London Fandom First Thursday Meeting: A Proposal
We are initiating this new thread as an attempt to pull together the various aspects of the First Thursday debate and move towards something that constitutes a decision with which we can all live. We've read the other threads on this topic and we think that what we're proposing is broadly in line with the views expressed but, to be blunt, we're trying to close down the endless discussion, here and elsewhere, which has now been ongoing for several months and doesn't seem to be getting us anywhere. We are also making a call for unity. As such, and given who we are, it was going to be entitled 'The Fishlifter Position', but we recognise the potential for ribaldry and we are trying to be vaguely serious about this. To be absolutely clear, we do not claim to speak for others and we do not claim to be making a decision on behalf of anybody else. We are merely trying to break this deadlock.
In essence, our personal views on the First Thursday meeting remain unchanged: that it is the continuity of a monthly meeting for a large broad-based group of London fans that is important and that the venue is of no consequence so long as it meets minimum standards which are primarily that it has a reasonable amount of space available either in a public area and/or in an area that can be reserved by us; that it is reasonably accessible which would cover just about anywhere within the bounds of the Circle line; that the ambience and locale are reasonably salubrious; and that it sells a reasonable range of drinks at reasonable (i.e. London pub) prices, a caveat that would really only exclude, say, a wine bar, a coffee shop, or the bar at the Savoy assuming they have one. Notice the emphasis on 'reason' throughout; this is not a quest for perfection. We believe that all three venues currently under consideration -- Barley Mow, Red Lion, Silver Cross -- do meet those minimum standards.
We realise, though, that there are a number of people who do care passionately about what we regard as minor issues -- the exact nature of the beers on sale, whether and to what extent food is available at the venue or nearby, the quality of the decor, and so on -- but we think these are all secondary and are areas where we should be prepared to individually compromise in pursuit of our primary objective which is the continuance of a broad-based London fan meeting. However, if there are people who do wish to debate the merits of one beer against another or which pub serves the best beef burgers, we'd prefer it if they just got on with debating the issue with other like-minded souls, established a consensus, and told the rest of us what it is.
This does not appear to be happening and at the moment we have people drifting between three venues while nobody seems to be advocating any kind of decision-making mechanism, a criticism we feel justified in making as we did propose such a mechanism in December but so many people told us it was too complicated, too time-consuming, unnecessary or just plain wrong, that we did not pursue it. This situation, we believe, is actively damaging the continuance which we consider to be primary. Many people are drifting away altogether and the relatively small numbers at each potential venue risks alienating the management of all three as none of them attract enough people to convey the impression that we are in fact a large group of potentially valuable customers. In the worst case, we could be left with nowhere and have to start again in our quest to find a venue, which will diminish numbers even further.
What we need right now, we believe, is a pub which fans generally can accept is adequate. It may not be yourpreferred choice, it certainly won't be perfect, and it'll probably at least have a few teething troubles, but we think everybody just needs to make the effort to accept a compromise if necessary and rally together before the London Circle fragments entirely.
Therefore, with that in mind we suggest that the Silver Cross is no longer sustainable as a potential venue. We know that there are people who disagree with this contention, who feel that the criticisms that have been levelled against it are not justified (to some extent, so do we), but the simple fact is that a large number of people have already decided that, for them, it is out of the question and it now seems impossible for the pub to develop any kind of genuine consensus support. We recognise that those who have already flatly refused to consider a certain option are not being helpful -- indeed this is precisely what we're asking you not to do -- but there are people who have taken this line, it seems unlikely that they will back down and we don't think they can be ignored. The Silver Cross is a busy pub and, as things stand, it seems that a meeting in that venue will no longer attract enough people to fill the space we have been 'reserving'. In the past these reservations have not always been honoured, and the decreasing number of attendees increase the chances in our view of future 'double bookings'. The pub does not need our custom, a position that is unlikely to change; indeed it could get worse if we're reserving a section of the pub and preventing other customers from using it while not fully utilising it ourselves. It should go without saying but just to be absolutely clear we intend no criticism of Simon Bradshaw and others who advocated the Silver Cross in the first place. The problems that have caused some fans to stop attending meetings were of a kind that would only come to light in practice; they couldn't have been identified in advance. We will not make further bookings at the Silver Cross, although of course anybody else who feels they really cannot get behind our proposal is of course welcome to do so.
Of the two remaining options we judge that the Barley Mow currently has the most support, making it best placed to be the foundation of a consensus, and we propose it as the new venue. It was notable that, whilst several people passed through the Red Lion last Thursday, nobody stayed. We recognise that nobody stayed because nobody else stayed, but the pub doesn't seem to have the same extent of established support as the Barley Mow. Both its bars were full; there were no seats available. The upstairs bar is bookable at no cost -- we have confirmed this -- but the downstairs bar does not represent a practical overflow as, on the basis of available evidence, it is likely to be full without us. Again, the pub does not seem to need our business although, to be fair, we have been told that we would be welcome. It probably offers the best all-round communications links and the best range of nearby facilities but its ale -- whilst cheap -- is insufficiently real for some tastes and we really think that, for all that we do not believe this should be a major consideration, it has the potential to limit this venue's ability to attract a broad-based consensus.
