Two years plus is a long time in Internet Time. When Yuku was launched as being “available now” in September 2005, its unique selling point appeared to be the way ezboard, Inc. were promising to share advertising revenues with message board owners.

In the presentation, ezboard, Inc. CEO “Silent Rob” Labatt is seen showing off the message board functions and user profiles that had been in development since early 2005.

Unfortunately for them, they’ve since wasted all of 2005, 2006 and now most of 2007.

The idea to combine message boards, user profiles, blogs and media hosting in one place was a good one even if not entirely original - most things on Yuku from ezboard, Inc. are ideas that someone else has had previously - as for instance WordPress can be extended with plug-ins and third party software to incorporate discussion forums, photo albums, etc. with the added benefit of an option to self-host the whole shebang and include advertising to generate a revenue stream as I do here.

In June 2005, Yuku was being touted by Labatt as the next generation of ezboard (although the name ‘Yuku’ had not been unveiled at that stage). Inexpicably, they concentrated not on ezboard migrations or getting the message boards ready for users. No, instead ezboard concentrated on the user profiles no doubt spurred on by the growth of MySpace and indeed Facebook. But by doing so, they dropped the ball and simply became Yet Another MySpace Wannabe even down to the evident similarities in their Terms of Use. Of course, extended beta tests are nothing new, c.f. Google’s applications and services, but then they are not usually quite this long for such products.

So under the direction of Robert Labatt (and presumably with the backing of the venture capitalists led by his wife’s firm), the development of Yuku has gone on and on and it’s still in beta.

In the meantime, however, everyone else has moved on. vBulletin is a very accomplished message board application and one I use myself for three different discussion boards and its far better in my opinion than Yuku is. And of course there’s now vBulletin Blog to go with the board software. I’ve already mentioned WordPress and its plug-ins capability.

And now another major player has revealed online communities, blogs and social media in one place.

“Every member of your community can create a personalized profile page. Standard Profile pages include the following content:

“Personal profile information, such as a photo, interests, or location information
A list of comments submitted by that user and comment responses
A list of recommended posts, forums, and comments by that user
Forums, community blogs and a number of templates and skins.”

All sound familiar?

Well this is Movable Type Community Solution from Six Apart, the company behind Movable Type and LiveJournal. But for once they’ve copied Yuku and not revealed pricing (you have to get a custom quote)!

So as time drags on and “Silent Rob” Labatt continues being elusive, maybe going for glider flights in Hawaii or going karting with the (small number of) staff, Yuku falls further and further behind the competition whilst not charging its users for the bandwidth and (reducing…) image storage.

As something of a postscript to the whole Tunbridge Wells parking scam, their e-mail refusing my appeal ended thus:

“Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council.”

Oh right! So can I take it that I haven’t received an official reply from these idiots?

Well done to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council and their stupid, overly complex parking (which seems to vary by the car park). I posted previously about getting a parking fine from them when I thought I was legally parked and when the signage was at fault. Of course, according to Tunbridge Wells, that’s not their fault:

“Thank you for your e-mail regarding the above Penalty Charge Notice that was issued to your vehicle while it was parked in Torrington car park.

“I have examined the grounds for your appeal and must inform you that, as shown on the large sign adjacent to the Southeastern Trains (ST) ticket machine from which you purchased your ticket, and on every exit door in the car park, the private bays where your ticket is valid are only the red bays belonging to ST, on the 3rd and 4th floor levels of the car park. A ST parking ticket is not valid for parking in a white Local Authority bay.

“To clear up any confusion, may I explain that the signage covering ST red bays, and ST tickets, machines and maintenance are entirely the responsibility of Meteor, which is the company operating on behalf of ST. Tunbridge Wells Borough Council, beyond its contracted obligation to enforce the ST parking regulations in the car park, has absolutely no involvement with or authority over what are these private business matters. Any complaints or dissatisfaction with the signage or system of issuing ST day tickets for commuters should be made direct to Meteor Customer Services Section. Their telephone number is 0845.603 6197 (7 days).

