Cross-posts from other local "dot life" forums



As site feedback I would like to suggest that moderators take a firmer line against forums cross-posting in this forum. A classic link to another site with no comment on the local relevancy to SE23:

Some of these spam threads appear to be started just to increase Google rankings rather than for any serious local interest (I’m sure that isn’t really the case, but that’s how it begins to feel for normal users), and just like other users posting links without comment, these should be discouraged by the moderators.

These spam threads clutter up topics that might be of genuine local interest. Perhaps we could have one thread to tell us about stuff being posted in the Catford forum and another for the Sydenham forum (and others for Brockley and any other less local forums)?


Lets see if anyone else feels that way Michael.


I have occasionally posted links to our adjacent forums because I know there are members here who live in Catford and Sydenham, or on the boundaries.

As evidenced by the strong feelings about Bell Green on this forum (including your own), there is an obvious appetite for our members to discuss issues in our neighbouring wards.

I am not promoting and in order to boost their Google ranking. Instead, I want to help encourage interested members to visit the forums, and hopefully to post there.

When this forum was young I also put a lot of time and effort into driving traffic here in order to build our critical mass - especially at the beginning.

Unfortunately, forums don’t get off the ground unless we actively drive traffic to them.

I hope you’ll agree the initial effort with this forum was worth it, given the healthy and active forum this now is. serves Forest Hill and Honor Oak residents very well, but it doesn’t serve Sydenham and Catford residents very well - they deserve their own modern forums IMO.

The legacy forum for Sydenham is not only dwindling and anonymously/autocratically moderated, but it is also an outright security risk for members as it is using fourteen year-old database technology.

Residents deserve better, and I won’t sit back and watch Facebook replace all local forums.

Thank you very much to the members of this forum who have positively contributed to the growth of our neighbouring “dot life” forums.


I’d be in favour of threads posting things of interest for neighbouring areas, rather than new posts every time.

And for the love of all things, please stop knocking STF. It really doesn’t do you any favours and is starting to make me disinclined to carry on reading this particular forum.


Could you explain what you’re suggesting here please?

As an anon, unverified member, I’m not sure what your connection / loyalty to STF is, but I won’t hold it against you :wink:


I mean a thread called “SE6 interest” or “SE26 interest” where a post about an event could go, rather than a new thread every time. That would presumably cover those who live on the borders without them having to specifically sign up to multiple forums (fora?).

I have no connection or specific loyalty to any forum, I read and occasionally post in more than one place depending on what I’m looking for. I just like everyone to get along without feeling like there is sniping. And I’m not verified because I have other things to do in my limited spare time!


I’m not sure this would fit with our model of meaningful titles / categories / tags / dated event topics?

Bell Green has been the subject of plenty of topics on despite it being in Bellingham ward. No one complained on geographic grounds until came into the equation, which suggests to me that objectors are more concerned with the overall “dot life” forum strategy rather than non-local topics existing on

I’m keen to distinguish opinions of “dot life detractors” (many of them anonymous accounts) from constructive concerns about the health of


I’m not sure this would fit with our model of meaningful titles / categories / tags / dated event topics?

Fair enough. Michael raised it, I see his point so suggested what I thought might be a middle ground. I can’t say I’m unduly bothered either way, I mostly ignore the cross-posts (as I do multiple posts where the topic doesn’t catch my interest).

I’m not a “ detractor”, I find this site useful for local information and I’ve been registered for 18 months! I just prefer everyone to get along, or at least to pretend to :grin:


Forum Wars…


I don’t want a war for the sake of war. I do not relish receiving personal attacks from anonymous abusers on other local forums.

I want to make positive change in Sydenham and Catford, as I did with in Forest Hill.

Often, making a change puts other people’s noses out of joint - especially when you offer an improved product that displaces an older product. That’s sad but inevitable.

If we didn’t have the occasional “war of change,” we’d all still be riding horses and carts.

I’m the kind of person who is unafraid of conflict if it means the overall outcome for everyone is better than the situation we’re currently in.


I think you’ve done a good job tbh. In starting something and sustaining all the ‘attacks’.


Thanks @JamesEvans.

I see Stuart is still posting about this on STF and he appears a bit confused from a technical point of view. Unfortunately I cannot respond there as I’m banned. But Stuart is very welcome to join us here if he likes.

Emoji are not “illegal characters,” or specific to Apple. They have been part of the Unicode spec since version 6 (2010), and are supported natively by Android, Apple and other platforms.

The reason STF’s forum software is unable to handle emojis (and the current Unicode characterset) is because its database is MySQL version 4 (as revealed in the error message Rachael received). This database software was released in 2004 and hasn’t received any security updates for years. In fact the subsequent MySQL release (version 5.1) stopped receiving security updates in 2013, which means anyone running MySQL 5.1 or earlier (especially MySQL 4.X) is not keeping their user’s data safe.


Would it be correct to say that any other forum cross-posting such links could be regarded as spam, and it is only not spam because you want us to sign up to the dot life forums?

Would it be reasonable for other forum admins to regularly post links on this site to topics on their sites so that they can actively drive traffic to their forums?


More on STF forum software:


Naturally, I want the dot life forums to support each other. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that.

Do I want the dot life forums to actively support the aging, insecure, hostile and anonymously-moderated competition? Nope.

/CC @starman


While I can see Chris’s view that there are some people here who regularly use the areas mentioned, there will be others who couldn’t care less. However, I do suspect that those genuinely interested, will simply join and visit those forums rather than wait for a cross-post. I wouldn’t expect to see an East Dulwich group here for the odd Southwark issue that impacts SE23 border residents. I just visit EDF.

Perhaps an opt-in group for Sydenham or Catford threads - which would allow best of both worlds? I’d prefer that as opposed to a single thread for each which might get unwieldy if events/replies to multiple topics kick in.


Now that’s a good idea :+1:

There are topics on that may be of general interest to members on this forum.

Let’s take a concrete example. Here’s a recent post about a development on Mayow Park

Some of our members have discussed #mayow-park in the past.

What would our members prefer?

  • Topic in opt-in Sydenham category (
  • Topic in Streetscape category (
  • No topic on
  • No strong opinion
  • Other (please comment)

0 voters