The Barley Mow does seem to have its own active and vocal supporters and promoters. It also topped the last PNN poll, something which should be taken into account although it's only a consideration because the poll was not billed as a decision, many people didn't know about it, and the Red Lion was not then an option. We were initially critical of the way that, despite topping that poll, none of the pub's advocates seemed willing to actively push it as a viable alternative -- seemingly expecting us to have the courage of their convictions when they did not themselves -- but this has now changed: there are a number of people actively promoting the choice and we feel it is worth noting that one of them, Leon, put up his own money as a deposit for last week's trial meeting (just to be absolutely clear, we understand that this would not be required in future). The pub seems to be virtually deserted in the evening so, whilst its upstairs bar is clearly too small on its own, the downstairs bar does offer a viable overflow. The pool tables -- perceived by some to be limiting the space available upstairs -- can be moved out of the way if attendance levels justify it. It's been noted that the management were initially disappointed that numbers did not come up to expectations last week, but attendance did pick up throughout the night and it's believed that they were reasonably content by the end. Contrary to some assertions, the location is perfectly accessible by public transport via Farringdon or Barbican. It's probably not as accessible for many as the Red Lion but it seems to be perfectly within the limits of what's reasonable.
We (the two of us) therefore intend to relocate to the Barley Mow for First Thursday meetings from March onwards and encourage others to do the same. If you really feel that you cannot get behind this idea, if you really feel that the Barley Mow cannot be made to work, then obviously you'll have to take whatever line you feel is necessary. We do however suggest that you make contact with the people who are promoting the Barley Mow -- look at the PNN threads to see who these people are if you don't know -- and talk to one another and try to establish a consensus. If that consensus is for one of the other two options we will of course go along with that because, as we said, we consider all three to be adequate. We think it's now impossible to develop any broad-based support for the Silver Cross, but we are perfectly prepared to be proved wrong. We suggest, though, that you do whatever you're going to do quickly with a view to identifying a permanent new venue effective from March, although clearly some people will need to attend the other pubs in March to redirect stragglers.
We also suggest that, whatever venue we select, we should all be prepared to accept that there may well be teething troubles but that -- remarkable as it may seem -- we are all responsible adults who can take charge of our own lives and deal with the minor set-backs that may come our way. Most of all, we encourage everybody to stop looking for a perfect venue, to try to establish a consensus on an adequate venue, and to treat as a priority the continuance of a First Thursday London fan meeting.
---Claire and Mark
In essence, our personal views on the First Thursday meeting remain unchanged: that it is the continuity of a monthly meeting for a large broad-based group of London fans that is important and that the venue is of no consequence so long as it meets minimum standards which are primarily that it has a reasonable amount of space available either in a public area and/or in an area that can be reserved by us; that it is reasonably accessible which would cover just about anywhere within the bounds of the Circle line; that the ambience and locale are reasonably salubrious; and that it sells a reasonable range of drinks at reasonable (i.e. London pub) prices, a caveat that would really only exclude, say, a wine bar, a coffee shop, or the bar at the Savoy assuming they have one. Notice the emphasis on 'reason' throughout; this is not a quest for perfection. We believe that all three venues currently under consideration -- Barley Mow, Red Lion, Silver Cross -- do meet those minimum standards.
We realise, though, that there are a number of people who do care passionately about what we regard as minor issues -- the exact nature of the beers on sale, whether and to what extent food is available at the venue or nearby, the quality of the decor, and so on -- but we think these are all secondary and are areas where we should be prepared to individually compromise in pursuit of our primary objective which is the continuance of a broad-based London fan meeting. However, if there are people who do wish to debate the merits of one beer against another or which pub serves the best beef burgers, we'd prefer it if they just got on with debating the issue with other like-minded souls, established a consensus, and told the rest of us what it is.
This does not appear to be happening and at the moment we have people drifting between three venues while nobody seems to be advocating any kind of decision-making mechanism, a criticism we feel justified in making as we did propose such a mechanism in December but so many people told us it was too complicated, too time-consuming, unnecessary or just plain wrong, that we did not pursue it. This situation, we believe, is actively damaging the continuance which we consider to be primary. Many people are drifting away altogether and the relatively small numbers at each potential venue risks alienating the management of all three as none of them attract enough people to convey the impression that we are in fact a large group of potentially valuable customers. In the worst case, we could be left with nowhere and have to start again in our quest to find a venue, which will diminish numbers even further.
