The all in one, All players chit chat thread

[Lags]

Seeing the thread below about Ossy being closed due to lack of funds, why not have a one thread fits all players ( would this make it cheaper Mods? I've no idea)

 

I mean, poor Ossy pulls out his tripe in blood and thunder style and his thread gets the chop!!!

 

So, in this here thread if you wanna talk about an individual player, then someone wants to talk about the next, then it's all game in here.

 

Off you go.......with Ossy.

[pk200]

Why not have a small charge (£1) to open a thread ? Just sent mine so I'm well in credit.

Edited October 26, 2017 by pk200

[robboman]

6 minutes ago, pk200 said:

Why not have a small charge (£1) to open a thread ?

Because then no one will open a thread

[pk200]

4 minutes ago, robboman said:

Because then no one will open a thread

If it's not worth a pound then probs not worth discussing.

[Ackey]

5 minutes ago, robboman said:

Because then no one will open a thread

What a wonderful world that would be!

 

46 minutes ago, Lags said:

Seeing the thread below about Ossy being closed due to lack of funds, why not have a one thread fits all players ( would this make it cheaper Mods? I've no idea)

What helps is people just following on from the conversations. There was plenty in the post-Bury chat about it already. Once people go to two places for one thing they double their bandwith consumption and that has a cost.  

 

We've thick skin and a bit of ribbing about closing a thread is well and good; but we're once again looking at a pot with about 2 months of funds in it... so if there's continued good form we'll be fine.  If we tank again, then we're fucked - because nothing causes a usage spike more than a bad run of form.

 

Here's hoping it all works out for the best.  If not, we'll set up a reddit thread and call it a day!

[robboman]

17 minutes ago, Ackey said:

What a wonderful world that would be!

 

What helps is people just following on from the conversations. There was plenty in the post-Bury chat about it already. Once people go to two places for one thing they double their bandwith consumption and that has a cost.  

 

We've thick skin and a bit of ribbing about closing a thread is well and good; but we're once again looking at a pot with about 2 months of funds in it... so if there's continued good form we'll be fine.  If we tank again, then we're fucked - because nothing causes a usage spike more than a bad run of form.

 

Here's hoping it all works out for the best.  If not, we'll set up a reddit thread and call it a day!

I have actually wondered why you don’t use Facebook and it’s free forum features

 

i do like owtb format mind

Edited October 26, 2017 by robboman

[Kusunga_Is_God]

3 minutes ago, robboman said:

I have actually wondered why you don’t use Facebook and it’s free forum features

 

i do like owtb format mind

Because Facebook is w*nk and breeds Brexit warriors. The Oldham fans on Facebook genuinely terrify me. 

Reddit would be a much better fall back option. 

I hope it doesn't collapse though.

Edited October 26, 2017 by Kusunga_Is_God

[singe]

17 minutes ago, Ackey said:

What a wonderful world that would be!

 

What helps is people just following on from the conversations. There was plenty in the post-Bury chat about it already. Once people go to two places for one thing they double their bandwith consumption and that has a cost.  

 

We've thick skin and a bit of ribbing about closing a thread is well and good; but we're once again looking at a pot with about 2 months of funds in it... so if there's continued good form we'll be fine.  If we tank again, then we're fucked - because nothing causes a usage spike more than a bad run of form.

 

Here's hoping it all works out for the best.  If not, we'll set up a reddit thread and call it a day!

I still can't get my head round opening another thread increases costs and bandwidth! Not denying it, just thinking how mad it is!

 

On that note, and in the spirit of helping reduce costs, does it help to close old topics? Looking at the Classifies, that hasn't worked, could it be merged into a Miscellaneous ?
Add in Old programme Layouts, Legend of the week, Face in the Crowd and Old Matchday threads?
Also possibly merge all the past Matchday threads, at least past seasons?
Just suggestions to help, hopefully taken in the spirit intended.

[LightDN123]

How much does it cost to keep this running per month ?

[robboman]

Can we open a new thread to discuss running costs 

[Ackey]

5 minutes ago, singe said:

I still can't get my head round opening another thread increases costs and bandwidth! Not denying it, just thinking how mad it is!

Basically every time you open a page (same thread, new thread, other...) you take a little bit of data from the server which holds OWTB and move it to your pc/phone/device.  This in isolation is fine, but we have a very active and quite large user base which we're really proud of building up (for the fan base/club size).  So if there's one thread on a topic you pull that data back to you once. If you have to go to three threads for the data you're pulling it back three times, and thus tripling the cost. Again, in isolation that's a tiny amount, probably (not really measurable in this way) 0.001p or something tiny.  But when that's a lot of people it all adds up.

 

This is a pretty simplified example, but hopefully it helps. 

 

6 minutes ago, singe said:

On that note, and in the spirit of helping reduce costs, does it help to close old topics? Looking at the Classifies, that hasn't worked, could it be merged into a Miscellaneous ?
Add in Old programme Layouts, Legend of the week, Face in the Crowd and Old Matchday threads?

Appreciate the ideas, but unfortunately they don't offer much in the way of savings because, as above, it's more about the active threads and traffic than the things sitting on the site in the background.  We have talked about reducing the open forums and may yet do that anyway, but it is unlikely to offer a significant saving. 

