Tue, 19 Dec 2023 05:58:31 +0000 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2349#Comment_2349 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2349#Comment_2349 Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:41:52 +0100 GBP-Keith
I believe with the new name, it will attract a wider audience and become more influential in this growing sector. I'm really disappointed with the way the mainstream building magazines are helping 'ordinary' product manufacturers undermine the concept and philosophy of the subject by running wall-to-wall 'PR babble' dressed up as qualified sustainable, zero-carbon and green building information. Even titiles aimed at planners, local and central government officers and building regulations officers are doing it.

Rest assured, Green Building Magazine will keep to the time honored strict advertising policy that BFF has enjoyed and we will keep a very, very strict control of stories offered to us by product purveyors and PR companies.

Most regular things from BFF will flip over into the new mag but I am seriously considering dropping the product section at the back of the mag as it is our weakest spot. Comments are welcome on this and other aspects.]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2359#Comment_2359 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2359#Comment_2359 Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:08:43 +0100 Mark Siddall As an architect and specifier I would urge that you do not drop the products section. On the understanding that this section is carefully managed and vetted (as I am sure it is) this is valuable tool that can assist the specifier in making the distinction between green and green wash products. Furthermore it also helps to maintain an awareness of suitable products that can/should be considered for a range of projects. If I could make any suggestion it would be to reinvigorate and reinforce the Products section in a suitable manner so as to ensure that it remains a useful and valuable tool for the future.

Hope this helps.
Mark]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2363#Comment_2363 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2363#Comment_2363 Sat, 21 Apr 2007 07:05:09 +0100 biffvernon Clearly, we have caught up with the future and we now have to build for the now.]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2366#Comment_2366 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2366#Comment_2366 Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:11:40 +0100 fostertom Posted By: (GBP) Keiththe mainstream building magazinesTo them, I suggest a new title: Grey Building. Or maybe Any-Colouring-You-Can-Market Building.]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2373#Comment_2373 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2373#Comment_2373 Sat, 21 Apr 2007 18:42:48 +0100 GBP-Keith http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2531#Comment_2531 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2531#Comment_2531 Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:30:33 +0100 snudge
What about keeping the title as BFF (this acronym too sounds much better than GB!) but if you really want to use the term ‘greener building’ adding below it ‘THE green building magazine for professionals and enthusiasts in the trade’. Then this phrase can be changed as necessary to suit the current whim of the day! Anyway I strongly urge you to not make any quick decision that you may come to regret. Anyway keep up the great work!]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2534#Comment_2534 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2534#Comment_2534 Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:40:57 +0100 GBP-Keith
Floundering? I wish! I can barely get time to do anything else at the moment with the runaway success of the Green Building Press and it's books - Green Building Bibles which by the way have just been shortlisted in the 2007 RIBA international book awards.

I have tried for years to imagine BFF as more than a green building magazine but frankly I'm not interested in 'ordinary building' in truth, I became uninterested in in in 1987 when I first dreamed up the BFF title and launched it and founded the AECB.

This name change, will not be regretted by me and will be used proudly on the magazine to let all-comers know that there is some real green building going on among all the tripe that's talked about and also to let everyone know not to offer us editorial or advertising unless it lives up to the name. The day that the trend moves away of saving the planet I'll give up anyway.

By the way. A major revamp was announced in the last issue on page 8.

Regards Keith]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2854#Comment_2854 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2854#Comment_2854 Sun, 06 May 2007 17:58:10 +0100 Guest this is a guy who's worked in building control for many years before becoming a lecturer about 18 yrs ago.
as a part time mature student i am astounded at the hands-off way that companies deal with 'the future personnel'. i think if you could address this through subsidised subscriptions, provision of complimentary mags to uni/college libraries and schools then the message would grow so much better than a proposed name change.
five years ago a lecturer verged on ridiculing me for questioning him about green technology, yet now it is paramount to development.
building for a future presents a vision of progressive movement and development whereas 'green building' is what people were talking about 20 yrs ago - the concept is now in the mainstream, but the term itself is stuck in the past.
whilst considering name change i'd suggest losing 'bible' and introducing 'handbook'.]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2872#Comment_2872 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2872#Comment_2872 Mon, 07 May 2007 14:03:14 +0100 Guest
Arguably "Green Building Magazine" lacks this temporal dynamic, it is of the moment and is sadly erring towards a more superficial of the environmental design. By all means Green is good, but why should we design to be green, for the protection of the world for future generations.

By all means reinvigorate the graphics and the branding of the magazine but changing the name, to my mind this is a loss. I understand the desire to reinforce the brand you are developing, but at what cost?]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2878#Comment_2878 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2878#Comment_2878 Mon, 07 May 2007 16:44:06 +0100 GBP-Keith http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2889#Comment_2889 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2889#Comment_2889 Mon, 07 May 2007 23:56:32 +0100 Mark Siddall
Mark]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2894#Comment_2894 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2894#Comment_2894 Tue, 08 May 2007 11:03:57 +0100 Solar bore
But at the end of the day Kieth you have decided haven't you what we want does not matter we are just the readers.

It has similarities to the public consultation that our government and Local authorities use. You do not care about our views anymore than they do!!!]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2907#Comment_2907 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2907#Comment_2907 Tue, 08 May 2007 13:40:57 +0100 Mark Siddall “Building for a Future” opens a gateway to a broader contextual view of sustainability in the built environment i.e. environmental, social and economic. Social and economic (in its true sense) sustainability are often not given sufficient attention by the "Green" press (who consentrate on gadgets, widgets etc.) but they are integral to any sustainable future.

Arguably the title “Green Building Magazine” does not suggest this holistic or indeed synoptic view, the title is solely concerned with “Green” issues (gadgets and widgets) at the expense of social and economic matters. As a result I feel that important aspects of sustainable design that is not embodied by the name change. NOTE: I am certain that it is not your intetion avoid discussing social and economic matters in “Green Building Magazine” but I do feel that such as focussed title could mean that the oportunity to do so could over time become harder to achieve.

Mark]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2930#Comment_2930 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2930#Comment_2930 Tue, 08 May 2007 16:49:09 +0100 GBP-Keith
Hey Arnold (SolarBore) Unfair comment. How many other publishers put their re-vamps out for comment before they go ahead? I'll tell you. NONE!]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2937#Comment_2937 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2937#Comment_2937 Tue, 08 May 2007 17:57:05 +0100 Rachel http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2940#Comment_2940 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2940#Comment_2940 Tue, 08 May 2007 18:20:37 +0100 Mark Siddall Hadn't registered that you were keeping BFF as the strap line. Glad to hear it! This allays much of the "concerns" raised above.

Mark
P.S. Just to be clear, regardless of the rhetorical feedback I have given above, I do wish you and your team the best of good luck.]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2982#Comment_2982 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=2982#Comment_2982 Wed, 09 May 2007 14:57:43 +0100 Solar bore
I have just re-read your first post on this you do not mention about the strap line is it any wonder we get concerned as we only have your information to comment on.

i do recollect an article in recent BFF but don't recall reading it, will have to get it out and read it properly.

yes I would like to see the Pre-publication proofs of the new layout I will send you an E

thanks Arnold]]> http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=3430#Comment_3430 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=212&Focus=3430#Comment_3430 Thu, 24 May 2007 17:52:39 +0100 Keith Hall