Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

BPS forum

Expand Messages
  • chrisophilus
    Dear all, I have been trying to use the BPS forum recently - as I assumed it could replace this one, but unfortunately I find it MUCH more complicated and
    Message 1 of 14 , Oct 14, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear all,
      I have been trying to use the BPS forum recently - as I assumed it could replace this one, but unfortunately I find it MUCH more complicated and difficult to use. The main reason is that you cannot just view the posts, they have all been split up under about 7 different headings, so one has to search in 7 different places. Sometimes the site is a bit slow, too - which makes that yet more cumbersome.
      Anthony kindly suggested some more complex e-addresses to use to get me into the recent posts, but they did not actually do that and led to obscure pages of jargon whose function I was not sure of. I have been a bit disappointed as I really wanted to use a very easy forum, as simple and clear as this one - and as it is I don't think that has been achieved yet. It appears it might not actually be possible to get it better, but it also might just be personal choice - not sure why.
      I wonder if others also find it more difficult to use? Maybe it's only me!
      But my request for improving it is copied below in case it's of interest and echoes others' difficulties too.
      Cheers,
      Chris F-J.

      No, unfortunately those new "addresses" do not lead to the list of postings, but to some complicated pages of something else.
      Actually I'm afraid this Forum is so darned obscure and difficult to use I doubt I'll be trying very much now. The major difficulty being the division of everything up under categories.
      I didn't quite understand when you said that this is as easy as you can make it - Do you mean it is actually electronically impossible to remove the categories, or do you mean that you yourself do not like to remove the categories? If it is the latter, seeing as it is the BPS website, I'd really like to put it to the vote at the next AGM I'm there for, as I am convinced it makes the thing so complicated to have to search in many different places - and I think others may have found it so, too. It is nothing like as easy and clear as the other Forum, for example.
      I cannot understand why anyone would want to split our subject up into various different, often rather contrived categories - pteridologists really should aim to be less compartmentalised, rather than more, don't you think? Of course some people love manipulating IT thingies - but for me I'm more interested in the subject itself and would like to have to do as little page-searching and fiddling as possible. You hardly have millions of posts which might therefore require division into categories!
      How about considering it, Anthony? Unless, of course, the site cannot physically be designed in any other way - but I can only doubt that very much. I just want us to end up with the easiest, simplest and clearest website - but obviously categories within the subject can only obstruct that aim!
      Cheers,
      Chris Fraser-Jenkins.
    • william hughes
      The RHS uses the same/similar software - setup and is equally irritating to use - I did mutter diplomatically about this sometime ago - I am growing old
      Message 2 of 14 , Oct 14, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        The RHS uses the same/similar 'software' - setup and is equally irritating to use - I did mutter 'diplomatically' about this sometime ago - I am growing old and I can't remember when I did my mutterings but it is a pity the BPS can't come to terms with this much easier to use 'Yahoo' system even with its imperfections. You are not the only one Chris, I knew as soon as I saw what had been used that it was a pig to negotiate. Pity politics tend to cloud issues, but that is life I suppose. I shall continue to use and support the Yahoo group - unless someone concocts something better.
        All the best to the Yahoo users,
        William
        --- On Wed, 14/10/09, chrisophilus <chrisophilus@...> wrote:

        From: chrisophilus <chrisophilus@...>
        Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
        To: uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Wednesday, 14 October, 2009, 4:54 PM

         
        Dear all,
        I have been trying to use the BPS forum recently - as I assumed it could replace this one, but unfortunately I find it MUCH more complicated and difficult to use. The main reason is that you cannot just view the posts, they have all been split up under about 7 different headings, so one has to search in 7 different places. Sometimes the site is a bit slow, too - which makes that yet more cumbersome.
        Anthony kindly suggested some more complex e-addresses to use to get me into the recent posts, but they did not actually do that and led to obscure pages of jargon whose function I was not sure of. I have been a bit disappointed as I really wanted to use a very easy forum, as simple and clear as this one - and as it is I don't think that has been achieved yet. It appears it might not actually be possible to get it better, but it also might just be personal choice - not sure why.
        I wonder if others also find it more difficult to use? Maybe it's only me!
        But my request for improving it is copied below in case it's of interest and echoes others' difficulties too.
        Cheers,
        Chris F-J.

        No, unfortunately those new "addresses" do not lead to the list of postings, but to some complicated pages of something else.
        Actually I'm afraid this Forum is so darned obscure and difficult to use I doubt I'll be trying very much now. The major difficulty being the division of everything up under categories.
        I didn't quite understand when you said that this is as easy as you can make it - Do you mean it is actually electronically impossible to remove the categories, or do you mean that you yourself do not like to remove the categories? If it is the latter, seeing as it is the BPS website, I'd really like to put it to the vote at the next AGM I'm there for, as I am convinced it makes the thing so complicated to have to search in many different places - and I think others may have found it so, too. It is nothing like as easy and clear as the other Forum, for example.
        I cannot understand why anyone would want to split our subject up into various different, often rather contrived categories - pteridologists really should aim to be less compartmentalised, rather than more, don't you think? Of course some people love manipulating IT thingies - but for me I'm more interested in the subject itself and would like to have to do as little page-searching and fiddling as possible. You hardly have millions of posts which might therefore require division into categories!
        How about considering it, Anthony? Unless, of course, the site cannot physically be designed in any other way - but I can only doubt that very much. I just want us to end up with the easiest, simplest and clearest website - but obviously categories within the subject can only obstruct that aim!
        Cheers,
        Chris Fraser-Jenkins.


      • howardfernlover
        Oh come on, you two, the BPS Fern Forum isn t THAT bad! It is a standard web forum format, straight out of the box (well, almost), exactly the same as you
        Message 3 of 14 , Oct 14, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Oh come on, you two, the BPS Fern Forum isn't THAT bad!

          It is a standard web forum format, straight "out of the box" (well, almost), exactly the same as you find on scores of other forums.

          Being fairly new, and a niche interest, it isn't heavily used, and all you need to do is skim your eyes down the dates in the right-hand column to see if there's anything new.

          My only little niggle is that I thought I had set the options for me to be notified by email when anything new is posted in each of the sections, but that rarely happens, not even with replies to my own posts. Then, it might be something personal, to do with the way i set it up, rather than something general affecting all users.

          As for Yahoo groups, they are sufficient, and easy to use, but I cannot say anything good about Yahoo themselves. I resent having to be registered with them just to be able to access the few groups I'm in - to look at photos for example - and I can't stand Yahoo mail and it's other pages with their flashing adverts and particularly the way the page jumps down a notch on your screen just as you're about to enter your name in the logon box. I used to use Yahoo email and had My Yahoo as my homepage, but they kept altering things with no warning.

