But then if I wanted to post an article and you were not around, it could go without being posted for a while and eventually become outdated.

wolf wrote:

---

Sounds great Sheddie, lets hope it all comes to pass. Although don't BBC Radio Nottingham have commentry on ATP Nottingham, and broadcast it on sports extra?

---

Yeah I'm looking forward to it....if we do Nottingham (it'll be a choice between that and Eastbourne), we'd just cover the qualies because it'd probably be difficult to get enough ppl up there in the week

we need a group of about 6 for it so if you're interested, you'd be very welcome to take part...same applies for anyone else

 

 

Ok cool...I'll keep you all up to date with developments on it...sometime in May (or maybe sooner) we'll have to arrange a meeting to discuss it all

Regarding the pm Madeline received...I can understand both points of view...obviously it looks best without spelling errors given who reads the site but it's a little harsh on wolf as he's been doing an amazing solo job for the past month and I know how time-consuming those articles can be.

The best thing is for a few more people to help out with the articles.......from now on I'll be able to contribute more to this each day and help wolf and if we have a couple of others too that'd be great. Also, once season 2008 starts there's going to be so many more Brits in futures, challengers, atps, wtas then atm so I suggest that the article writers combine things to get articles for atp round-up, challenger round-up, futures round-up to make things a bit easier for them rather than having separate ones fo each tourney as I and others have done in the past.

Sounds good to me.

Hi, everyone,
It's head-above-the-parapet time, I think.
I'm the villain of this particular piece, but I plead the very best of intentions. I wrote to Madeline, as I was under the impression that she was involved with the running of the site; I had intended keeping the whole matter from going public, as I very much wanted to avoid hurting anyone's feelings, but it seems I have failed in that, so I offer my sincere apologies to Wolf, and to anyone else who may feel their efforts have been slighted.
What I was trying to do was to improve the perception of our site in the eyes of non-members, in particular, in the eyes of those who have power and/or influence in our sport, the LTA, ITF, WTA, ATP and the media; I'm sure such people must look at the various fan sites, at least occasionally. I would like us to have some influence on the future of British tennis, because I recognise in our membership a vast goodwill towards our players and for the development of our sport; I also recognise some deep thinking (as well as a lot of humour!). I'm very much of the opinion that those people of influence are much more likely to take our views and suggestions seriously, if we take sufficient pride in our offerings to ensure accuracy in both fact and language - not in the postings of individuals in the threads, thats a private matter, but in those pages which can be seen as the accumulated wisdom of the site, and in particular, the news reports. If I may make the comparison, it's akin to the difference in credence we place on reports in the Guardian to those in the Sun (remember the poking of fun during the first days of the 'Andy sacks Brad' debate?) We want to be The Grauniad, not The Sun. (Why do I feel as though I'm digging myself into a hole as far as causing offence is concerned? Would you like my membership card back?)
I think it's terrific that enthusiasts give up their time to write reports for the pleasure of the rest of us; I commend them and thank them most sincerely. I would just like to see some sort of editorial system - preferably an upfront one, rather than the post hoc one suggested by John, which seems to have gathered support - to ensure our public persona is of the highest possible standard. Are there not enough of us with a fair amount of time available to pre-edit the material coming in? In my correspondence with Madeline, which I release below (not Madeline's responses, that would be an invasion of her privacy), you'll see that I suggest Madeline, Rob and myself as possible helpers in this way. That's because, in my short period of membership, though rather longer period of readership, Madeline's and Rob's postings have struck me as particularly literate (that hole's getting bigger!)
And, to put my money where my mouth is (though whether there's any room, considering I think I've already put both feet in there!) , I'm happy to offer my services in any way which would be useful to the site editorially, in report-writing (though my knowledge is restricted to the men, I'm afraid, and I have no useful contacts whatsoever) or by picking up my ball and going home.

Apologies again to anyone I've offended,

Yours in sport,
Derek

Copy of my letters to Madeline: don't shoot her, she's just the messenger.

Hello, Madeline,

I'm writing to you in your capacity as Moderator, which, I assume, means you have some sort of status within the site's hierarchy, and, therefore, have some 'pull' in respect of editorial decisions.

I've become increasingly dispirited recently at the quality of grammar and spelling on our 'News' page. As far as individual postings are concerned, whether someone writes accurately or not is very much their own business, and I wouldn't dream of suggesting that there should be any kind of quality control on them! On the other hand, the News page is our interface with the outside world - I would like to think that the LTA, the media, possibly even the various professional organisations, such as the ATP, keep an eye on what's being said by committed fans such as ourselves. I'm very much of the opinion that poor material, in the sense of accuracy, both in facts and language, lets us down and renders our views less important to those in positions of power. In a nutshell, they'll not take us seriously unless we take ourselves seriously enough to ensure we have accurate, good-quality writing on our 'front page'.

I'm writing to you about this because your postings are always in good English - as well as being interesting. There are others of whom the same comment could be made, of course, but they're not necessarily on the site's admin side.

Is it a matter you might care to raise with your colleagues on my behalf, please, or is there someone else you'd rather I contact?


________________________________________
Hello, again, Madeline,

I'm SO pleased that I have your support in this!

I, too, feel awkward about the possibility of treading on toes, especially the toes of enthusiastic volunteers. I wonder if one way round this might be for David to issue a general statement, asking that all reports, and it's reports alone about which I'm anxious, should be passed to an 'editor', or some such title, who would then post them. In that way, our members might think it a general policy change, rather than one aimed at them in particular - after all, each contributor probably thinks (as do we, of course!) that they are writing accurately, so 'it must be someone else they mean!'
If, say, you, Rob and I were willing to act in an editorial capacity, one of us would surely be available at any given time, so that there shouldn't be any real delay in the posting of news.

May I suggest that this might just carry a little more weight were it to come from you - I'm a mere newcomer and possibly would be thought of as an interfering busybody! Perhaps you could simply forward our correspondence to the powers-that-be, together with a wee accompanying note?

Regards,

Derek

-- Edited by DJ at 15:03, 2007-12-12

-- Edited by DJ at 15:10, 2007-12-12

-- Edited by DJ at 15:11, 2007-12-12

Thanks, Wolf; I'm very relieved you've not taken offence.