Forum Rules

[The Team]

During the course of recent discussions some Members have commented about the Forum Rules as a result of these comments  we the Team are next going to look at the Rules but we need the help of YOU the Members to help us. What we need us your ideas. Is there any of the current rules that could be deleted or is there something not in the Rules that you think should be , are the Rules worded correctly could they be simplified or worded better ? So come on let us have your thoughts on the Forum Rules. 

 

Thank You

 

The Team

 

The current rules are at http://www.fun-fairs.co.uk/rules/

[Peter van der Knaap]

Rule to be removed: 7. One should allow to report incidents/accidents, for as long as the incident is known by the showman involved (i.e.: report at the cashbox) and the reaction of the showman involved is put in the forums too (if one can get a reaction at that moment). As long as the discussion is respectfully done, there should not be a problem. If newspapers report of incidents or accidents, one should allow them to be included in this forum too (copyright has to be taken into account, of course). It's not always "all the fun of the fair" and one should not censor this. It's bad if you are a "good news only" forum, since you lose credibility.

 

Rule to be removed: 9. Why can one not say that a showman has an exceptionally good ride, or has exceptionally good food? For as long as you speak out positive, there is no problem. However, if you are going to report negative: always go to the cashbox first and state why it was bad and report here how the showman reacted. We are not only fans, but we are also customers and should be able to have a place to give our views not only on positive, but on negative things too. Freedom of speech is a very important thing in our society.

 

Rule to be removed: 15. If a showman messes up, it should be reported here. But also here: go to the cashbox first and report how the showman reacted. Normal forum rules (respect for one another) should be enough.

 

Rule to be removed: 24. This reduces storage costs. One can add that if one uses links out of other websites for hosting pictures, a minimal amount of time has to be guaranteed that the pictures are visible in this forum (f.e. 1 year at least).

 

And of course, I don't expect to be banned, since I've now violated rule number 25 by answering your request... 😀

 

 

 

 

 

[Ian Woodall]

10 hours ago, Peter van der Knaap said:

Rule to be removed: 7. One should allow to report incidents/accidents, for as long as the incident is known by the showman involved (i.e.: report at the cashbox) and the reaction of the showman involved is put in the forums too (if one can get a reaction at that moment). As long as the discussion is respectfully done, there should not be a problem. If newspapers report of incidents or accidents, one should allow them to be included in this forum too (copyright has to be taken into account, of course). It's not always "all the fun of the fair" and one should not censor this. It's bad if you are a "good news only" forum, since you lose credibility.

 

 

 

This rule is down to UK law. You wouldn't know which incidents/accidents could end up in court.

[The Team]

Thanks Peter and Ian. We're looking into it.

 

Any more suggestions to be looked at will be beneficial to everyone.

Thanks

[Peter van der Knaap]

17 hours ago, Ian Woodall said:

 

This rule is down to UK law. You wouldn't know which incidents/accidents could end up in court.

 

If that's so, why can newspapers report accidents and incidents? They also don't know which ones could end up in court. I don't understand this, so can you give me some insight of how UK law prevents this from happening?

Edited May 14, 2018 by Peter van der Knaap

[Bill Edwards]

Please see https://www.out-law.com/page-9742   (The sub judice rule and contempt of court)

 

It's a mine field, newspapers with their unlimited budgets and armies of lawyers get it wrong occasionally. What hope has an enthusiast web site got?

 

Also, in all my years on Fairgrounds, I've NEVER spoken to a Showman who supports an enthusiast forum discussing accidents. I think the forum and individual members would lose a lot of support from Showmen if this rule were dropped.

 

 

On a general note, I don't know how things work in Holland, but in the UK enthusiasts usually visit fairs in their local area and will often, over time, develop an on-going relationship with local Showmen. As a result of this process I have several Showmen I consider to be friends and will, from time to time, get a phone call asking if I can help out. If the forum were to report accidents, be critical, encourage detrimental posts I'm sure my relationship with those Showmen would be strained or even break down. That is something I personally don't want to happen.

Edited May 14, 2018 by Bill Edwards

[Adam Brown]

To be fair, much as I think there are some rules worth looking at, this isn't one of them. I've never noted a discussion on any form of social media, either by showmen or a enthusiasts on the subject and such things are usually fairly private.

 

It is indeed legal to announce an accident has happened, and to give the facts. The problem is that it is very easy to stray from fact to opinion and then the trouble starts. Things can also not be discussed during a trial which would mean threads needing to be removed. A hornets nest is ever there was one.

 

Thankfully there are very few serious accidents on the UK fairground scene. I seem to recall hearing David Wallis (then Senior Vice President of the Guild) discussing safety at the Eastern Section AGM, he said that statistically speaking fairs are the safest passenger carrying industry around. 