          Then there are the times when Yahoo is mind-numbingly s-l-o-w with each page taking an eternity to open, causing me to thump my fist on the desk with frustration. And would you believe, this is the second time I have typed this message, because the first time, I looked at it in Preview, and when I returned to Compose I had lost the whole lot. Grrrr....
        • Anthony Pigott
          Dear All I ve replied to Christopher on the forum but for those here who are not there as well, I ll copy it here. Hope to see some of you on the forum. Best
          Message 4 of 14 , Oct 14, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear All

            I've replied to Christopher on the forum but for those here who are not
            there as well, I'll copy it here. Hope to see some of you on the forum.

            Best wishes

            Anthony

            --------------------------------------------

            Christopher

            I don't know why you can't get the direct links to work - they do for me and
            I've not heard of anyone else having trouble. In any case, they only save
            you one keystroke / mouse click.

            The whole point of a forum, as opposed to a mailing list, is that it's
            structured and categorised - that's why people built them and that's why
            people use them. There are thousands of them on the internet, on all sorts
            of subjects used by all sorts of people. Some have thousands of members and
            millions of posts. They work very well because they are structured,
            categorised and searchable. I've never heard anyone suggest that one should
            be reduced to a simple chronological list. It surely goes without saying
            that the BPS aren't going to go to a lot of trouble setting up a forum only
            to cripple it to make it behave like a mailing list - that would be stupid.

            Ultimately it's a matter of personal choice: if your priority is simplicity,
            then there's no doubt that waiting for posts to drop into your inbox is
            always going to be at least a bit easier than using a forum. Most people
            seem think the advantages of a forum are worth a little bit of effort. If
            you don't, that's fine, nobody's forced to use it. I've tried hard but I
            don't think there's anything more I can say or do to help.

            Best wishes

            Anthony

            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com [mailto:uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com]On
            > Behalf Of chrisophilus
            > Sent: 14 October 2009 16:55
            > To: uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
            >
            >
            > Dear all,
            > I have been trying to use the BPS forum recently - as I
            > assumed it could replace this one, but unfortunately I find it
            > MUCH more complicated and difficult to use. The main reason is
            > that you cannot just view the posts, they have all been split up
            > under about 7 different headings, so one has to search in 7
            > different places. Sometimes the site is a bit slow, too - which
            > makes that yet more cumbersome.
            > Anthony kindly suggested some more complex e-addresses to use
            > to get me into the recent posts, but they did not actually do
            > that and led to obscure pages of jargon whose function I was not
            > sure of. I have been a bit disappointed as I really wanted to
            > use a very easy forum, as simple and clear as this one - and as
            > it is I don't think that has been achieved yet. It appears it
            > might not actually be possible to get it better, but it also
            > might just be personal choice - not sure why.
            > I wonder if others also find it more difficult to use? Maybe
            > it's only me!
            > But my request for improving it is copied below in case it's
            > of interest and echoes others' difficulties too.
            > Cheers,
            > Chris F-J.
            >
            > No, unfortunately those new "addresses" do not lead to the list
            > of postings, but to some complicated pages of something else.
            > Actually I'm afraid this Forum is so darned obscure and difficult
            > to use I doubt I'll be trying very much now. The major
            > difficulty being the division of everything up under categories.
            > I didn't quite understand when you said that this is as easy as
            > you can make it - Do you mean it is actually electronically
            > impossible to remove the categories, or do you mean that you
            > yourself do not like to remove the categories? If it is the
            > latter, seeing as it is the BPS website, I'd really like to put
            > it to the vote at the next AGM I'm there for, as I am convinced
            > it makes the thing so complicated to have to search in many
            > different places - and I think others may have found it so, too.
            > It is nothing like as easy and clear as the other Forum, for example.
            > I cannot understand why anyone would want to split our subject up
            > into various different, often rather contrived categories -
            > pteridologists really should aim to be less compartmentalised,
            > rather than more, don't you think? Of course some people love
            > manipulating IT thingies - but for me I'm more interested in the
            > subject itself and would like to have to do as little
            > page-searching and fiddling as possible. You hardly have
            > millions of posts which might therefore require division into categories!
            > How about considering it, Anthony? Unless, of course, the site
            > cannot physically be designed in any other way - but I can only
            > doubt that very much. I just want us to end up with the easiest,
            > simplest and clearest website - but obviously categories within
            > the subject can only obstruct that aim!
            > Cheers,
            > Chris Fraser-Jenkins.
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
          • chrisophilus
            Dear Anthony and all, Thanks again for your patience, and I do agree that I hate the drop-in adverts on Yahoo, though I do find it fast at all times. I ve
            Message 5 of 14 , Oct 14, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear Anthony and all,
              Thanks again for your patience, and I do agree that I hate the drop-in adverts on Yahoo, though I do find it fast at all times. I've nothing against - is it Bill Gates? or whoever it is who makes Yahoo, but also I don't have any particular loyalty to them and I would prefer to have just the one British fern forum, which would be nice if it were the BPS official one.
              But, as I say this BPS one is too complicated and confusing for me ONLY because it has all those trifling, unnecessary categories, which attempt to split us all up into separate boxes when we're not, and prevent us from simply seeing all posts that come in, in order! Yet, Anthony, you just say it would be ridiculous to have a simple list. So that is not up for discussion, it seems - but why? What's so wrong with that idea - which of course will NOT in any way "cripple" the site as you imagine? You are never going to have masses of posts on this site - i.e. too much to handle. Maybe your idea of having all those posts is slightly above the reality of the situation we have? Have you actually thought to ask anyone if they want these confounded categories, or if they might prefer a simple list?
              Anyway I DO ask you to reconsider this, rather than simply dismissing it, and I do ask for that straight forward chronological list of postings - THEN I can be into it any time and will enjoy using it and we won't need two fora. As it is at present, I think it is too cumbersome and was not quite designed for ordinary pteridologists in that respect. This is the only thing I'm asking, but, forgive me, I AM asking it - in order to help us all, not only myself. Any flexibility there, or will it need some sort of vote?
              Cheers,
              Chris.


