A suggestion that de-listing the Oasis dome is the best way to secure a future for the leisure centre met with a mixed reception from Adver readers.

As detailed on our page 2 story today, campaigners have been told giving it protected status has piled huge extra cost on any scheme to get it reopened.

Here's what readers had to say....

Paul Morse: "It's a modern-day icon and needs protecting from speculators with no connections to Swindon, that's why it was listed."

Billy Smith: "It’s time to rip it down! Maybe build some much-needed housing in its place."

Chris Matthews: "A change of personnel at the top of SBC, would be more likely to help the future of the Oasis."

Daniel Adams: "The facts of the situation would remain the same regardless of who was at the top. Hugely expensive to work on now its listed, uneconomical in its current form and no one interested in running the site unless the energy use problem is sorted."

Toby Robson: "The best hope for a sustainable future is to invest in existing buildings and keeping them maintained and fit for use. It's not allowing them to rot away to the point of dereliction, then spaffing £££££s and tons of new carbon, demolishing them and rebuilding them?"

Emma Williams: "The listing which was not applied for by Save Oasis Swindon but 20th Century Society includes the design of the pool. One of only a few free form pools left in the country. The pool that babies, toddlers and anyone with disabilities had easy access to and is the only one of it's type in Swindon and surrounding areas. The listing is not just about the dome. If Seven Capital and SBC had been more transparent about the proposed pool design then maybe the listing application would not have gone through. SBC and Seven Capital have done nothing to publicly communicate these proposed plans and have to take responsibility for that."

Daniel Errington: "Protecting our historic buildings is incredibly important. We already have a soulless town centre that attracts very few people. If it weren’t for the protection afforded to the outlet buildings, railway village houses and some of the old town buildings, we’d simply have nothing but coffee and vape shops and mega warehouses to attract investment. Failure to meet obligations (Abbey Meads stadium and the shocking decision to remove the old town hall spring to mind) has been seen so often, especially when we factor in property developers. SBC need to devise a method of protecting our heritage that doesn’t include ripping it down and selling it off to the highest bidder.

"For decades, people travelled to Swindon for the Oasis, shopping, railway history and as a gateway into the Cotswolds. We need to regenerate those links. Unlikely to happen in my lifetime though!

Andrew Little: "It’s alright all this arguing why it should or shouldn’t be de-listed. But what people seem to forget is that when or if it reopens, will people be able to afford to go there anyway? So It could be back to square one - another expensive building, which will just go to ruin.

Alan Chippy Pellymounter: "Needs totally bulldozing then a brand new state of the art modern leisure centre built with connection to a new Swindon rail station entrance on the north side of the tracks connecting people straight from the station to the leisure centre."

Dave Vincent Grainger: "Fingers crossed for the de-listing so the land can be developed rather than it turning into the Mechanics, Locarno etc. Swindon needs a new built leisure centre within Swindon but with good travel links so people can come from afar and make it financially viable and sustainable for years to come."

Robert Weyman: "Should never have been listed in the first place."