What we need right now, we believe, is a pub which fans generally can accept is adequate. It may not be yourpreferred choice, it certainly won't be perfect, and it'll probably at least have a few teething troubles, but we think everybody just needs to make the effort to accept a compromise if necessary and rally together before the London Circle fragments entirely.
Therefore, with that in mind we suggest that the Silver Cross is no longer sustainable as a potential venue. We know that there are people who disagree with this contention, who feel that the criticisms that have been levelled against it are not justified (to some extent, so do we), but the simple fact is that a large number of people have already decided that, for them, it is out of the question and it now seems impossible for the pub to develop any kind of genuine consensus support. We recognise that those who have already flatly refused to consider a certain option are not being helpful -- indeed this is precisely what we're asking you not to do -- but there are people who have taken this line, it seems unlikely that they will back down and we don't think they can be ignored. The Silver Cross is a busy pub and, as things stand, it seems that a meeting in that venue will no longer attract enough people to fill the space we have been 'reserving'. In the past these reservations have not always been honoured, and the decreasing number of attendees increase the chances in our view of future 'double bookings'. The pub does not need our custom, a position that is unlikely to change; indeed it could get worse if we're reserving a section of the pub and preventing other customers from using it while not fully utilising it ourselves. It should go without saying but just to be absolutely clear we intend no criticism of Simon Bradshaw and others who advocated the Silver Cross in the first place. The problems that have caused some fans to stop attending meetings were of a kind that would only come to light in practice; they couldn't have been identified in advance. We will not make further bookings at the Silver Cross, although of course anybody else who feels they really cannot get behind our proposal is of course welcome to do so.
Of the two remaining options we judge that the Barley Mow currently has the most support, making it best placed to be the foundation of a consensus, and we propose it as the new venue. It was notable that, whilst several people passed through the Red Lion last Thursday, nobody stayed. We recognise that nobody stayed because nobody else stayed, but the pub doesn't seem to have the same extent of established support as the Barley Mow. Both its bars were full; there were no seats available. The upstairs bar is bookable at no cost -- we have confirmed this -- but the downstairs bar does not represent a practical overflow as, on the basis of available evidence, it is likely to be full without us. Again, the pub does not seem to need our business although, to be fair, we have been told that we would be welcome. It probably offers the best all-round communications links and the best range of nearby facilities but its ale -- whilst cheap -- is insufficiently real for some tastes and we really think that, for all that we do not believe this should be a major consideration, it has the potential to limit this venue's ability to attract a broad-based consensus.
The Barley Mow does seem to have its own active and vocal supporters and promoters. It also topped the last PNN poll, something which should be taken into account although it's only a consideration because the poll was not billed as a decision, many people didn't know about it, and the Red Lion was not then an option. We were initially critical of the way that, despite topping that poll, none of the pub's advocates seemed willing to actively push it as a viable alternative -- seemingly expecting us to have the courage of their convictions when they did not themselves -- but this has now changed: there are a number of people actively promoting the choice and we feel it is worth noting that one of them, Leon, put up his own money as a deposit for last week's trial meeting (just to be absolutely clear, we understand that this would not be required in future). The pub seems to be virtually deserted in the evening so, whilst its upstairs bar is clearly too small on its own, the downstairs bar does offer a viable overflow. The pool tables -- perceived by some to be limiting the space available upstairs -- can be moved out of the way if attendance levels justify it. It's been noted that the management were initially disappointed that numbers did not come up to expectations last week, but attendance did pick up throughout the night and it's believed that they were reasonably content by the end. Contrary to some assertions, the location is perfectly accessible by public transport via Farringdon or Barbican. It's probably not as accessible for many as the Red Lion but it seems to be perfectly within the limits of what's reasonable.
We (the two of us) therefore intend to relocate to the Barley Mow for First Thursday meetings from March onwards and encourage others to do the same. If you really feel that you cannot get behind this idea, if you really feel that the Barley Mow cannot be made to work, then obviously you'll have to take whatever line you feel is necessary. We do however suggest that you make contact with the people who are promoting the Barley Mow -- look at the PNN threads to see who these people are if you don't know -- and talk to one another and try to establish a consensus. If that consensus is for one of the other two options we will of course go along with that because, as we said, we consider all three to be adequate. We think it's now impossible to develop any broad-based support for the Silver Cross, but we are perfectly prepared to be proved wrong. We suggest, though, that you do whatever you're going to do quickly with a view to identifying a permanent new venue effective from March, although clearly some people will need to attend the other pubs in March to redirect stragglers.
We also suggest that, whatever venue we select, we should all be prepared to accept that there may well be teething troubles but that -- remarkable as it may seem -- we are all responsible adults who can take charge of our own lives and deal with the minor set-backs that may come our way. Most of all, we encourage everybody to stop looking for a perfect venue, to try to establish a consensus on an adequate venue, and to treat as a priority the continuance of a First Thursday London fan meeting.
---Claire and Mark