              --- In uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com, "Anthony Pigott" <Anthony.Pigott@...> wrote:
              >
              > Dear All
              >
              > I've replied to Christopher on the forum but for those here who are not
              > there as well, I'll copy it here. Hope to see some of you on the forum.
              >
              > Best wishes
              >
              > Anthony
              >
              > --------------------------------------------
              >
              > Christopher
              >
              > I don't know why you can't get the direct links to work - they do for me and
              > I've not heard of anyone else having trouble. In any case, they only save
              > you one keystroke / mouse click.
              >
              > The whole point of a forum, as opposed to a mailing list, is that it's
              > structured and categorised - that's why people built them and that's why
              > people use them. There are thousands of them on the internet, on all sorts
              > of subjects used by all sorts of people. Some have thousands of members and
              > millions of posts. They work very well because they are structured,
              > categorised and searchable. I've never heard anyone suggest that one should
              > be reduced to a simple chronological list. It surely goes without saying
              > that the BPS aren't going to go to a lot of trouble setting up a forum only
              > to cripple it to make it behave like a mailing list - that would be stupid.
              >
              > Ultimately it's a matter of personal choice: if your priority is simplicity,
              > then there's no doubt that waiting for posts to drop into your inbox is
              > always going to be at least a bit easier than using a forum. Most people
              > seem think the advantages of a forum are worth a little bit of effort. If
              > you don't, that's fine, nobody's forced to use it. I've tried hard but I
              > don't think there's anything more I can say or do to help.
              >
              > Best wishes
              >
              > Anthony
              >
              > > -----Original Message-----
              > > From: uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com [mailto:uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com]On
              > > Behalf Of chrisophilus
              > > Sent: 14 October 2009 16:55
              > > To: uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com
              > > Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
              > >
              > >
              > > Dear all,
              > > I have been trying to use the BPS forum recently - as I
              > > assumed it could replace this one, but unfortunately I find it
              > > MUCH more complicated and difficult to use. The main reason is
              > > that you cannot just view the posts, they have all been split up
              > > under about 7 different headings, so one has to search in 7
              > > different places. Sometimes the site is a bit slow, too - which
              > > makes that yet more cumbersome.
              > > Anthony kindly suggested some more complex e-addresses to use
              > > to get me into the recent posts, but they did not actually do
              > > that and led to obscure pages of jargon whose function I was not
              > > sure of. I have been a bit disappointed as I really wanted to
              > > use a very easy forum, as simple and clear as this one - and as
              > > it is I don't think that has been achieved yet. It appears it
              > > might not actually be possible to get it better, but it also
              > > might just be personal choice - not sure why.
              > > I wonder if others also find it more difficult to use? Maybe
              > > it's only me!
              > > But my request for improving it is copied below in case it's
              > > of interest and echoes others' difficulties too.
              > > Cheers,
              > > Chris F-J.
              > >
              > > No, unfortunately those new "addresses" do not lead to the list
              > > of postings, but to some complicated pages of something else.
              > > Actually I'm afraid this Forum is so darned obscure and difficult
              > > to use I doubt I'll be trying very much now. The major
              > > difficulty being the division of everything up under categories.
              > > I didn't quite understand when you said that this is as easy as
              > > you can make it - Do you mean it is actually electronically
              > > impossible to remove the categories, or do you mean that you
              > > yourself do not like to remove the categories? If it is the
              > > latter, seeing as it is the BPS website, I'd really like to put
              > > it to the vote at the next AGM I'm there for, as I am convinced
              > > it makes the thing so complicated to have to search in many
              > > different places - and I think others may have found it so, too.
              > > It is nothing like as easy and clear as the other Forum, for example.
              > > I cannot understand why anyone would want to split our subject up
              > > into various different, often rather contrived categories -
              > > pteridologists really should aim to be less compartmentalised,
              > > rather than more, don't you think? Of course some people love
              > > manipulating IT thingies - but for me I'm more interested in the
              > > subject itself and would like to have to do as little
              > > page-searching and fiddling as possible. You hardly have
              > > millions of posts which might therefore require division into categories!
              > > How about considering it, Anthony? Unless, of course, the site
              > > cannot physically be designed in any other way - but I can only
              > > doubt that very much. I just want us to end up with the easiest,
              > > simplest and clearest website - but obviously categories within
              > > the subject can only obstruct that aim!
              > > Cheers,
              > > Chris Fraser-Jenkins.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > ------------------------------------
              > >
              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >
            • Barbara Adams
              Is there any other fern list other than this one? Maybe one in the USA. I thought that someone mention one awhile back. I am interested on growing ferns as
              Message 6 of 14 , Oct 15, 2009
              • 0 Attachment

                Is there any other fern list other than this one? Maybe one in the USA . I thought that someone mention one awhile back. I am interested on growing ferns as house or green house plants some of the things on this list go way over my head although I do like all the notes from different places. Thanks again for all your help

                 

                P. S. I don’t like to log into a forum each and every time I like just getting in my email every day.

                 

                Barbara

                zone 9

                Latrobe Ca

                 


                From: uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com [mailto:uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of chrisophilus
                Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:44 PM
                To: uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum

                 

                 

                Dear Anthony and all,
                Thanks again for your patience, and I do agree that I hate the drop-in adverts on Yahoo, though I do find it fast at all times. I've nothing against - is it Bill Gates? or whoever it is who makes Yahoo, but also I don't have any particular loyalty to them and I would prefer to have just the one British fern forum, which would be nice if it were the BPS official one.
                But, as I say this BPS one is too complicated and confusing for me ONLY because it has all those trifling, unnecessary categories, which attempt to split us all up into separate boxes when we're not, and prevent us from simply seeing all posts that come in, in order! Yet, Anthony, you just say it would be ridiculous to have a simple list. So that is not up for discussion, it seems - but why? What's so wrong with that idea - which of course will NOT in any way "cripple" the site as you imagine? You are never going to have masses of posts on this site - i.e. too much to handle. Maybe your idea of having all those posts is slightly above the reality of the situation we have? Have you actually thought to ask anyone if they want these confounded categories, or if they might prefer a simple list?
                Anyway I DO ask you to reconsider this, rather than simply dismissing it, and I do ask for that straight forward chronological list of postings - THEN I can be into it any time and will enjoy using it and we won't need two fora. As it is at present, I think it is too cumbersome and was not quite designed for ordinary pteridologists in that respect. This is the only thing I'm asking, but, forgive me, I AM asking it - in order to help us all, not only myself. Any flexibility there, or will it need some sort of vote?
                Cheers,
                Chris.


                --- In uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com, "Anthony Pigott" <Anthony.Pigott@ ...> wrote:

