Dude - the fact RAWK use SMF was part of the decision, and I've seen it used well on other high-volume forums, it seems to be the most "professional" of the free scripts out there. PHPBB isn't bad, but has a reputation for being easily hacked.
Kingjari - Thanks for that!
I understand what you're saying, and you're not the first. I think most of the time what I've said has been to question the "facts" we're fed in the media, and the "facts" people leave as comments on the blog. I've done the same on other LFC forums and often got the same response.
The problem is that most of these "facts" are (for want of a better way of putting it) anti-Hicks, pro-Dubai. This means that when I go to check a "fact", and then write about how the "fact" is wrong or maybe exaggerated, it means by default my words seem to defend Hicks and attack Dubai.
I'll not go on too long about it now, but too many attacks on Hicks are based on false information, or even on "promises" that were actually from Gillett. (Generalising here) people tend to gloss over any worries about Dubai, and sensationalise the slightest little thing about Hicks. I'd rather we tried to see the whole picture, base our feelings on as much of the truth as we possibly can. I hate the way LFC and LFC fans are often misrepresented in the press, and how that's been the case for years, and I don't feel comfortable with us doing the same to Hicks.
I've spoken to the union about my concerns, and it's all constructive criticism really. I think if I went into it too much on here it would be seen as undermining them though, and I don't want to do that. I won't support a campaign if I'm against it (I wasn't keen on the shovel-in-the-ground campaign for instance, for a number of reasons) but I don't want to make a fuss by writing an article about why I wasn't keen on the campaign. It's just my opinion. Basically I don't want to promote a campaign if a lot of what it says is either inaccurate, or full of spin. But that's my opinion.
I want the union to succeed.