“The Parking Attendant’s comprehensive notes show that your vehicle was displaying a ST ticket but was not parked in the correct private red bay area. It was instead parked in a white bay belonging to the Local Authority and was not displaying a valid pay-and-display ticket. I have therefore to inform you that the grounds for representation against the Penalty Charge Notice have not been established and your appeal is rejected. I am, however, able to accept the reduced rate of £30.00, provided that payment is received within fourteen days of the date of this letter. Cheques and Postal Orders should be made payable to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council and addressed to the Parking Information Centre. Alternatively, you can pay via our website, www.tunbridgewells.gov.uk, or by credit/debit card on our dedicated payment line 01892 554094, which is open 23½ hours a day, 7 days a week (except between 5pm and 5:30pm when the system is closed for essential processing).

“Should this Penalty not be paid within the given time-scale, a ‘Notice to Owner’ subsequently will be sent to the registered owner/keeper of the vehicle. The registered owner/keeper will be given 28 days from receipt of the Notice either to pay the full charge of £60.00 or make formal appeal in writing on the Notice, which the Council will be under a statutory obligation to consider. If the formal appeal is rejected, they will be sent the forms to allow them to appeal direct to the National Parking Adjudication Service, should they wish, for an independent ruling on the matter - which will be binding on all parties. There is no formal right of appeal to the adjudicators until the ‘Notice to Owner’ is issued and returned to us.”

So let’s just have a look at that, shall we?

“the Southeastern Trains (ST) ticket machine from which you purchased your ticket”

How does an unfortunate visitor to Tunbridge Wells know that this machine is supposedly a Southeastern Trains ticket machine, when all it says on it is “Parkeon” and (more particularly) “Central Parking System”?

Or:

“the large sign adjacent to the Southeastern Trains (ST) ticket machine”

That would be the large sign that says that railway day tickets can only be purchased from the South Eastern Trains entrance. We used the entrance to the car park and not to the station which was around the corner and down the road a way.

“To clear up any confusion, may I explain that the signage covering ST red bays, and ST tickets, machines and maintenance are entirely the responsibility of Meteor, which is the company operating on behalf of ST. Tunbridge Wells Borough Council, beyond its contracted obligation to enforce the ST parking regulations in the car park, has absolutely no involvement with or authority over what are these private business matters.”

Meteor, eh? And who are they? Are they saying that Meteor are Parkeon or Central Parking System? Who knows?

And whose car park is it anyway? Are Tunbridge Wells Borough Council saying that they don’t own or operate the car park but are simply a private contractor like those clamping cowboys? They certainly seem to come across like the cowboy clampers. They also seem to be ignoring their County Council’s ticket cancellation policy - no suprise there.

“Alternatively, you can pay via our website, www.tunbridgewells.gov.uk“

Well I tried that, but after I’d finally found a link to the payment section it refused to allow me to make payment as it didn’t recognise the parking ticket number…

“or by credit/debit card on our dedicated payment line 01892 554094″

That’s what I had to do but having carefully entered “6000″ for the payment amount the first time, the automated system thought I had entered 60p and it took two attempts for their system to recognise my debit card number.

So their payment systems are as useful as their parking facilities, then.

So congratulations, Tunbridge Wells. We will never again stay in or near Tunbridge Wells, not will we ever visit Tunbridge Wells, nor will we ever buy anything from anyone in Tunbridge Wells.

Or more succinctly, fuck you Tunbridge Wells!

One of the ways that the ezboard/yuku staff seek to deflect criticism - in addition to their present toolbox that includes banning people, editing posts, hiding posts and threads and being able to post from individuals’ accounts - is by derailing a thread by posting meaningless waffle in a support thread with the help of their usual band of sycophants and ezApologists.

This is particularly used where the complainant makes the mistake of posting in the yuku support chat forum rather than the bug forum. Well I say ‘mistake’, but if it’s not a bug, they’re stuffed in terms of the lack of a general customer service forum.

Take for instance this thread in the yuku support [sic] forum by someone complaining of harassment by means of a yuku board having a pop at individuals. After setting out the issues, the individual writes that: “I have sent numerous emails to YUKU and they’ve come back to me. I’m not sure the actual address I’m supposed to complain to.” Shortly after this, the thread is derailed by the ezApologists and yuku staff talking about trout-slapping, squirting with silly string, etc. After 41 replies, mostly of that ilk, the user posted something else that has since mysteriously disappeared and one of the cronies writes:

“I really don’t think we needed that posted Chloe. Just as long as the staff has been alerted they can look into what needs to be done. Even is she does it in private, the staff can find out.”

Now is it just me or is that reply sanctimonious in the extreme, especially considering the poster is just another user (even if they don’t seem to see themselves that way)?