Melbourne & Australian Architecture Topics

A place to talk about Australian Architecture, Heritage & Planning Issues
It is currently 24 Oct 2017, 18:26




All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Poor traffic
PostPosted: 17 Mar 2004, 10:54 
Offline
Senior Member
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2002, 00:24
Posts: 175
We should make this forum the official forum of the National Trust, with their involvement. We should also consider taking this forum to other architecture bodies - I'm sure they have their own forums already. Does anybody have a list or recommendation of Melbourne and even Australian-based architecture/heritage forums?

The traffic through this forum is very poor.

_________________
The Melbourne Zealot!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 17 Mar 2004, 12:00 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 13 Sep 2002, 00:36
Posts: 3940
Thanks for your comments Blabby.
Maybe this site doesn't satisfy an insatiable appetite for Melbourne architecture information.

I have spoken to the Trust extensively on this and they are not interested in a forum.

They said it would be too much work to moderate and that not enough people would be interested (they consider their primary audience to be over 60 - which coincidentally is the highest growth demographic in Internet use in Australia at the moment).
I am no longer a member of the Trust.

Actually, we get over 500 unique visitors a day to this forum, which is growing all the time.
I think it is a lack of posts from registered users which is what you are looking for.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 17 Mar 2004, 15:38 
Offline
Elite Member
Elite Member

Joined: 15 Sep 2002, 20:41
Posts: 308
Location: Melbourne
If the volume of posts increases and the content varies, the more likely different things are going to crop up in Search Engines.

"Build it and they will come"

_________________
MELBOURNE - VIRES ACQUIRIT EUNDO


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 22 Mar 2004, 17:20 
Offline
Senior Member
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2002, 00:24
Posts: 175
williampitt wrote:
Thanks for your comments Blabby.
Maybe this site doesn't satisfy an insatiable appetite for Melbourne architecture information.

I have spoken to the Trust extensively on this and they are not interested in a forum.

They said it would be too much work to moderate and that not enough people would be interested (they consider their primary audience to be over 60 - which coincidentally is the highest growth demographic in Internet use in Australia at the moment).
I am no longer a member of the Trust.

Actually, we get over 500 unique visitors a day to this forum, which is growing all the time.
I think it is a lack of posts from registered users which is what you are looking for.

Which bits don't you agree with re National Trust? I gave up my membership, but when they came crawling back asking for another chance, I gave them another chance after Randell Bell left. Their activities, etc are great, even if I don't agree with all their policies. The problem with the National Trust could be the over 60s element - if more people were interested, its policies would be more inclusive and hence it would have more clout when it advocated. How do you get younger people interested? Start by having more inclusive policies! Instead, what happens when this generation of members goes? You've got to cultivate the appreciation and the education in the young today! Its membership is dwindling into irrelevancy. Their response to the forum is classic about what's wrong with the Trust! Who will advocate and volunteer tomorrow if not today's younger members? Somebody should tell them that. They need to attract more people - younger people today to secure tomorrow's . I think the problem with the Trust is simple - OVER-CONSERVATIVE in policies and management. But that's perhaps too simplistic. Well, I'm still a member - for now.

_________________
The Melbourne Zealot!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 08 Jan 2007, 16:23 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: 13 Sep 2002, 00:36
Posts: 3940
Blabbyboy wrote:
williampitt wrote:
Thanks for your comments Blabby.
Maybe this site doesn't satisfy an insatiable appetite for Melbourne architecture information.

I have spoken to the Trust extensively on this and they are not interested in a forum.

They said it would be too much work to moderate and that not enough people would be interested (they consider their primary audience to be over 60 - which coincidentally is the highest growth demographic in Internet use in Australia at the moment).
I am no longer a member of the Trust.

Actually, we get over 500 unique visitors a day to this forum, which is growing all the time.
I think it is a lack of posts from registered users which is what you are looking for.

Which bits don't you agree with re National Trust? I gave up my membership, but when they came crawling back asking for another chance, I gave them another chance after Randell Bell left. Their activities, etc are great, even if I don't agree with all their policies. The problem with the National Trust could be the over 60s element - if more people were interested, its policies would be more inclusive and hence it would have more clout when it advocated. How do you get younger people interested? Start by having more inclusive policies! Instead, what happens when this generation of members goes? You've got to cultivate the appreciation and the education in the young today! Its membership is dwindling into irrelevancy. Their response to the forum is classic about what's wrong with the Trust! Who will advocate and volunteer tomorrow if not today's younger members? Somebody should tell them that. They need to attract more people - younger people today to secure tomorrow's . I think the problem with the Trust is simple - OVER-CONSERVATIVE in policies and management. But that's perhaps too simplistic. Well, I'm still a member - for now.


for one thing I dissagreed totally with their stance on opposing windfarms. with climate change a reality, anything to offset pollution is a must. Anyway Victoria has no "unspoilt" coastline left. Stopping windfarms for the sake of it is just stupid.

Secondly I hate their attitude towards young people. And in this I mean anyone under 60 years of age. They are far too conservative in their opinion.

Finally. They do nothing and simply use their funds to prop up several money pits which would be better served by establishing covenants than owning it under their antiquated 1950s model of heritage protection.

They aren't very active or vocal and they often have this annoying "Kay Serah" attitude to the demise of heritage (ala Baymor Court, St Kilda). Their status as a watchdog has been heavily undermined by the VHR and the Heritage Council and fan sites like this one.

And their publications are simply not of the quality of what else is out there ....

In summary, they need a big changing of the guard and an attitude adjustment in order to survive the next 50 years.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Melbourne Buildings