|
|
Post by 3405jimmy on Mar 5, 2015 8:07:56 GMT
Just a thought but is it possible when you do search to find something in one of these endless threads that have nothing to do with the title anymore? I am sure that somewhere in there is something someone might find handy in the future but will they be able to find it.
I can see the point in a build log if anyone was bothering with them anymore but I won’t pick that scab again. So what’s the drive to keep completely new topics under the same heading?
I am sure it’s not some sort of ego thing to brag about how many posts or how long the threads been going so would it not be more useful for the future to start new questions under a new topic?
|
|
|
|
Post by joanlluch on Mar 5, 2015 8:31:14 GMT
Isn't it already like that?. Not sure what you mean. Maybe you can bring an example...
Particularly, I like the current way because if we keep starting a new topic for every single deviation we would loss the ability to follow the flow of posts.
In my opinion, what you propose is more useful on "question -> response" like forums. This is the model of the "stack overflow" forums, and given their nature they are as they should. But in this case we tend to produce more conversational posts and as such it is interesting to keep the flow of them in single, longer threads. When something different occurs to somebody that requires a new thread, it is made. So this is already done.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2015 8:49:06 GMT
I must admit I think this forum has become just a jumbled up mess. There's specific sections for things like tools and tooling but everyone just seems to post under General Chat wth the result this section has become huge and the others hardly used. Personally, I would like to see build threads under their own section as well to keep them all together and easy to find. The Home Machinist forum did that last year and I find it a big improvement over having to search through endless posts for a build that you want to look up.
John
|
|
|
|
Post by miketaylor on Mar 5, 2015 10:19:36 GMT
Lots of different questions here - not all susceptible to easy answers I fear.
Humungous threads - I don't suppose they start with that intention, I don't for a minute think people here have the "I have more posts than you" mentality that seems to crop up on other forums. One thing that I think would improve matters, if it's possible, would be for some thread editing to take place in technical query or build threads. There are so many comments on the lines of "what great work" which, although justified, gratifying and no doubt appreciated at the time, actually have no long term value in such a thread and could well be edited out after a period. Ideally there would be a self destruct button after 7 days that posters could use to self edit their postings in this way; failing that, perhaps the original poster could be empowered to clean up his own thread from time to time.
I don't think useful but off topic info should be edited out and there seems little way that its inclusion can be avoided. I am aware that I have been distracting Julian's Boxhill thread in just this way with discussion re springing, but it came up as a natural response to postings which Julian and Jim Scott had made. It ought now, logically, to be tranferred to the Leaf Spring thread but there doesn't really seem to be a convenient way to do this without risk of losing something.
Slightly differently, I wanted to retain in a useful form, Julian's info on boiler construction in the Boxhill thread so I copied all the relevant text and photos to a separate document, filed for future reference. Not the most convenient approach but it seemed the only way to keep the info readily available and the info would probably have been hard to get to some years later with a search button.
Sorting by Subject to different areas: I go to other boards where this is done, apparently fairly rigorously, and find it a real pain. I can never find what I'm interested in and am never sure that I have found the current topics under discussion. Despite the muddle, I do find the General Chat approach very friendly and convenient. Joan has a sound point above regarding the desirability of a bit of free flowing conversation and I don't think this can somehow be divorced from build threads or technical threads or whatever.
Consider Roger's epic Speedy thread; now a sort of discursive generalised build thread. It started off as a query about valve movement design. Had it been relegated to the Valve movement chat room it would never have developed as it has and that would have been a great shame with all sorts of stuff never coming to light.
I think we need to be thankful for what we have and make the best of it.
Mike
|
|
jma1009
Elder Statesman
Posts: 5,900
|
Post by jma1009 on Mar 5, 2015 10:59:21 GMT
i agree 100% with mike.
had one of our moderators said mike couldnt comment on 5"g terrier springs on the 'Boxhill' thread because his loco is a Garrett, a lot of interesting facts wouldnt have emerged. and to transfer stuff from one thread to another probably involves a lot of work, and i dont know how to do this myself.
if someone poses a specific question we can usually put a link up to the page of a particular thread to help.
actually the search function on here is very good and a search for say 'leaf springs' will provide very quickly all the relevant results. i can think of a few more 'rigidly' moderated forums where the search function is rubbish and you can never find what you want!
cheers,
julian
|
|
|
|
Post by alanstepney on Mar 5, 2015 11:43:21 GMT
I am a moderator on another Board where we have the option of splitting or combining threads, moving parts of threads or
limiting access to threads by certain members, or even limiting posts until a members posts have been approved by a moderator.
Here, our choices are limited.
