# Live Sites



## nelly (Sep 14, 2011)

I must have dozed off 

Why is the Live Sites section not open for posting any more?

Did I miss something?

Where am I meant to put my report of The Private Bar at The House of Commons now??


----------



## night crawler (Sep 15, 2011)

On Flickr


----------



## krela (Sep 15, 2011)

nelly said:


> I must have dozed off
> 
> Why is the Live Sites section not open for posting any more?
> 
> ...



Because live sites by definition are not abandoned or derelict.


----------



## Munchh (Sep 15, 2011)

The House of Commons private bar isn't a live site anyway as it's occupied exclusively by the undead, although you could probably argue that the whole Governmental structure is both derelict and abandoned.


----------



## highcannons (Sep 15, 2011)

Munchh said:


> The House of Commons private bar isn't a live site anyway as it's occupied exclusively by the undead, although you could probably argue that the whole Governmental structure is both derelict and abandoned.



Ah! If 'occupied' by the undead its not abandoned... (I missed it 'till you said)


----------



## BenCooper (Sep 15, 2011)

krela said:


> Because live sites by definition are not abandoned or derelict.



Wouldn't they come under the definition of "not usually accessible or seen", like underground sites?


----------



## krela (Sep 15, 2011)

BenCooper said:


> Wouldn't they come under the definition of "not usually accessible or seen", like underground sites?



They did, but they don't anymore. 

Anything that's of any relevance to this site can be posted in the normal categories. The live site category has tended to encourage things that are irrelevant or pointless.


----------



## nelly (Sep 16, 2011)

krela said:


> Because live sites by definition are not abandoned or derelict.



Now I do see where you're coming from with the not derelict stance, but some of the live sites can be the nuts and very very exciting to get into.

So if one was to infiltrate a live site, then could one post the report in the main category of the site? E.g. If I got my lardy arse over the fence of a local glass factory and got some dodgy photos of industry and the glass making machinery then could I still post it under industrial? Even though its not dere?

Not trying to be a pain, just trying to understand the situation


----------



## krela (Sep 16, 2011)

nelly said:


> Now I do see where you're coming from with the not derelict stance, but some of the live sites can be the nuts and very very exciting to get into.
> 
> So if one was to infiltrate a live site, then could one post the report in the main category of the site? E.g. If I got my lardy arse over the fence of a local glass factory and got some dodgy photos of industry and the glass making machinery then could I still post it under industrial? Even though its not dere?
> 
> Not trying to be a pain, just trying to understand the situation



This is a site about derelict and abandoned buildings, not how l337 and awesome you are for getting into somewhere you shouldn't. You can post it if you want, but if it's shit or not relevant it'll get pitted. 

The chances are if it's a building then it'll be okay, but if its a crane, rooftop, railway, or something else unrelated then it wont.


----------



## nelly (Sep 16, 2011)

krela said:


> This is a site about derelict and abandoned buildings, not how l337 and awesome you are for getting into somewhere you shouldn't. You can post it if you want, but if it's shit or not relevant it'll get pitted.
> 
> The chances are if it's a building then it'll be okay, but if its a crane, rooftop, railway, or something else unrelated then it wont.



Perfectly and eloquently clarified there Krela 

As I said. Not trying to be a pain or to raise troubles. Its simply that I had only just noticed that the Live Site section had been locked and I have one or two in the pipeline. 

I shall asses them when done and try to avoid The Pit, it buurns


----------



## Munchh (Sep 16, 2011)

There is always the option that when you 'do' a site of this type that you just share it with your mates rather than the whole internet. No criticism nelly, I like your stuff.


----------



## Pincheck (Sep 16, 2011)

krela said:


> This is a site about derelict and abandoned buildings, not how l337 and awesome you are for getting into somewhere you shouldn't. You can post it if you want, but if it's shit or not relevant it'll get pitted.
> 
> The chances are if it's a building then it'll be okay, but if its a crane, rooftop, railway, or something else unrelated then it wont.



Funny how you brought that up as i have noticed that in the last 2-3 years it has become a elite hobby for some to be the latest and greatest . For me its not what this is about!,for me anyway. I know explore more than i post up on forums these days and that's one of the reasons regardless, some places are just not for posting any place !. Your call krela, your forum mate i have no problem with it.


----------



## Bluedragon (Sep 16, 2011)

How about uploading them to flickr and just posting a link?


----------



## krela (Sep 16, 2011)

Bluedragon said:


> How about uploading them to flickr and just posting a link?



If it's not relevant it's not relevant. Whether you post a full report or a link, it makes no difference!