                >
                > Dear All
                >
                > I've replied to Christopher on the forum but for those here who are not
                > there as well, I'll copy it here. Hope to see some of you on the forum.
                >
                > Best wishes
                >
                > Anthony
                >
                > ------------ --------- --------- --------- -----
                >
                > Christopher
                >
                > I don't know why you can't get the direct links to work - they do for me
                and
                > I've not heard of anyone else having trouble. In any case, they only save
                > you one keystroke / mouse click.
                >
                > The whole point of a forum, as opposed to a mailing list, is that it's
                > structured and categorised - that's why people built them and that's why
                > people use them. There are thousands of them on the internet, on all sorts
                > of subjects used by all sorts of people. Some have thousands of members
                and
                > millions of posts. They work very well because they are structured,
                > categorised and searchable. I've never heard anyone suggest that one
                should
                > be reduced to a simple chronological list. It surely goes without saying
                > that the BPS aren't going to go to a lot of trouble setting up a forum
                only
                > to cripple it to make it behave like a mailing list - that would be
                stupid.
                >
                > Ultimately it's a matter of personal choice: if your priority is
                simplicity,
                > then there's no doubt that waiting for posts to drop into your inbox is
                > always going to be at least a bit easier than using a forum. Most people
                > seem think the advantages of a forum are worth a little bit of effort. If
                > you don't, that's fine, nobody's forced to use it. I've tried hard but I
                > don't think there's anything more I can say or do to help.
                >
                > Best wishes
                >
                > Anthony
                >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com
                [mailto:uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com]On
                > > Behalf Of chrisophilus
                > > Sent: 14 October 2009 16:55
                > > To: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com
                > > Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
                > >
                > >
                > > Dear all,
                > > I have been trying to use the BPS forum recently - as I
                > > assumed it could replace this one, but unfortunately I find it
                > > MUCH more complicated and difficult to use. The main reason is
                > > that you cannot just view the posts, they have all been split up
                > > under about 7 different headings, so one has to search in 7
                > > different places. Sometimes the site is a bit slow, too - which
                > > makes that yet more cumbersome.
                > > Anthony kindly suggested some more complex e-addresses to use
                > > to get me into the recent posts, but they did not actually do
                > > that and led to obscure pages of jargon whose function I was not
                > > sure of. I have been a bit disappointed as I really wanted to
                > > use a very easy forum, as simple and clear as this one - and as
                > > it is I don't think that has been achieved yet. It appears it
                > > might not actually be possible to get it better, but it also
                > > might just be personal choice - not sure why.
                > > I wonder if others also find it more difficult to use? Maybe
                > > it's only me!
                > > But my request for improving it is copied below in case it's
                > > of interest and echoes others' difficulties too.
                > > Cheers,
                > > Chris F-J.
                > >
                > > No, unfortunately those new "addresses" do not lead to the
                list
                > > of postings, but to some complicated pages of something else.
                > > Actually I'm afraid this Forum is so darned obscure and difficult
                > > to use I doubt I'll be trying very much now. The major
                > > difficulty being the division of everything up under categories.
                > > I didn't quite understand when you said that this is as easy as
                > > you can make it - Do you mean it is actually electronically
                > > impossible to remove the categories, or do you mean that you
                > > yourself do not like to remove the categories? If it is the
                > > latter, seeing as it is the BPS website, I'd really like to put
                > > it to the vote at the next AGM I'm there for, as I am convinced
                > > it makes the thing so complicated to have to search in many
                > > different places - and I think others may have found it so, too.
                > > It is nothing like as easy and clear as the other Forum, for example.
                > > I cannot understand why anyone would want to split our subject up
                > > into various different, often rather contrived categories -
                > > pteridologists really should aim to be less compartmentalised,
                > > rather than more, don't you think? Of course some people love
                > > manipulating IT thingies - but for me I'm more interested in the
                > > subject itself and would like to have to do as little
                > > page-searching and fiddling as possible. You hardly have
                > > millions of posts which might therefore require division into
                categories!
                > > How about considering it, Anthony? Unless, of course, the site
                > > cannot physically be designed in any other way - but I can only
                > > doubt that very much. I just want us to end up with the easiest,
                > > simplest and clearest website - but obviously categories within
                > > the subject can only obstruct that aim!
                > > Cheers,
                > > Chris Fraser-Jenkins.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > ------------ --------- --------- ------
                > >
                > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >
                > >
                > >
                >

              • william hughes
                By the way for those that use firefox - a far safer browser than microsoft explorer - there is an add on which controls scripting i.e. the advertising that
                Message 7 of 14 , Oct 15, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  By the way for those that use firefox - a far safer browser than microsoft explorer - there is an add on which controls scripting i.e. the advertising that comes with Yahoo - you have complete control either selectively turning scripting on or for online banking you may have to turn it off completely for it to work. http://noscript.net/ Some may find it irritating but it does make surfing far safer and perhaps people should give it a try but whatever you should all be using firefox just on the basis of safety.
                  William

                  --- On Thu, 15/10/09, chrisophilus <chrisophilus@...> wrote:

                  From: chrisophilus <chrisophilus@...>
                  Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
                  To: uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com
                  Date: Thursday, 15 October, 2009, 3:43 AM

                   

                  Dear Anthony and all,
                  Thanks again for your patience, and I do agree that I hate the drop-in adverts on Yahoo, though I do find it fast at all times. I've nothing against - is it Bill Gates? or whoever it is who makes Yahoo, but also I don't have any particular loyalty to them and I would prefer to have just the one British fern forum, which would be nice if it were the BPS official one.
                  But, as I say this BPS one is too complicated and confusing for me ONLY because it has all those trifling, unnecessary categories, which attempt to split us all up into separate boxes when we're not, and prevent us from simply seeing all posts that come in, in order! Yet, Anthony, you just say it would be ridiculous to have a simple list. So that is not up for discussion, it seems - but why? What's so wrong with that idea - which of course will NOT in any way "cripple" the site as you imagine? You are never going to have masses of posts on this site - i.e. too much to handle. Maybe your idea of having all those posts is slightly above the reality of the situation we have? Have you actually thought to ask anyone if they want these confounded categories, or if they might prefer a simple list?
                  Anyway I DO ask you to reconsider this, rather than simply dismissing it, and I do ask for that straight forward chronological list of postings - THEN I can be into it any time and will enjoy using it and we won't need two fora. As it is at present, I think it is too cumbersome and was not quite designed for ordinary pteridologists in that respect. This is the only thing I'm asking, but, forgive me, I AM asking it - in order to help us all, not only myself. Any flexibility there, or will it need some sort of vote?
                  Cheers,
                  Chris.


