problem and would not affect members (registered or full).

 

Easy and it costs no money and takes no time..

[Mole]

No - I'm not missing the point - you get what you paid for - £5 is hardly a great deal of money for a years subscription to this site. Of course if you are not happy you could go to S4E.

 

 

 

So this site has modelled itself on a site that errr gets no hits and went downhill. Or did the punters on S4E see that there was another option...???

 

 

Wooosh, S4E was this sites predecessor which shut down.

[Micky]

And my point was that we got a forum very very similar to this for free a couple of years ago. If nothing improves (and it ISN'T better than S4E) then why are they charging at all (I gave voluntarily to S4E but making people pay to a fiver to use the forum properly is totally different.)

 

Hypo - nobody made you pay - they gave you the option and you opted in. Yes the idea was that they were going to upgrade the server and we are led to believe that they have done this. OK it hasn't completely fixed the matchday problems that some have experience, but I have no reason to believe that anybody has been negligent in this.

 

They have made best efforts to try to source a solution to the problems, and I believe that are still trying. I really don't think that just because the user has been asked to contribute towards a solution (5 quid) it gives us carte blanche to hassle those actually trying to keep this site going.

[hypochondriac]

No - I'm not missing the point - you get what you paid for - £5 is hardly a great deal of money for a years subscription to this site. Of course if you are not happy you could go to S4E.

 

 

 

So this site has modelled itself on a site that errr gets no hits and went downhill. Or did the punters on S4E see that there was another option...???

 

I think you are confusing S4E meaning saintsforever, the original version of this website with 4ES meaning foreversaints which is something completely different. If you weren't around to use saintsforever then you can't really comment.

[hypochondriac]

Hypo - nobody made you pay - they gave you the option and you opted in. Yes the idea was that they were going to upgrade the server and we are led to believe that they have done this. OK it hasn't completely fixed the matchday problems that some have experience, but I have no reason to believe that anybody has been negligent in this.

 

They have made best efforts to try to source a solution to the problems, and I believe that are still trying. I really don't think that just because the user has been asked to contribute towards a solution (5 quid) it gives us carte blanche to hassle those actually trying to keep this site going.

 

My issue is really the aggressive nature of Baj's replies and also the fact that he believes that there has been some vast improvement to the server when I can barely remember any crashes back in the day. I also have an issue with the "it's only a fiver so don't expect much" brigade. At the very least I would expect an improvement on the S4E days when the same service was provided free of charge.

Edited 7 March, 2009 by hypochondriac

[Micky]

Wooosh, S4E was this sites predecessor which shut down.

 

Apologies - a typo on my part - but I'm sure you know where I meant though...

[Micky]

I think you are confusing S4E meaning saintsforever, the original version of this website with 4ES meaning foreversaints which is something completely different. If you weren't around to use saintsforever then you can't really comment.

 

I am, I was, and I can...!

[Micky]

My issue is really the aggressive nature of Baj's replies and also the fact that he believes that there has been some vast improvement to the server when I can barely remember any crashes back in the day.

 

Perhaps if those are your issues you might take them up with Baj by PM as would be common curtesy when dealing with customer related issues - I'm sure he would reply likemindedly to constructive complaints.

[Mole]

Perhaps if those are your issues you might take them up with Baj by PM as would be common curtesy when dealing with customer related issues - I'm sure he would reply likemindedly to constructive complaints.

 

It reminds me of when i was on holiday and ordered a prawn coctail. When it arrived the prawns were raw. I called the waitress back and quitely said the prawns were raw and she informed me her husband was the chef and was a trained chef and that's how they should be. An argument then followed which was quite embarrassing. She was wrong and i was right, but even if i'd been wrong the customer is always right.

[hypochondriac]

Perhaps if those are your issues you might take them up with Baj by PM as would be common curtesy when dealing with customer related issues - I'm sure he would reply likemindedly to constructive complaints.

 

If previous experience and replies to old PMs is anything to go by then I doubt that very much. The server issues would be a lot easier to deal with if it didn't feel like users were being dismissed all the time and talked down to.

Edited 7 March, 2009 by hypochondriac