Who Will Save Vault Of Evil?

[dem bones]

Or perhaps that should be, is it even worth saving?

Many of those who started and made it special post infrequently, if at all, though they sometimes pm and email me with their concerns.

OK, not an easy one to write, and this might offend some people i don't wish to, but it's got to a point now where someone has to say it.

The big Vault mistake - for which I must take full responsibility - was trying to be all things to all men instead of sticking to our vintage horror & pulp roots. You you only have to look in the last thirty posts most days to see how far we've strayed from what we were once all about and why this forum looks just the bloody same as any other common or garden modern horror board you care to mention. Somewhere along the line, word must have got around that Vault exists solely to serve as a glorified chat-room cum advertising hoarding for the terminally self-interested and fuck all those old geezers they rave about.

So how did it come to this? Tragically, it seems to me that it all started to go wrong when we added a modern horror section on the old board. You'd have to be a bit dim not to have foreseen that such a development would lead to an influx of new and aspiring authors joining the board for the solitary purpose of peddling their wares, maybe saying the occasional hello-what-a-great-board-this-is (is it? how would you know?) to new members for variations sake - my fault for being stupid. Should've gone with my gut instinct, that modern horror is largely comprised of a load of pretentious garbage written by naval-gazers who'd have much preferred to write SF if only the market hadn't collapsed.

It could be that a few tweaks could turn things around. Perhaps if more prominence were given to the REAL Vault stuff - shift NEL & Co above the anthologies, shunt the worst offenders - New Members/ News/ Small Press and 'Noughties - WAY down the board and merge/ ditch some of the unproductive sections. That might see off the more scarifyingly self-interested end of the small presses for a start. There are already a plethora of modern horror boards to cater for them anyhow - indeed, all you modern and aspiring authors already take full advantage of Shocklines & Co. by posting exactly the same joyous self-self-self-buy my book/ visit my site/ join my forum me me me me mantra you peddle on here. I suggest you spam away to your hearts content to the big audience and leave the few people left on here after this post to our own devices.

Any thoughts, suggestions, hate mail & so on & so on ...?

I'll get me shroud ...

[David A. Riley]

Why not just make it official policy: nothing first published after a specific date?

Shunting things to the bottom of the column wouldn't work for me because I usually go straight to the latest 30 entries function.

It's your site, dem - you make the rules.

I assume this wouldn't include discussing modern reprints of old books, like the Wordsworth editions, just new stuff in general (ie first published recently).

David

[benedictjjones]

i wouldn't be adverse to the wiping out of the modern sections/ advertise etc.
would this affect things like the black books though?

the reason i like the site is that it has encorouged me to read older stuff i'd never of known about so would like to thank you all for that. also it has made me a book-hunter! i'm now often seen stalking the south bank for old penguins/pans and the like.

[carolinec]

Hmmm. Oh dear, Dem - what's caused this? I'm not sure I agree with you - but then I wasn't around when you had the old board so maybe I'm not the best person to comment. But I will anyway, as I know you'll welcome all kinds of input ...

I have come to the Vault quite late compared with many of you who clearly knew each other before I arrived. But when I first came here, I saw it as a Vault which celebrated ALL horror - not just the old but the new too. Now I know there are people here who prefer the old; similarly there are ones here who are just as interested in the new stuff - at least, the GOOD new stuff. So why can't the Vault be about both? That's certainly what I'd like to see anyway.

Personally if it was just about old horror and "pulp" I wouldn't feel able to contribute as much as I do. There are loads of things you folks talk about here which I haven't a clue about, and many people I've never heard of. So surely the best way forward is to cater for ALL kinds of tastes? Then, members contribute to which ever threads are of interest/relevance to them. For example, I'd never be able to contribute to a GNS thread (quite honestly, books about giant crabs sound awful - but I still think those of you who enjoy that kind of thing should be free to talk about it, I'm not wanting to stop anyone from doing that if that's what turns you on!). Similarly I've no interest at all in cowboy or crime books, so I can't contribute there either.