                  --- In uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com, "Anthony Pigott" <Anthony.Pigott@ ...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Dear All
                  >
                  > I've replied to Christopher on the forum but for those here who are not
                  > there as well, I'll copy it here. Hope to see some of you on the forum.
                  >
                  > Best wishes
                  >
                  > Anthony
                  >
                  > ------------ --------- --------- --------- -----
                  >
                  > Christopher
                  >
                  > I don't know why you can't get the direct links to work - they do for me and
                  > I've not heard of anyone else having trouble. In any case, they only save
                  > you one keystroke / mouse click.
                  >
                  > The whole point of a forum, as opposed to a mailing list, is that it's
                  > structured and categorised - that's why people built them and that's why
                  > people use them. There are thousands of them on the internet, on all sorts
                  > of subjects used by all sorts of people. Some have thousands of members and
                  > millions of posts. They work very well because they are structured,
                  > categorised and searchable. I've never heard anyone suggest that one should
                  > be reduced to a simple chronological list. It surely goes without saying
                  > that the BPS aren't going to go to a lot of trouble setting up a forum only
                  > to cripple it to make it behave like a mailing list - that would be stupid.
                  >
                  > Ultimately it's a matter of personal choice: if your priority is simplicity,
                  > then there's no doubt that waiting for posts to drop into your inbox is
                  > always going to be at least a bit easier than using a forum. Most people
                  > seem think the advantages of a forum are worth a little bit of effort. If
                  > you don't, that's fine, nobody's forced to use it. I've tried hard but I
                  > don't think there's anything more I can say or do to help.
                  >
                  > Best wishes
                  >
                  > Anthony
                  >
                  > > -----Original Message-----
                  > > From: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com]On
                  > > Behalf Of chrisophilus
                  > > Sent: 14 October 2009 16:55
                  > > To: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com
                  > > Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Dear all,
                  > > I have been trying to use the BPS forum recently - as I
                  > > assumed it could replace this one, but unfortunately I find it
                  > > MUCH more complicated and difficult to use. The main reason is
                  > > that you cannot just view the posts, they have all been split up
                  > > under about 7 different headings, so one has to search in 7
                  > > different places. Sometimes the site is a bit slow, too - which
                  > > makes that yet more cumbersome.
                  > > Anthony kindly suggested some more complex e-addresses to use
                  > > to get me into the recent posts, but they did not actually do
                  > > that and led to obscure pages of jargon whose function I was not
                  > > sure of. I have been a bit disappointed as I really wanted to
                  > > use a very easy forum, as simple and clear as this one - and as
                  > > it is I don't think that has been achieved yet. It appears it
                  > > might not actually be possible to get it better, but it also
                  > > might just be personal choice - not sure why.
                  > > I wonder if others also find it more difficult to use? Maybe
                  > > it's only me!
                  > > But my request for improving it is copied below in case it's
                  > > of interest and echoes others' difficulties too.
                  > > Cheers,
                  > > Chris F-J.
                  > >
                  > > No, unfortunately those new "addresses" do not lead to the list
                  > > of postings, but to some complicated pages of something else.
                  > > Actually I'm afraid this Forum is so darned obscure and difficult
                  > > to use I doubt I'll be trying very much now. The major
                  > > difficulty being the division of everything up under categories.
                  > > I didn't quite understand when you said that this is as easy as
                  > > you can make it - Do you mean it is actually electronically
                  > > impossible to remove the categories, or do you mean that you
                  > > yourself do not like to remove the categories? If it is the
                  > > latter, seeing as it is the BPS website, I'd really like to put
                  > > it to the vote at the next AGM I'm there for, as I am convinced
                  > > it makes the thing so complicated to have to search in many
                  > > different places - and I think others may have found it so, too.
                  > > It is nothing like as easy and clear as the other Forum, for example.
                  > > I cannot understand why anyone would want to split our subject up
                  > > into various different, often rather contrived categories -
                  > > pteridologists really should aim to be less compartmentalised,
                  > > rather than more, don't you think? Of course some people love
                  > > manipulating IT thingies - but for me I'm more interested in the
                  > > subject itself and would like to have to do as little
                  > > page-searching and fiddling as possible. You hardly have
                  > > millions of posts which might therefore require division into categories!
                  > > How about considering it, Anthony? Unless, of course, the site
                  > > cannot physically be designed in any other way - but I can only
                  > > doubt that very much. I just want us to end up with the easiest,
                  > > simplest and clearest website - but obviously categories within
                  > > the subject can only obstruct that aim!
                  > > Cheers,
                  > > Chris Fraser-Jenkins.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > ------------ --------- --------- ------
                  > >
                  > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  >


                • william hughes
                  I would not pretend that this is complete in any way but it might help. http://www.mygarden.ws/fernlinks.htm I like having messages in my inbox too. William
                  Message 8 of 14 , Oct 15, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I would not pretend that this is complete in any way but it might help.
                    http://www.mygarden.ws/fernlinks.htm
                    I like having messages in my inbox too.
                    William

                    --- On Thu, 15/10/09, Barbara Adams <badams@...> wrote:

                    From: Barbara Adams <badams@...>
                    Subject: RE: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
                    To: uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com
                    Date: Thursday, 15 October, 2009, 8:42 AM

                     

                    Is there any other fern list other than this one? Maybe one in the USA . I thought that someone mention one awhile back. I am interested on growing ferns as house or green house plants some of the things on this list go way over my head although I do like all the notes from different places. Thanks again for all your help

                     

                    P. S. I don’t like to log into a forum each and every time I like just getting in my email every day.

                     

                    Barbara

                    zone 9

                    Latrobe Ca

                     


                    From: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:uk-ferns@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of chrisophilus
                    Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 7:44 PM
                    To: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com
                    Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum

                     

                     

                    Dear Anthony and all,
                    Thanks again for your patience, and I do agree that I hate the drop-in adverts on Yahoo, though I do find it fast at all times. I've nothing against - is it Bill Gates? or whoever it is who makes Yahoo, but also I don't have any particular loyalty to them and I would prefer to have just the one British fern forum, which would be nice if it were the BPS official one.
                    But, as I say this BPS one is too complicated and confusing for me ONLY because it has all those trifling, unnecessary categories, which attempt to split us all up into separate boxes when we're not, and prevent us from simply seeing all posts that come in, in order! Yet, Anthony, you just say it would be ridiculous to have a simple list. So that is not up for discussion, it seems - but why? What's so wrong with that idea - which of course will NOT in any way "cripple" the site as you imagine? You are never going to have masses of posts on this site - i.e. too much to handle. Maybe your idea of having all those posts is slightly above the reality of the situation we have? Have you actually thought to ask anyone if they want these confounded categories, or if they might prefer a simple list?
                    Anyway I DO ask you to reconsider this, rather than simply dismissing it, and I do ask for that straight forward chronological list of postings - THEN I can be into it any time and will enjoy using it and we won't need two fora. As it is at present, I think it is too cumbersome and was not quite designed for ordinary pteridologists in that respect. This is the only thing I'm asking, but, forgive me, I AM asking it - in order to help us all, not only myself. Any flexibility there, or will it need some sort of vote?
                    Cheers,
                    Chris.


