General questions and Forum issues


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I could have thought of this myself :bang::lol:

Thank you very much Lumutqueen, I found them :monacoflag:
 
Uh? Did anyone else get spam PM from royalforums about a free trip to Disney? I am assuming it's spam and honestly I am pretty annoyed if it is......why are we being spammed on here? If it's really I find it highly unlikely.....sorry
 
Uh? Did anyone else get spam PM from royalforums about a free trip to Disney? I am assuming it's spam and honestly I am pretty annoyed if it is......why are we being spammed on here? If it's really I find it highly unlikely.....sorry

Just saw that PM in my mailbox, and deleted it out of caution. I was very puzzled by getting something like that.
 
Daria_S said:
Just saw that PM in my mailbox, and deleted it out of caution. I was very puzzled by getting something like that.

I deleted too- very letdown by the site for allowing spam :(
 
Is this your personal mailbox or your TRF mailbox?

Just checking our filters.
 
I also received this message. It was an email advising me that I have a new PM here at TRF. When I logged on here there was indeed a PM advising me of my 'prize'.
 
Is this your personal mailbox or your TRF mailbox?

Just checking our filters.

I logged on and was informed I had a PM in my TRF mailbox. I also deleted it. I apologize if you needed to see it.
 
Is this your personal mailbox or your TRF mailbox?

Just checking our filters.

I received an email notification about a PM on this site, and when I went to my TRF mailbox, there was the PM about the free vacation.
 
Thanks to everyone for the information.

This PM was not from TRF.

TRF does not monitor your private messages for your personal privacy. So unfortunately, we can't monitor spam messages before they are sent but we can certainly take action after they have been sent.

Apologies to all for any confusion.
 
Last edited:
What's more disturbing is that this "offer" is asking you for your credit card info. BEWARE.:bang:
 
Hi ... apologies, but despite many minutes searching, I can't find the FAQ section ... How do I subscribe to a thread so that I can see posts after mine? Thanks in advance.
 
If you click the 'thread tools' at the top of every thread gives you a drop down box with a link to subscribe to the thread.
 
Don't know if this is related to the above spamming reports, but my "Royal Forums - the Royal House of Sweden" suddenly brings up the royal house of Thailand. Finding the House of Sweden is very difficult. Is this where I report this? Was it the result of the spamming? I'm confused. Perhaps it has something to do with my internet provider?
Thank you.
 
Are you having this trouble when using the drop down menus at the top of the page?
 
Yes. I have to go through several layers to find the Royal House of Sweden -- each time seems to be different. I'm not very familiar with the drop down menus.

Thanks for your assistance.
 
Hey Mods!

A thread that I started in General Discussion has vanished. I have two tickets to a play in Belfast that I am unable to use, and I would like someone from TRF to enjoy the performance. (In other words, I'm not selling the tickets.) Can you shed some light on that?

Thanks....
 
That was me! Sorry...I was moving some threads around this morning and accidentally moved yours as well. Didn't realize it until I saw this message. Its back.
 
Thanks Zonk! I'd really like to share the bounty with my Royal fan friends....
 
This post is about the rule saying that visits by members of one royal family (A) to another monarchy (B), should be dealt with in the forum specifically devoted to family B.

I find that rule confusing and illogic.

Example: Kate and William are going to visit Copenhagen on the 2nd November, where they (naturally) also will meet members of the DRF, Mary and Frederik.
It's not a grand official state visit, just a work visit, simply because the UNICEF centre Kate and William is going to visit, happens to be located in Copenhagen.
That's the background.

That is of course mentioned on the DRF forum, because Mary and Frederik are involved. And just as naturally it's also mentioned on the BRF forum. That's logic as so many follow Kate and William.
You are asking the readers, especially future readers, to go look somewhere in the Danish forum, if they want to see what Kate and William were up to, for some hours in Copenhagen.

The press coverage will also be divided.
the Danish press reports, and that's going to be considerable, will focus on Mary and Frederik then Kate and William.
The British press is going to focus on Kate and William then Mary and Frederik.

Why not make it simple?
Have two threads on both fora.
I could understand it if Kate and William were to visit DK at an official visit, lasting several days. Then it would be more logic to place the entire topic in DRF forum.

I mean, surely the main purpose of the TRF is to service the readers and posters. Let's not make it more complicated for the readers to figure out where to go and where to post.
I'm sure those who are interested can figure out to go to both the DRF and the BRF forums, to get a broader view.

Because as it is, dear moderators, you are going to constantly move or delete posts and to repeatedly explain where the readers must go in order to learn about Kate and William in Copenhagen for the next couple of weeks. - To the annoyance of both posters and readers.

Please do not over-interprete the forum rules, bend them when it's practical.
 
Last edited:
It is customary that all royal visits from one country to another country that also has a form of royalty, that the visits are hosted in the Host Forum at The Royal Forums. In this instance, the visit of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge when meeting The Crown Prince and Crown Princess of Denmark will be hosted in the Danish forums. If William and Catherine were visiting a country that didn't have a monarchy (i.e. the United States) than the visit would remain in their forum because the United States does not have a form of monarchy.

Frankly not much could be gained from having two separate threads in two different forums about the same trip. If anyone is interested in either the British or Danish royal couple they can still talk about it in one thread, if anyone is interested in the purpose of the thread, what Catherine and/or Mary will wear, etc. it can all be discussed in one thread. If there are reports from either the British and/or Danish press it can be posted, read, and discussed in one thread. If people have new and interesting information, why should it be limited by posting and reading it in the British thread or the Danish thread when everyone would have the opportunity to learn from one thread?


In addition, there have been plenty of TRF members who have been introduced to other royal families (that they generally do not follow) because they were introduced to a new forum as a result of a state visit. To make it easier for those who follow the Cambridge royals, a link has been placed in the Cambridge Current Events thread for easier navigability.

Personally, I would find it confusing for someone who follows both royal couples to post a question in one thread, or both threads and than to follow up with the question. Did I post it in the British or Danish forum? Its a duplication of efforts to be honest, and it makes it harder to have a concise discussion if there are two separate threads.

The TRF member base is fairly quick and familiar with the way these visits go. Such a custom is not a harsh interpretation of the rules, but rather we have found that this particular way works best. This system has been en vogue for years, both here as in MANY other forums. To change it would add to the confusion.

Thanks for sharing your concerns.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if this is just me, but I never seem to get Cambridge threads in the recent discussions side panel.
 
I get that too Lumutqueen! I am very confused by that.
 
Last edited:
:previous:
I've checked the settings for the 'Recent Discussions' panel and this should now be resolved.
 
Back
Top Bottom