[Simon Deery]

I personally don't feel any of the rules are in need of removal or are in any way unreasonable. Some could well be condensed or combined and or reworded possibly and also have a more prominent position to access the rules from all pages on the site to reinforce their importance and be easy to reference.

With regard to the mention of discussing accidents and incidents, I strongly disagree that this is in any way conducive or indeed necessary. To reiterate Bill's post, I also have a number of showmen whom I count as good friends and have built up a relationship of trust and respect with over the years. My interest in the fairground industry does not extend to acting as a reporter to something which I probably did not witness nor have the facts to justify my words. 

As Adam rightly points out above, fairgrounds are statistically safe and serious accidents are rare. It is not helpful to speculate on any incidents should they occur and given the inaccurate and shoddy wording of newspaper reports on such matters over the years that culture has to stop.

 

[Paul Needham]

i dont have an issue with ANY of the rules and think them to be sensible, and necessary, no need to be discussing accidents as said we are here to support showmen without whom we would sat at home doing an awful lot of thumb twiddling🙁 anything anyone wishes to discuss in this area can be done in person at one of the many shows

although not a betting man I wish I could have got good odds on who might object to any rules🙂

[Peter van der Knaap]

It has nothing to do with being friends with showmen at all. On the contrary: in every branche you've got bad and good companies. If a showman tends to give customers bad service, one should be able to write about it, just as if a showman gives exceptional good service. I'll give you an example of a discussion which comes up in the Netherlands a lot of times in the last couple of years. It's the use of smartphones by staff and showmen during opening times of the fair, which in the eyes of the customers is considered to be rude. This in itself is believed to be harmful for the industry. But it seems to have become something of a habit nowadays. Should we not be able to discuss these kind of things if you see this same thing happening on your fairgrounds? Customer treatment is also a subject which one should be able to discuss. Don't forget: on forums like this showmen meets customer outside from the fairground itself. Customer experience might be totally different that what the showman expects the customer to experience...

 

People here are also concerned with possible lawsuits. That's something which astonishes me. Isn't there something like "free speech" in the UK? For as long as one stays with the facts and stays respectful there should not be a problem at all. I've never heard of a law suit been raised against Themepark.nl, where accidents are reported and respectfully discussed.

So I don't know where you are afraid of. Or are nowadays newspapers sued for every accident they are reporting in the UK? Never heard about that.

 

Personally, I think that we are imposing censorship upon ourself if you don't allow these kind of discussions.

[Bill Edwards]

8 minutes ago, Peter van der Knaap said:

It has nothing to do with being friends with showmen at all. On the contrary: in every branche you've got bad and good companies. If a showman tends to give customers bad service, one should be able to write about it, just as if a showman gives exceptional good service. I'll give you an example of a discussion which comes up in the Netherlands a lot of times in the last couple of years. It's the use of smartphones by staff and showmen during opening times of the fair, which in the eyes of the customers is considered to be rude. This in itself is believed to be harmful for the industry. But it seems to have become something of a habit nowadays. Should we not be able to discuss these kind of things if you see this same thing happening on your fairgrounds? Customer treatment is also a subject which one should be able to discuss. Don't forget: on forums like this showmen meets customer outside from the fairground itself. Customer experience might be totally different that what the showman expects the customer to experience...

 

People here are also concerned with possible lawsuits. That's something which astonishes me. Isn't there something like "free speech" in the UK? For as long as one stays with the facts and stays respectful there should not be a problem at all. I've never heard of a law suit been raised against Themepark.nl, where accidents are reported and respectfully discussed.

So I don't know where you are afraid of. Or are nowadays newspapers sued for every accident they are reporting in the UK? Never heard about that.

 

Personally, I think that we are imposing censorship upon ourself if you don't allow these kind of discussions.

 

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine. I don't agree and won't be persuaded otherwise so we'll have to agree to differ.

 

If the team agree with you and change the rules, I will take no part in such discussions.

[John Carter]

It seems to me that there's a massive difference between reporting an accident/incident and discussing it. What follows from that is something I don't know: at the moment, if there's an accident/incident with a particular type of ride, how do other operators, of the same type of ride, find out about it and how long does it take?