                    --- In uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com, "Anthony Pigott" <Anthony.Pigott@ ...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Dear All
                    >
                    > I've replied to Christopher on the forum but for those here who are not
                    > there as well, I'll copy it here. Hope to see some of you on the forum.
                    >
                    > Best wishes
                    >
                    > Anthony
                    >
                    > ------------ --------- --------- --------- -----
                    >
                    > Christopher
                    >
                    > I don't know why you can't get the direct links to work - they do for me and
                    > I've not heard of anyone else having trouble. In any case, they only save
                    > you one keystroke / mouse click.
                    >
                    > The whole point of a forum, as opposed to a mailing list, is that it's
                    > structured and categorised - that's why people built them and that's why
                    > people use them. There are thousands of them on the internet, on all sorts
                    > of subjects used by all sorts of people. Some have thousands of members and
                    > millions of posts. They work very well because they are structured,
                    > categorised and searchable. I've never heard anyone suggest that one should
                    > be reduced to a simple chronological list. It surely goes without saying
                    > that the BPS aren't going to go to a lot of trouble setting up a forum only
                    > to cripple it to make it behave like a mailing list - that would be stupid.
                    >
                    > Ultimately it's a matter of personal choice: if your priority is simplicity,
                    > then there's no doubt that waiting for posts to drop into your inbox is
                    > always going to be at least a bit easier than using a forum. Most people
                    > seem think the advantages of a forum are worth a little bit of effort. If
                    > you don't, that's fine, nobody's forced to use it. I've tried hard but I
                    > don't think there's anything more I can say or do to help.
                    >
                    > Best wishes
                    >
                    > Anthony
                    >
                    > > -----Original Message-----
                    > > From: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com]On
                    > > Behalf Of chrisophilus
                    > > Sent: 14 October 2009 16:55
                    > > To: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com
                    > > Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Dear all,
                    > > I have been trying to use the BPS forum recently - as I
                    > > assumed it could replace this one, but unfortunately I find it
                    > > MUCH more complicated and difficult to use. The main reason is
                    > > that you cannot just view the posts, they have all been split up
                    > > under about 7 different headings, so one has to search in 7
                    > > different places. Sometimes the site is a bit slow, too - which
                    > > makes that yet more cumbersome.
                    > > Anthony kindly suggested some more complex e-addresses to use
                    > > to get me into the recent posts, but they did not actually do
                    > > that and led to obscure pages of jargon whose function I was not
                    > > sure of. I have been a bit disappointed as I really wanted to
                    > > use a very easy forum, as simple and clear as this one - and as
                    > > it is I don't think that has been achieved yet. It appears it
                    > > might not actually be possible to get it better, but it also
                    > > might just be personal choice - not sure why.
                    > > I wonder if others also find it more difficult to use? Maybe
                    > > it's only me!
                    > > But my request for improving it is copied below in case it's
                    > > of interest and echoes others' difficulties too.
                    > > Cheers,
                    > > Chris F-J.
                    > >
                    > > No, unfortunately those new "addresses" do not lead to the list
                    > > of postings, but to some complicated pages of something else.
                    > > Actually I'm afraid this Forum is so darned obscure and difficult
                    > > to use I doubt I'll be trying very much now. The major
                    > > difficulty being the division of everything up under categories.
                    > > I didn't quite understand when you said that this is as easy as
                    > > you can make it - Do you mean it is actually electronically
                    > > impossible to remove the categories, or do you mean that you
                    > > yourself do not like to remove the categories? If it is the
                    > > latter, seeing as it is the BPS website, I'd really like to put
                    > > it to the vote at the next AGM I'm there for, as I am convinced
                    > > it makes the thing so complicated to have to search in many
                    > > different places - and I think others may have found it so, too.
                    > > It is nothing like as easy and clear as the other Forum, for example.
                    > > I cannot understand why anyone would want to split our subject up
                    > > into various different, often rather contrived categories -
                    > > pteridologists really should aim to be less compartmentalised,
                    > > rather than more, don't you think? Of course some people love
                    > > manipulating IT thingies - but for me I'm more interested in the
                    > > subject itself and would like to have to do as little
                    > > page-searching and fiddling as possible. You hardly have
                    > > millions of posts which might therefore require division into categories!
                    > > How about considering it, Anthony? Unless, of course, the site
                    > > cannot physically be designed in any other way - but I can only
                    > > doubt that very much. I just want us to end up with the easiest,
                    > > simplest and clearest website - but obviously categories within
                    > > the subject can only obstruct that aim!
                    > > Cheers,
                    > > Chris Fraser-Jenkins.
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > ------------ --------- --------- ------
                    > >
                    > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    >


                  • Alison Evans
                    Hello everyone. In my view the BPS forum makes it much easier to find previous posts, and it s only a mouse click to see the most recent posts, or the active
                    Message 9 of 14 , Oct 15, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hello everyone. In my view the BPS forum makes it much easier to find previous posts, and it's only a mouse click to see the most recent posts, or the active topics. It's like having a library ordered by subject rather than by date of accession of the books - makes sense to me. I do enjoy following the conversations on uk-ferns, but it's not so easy to find what someone said months ago. It would be a shame to lose Christopher's expert contributions - but I think they would be much more accessible to everyone on the BPS forum.
                      What do others think?
                      Alison
                       
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 3:43 AM
                      Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum

                       

                      Dear Anthony and all,
                      Thanks again for your patience, and I do agree that I hate the drop-in adverts on Yahoo, though I do find it fast at all times. I've nothing against - is it Bill Gates? or whoever it is who makes Yahoo, but also I don't have any particular loyalty to them and I would prefer to have just the one British fern forum, which would be nice if it were the BPS official one.
                      But, as I say this BPS one is too complicated and confusing for me ONLY because it has all those trifling, unnecessary categories, which attempt to split us all up into separate boxes when we're not, and prevent us from simply seeing all posts that come in, in order! Yet, Anthony, you just say it would be ridiculous to have a simple list. So that is not up for discussion, it seems - but why? What's so wrong with that idea - which of course will NOT in any way "cripple" the site as you imagine? You are never going to have masses of posts on this site - i.e. too much to handle. Maybe your idea of having all those posts is slightly above the reality of the situation we have? Have you actually thought to ask anyone if they want these confounded categories, or if they might prefer a simple list?
                      Anyway I DO ask you to reconsider this, rather than simply dismissing it, and I do ask for that straight forward chronological list of postings - THEN I can be into it any time and will enjoy using it and we won't need two fora. As it is at present, I think it is too cumbersome and was not quite designed for ordinary pteridologists in that respect. This is the only thing I'm asking, but, forgive me, I AM asking it - in order to help us all, not only myself. Any flexibility there, or will it need some sort of vote?
                      Cheers,
                      Chris.