Maybe we need a poll - what should the Vault contain? I feel that if its TOO restricted you'll put a lot of people off, but if making it more restrictive is what people want, then so be it ..

BTW I think it's a different issue about people pimping their stuff. If you don't want people to do that, then you need to be consistent - stop everyone pimping. But if you're going to do that then what about, for example, those nice people from Wordsworth? They've been providing excellent, valuable and really interesting info for people here on the board - I'd say we need that kind of input. Is pimping your own stuff/spamming really such a problem here? It clearly annoys you, Dem, but does it bother anyone else here? Again I say, if we want to read it we can, and if we want to ignore it we can do that too - I don't see it as a problem at all, and the board has given me lots of useful links and invaluable information (which I either take or leave depending on interest).

So, those are my thoughts. I've probably annoyed you now, Dem - I'll wait sheepishly to see what kind of backlash I get ...

[carolinec]

Yes! I was typing my diatribe as David and Ben were doing their much more succint comments. Totally agree, Ben, about things like the Black Books, etc. TBH there wouldn't be much here for me at all if you got rid of new stuff like that. And if you don't, where do you draw the line? Is it OK to have mention of the Black Books as Charles is a good friend of the Vault and a regular contributor? But would you ditch anything new coming out - or recent - which might be of equal interest to people here? I'd hate to see that happen!

And I'm the same as you David, I just go for last 30 posts - regardless of thread/section (indeed, I'm still REALLY confused by the threads/sections here!).

Never mind "saving the Vault", I personally feel you'll destroy it, Dem, if you ban new stuff! It definitely wouldn't be of so much interest to me without its wide coverage.

[benedictjjones]

^
"Personally if it was just about old horror and "pulp" I wouldn't feel able to contribute as much as I do."

i'd have to add an echo to this.

[David A. Riley]

I think Dem's main complaint is summarised here:

"Should've gone with my gut instinct, that modern horror is largely comprised of a load of pretentious garbage written by naval-gazers who'd have much preferred to write SF if only the market hadn't collapsed."

I don't know about the SF market having collapsed though. In any new bookshop, that particular genre seems to be thriving far better than horror, alas.

It's the modern horror naval-gazers and pretentiousness that Dem obviously dislikes, something which doesn't crop up in Charles' Black Books, but does figure frequently elsewhere these days. Mind you, I'd do a bit of naval-gazing myself but I don't think I'm very good at it.

David

[sean]

Cattle prods. Thats what you need.

Anyway Dem, I'm sure whatever you decide to do will be cool. Just don't scrap the sf section!

[David A. Riley]

Cattle prods - they sound fun.

(How to side track a debate)



David

[weirdmonger]

Nov 13, 2008 11:31:24 GMT dem bones said:

, shunt the worst offenders - New Members/ News/ Small Press and 'Noughties - WAY down the board

You mean something like the Small Press Ark aka The Baser Pulps?

[Dr Terror]

How about treating the 'buy my book etc spam' like any other spam, Dem? Delete it if you feel it is inappropriate for the Vault.

If it helps any, in future I'll put any Black Book news etc on the forum thingy I've added to the Mortbury website instead of here.

[carolinec]

Nov 13, 2008 14:28:16 GMT Dr Terror said:

How about treating the 'buy my book etc spam' like any other spam, Dem? Delete it if you feel it is inappropriate for the Vault.

Yes, that's one solution - but how do you decide what's OK and what isn't, that's my point? You can't say "OK, we'll have the Black Books and Wordsworth Editions, but anything else gets deleted" - it's just unfair! So if you delete some, then some really interesting/useful/important stuff gets missed out. For example:

Nov 13, 2008 14:28:16 GMT Dr Terror said:

If it helps any, in future I'll put any Black Book news etc on the forum thingy I've added to the Mortbury website instead of here.

