Hyndburn Life - Well Would You Believe it?

[cashman]

Originally Posted by garinda

It's almost like he's put a load of stuff on about Stanley, to appear in a favourable light to the people and fans, but has no idea what is actually on there.

Even if it was posted by himself, in his third person guise, it's his website, and he's responsible.

Not in my name.

Disgraceful.

so whats new about the guy?

[garinda]

If the foul video suddenly disappears from his site, which it hopefully will, so no innocent children are tainted by it, and anyone wants to see what was on it, someone in the media say, I have the featured video safely secured, where it is out of harms way.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by cashman

so whats new about the guy?

Some people are really just a liability, and their own worst enemy.

I genuinely feel sorry for Conservative activists in Hyndburn, they don't exactly get the best materials to work with.

Westminster?

The Tower of London would be a kinder, safer solution, for us...and himself.

[Wynonie Harris]

To be fair, I think he probably gave someone else the task of putting the Stanley video together. I was taught by the same English teachers at both St Peters and AGS and I'm convinced that he couldn't have written the semi-literate drivel that passes for captions.

As for the offending song, I can only assume he hasn't listened to it.

What amuses me is that the site's been up and running for at least two years and there's been no furore about it before. You'd think with the many visitors that a council leader's site receives, someone would've noticed...

[Less]

Originally Posted by Gayle

Just a thought though - the money that was 'wasted', what was it actually spent on?

Hardware - possibly bought from a local supplier
Software - probably a national one, so we'll gloss over this one
Staff wages - all local people which means that people were paid a wage and it was spent in local shops in the local economy

I'm not trying to justify it, because I don't think there's any doubt that it didn't work, but just trying to play devils advocate and look at how 'wasted' money, isn't actually as 'wasted' as you might think. Some people who live locally earned money, which put bread on their table and clothes on their back.

Sorry Gayle no money spent locally, the site 'constructed' by a Manchester firm that was above a Barbers:-

http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/94586-post135.html

The shame is the link now shows that error 404 do you suppose these 'software Engineers', took the money and ran?
If so may I just say enjoy your early retirement lads, nice work if you can get it, we would all do the same if offered the same chance.

The standard of the sites poor coding was also discussed:-

http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/92838-post106.html

& The site was announced to the world in the Obbo', which managed to draw this comment from Acrylic Bob:-

http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/93033-post116.html

If you read the whole of that thread I think you will come to the conclusion that the money was, wasted.

[Retlaw]

[quote=garinda;780383]It's 'wasted' period, if it didn't fulfill it's brief, provinding a community website for Hyndburn, and never got off the ground because of the apathy of our council.

£591,000.00 would provide an awful lot of bread, on even the greediest of glutton's table.

It would be interesting to see an actual breakdown of where the money was spent, by whom, and on what.
So would I, how much does it actually cost to create a website, wages for the designer, cost of hosting the website. I think £10,000 is too much
never mind £591,000. Some one is laughing all the way to the bank, and some of our local bigwigs need to get a grip on reality, and do a proper job, instead of filling offices with made up jobs & time wasters.

Retlaw.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris

To be fair, I think he probably gave someone else the task of putting the Stanley video together. I was taught by the same English teachers at both St Peters and AGS and I'm convinced that he couldn't have written the semi-literate drivel that passes for captions.

As for the offending song, I can only assume he hasn't listened to it.

What amuses me is that the site's been up and running for at least two years and there's been no furore about it before. You'd think with the many visitors that a council leader's site receives, someone would've noticed...

You, me, or anyone else with any common sense at all, would at least check what was put on our own personal website.

I certainly would.

The odd link to the H.B.C. site that doesn't work is an embarrassment.

Accriwooton/Hywndbun is a laughable faux pas.

Having a video on your own personal website, which clearly features the f-word, is very sloppy.

Like you say, it's been there for ages. Obviously not many Stanley fans are Britcliffe fans, no matter what trite guff he puts on there, trying to appear supportive.

The f-word, on a site accesible to anyone, of any age?

You can be damn sure it wouldn't be there, not in my name.

[garinda]

[quote=Retlaw;780480]

Originally Posted by garinda

It's 'wasted' period, if it didn't fulfill it's brief, provinding a community website for Hyndburn, and never got off the ground because of the apathy of our council.

£591,000.00 would provide an awful lot of bread, on even the greediest of glutton's table.

