Thursday, 19 August 2010

Champions League Beckons for Redimanager

On 13 January 2010 16:19 I commented:
Well, she [Redimanager] has overtaken me on the all time list and moved into 5th place. Still just over a hundred to go before she catches Dopeyf. Sometime in May I should think.
I was a bit optimistic.

Of the top 20 contributors to Redbridge-i forums, 12 have not appeared since 9th Feb 2010 or before - at least 6 months.

Top of the pops since that date is Redimanager.

Redimanager – 88
Morris Hickey – 29
Anne Sevant – 12
Julie Bradley – 11
Knowsie – 8
Vfmctax – 7
Weggis – 6
Dopeyf – 6

Redimanager is now just 6 points posts away from overtaking Dopeyf and moving into 4th place to qualify for the Champions League.

18 comments:

  1. 29? Probably less than half of the submissions, most of which were censored by Redimanager.

    It's clearly an unequal world - who censors Redimanager?

    ReplyDelete
  2. How many Yellow cards have you racked up now, Morris?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Oh, it goes further - two red ones!

    ReplyDelete
  4. You won't be qualifying via the "Fair Play" league then?

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Fair play" went out through the window when Redi V2 was set up.

    ReplyDelete
  6. And they've received their own "Red Card" from the punters.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I have had several rejected because Redi censures you to a maximum of 2000 characters, a bit like restricting speakers at council meetings to 15 seconds (perhaps that is coming next)

    I would say something if only there was something worth commenting on,I am reduced to questioning the source of information they put up, expecting everyone to believe it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. As a propaganda machine it probably does a better job than the Stasi, KGB and Gestapo combined. Same mindset - Thought Police.

    ReplyDelete
  9. We'll be opening up the Forums again, on a trial basis, alongside the forthcoming Redbridge Conversation. Hopefully this should lead to a renewal of interest and activity in the forum part of the website, which currently isn't adding much value to the Council's website.

    ReplyDelete
  10. There is still interest but we feel that, even when published, valid contributions are just ignored. A small amount of honest response from decision-making people like council employees or councillors, would go a long way. Look for instance at recycling. We want to recycle and we know redbridge could do a lot more. What do we get? 'We are so good'. Good, perhaps, but there is still so much room for improvement. We feel that, as long as they tick the box, they are fine.
    annesevant

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ian, apart from Morris and Redimanager, do you think anybody will notice ...?

    Oh, and how do you expect this 'trial' will be publicised ...?

    ... After all, if nobody but Morris and Redimanager know about it, I doubt we'll see much change ...!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I would have thought the more appropriate place for Ian's announcement would have been the forums section of Redbridge-i. But then, of course, nobody would have read it......

    ReplyDelete
  13. Ian you say that the Forums aren't "currently ... adding much value to the Council's website".

    Would you, please, care to quantify the 'value' which has been added since RiV2 commenced ...?

    ... You're response will, of course, be much more useful if it also includes the costs involved in implementing the clamp-down and the administrative costs - on a cost per post basis - for a similar pre-clamp-down period ...

    ReplyDelete
  14. "Clamp-down", Knowsie? Damned near killed off!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ian, to have a vibrant, and officer and councillor involved forum, will tick more boxes for our star rating, than any "Redbridge Life"
    I have continuously quoted the nirvhana promised by the Chief Executive, all we ask is that he makes good on those promises,in terms of officer involvement, and Cllor Prince and yourself on Councillor involvement.
    I will remind all that one of the Local Government Omsbudsman's definitions of "Maladministration" is "failure to provide information" this does not mean a referral to the FoI satisfies this "maladministration".This lack of involvement was a major complaint, along with the level of moderation, and time to publish posts, and the 2000 character limit to posts,and the ability to start our own threads.All these things,contribute to the transparency of local government, it is not a coincidence that the most transparent councils have a lower council tax and a higher level of participation,and resident satisfaction.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Precisely - if the website is to have a Forum section then it makes sense for it to be well-used; otherwise we might as well not bother. In cost terms it's clearly less administration not to accept postings at all, but that's not really the issue. Obviously if the forums are to become more popular then we need to publicise the change - which is why doing so alongside the Conversation, which will attract a lot of interest, makes sense and, yes, I'd hope that councillors of all parties make a bit more effort to participate than they did the last time. When all the details are resolved, there'll be an announcement - meanwhile I'm just sharing the latest intentions.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Ian - 100% with you! But the GOOD news is....

    ReplyDelete
  18. I bet the moderators and their manager can't wait!
    annesevant

    ReplyDelete