Thought it might be worth a mention

[Tom W]

Oh I agree guys, it has its worth. But stating the facts that there is so many members and so few posters how do we increase the input?

I liken it to an imbred village (no offence!) the genepool needs to expand so how would you go about doing it?

Talking amongst your (our) selves is all well and good but actually you can get more out of it with more contributors.

[Meerkat]

Warp factor 10 Chekov...

*sighs* - Chekov was the Navigator.  It's Sulu you need for the warp factoring...  

(hurtfulness unintended   )

[Mr. P]

Meerkat, But... Sulu is asleep, cannot you hear him snoring? It's actually vibrating the warp thruster intercooler, Scotty canee hold it much longer...

[CivvyFSO]

beligerant

Belligerent.

I often question why I bother to post or contribute.

I ask myself the same. Then I remind myself that to suggest I actually "contribute" is stretching it a bit. (I hope you appreciate the effort made there NOT to insult you)

[Midland Retty]

Perhaps a mailshot to all existing members stating that the site is back up and running, and the login feature is fully restored, etc, will help entice some of our lost members back.

Then as Wiz has suggested more specific interest sections, fire alarms and other bits and bobs!

And just another note, a point was made specifically about firefighters and fire safety inspectors who are used to people automatically listening to them, or thinking they know more than fire alarm engineers. I cant agree with that and actually the vast majority are non fire service

Its important not to try and lay blame at anyone specific group of people, or otherwise. For the most part I think people do get along here and new members are welcomed - i'd be interested to know why Bleve felt that elitism was playing its part.

Perhaps they could also suggest what they would like to see on the forums, as this may also benefit any new prospective members.

[Wiz]

................And just another note, a point was made specifically about firefighters and fire safety inspectors who are used to people automatically listening to them, or thinking they know more than fire alarm engineers. I cant agree with that and actually the vast majority are non fire service...........

Oooops that was me!

I'm not meaning to disrespect Fire Service personnel generally.

I have met and dealt with hundreds of them over the last 30 years and it is true to say that only a very few of them were useless. Most were helpful, knowledgeable and, most importantly, easy to work with. However, I did meet a few who had the attitude 'you will do as I say, even though you are telling me I am wrong and you can prove it'!

I apologise if any current or ex fire service personnel were offended by my comment. Although if there aren't many on Firenet, as M.R. suggests, hopefully no-one was offended.

However, if there are only a few members who are Fire Service, then surely the whole Firenet site needs re-vamping - because it certainly looks Fire Service orientated to me.

[AnthonyB]

It looks Fire service oriented, but isn't in practice - no one really uses it for issues relating to Fire Service recruitment, tactics, banter, HR, etc.

It's evolved more towards a general fire safety forum and needs to be remodelled to that with a better breakdown of sections in that way-

Alarms
EL
MoE
PFE
FRA
Training
Law/guidance
bit of everything
Engineering
Specialist - Healthcare
Specialist - Aviation
Specialist - marine

etc etc

I too now mainly use firealarmengineers.com for that side of things as well - I can get help quickly that way from several sources.

This site needs a remodel & better publicity

[BLEVE]

It needs to be less clicky, IMO banterboat should be taken to deep water and scuppered for good.

MR elitism was possibly an incorrect description selected after one too many glenmorangie late in the evening.

I certainly think that the forum should be subjected to examination with a view of obtaining a wider input.

[BLEVE]

beligerant

Belligerent.

I often question why I bother to post or contribute.

I ask myself the same. Then I remind myself that to suggest I actually "contribute" is stretching it a bit. (I hope you appreciate the effort made there NOT to insult you)

I actually look forward to your attempt at insult. Without you this forum would not be quite the same, better perhaps but not the same.