How many of us here knew you had a forum thingy on your site now? I certainly didn't until you mentioned it here. So we'd lose that kind of info. That's what I come to the various forums I use for - info on stuff I'm interested in. I want info on Black Books, Nemonymouses, small presses, etc.

And as for Des' suggestion of pushing his Cover Ark way down the list - no way!!

I think I'm going to go and post a couple of polls ...

[benedictjjones]

^re the top issue c. it's not really about 'fair' is it? not all the people contribute anything to the site but still want to spam - these should be crushed regardless, but someone who is a regular poster etc. would be okay with me.

[pulphack]

actually, it's people like me who are the problem, cos i was moaning to dem about it yesterday and hadn't bothered posting, so blame me.

it's not about 'new horror' per se. it's about people like - lets name names - troo and truegho and allyson bird who only ever seem to come on here to plug themselves. and yes, i know i posted about the varneyjack blog three (?) times, but i felt guilty about that and wish i hadn't.*

because the traffic of the above named and their like has meant that things have become bogged down in acres of 'look at me!'. and that wasn't what this was about. i've got no problem with people plugging themselves on things like shocklines - in fact, you HAVE to do that to get noticed these days - but this is not the place. this is about talking about old shit. sorry caroline, you're missing the point. you wanna talk about new small press writers? that's cool - there are plenty of places to do it. not so many to talk about old stuff, though, which is why some of us are pissed off with the way it's gone lately and have lost a bit of interest. we - well, me - don't want to to stop you talking about new stuff and yourselves - it's just that you've got LOTS of places to do it. (am i repeating myself? good. take the point.)

the vault should be about what it says on the tin. simple as that.

pimping per se isn't bad - wordsworth et al are worth it because its the old stuff they're publishing. this is the right place for them to announce it. it's not relevant for new writers and small presses, because they're NOT what the site says in the headings. how difficult is that to grasp? form and function, for gods sakes.

*charles, you're not included for two reasons. one: you never pimp the black books, just announce them, and you also contribute across the board. two: a lot of the first one seems to have stemmed from early vaulters anyway, and as such its like a house publication. nothing wrong with plugging an in-house project. you didn't join just to pimp. big difference (he says spelling it out in big letters so he doesn't get misunderstood in any way by those he has named and shamed).

go on, hate me then. those of you that would aren't worth the bother.

that as strong as i expressed it yesterday, dem? you're not taking the flak alone, old son. i'll just put the kettle on...

[carolinec]

Yes, I admit I might be misunderstanding. Indeed I'm probably one of the people who've taken the Vault in the wrong direction - totally unintentionally.

Like I said, when I joined I noticed that it was about both old and new, primarily British, horror - just what I was looking for - so those are the areas I've been interested in and have been posting in. But I'm not as knowledgeable about the old stuff as most of you here, so I can't contribute much in that regard at all. I just enjoy reading the interesting bits! I can comment on some of the newer stuff, so I have done - 'cos I thought that was what I was meant to be doing! I had no idea I was taking the Vault in the wrong direction!

Now, obviously, if the majority want the Vault to just be about old horror, then that's fine (it's Dem's board!), but that probably means I'm in the wrong place without realising it!

So, where are these other boards where people post about both the old and the new? I don't feel comfortable posting about horror too much on the BFS board - because of the "too much horror" debate which seems to pop up there occasionally. The Pantechnicon forum is top-heavy with modern SF fans. I've looked at Shocklines, but it seems to be too American oriented for my tastes and too full of professional writers - I'd be waaaaaaay out of my league with that lot! I hadn't heard of the Ramsey Campbell board until recently - is that worth a look do you reckon? Anywhere else you can recommend?

If you guys do want to get rid of the new, then I'll hang around and contribute if I can - but I do feel I need some clear guidelines now on what I should/should not be talking about here. In fact, I'm now well and truly confused!