It would be interesting to see an actual breakdown of where the money was spent, by whom, and on what.
So would I, how much does it actually cost to create a website, wages for the designer, cost of hosting the website. I think £10,000 is too much
never mind £591,000. Some one is laughing all the way to the bank, and some of our local bigwigs need to get a grip on reality, and do a proper job, instead of filling offices with made up jobs & time wasters.

Retlaw.

Well we're informed by the man who funded Roy, that Accy Web took about sixty quid, give or take a tenner or so, to set up.

Which would leave rather a lot of change out of £591,000.00.

Well £590,940.00 to be precise.

Enough to employ a couple of people to run it for years, some marketing, making sure everyone in the borough knew about, or could access it.

There'd even be enough change to provide a few butties and balloons, and have a launch party.

[Less]

[quote=garinda;780484]

Originally Posted by Retlaw

Well we're informed by the man who funded Roy, that Accy Web took about sixty quid, give or take a tenner or so, to set up.

Rindy can I just tell you, I didn't actually fund Roy, I was only joking when I mentioned him using my credit card, the figure arrived at between you and I was plucked out of the air, though no doubt, is nearer to an accurate amount than £600,000 odd for setting up a website!

[andrewb]

So.. did all the £600k of the fund go towards this website? I can't understand how a company or council would charge and pay that much.

If they do, I've clearly made a career mistake.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by andrewb

So.. did all the £600k of the fund go towards this website? I can't understand how a company or council would charge and pay that much.

If they do, I've clearly made a career mistake.

i can understand it andrew, don't sound that incredible when yer as owd as me. aint saying it did, but saying owts believeable wi politicians.

[Morecambe Ex Pat]

I would assume that the Council obtained several quotes for the website before signing a contract with the people who actually carried out the work.
I wonder what some of the rejected quotes were?
A figure of £10000 has been mentioned and that would be about right for a website like that. There would be ongoing costs but even if the site had taken off and a huge photo library was created, it would never have cost more than £500 per year.

In the real world, it would take many years to reach the final total.

[Wynonie Harris]

Originally Posted by garinda

You, me, or anyone else with any common sense at all, would at least check what was put on our own personal website.

I certainly would.

The odd link to the H.B.C. site that doesn't work is an embarrassment.

Accriwooton/Hywndbun is a laughable faux pas.

Having a video on your own personal website, which clearly features the f-word, is very sloppy.

Like you say, it's been there for ages. Obviously not many Stanley fans are Britcliffe fans, no matter what trite guff he puts on there, trying to appear supportive.

The f-word, on a site accesible to anyone, of any age?

You can be damn sure it wouldn't be there, not in my name.

You're right, of course. It's simply professional to check anything that goes out under your own name in the most minute detail.

It also says a lot about his attitude towards Stanley, too, despite his grandoise words about the importance of the club to the borough.

And, quite frankly, it does him no credit at all.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by garinda

If the foul video suddenly disappears from his site, which it hopefully will, so no innocent children are tainted by it, and anyone wants to see what was on it, someone in the media say, I have the featured video safely secured, where it is out of harms way.

A video, with lyrics that say, 'If ya wanna fight just step inside the ring'. I doubt very much any media would be interested in that. Only a select few individuals, motivated by getting one up on Councillor Britcliffe, without having established the facts.

Oh you do get yourself in a giddy mood. That is twice in a week that excitement has got ahead of you.

Silly billy.

[Less]

Originally Posted by Morecambe Ex Pat

I wonder what some of the rejected quotes were?
A figure of £10000 has been mentioned and that would be about right for a website like that. There would be ongoing costs but even if the site had taken off and a huge photo library was created, it would never have cost more than £500 per year.

In the real world, it would take many years to reach the final total.

I doubt we will ever know what the rejected quotes were.


Can I just ask, how do you know that £10k is 'about right'?

Especially as it was a site never fit for purpose?

In the real world since Roy started Accyweb he has moved on from using free software and renting space on someone else's servers to running two servers of his own which because of the amount of space taken by everything are upgraded sometimes as quickly as after 18 months.
The software isn't cheap, he is planning another upgrade for that has all ready purchased it just doesn't have time to install it due to work commitments.

Although these and sundry other overheads have to be paid for, I doubt very much that even though the site has been running since 2003 the total expenditure would be anything like that figure, if it was he just wouldn't be able to afford it.