                      --- In uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com, "Anthony Pigott" <Anthony.Pigott@ ...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Dear All
                      >
                      > I've replied to Christopher on the forum but for those here who are not
                      > there as well, I'll copy it here. Hope to see some of you on the forum.
                      >
                      > Best wishes
                      >
                      > Anthony
                      >
                      > ------------ --------- --------- --------- -----
                      >
                      > Christopher
                      >
                      > I don't know why you can't get the direct links to work - they do for me and
                      > I've not heard of anyone else having trouble. In any case, they only save
                      > you one keystroke / mouse click.
                      >
                      > The whole point of a forum, as opposed to a mailing list, is that it's
                      > structured and categorised - that's why people built them and that's why
                      > people use them. There are thousands of them on the internet, on all sorts
                      > of subjects used by all sorts of people. Some have thousands of members and
                      > millions of posts. They work very well because they are structured,
                      > categorised and searchable. I've never heard anyone suggest that one should
                      > be reduced to a simple chronological list. It surely goes without saying
                      > that the BPS aren't going to go to a lot of trouble setting up a forum only
                      > to cripple it to make it behave like a mailing list - that would be stupid.
                      >
                      > Ultimately it's a matter of personal choice: if your priority is simplicity,
                      > then there's no doubt that waiting for posts to drop into your inbox is
                      > always going to be at least a bit easier than using a forum. Most people
                      > seem think the advantages of a forum are worth a little bit of effort. If
                      > you don't, that's fine, nobody's forced to use it. I've tried hard but I
                      > don't think there's anything more I can say or do to help.
                      >
                      > Best wishes
                      >
                      > Anthony
                      >
                      > > -----Original Message-----
                      > > From: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com]On
                      > > Behalf Of chrisophilus
                      > > Sent: 14 October 2009 16:55
                      > > To: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com
                      > > Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > Dear all,
                      > > I have been trying to use the BPS forum recently - as I
                      > > assumed it could replace this one, but unfortunately I find it
                      > > MUCH more complicated and difficult to use. The main reason is
                      > > that you cannot just view the posts, they have all been split up
                      > > under about 7 different headings, so one has to search in 7
                      > > different places. Sometimes the site is a bit slow, too - which
                      > > makes that yet more cumbersome.
                      > > Anthony kindly suggested some more complex e-addresses to use
                      > > to get me into the recent posts, but they did not actually do
                      > > that and led to obscure pages of jargon whose function I was not
                      > > sure of. I have been a bit disappointed as I really wanted to
                      > > use a very easy forum, as simple and clear as this one - and as
                      > > it is I don't think that has been achieved yet. It appears it
                      > > might not actually be possible to get it better, but it also
                      > > might just be personal choice - not sure why.
                      > > I wonder if others also find it more difficult to use? Maybe
                      > > it's only me!
                      > > But my request for improving it is copied below in case it's
                      > > of interest and echoes others' difficulties too.
                      > > Cheers,
                      > > Chris F-J.
                      > >
                      > > No, unfortunately those new "addresses" do not lead to the list
                      > > of postings, but to some complicated pages of something else.
                      > > Actually I'm afraid this Forum is so darned obscure and difficult
                      > > to use I doubt I'll be trying very much now. The major
                      > > difficulty being the division of everything up under categories.
                      > > I didn't quite understand when you said that this is as easy as
                      > > you can make it - Do you mean it is actually electronically
                      > > impossible to remove the categories, or do you mean that you
                      > > yourself do not like to remove the categories? If it is the
                      > > latter, seeing as it is the BPS website, I'd really like to put
                      > > it to the vote at the next AGM I'm there for, as I am convinced
                      > > it makes the thing so complicated to have to search in many
                      > > different places - and I think others may have found it so, too.
                      > > It is nothing like as easy and clear as the other Forum, for example.
                      > > I cannot understand why anyone would want to split our subject up
                      > > into various different, often rather contrived categories -
                      > > pteridologists really should aim to be less compartmentalised,
                      > > rather than more, don't you think? Of course some people love
                      > > manipulating IT thingies - but for me I'm more interested in the
                      > > subject itself and would like to have to do as little
                      > > page-searching and fiddling as possible. You hardly have
                      > > millions of posts which might therefore require division into categories!
                      > > How about considering it, Anthony? Unless, of course, the site
                      > > cannot physically be designed in any other way - but I can only
                      > > doubt that very much. I just want us to end up with the easiest,
                      > > simplest and clearest website - but obviously categories within
                      > > the subject can only obstruct that aim!
                      > > Cheers,
                      > > Chris Fraser-Jenkins.
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > ------------ --------- --------- ------
                      > >
                      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      >



                      No virus found in this incoming message.
                      Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                      Version: 8.5.421 / Virus Database: 270.14.16/2435 - Release Date: 10/14/09 06:33:00
                    • william hughes
                      Do you realise Chris that the BPS forum uses an off the peg piece of sofware used all over the web by all sorts of forums - all with this irritating design!
                      Message 10 of 14 , Oct 15, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Do you realise Chris that the BPS forum uses an off the peg piece of sofware used all over the web by all sorts of forums - all with this irritating design! The reason of course is that it is free. You have to get used to that type of design, you cannot change it, unless you can rewrite the sofware coding and then it would be simpler to go back to a blank piece of paper and start from scratch (and it would cost a fortune). There are paid for versions - I do hope that the BPS is not paying for this as the RHS do - I suspect around the £5000 mark and it has the same problems that Chris(and myself and others)  find so irritating. The BPS have chosen this software, they are stuck with that design. If you use it you have to get used to it. The choice then is simple this Yahoo group or the BPS forum - it would be a pity to pull the plug on this Yahoo group. If I remember that was one possibility - to transfer the information from here to the BPS - easier said than done! At the moment we have a free choice which to use - it would be a pity to loose this. I very much doubt that the BPS would ditch their forum and accept this Yahoo group as being the one the BPS uses.
                        We may run the risk that someone might make the choice a very simple one.
                        William

                        --- On Thu, 15/10/09, chrisophilus <chrisophilus@...> wrote:

                        From: chrisophilus <chrisophilus@...>
                        Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
                        To: uk-ferns@yahoogroups.com
                        Date: Thursday, 15 October, 2009, 3:43 AM

                         

                        Dear Anthony and all,
                        Thanks again for your patience, and I do agree that I hate the drop-in adverts on Yahoo, though I do find it fast at all times. I've nothing against - is it Bill Gates? or whoever it is who makes Yahoo, but also I don't have any particular loyalty to them and I would prefer to have just the one British fern forum, which would be nice if it were the BPS official one.
                        But, as I say this BPS one is too complicated and confusing for me ONLY because it has all those trifling, unnecessary categories, which attempt to split us all up into separate boxes when we're not, and prevent us from simply seeing all posts that come in, in order! Yet, Anthony, you just say it would be ridiculous to have a simple list. So that is not up for discussion, it seems - but why? What's so wrong with that idea - which of course will NOT in any way "cripple" the site as you imagine? You are never going to have masses of posts on this site - i.e. too much to handle. Maybe your idea of having all those posts is slightly above the reality of the situation we have? Have you actually thought to ask anyone if they want these confounded categories, or if they might prefer a simple list?
                        Anyway I DO ask you to reconsider this, rather than simply dismissing it, and I do ask for that straight forward chronological list of postings - THEN I can be into it any time and will enjoy using it and we won't need two fora. As it is at present, I think it is too cumbersome and was not quite designed for ordinary pteridologists in that respect. This is the only thing I'm asking, but, forgive me, I AM asking it - in order to help us all, not only myself. Any flexibility there, or will it need some sort of vote?
                        Cheers,
                        Chris.