 

2 minutes ago, robboman said:

Can we open a new thread to discuss running costs 

Haha! I probably should move all this to the main begging thread. I will try and get time later.

 

[leeslover]

58 minutes ago, Kusunga_Is_God said:

Because Facebook is w*nk and breeds Brexit warriors.

[MAC0AFC]

In all honesty, I'll often go on topics that I'm not interested in just to get it off the unread blue look that you'll see if it's on a phone. Now knowing that going on every 'next thread' will use data and cost that bit more money I'll just open the ones I have an interest in ?? Cheers for the info ackey.

[singe]

1 hour ago, Ackey said:

Basically every time you open a page (same thread, new thread, other...) you take a little bit of data from the server which holds OWTB and move it to your pc/phone/device.  This in isolation is fine, but we have a very active and quite large user base which we're really proud of building up (for the fan base/club size).  So if there's one thread on a topic you pull that data back to you once. If you have to go to three threads for the data you're pulling it back three times, and thus tripling the cost. Again, in isolation that's a tiny amount, probably (not really measurable in this way) 0.001p or something tiny.  But when that's a lot of people it all adds up.

 

This is a pretty simplified example, but hopefully it helps. 

 

Appreciate the ideas, but unfortunately they don't offer much in the way of savings because, as above, it's more about the active threads and traffic than the things sitting on the site in the background.  We have talked about reducing the open forums and may yet do that anyway, but it is unlikely to offer a significant saving. 

 

Haha! I probably should move all this to the main begging thread. I will try and get time later.

 

Cheers Ackey, and I appreciate you taking the time to explain.

[NewBlue]

2 hours ago, Ackey said:

What a wonderful world that would be!

 

What helps is people just following on from the conversations. There was plenty in the post-Bury chat about it already. Once people go to two places for one thing they double their bandwith consumption and that has a cost.  

 

We've thick skin and a bit of ribbing about closing a thread is well and good; but we're once again looking at a pot with about 2 months of funds in it... so if there's continued good form we'll be fine.  If we tank again, then we're fucked - because nothing causes a usage spike more than a bad run of form.

 

Here's hoping it all works out for the best.  If not, we'll set up a reddit thread and call it a day!

 

And presumably people not going off topic into unfunny, tedious worldplay every thread...

[leeslover]

3 minutes ago, NewBlue said:

 

And presumably people not going off topic into unfunny, tedious worldplay every thread...

Worldplay sounds like a computer game Ackey and Zorrro would spend all weekend playing, sitting in one of their bedrooms in their pants

[Lags]

AAH it seems was out in the wilderness with RW due to laziness in training. Reading between the lines the pair have had a frank discussion and for now it would seem AAH is knuckling down. The thing is I can't see him dislodging Doyle or Davies anytime soon, so how long will AAH put in the necessary? make or break for Aaron I reckon.

[Andy Perimeter West]

It really cost per thread? that's mental

[singe]

So far, you've been very restreained with the adverts, and that is apprecaited. I'd be happy for a little bit more if ot helps. It'd be appreicated not too much still, but you've got to break even at least.

[underdog]

Ye gods...I'll try and be more mindful and give more of a kickback when I post new threads.

 

cheers for the insight Ackey

[oafc1955]

6 hours ago, Lags said:

AAH it seems was out in the wilderness with RW due to laziness in training. Reading between the lines the pair have had a frank discussion and for now it would seem AAH is knuckling down. The thing is I can't see him dislodging Doyle or Davies anytime soon, so how long will AAH put in the necessary? make or break for Aaron I reckon.

 

If Doyle returns to Preston there’s a place for him if he shows enough desire. He’s really very good on the ball and could easily play at a higher level but he has to show he wants it first!

[yarddog73]

5 hours ago, oafc1955 said:

 

If Doyle returns to Preston there’s a place for him if he shows enough desire. He’s really very good on the ball and could easily play at a higher level but he has to show he wants it first!

There may well be a place for him but he's so far away from Doyle you can't even compare the two, take Doyles goals and assists away and Wellens start could of been so different, if we had to revert back to AAH it would be a massive backward step.

[Monty Burns]

6 hours ago, oafc1955 said:

 

If Doyle returns to Preston there’s a place for him if he shows enough desire. He’s really very good on the ball and could easily play at a higher level but he has to show he wants it first!

Really, really, really have to disagree with this.

When Doyle leaves, we MUST sign another goalscorer.

[Lee Sinnott]

6 hours ago, oafc1955 said:

 

If Doyle returns to Preston there’s a place for him if he shows enough desire. He’s really very good on the ball and could easily play at a higher level but he has to show he wants it first!

Could not disagree more. A striker with a ratio of 3 in 30-odd games cannot replace Doyle...

[opinions4u]

9 hours ago, oafc1955 said:

 

If Doyle returns to Preston there’s a place for him if he shows enough desire. He’s really very good on the ball and could easily play at a higher level but he has to show he wants it first!

 

I like the way Holloway plays but Doyle's goal a game strike rate isn't replaceable by somebody with 90% fewer goals in him.