----------



## PaulPowers (Sep 16, 2011)

I agree 100% with the decision, the site is DERELICT places.
Like a lot of people I also go on other forums and can see cranes and live sites there, I come on DP for historic and derelict sites


----------



## BenCooper (Sep 16, 2011)

There are very few live sites I've done that I'd be happy appearing in public - live sites have workers and owners who care a lot about the site, so are much more likely to notice any mention online. Authorities would also look much more seriously on trespassing in live sites.

I only make about half what I do public, and a good amount of what I do doesn't get shared with anyone, even privately.


----------



## Foxylady (Sep 16, 2011)

BenCooper said:


> There are very few live sites I've done that I'd be happy appearing in public - live sites have workers and owners who care a lot about the site, so are much more likely to notice any mention online.


About four years ago I posted a report on here about a derelict building in a gated field, owned by a local handyman. I recently accessed the whole of the site properly and after snapping away happily for half an hour or so, I suddenly realised that I wasn't just taking pics of the building itself but of the outdoor workshop behind it (which was fascinating, btw)...and that this is someone's personal space that I was invading. It really made me think about where to draw the line.


----------



## Derelict-UK (Sep 16, 2011)

krela said:


> They did, but they don't anymore.
> 
> Anything that's of any relevance to this site can be posted in the normal categories. The live site category has tended to encourage things that are irrelevant or pointless.



A bit like people climbing cranes in brand new building sites? I never did get the whole urban exploration side of climbing a crane!


----------



## BenCooper (Sep 17, 2011)

Well, it is exploration 

In fact, if you're going to get all ontological about it all, the word "urbex" is generally thought to have been coined by Ninjalicious, and what he mostly did was infiltration of live sites.

Personally, I don't get ROC posts - surely, once oyu've seen one you've seen them all?


----------



## ThenewMendoza (Sep 17, 2011)

Personally I don't get the word 'urbex'. Then again, these days I'm virtually retired. Live sites are great fun, like a grown up game of hide and seek with a little more risk involved other than being 'it'. If Ben has made a decision to keep this site to derelict places I can't argue, it's what it says on the tin (or URL, you know).

M


----------



## krela (Sep 17, 2011)

Like I said, the majority of live buildings that are suitable for posting will fit into the other categories here and you are welcome to post them. What I'm trying to do is discourage people creating threads that are purely about cranes, rooftopping, live railways etc as they're simply not relevant here.

I have no doubt that they interest some people, are thrilling to do and make for pretty photos, but that's not what this site is about.


----------



## PaulPowers (Sep 17, 2011)

BenCooper said:


> Well, it is exploration
> 
> In fact, if you're going to get all ontological about it all, the word "urbex" is generally thought to have been coined by Ninjalicious, and what he mostly did was infiltration of live sites.
> 
> Personally, I don't get ROC posts - surely, once oyu've seen one you've seen them all?



I like seeing inside roc posts but there are a few that just look like empty fields then there is a comment that it's been demolished :S


----------



## krela (Sep 17, 2011)

BenCooper said:


> In fact, if you're going to get all ontological about it all, the word "urbex" is generally thought to have been coined by Ninjalicious, and what he mostly did was infiltration of live sites.



Can I just point out that no-where on any part of this site are the terms 'urbex' or 'urban exploration' used, except when members refer to them in their own posts... 

"DerelictPlaces is a forum for people with an interest in the history and documentation of derelict and abandoned buildings to come together and share their explorations, photography and historical findings."


----------



## highcannons (Sep 17, 2011)

krela said:


> Can I just point out that no-where on any part of this site are the terms 'urbex' or 'urban exploration' used, except when members refer to them in their own posts...
> 
> "DerelictPlaces is a forum for people with an interest in the history and documentation of derelict and abandoned buildings to come together and share their explorations, photography and historical findings."



Yes! Hate 'urbex', wots it got to do with an abandoned farm in the middle of a moor - or is that rurex - sound like one of those rubber things..


----------



## PaulPowers (Sep 17, 2011)

highcannons said:


> Yes! Hate 'urbex', wots it got to do with an abandoned farm in the middle of a moor - or is that rurex - sound like one of those rubber things..



I'd see the doctor about that


----------



## highcannons (Sep 17, 2011)

PaulPowers said:


> I'd see the doctor about that



 ha ha


----------



## sYnc_below (Sep 19, 2011)

BenCooper said:


> Personally, I don't get ROC posts - surely, once oyu've seen one you've seen them all?



That's a pretty accurate statement


----------