                        --- In uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com, "Anthony Pigott" <Anthony.Pigott@ ...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Dear All
                        >
                        > I've replied to Christopher on the forum but for those here who are not
                        > there as well, I'll copy it here. Hope to see some of you on the forum.
                        >
                        > Best wishes
                        >
                        > Anthony
                        >
                        > ------------ --------- --------- --------- -----
                        >
                        > Christopher
                        >
                        > I don't know why you can't get the direct links to work - they do for me and
                        > I've not heard of anyone else having trouble. In any case, they only save
                        > you one keystroke / mouse click.
                        >
                        > The whole point of a forum, as opposed to a mailing list, is that it's
                        > structured and categorised - that's why people built them and that's why
                        > people use them. There are thousands of them on the internet, on all sorts
                        > of subjects used by all sorts of people. Some have thousands of members and
                        > millions of posts. They work very well because they are structured,
                        > categorised and searchable. I've never heard anyone suggest that one should
                        > be reduced to a simple chronological list. It surely goes without saying
                        > that the BPS aren't going to go to a lot of trouble setting up a forum only
                        > to cripple it to make it behave like a mailing list - that would be stupid.
                        >
                        > Ultimately it's a matter of personal choice: if your priority is simplicity,
                        > then there's no doubt that waiting for posts to drop into your inbox is
                        > always going to be at least a bit easier than using a forum. Most people
                        > seem think the advantages of a forum are worth a little bit of effort. If
                        > you don't, that's fine, nobody's forced to use it. I've tried hard but I
                        > don't think there's anything more I can say or do to help.
                        >
                        > Best wishes
                        >
                        > Anthony
                        >
                        > > -----Original Message-----
                        > > From: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com]On
                        > > Behalf Of chrisophilus
                        > > Sent: 14 October 2009 16:55
                        > > To: uk-ferns@yahoogroup s.com
                        > > Subject: [uk-ferns] BPS forum
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > Dear all,
                        > > I have been trying to use the BPS forum recently - as I
                        > > assumed it could replace this one, but unfortunately I find it
                        > > MUCH more complicated and difficult to use. The main reason is
                        > > that you cannot just view the posts, they have all been split up
                        > > under about 7 different headings, so one has to search in 7
                        > > different places. Sometimes the site is a bit slow, too - which
                        > > makes that yet more cumbersome.
                        > > Anthony kindly suggested some more complex e-addresses to use
                        > > to get me into the recent posts, but they did not actually do
                        > > that and led to obscure pages of jargon whose function I was not
                        > > sure of. I have been a bit disappointed as I really wanted to
                        > > use a very easy forum, as simple and clear as this one - and as
                        > > it is I don't think that has been achieved yet. It appears it
                        > > might not actually be possible to get it better, but it also
                        > > might just be personal choice - not sure why.
                        > > I wonder if others also find it more difficult to use? Maybe
                        > > it's only me!
                        > > But my request for improving it is copied below in case it's
                        > > of interest and echoes others' difficulties too.
                        > > Cheers,
                        > > Chris F-J.
                        > >
                        > > No, unfortunately those new "addresses" do not lead to the list
                        > > of postings, but to some complicated pages of something else.
                        > > Actually I'm afraid this Forum is so darned obscure and difficult
                        > > to use I doubt I'll be trying very much now. The major
                        > > difficulty being the division of everything up under categories.
                        > > I didn't quite understand when you said that this is as easy as
                        > > you can make it - Do you mean it is actually electronically
                        > > impossible to remove the categories, or do you mean that you
                        > > yourself do not like to remove the categories? If it is the
                        > > latter, seeing as it is the BPS website, I'd really like to put
                        > > it to the vote at the next AGM I'm there for, as I am convinced
                        > > it makes the thing so complicated to have to search in many
                        > > different places - and I think others may have found it so, too.
                        > > It is nothing like as easy and clear as the other Forum, for example.
                        > > I cannot understand why anyone would want to split our subject up
                        > > into various different, often rather contrived categories -
                        > > pteridologists really should aim to be less compartmentalised,
                        > > rather than more, don't you think? Of course some people love
                        > > manipulating IT thingies - but for me I'm more interested in the
                        > > subject itself and would like to have to do as little
                        > > page-searching and fiddling as possible. You hardly have
                        > > millions of posts which might therefore require division into categories!
                        > > How about considering it, Anthony? Unless, of course, the site
                        > > cannot physically be designed in any other way - but I can only
                        > > doubt that very much. I just want us to end up with the easiest,
                        > > simplest and clearest website - but obviously categories within
                        > > the subject can only obstruct that aim!
                        > > Cheers,
                        > > Chris Fraser-Jenkins.
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        > > ------------ --------- --------- ------
                        > >
                        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                        > >
                        > >
                        > >
                        >


                      • Wim de Winter
                        The strong point of yahoo to my opinion is the daily digest. Could I ask you the keep that value high by not copying the entire message history every time you
                        Message 11 of 14 , Oct 15, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          The strong point of yahoo to my opinion is the daily digest. Could I ask
                          you the keep that value high by not copying the entire message history
                          every time you reply, but only the most relevant lines? For a single
                          message it is not too bad to be able to scroll down through the archive,
                          but especially in active discussions like this one the unwillingness to
                          use the delete-key leads to a self multiplying snowball of repeating text.

                          I hope you like the suggestion,

                          Wim
                        • Steve
                          Hi William While there is still an interest in using uk-ferns it will keep going Steve ... From: william hughes Subject: Re: [uk-ferns] BPS forum The choice
                          Message 12 of 14 , Oct 15, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Hi William
                             
                            While there is still an interest in using uk-ferns it will keep going
                             
                            Steve
                            ----- Original Message -----
                             
                             
                            Subject: Re: [uk-ferns] BPS forum

                             The choice then is simple this Yahoo group or the BPS forum - it would be a pity to pull the plug on this Yahoo group. If I remember that was one possibility - to transfer the information from here to the BPS - easier said than done! At the moment we have a free choice which to use - it would be a pity to loose this. I very much doubt that the BPS would ditch their forum and accept this Yahoo group as being the one the BPS uses.

                             


                          • william hughes
                            Dear all, I shall make sure I delete all the previous messages as Wim reminds us that it is a bit tedious. Regards, William Send instant messages to your
                            Message 13 of 14 , Oct 15, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment

                              Dear all,
                              I shall make sure I delete all the previous messages as Wim reminds us that it is a bit tedious.
                              Regards,
                              William

                              Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
                            • chrisophilus
                              Ah, actually someone didn t explain that there is only that format available for the BPS, I was labouring on in the delusion that it might be improved if
                              Message 14 of 14 , Oct 15, 2009
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Ah, actually someone didn't explain that there is only that format available for the BPS, I was labouring on in the delusion that it might be improved if agreed to - what pity! I had thought it had been designed by the Society's IT king.
                                Not really like a library - i.e. thousands of books - but more like a school cupboard shelf - only a very few books, thus superfluously complicated to separate everything into categories - but, well, if that's the compulsory format without being taken for a financial ride by IT-ites, then there's nothing more to be said, apart from I'll be here and others can be there if they like! I might still dip into the BPS on some occasions, though.
                                Cheers,
                                Chris.
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.