Edited May 16, 2018 by John Carter

[Owain Williams]

In regards to accidents I think  it would be unwise to discuss the actual accident but I don't think it's a bad thing that we discuss what happens afterwards. For example, with the accident in USA regarding the KMG Afterburners, I can't see what the problem is in discussing KMG's reaction,  effect on rides currently travelling in the UK and which ones,  progress and changes in safety aspects etc. But in terms of deaths/injuries, faults (mechanical or human) and investigations I think it would be best to leave that alone as it could cause a lot of unwanted tension and ill feeling. I don't want to walk onto a ground and be challenged by a showman due to a comment I made on here and I hope other enthusiasts feel the same. It may be different abroad, but I feel that the UK scene is alot closer and we tend to see members of the same showfamilies on numerous grounds during the season and they familiarise with some enthusiasts. The newspapers and other media are far too ready to place blame and to raise the same old rubbish about ride safety without enthusiasts stoking the very same flames. So if the rule about accidents is to be tweaked it would need to be closely monitored and carefully worded to eliminate any potential blurred lines between can say and cannot say

[Adam Brown]

11 hours ago, John Carter said:

It seems to me that there's a massive difference between reporting an accident/incident and discussing it. What follows from that is something I don't know: at the moment, if there's an accident/incident with a particular type of ride, how do other operators, of the same type of ride, find out about it and how long does it take?

 

There is a system in place. Lists are maintained of who owns what and each section notifies as appropriate. I would imagine other bodies (such as SIRPS) have something similar in place.

 

An example by a tester was given of a ride in the US that failed resulting in a fatality. All UK based rides of similar design were immediately closed until the cause became clear, and inspected and reopened as appropriate. The system is fairly robust.  

[Paul McHaddan]

Accidents on fairgrounds or theme parks should only be talked about between the owners & health & safety & the local authority not anyone else..

 

It does not do anyone any good talking about it on FB or websites or in the newspapers!!!

[Ormester101]

let's stick away from accidents full stop 

[The Team]

When the forum was under the old management there were numerous complaints about the current rule set.

We have agreed to look at the rules and have asked for your input. Given the previous number of complaints, the general response has been disappointing.

 

We are currently finalising what we believe to be a reasonable rule set. This is YOUR last opportunity to shape the new rule set.

 

Please give us your input or forever hold your peace.

[Jay Foulkes]

I have no objections to the current rules. I don't personally see how reporting the very occasional mishap (as is life) is beneficial to Showmen, their staff, or us as fans of the industry.

[Wood1]

Regarding the rules ,I am sure they have got a lot stricter over the last 2 years over what I consider very petty  things.

The main rules regarding Accidents and naming showmen  are all sensible and protect the site from legal action, my  issue is with what I consider to be rules for the sake of rules, and feel  the amount of rules on here are just crazy for the sake of rules.

 

I have posted many comments on here previously all innocent never  saying any thing bad about a showmen only to find a moderator has removed it ,when that happens a lot it is really annoying.One item  that really sticks out and annoys me and I think highlights how petty these rules are ,2 years ago their was a report I think of a showmen's waltzer  on the car park opposite Fantasy island ,that year their was a reverse Bungee ride next to it ,and I asked whose ride was it as I had never seen such a ride take so much money .I don't think their was any thing wrong with that  but the moderators did. I have  had several instances like that  only over the last 2 years ,so now their is no point in contributing anything as it will be removed !

I would like to know how thick the rule book is ,I imagine at least the size of a phone book ,whilst you need some rules ,the amount of rules on this site are way to excessive.Bill did a brilliant job on setting up this site ,but the rules now need bringing back to a sensible level that most can understand. If their is a question about  something on a fair report why can you not ask it after the fair report not have to start a new thread .

[Mike Willis]

3 hours ago, Wood1 said:

I would like to know how thick the rule book is ,I imagine at least the size of a phone book ,whilst you need some rules ,the amount of rules on this site are way to excessive.Bill did a brilliant job on setting up this site ,but the rules now need bringing back to a sensible level that most can understand. If their is a question about  something on a fair report why can you not ask it after the fair report not have to start a new thread .

 

http://www.fun-fairs.co.uk/rules/

[The Team]

@Wood1

Thanks for your response.

The whole reason for us asking for the members views is to re-do the rules 😊

 

Don't forget, the only reason the existing rules are so in-depth is due to problems that have been encountered over the years.

 

3 hours ago, Wood1 said:

,but the rules now need bringing back to a sensible level that most can understand.

 

Hence our request to you all to tell us what needs changing, altering, re-wording, deleting, editing  .

 

Quote

 

If their is a question about  something on a fair report why can you not ask it after the fair report not have to start a new thread .

 

 This is already under discussion by The Team 😉

Edited May 19, 2018 by harry monk
spacing

[The Team]

To follow on from our request, and after heavy discussion within the Team, the revised rule list is in place.

 

'Thank You' to everyone who responded with suggestions and views/opinions to our request in this topic .