Forgive me for mispelling belligerent may be a spull chucker would be a handy addition to the forum. Also do you have any f***** idea it is to see the response window on an IPHONE

[FireNet]

I would like to thank you all for your thoughts and ideas on the layout of the Forum.
As you know the FireNet Forum was created to service the Fire Safety Officers initially but times have changed as well as responsibilities.
I will certainly add the topics that have been mentioned by AnthonyB and would most welcome your thoughts ideas on what other areas you would like to see covered on the Forum.
As always the FireNet Forum was developed to provided an area to exchange ideas and techniques which I hope will be of benefit to all our members.
Should you need to get in touch you can contact me via the forum message system.
Thanks for all your continued support
Colin Simpson
PS for all of those that don't know me I am NOT Colin Todd in any shape or form (No disrespect to the real CS Todd)

[Clevelandfire 3]

Thanks for the endorsement Bleve. I didnt realise I had been beligerant towards you on this thread. May I suggest that if someone questions you or argues with you it isnt a personal attack. We are all different and just because we argue professionally doesnt mean in any way shape or form that we dont like the person arguing with us. The tone of a reply cannot always be judged over the internet - a lesson I learnt to my detrement on these forums myself. Your summary of me was unjustified, also your comment about the "banterboat needing to be sunk" completely irelevant to the rest of the forum.

The banter thread is very much a tongue in cheek thread with absolutely nothing to do with with fire safety, and im not sure why you choose to attack that in your summary of the firenet forum. If you dont like that particular small section then dont read it. I dont think youve ever contributed to it and if you did im sure you would be most welcomed.

I make one and final point. Non fire service people on here far out number fire service personnel on this site so i think your comments were unjustified too Wiz. Ive never seen the problems you mention about inspectors being bolshy on this forum, or firefighters telling fire alarm engineers their job.Dare i mention a certain fire consultant who is very sharp with his tongue? I just cant see how this is fire service orientated either with many fire risk assessors myself included making comments. How is that fire service orientated.  jBut everyone is entitled to their opinion and i would never say otherwise. I agree special interest sections should be created for thos who want them.

The decline in membership did occur after the site alterations and i think that is glaringly obvious. Piuglet and BLeve are the first people ive known to complain. That is their right. And im not saying firenet is perfect. But lets remember its free, that people work hard to keep it free and available, and frankly if you think its that bad then why waste your time here. Just my opinion of course and not meant with mallice.

[BLEVE]

What summary of you was that

[Tom Sutton]

The level of interest by members is about the same as it as always been. In most forums there are always far more lurkers than participants, which includes me.

As for the categories I have never found any problem in finding one to ask my question in, and then I accept all the submission to form an opinion. There is always somebody who has the depth of knowledge to help you out. I am sure if a new specialist category is required then I am sure this could be accommodated.

I also do not care who responds whether it’s a small group of regular contributors or some person I have never heard of before. Because after a short time you soon find out whom you can trust and those you need to treat with caution (I haven’t found many of them). Also if you expect members to accept contributor’s pearls of wisdom without question then forget it.

I believe this is all about personalities and not about how effective the forum is.

[Clevelandfire 3]

What summary of you was that

That i dont come across as very nice.

The point is with respect to you Bleve you havent perhaps seen the full picture. Dont get me wrong if things can be done better to appeal to more prospective members then lets do it. Tell us how things need to be changed.Offer some options on how firenet could be better, but by virtue of your complaining and not merely ignoring the site tells me something. So put those complaints into something we can quantify understand and put right.

Im going to also ask piglet about his question about what firenet forums are for? Ill reverse that question what does he think of the forums are for and why they arent his cup of tea. Again thats not me being antagonistic. I just genuinely want to know.

[Steven N]

I have been using firenet now for a number of years, many like me as has already been noted don't always post. I find it a great forum to thrash out ideals, there is great knowledge among many of the members. Yes I don't always agree with what they say but very little in our world is black & white anyway. Just because views are robustly challenged doesnt make something wrong.
All forums give the impression of being cliquey particularly to newbie. To state they are unwelcoming or elitist is very insulting.
Finally the banter bar is just that a knockabout scatty forum no one is compelled to read it but it can certianly lighten up a sometimes dull evening.
(apologies for any spelling errors I borrowed cleveys spill chicker)