I personally regret that we dont have some more facilities, but we have to live with what we have.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2015 12:07:33 GMT
Hello all.....Good point, JIMMY---- maybe when threads such as Rogers "Speedy Valves" and the like evolves into the size it is now, then the title could be changed by the Moderators (with the approval and/or request of the author) to one that's more reflective of what it has become.....EG}--- Roger's is obviously now "Building my Speedy" ---or-- "Building Speedy (with modern tooling)".... etc, etc.....
IF..(and it's a big "ask" at the moment).. my Great Bear thread develops then that'll be an ideal candidate for a title change.....
I for one don't see just what use displaying a persons No.of Posts actually has ??.........As others elsewhere on this forum have indicated just putting shorties like}--- "I agree", or "Really?" will add to the posting counter's total in the same way as a full page'd, in-depth reply will---------- so what's the point of having it ?? ..... Surely a person's point of view is just as valid based on its content, no matter how many times it's said, OR if they be a GRANDEE or a NEWBIE on here ??................I'd be happy for my counter to be ditched...
I've yet to try the "Search" function so can't comment as to HOW WELL it does or doesn't respond, but as mentioned the use of a Key Word (Such as "springing" or "Boiler") hopefully will bring- forth all that's needed ??
EDIT}----- Sorry Alan, was typing this as you posted-----should be read as if following directly on from Julian's last one....Alan R
|
|
|
|
Post by joanlluch on Mar 5, 2015 14:24:51 GMT
"Forum": "a meeting or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged" Source: Oxford dictionary of English. Comes from Latin "forum/fora" (nominative singular/plural), "foro/foris" (dative and ablative singular/plural): "a public square or marketplace used for judicial and other business". See also this : en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Forum  So a public place for discussion and exchange, after all. |
|
SteveW
Elder Statesman
Posts: 1,393
|
Post by SteveW on Mar 5, 2015 16:42:31 GMT
Guys,just spend too long writing a reply to have it disappear on hitting the post button. Bol-locks
Yes, a 181 page thread is too long. Although it is likely to be full of useful stuff no one following later will ever find it.
We need build threads to spawn new threads using a base title and suffixed appropriately for the new bit that's getting described. This way solutions to generic problems regardless of particular engine can be applied on other engines and can get found again quickly and easily.
|
|
|
|
Post by springcrocus on Mar 5, 2015 16:52:00 GMT
Guys,just spend too long writing a reply to have it disappear on hitting the post button. Bol-locks If I want to post something a bit lengthy, I usually type it out in Notepad first where I can refine it a bit and correct any spelling mistakes etc. Then save it first and finally copy / paste to the forum. Also helps to save making a fool of oneself. Steve |
|
SteveW
Elder Statesman
Posts: 1,393
|
Post by SteveW on Mar 5, 2015 17:14:25 GMT
Guys,just spend too long writing a reply to have it disappear on hitting the post button. Bol-locks If I want to post something a bit lengthy, I usually type it out in Notepad first where I can refine it a bit and correct any spelling mistakes etc. Then save it first and finally copy / paste to the forum. Also helps to save making a fool of oneself. Steve Agreed. However, it wasn't that long just well considered. My mistake was opening another browser tab to check my facts. Normally I do a copy all to the clip board...... but then I'm going off-thread and this could become end-less. |
|
|
|
Post by 3405jimmy on Mar 5, 2015 17:35:27 GMT
Isn't it already like that?. Not sure what you mean. Maybe you can bring an example... Particularly, I like the current way because if we keep starting a new topic for every single deviation we would loss the ability to follow the flow of posts. In my opinion, what you propose is more useful on "question -> response" like forums. This is the model of the "stack overflow" forums, and given their nature they are as they should. But in this case we tend to produce more conversational posts and as such it is interesting to keep the flow of them in single, longer threads. When something different occurs to somebody that requires a new thread, it is made. So this is already done. Well a good example would probably be after about page four of help with speedy valve gear. But I see that’s now become “and other issues”, when did that happen? |
|
|
|
Post by miketaylor on Mar 5, 2015 18:23:48 GMT
I have just been playing with the search function and as a result I'm not clear why "endless threads" present a problem.
(Thanks for the heads up Julian. The search function seems to be very good indeed)
If I search General Chat for a specific subject it brings up the threads which reference that subject. I can then select any one of those threads and it will bring up the replies that mention the subject.
In a way the use of monster threads can actually be a help in this search process. If I know that Roger's thread contains a reference somewhere to something then I can find it easily. If Roger's thread were split into a dozen separate threads I might find myself having to go through several of them before finding the right one with the reference I sought.
I really don't think it makes much odds one way or the other as far as finding info is concerned.
Monster threads look very untidy on the surface but that is the fault of all of us really. Something of interest comes up and we respond and things just go from there. If threads get split into a multitude of small threads each with its own appropriate heading things won't really get any easier to find because those smaller threads will disappear into the depths and will only be easily recovered by using search anyway. Search is much quicker and easier than browsing through umpteen pages of threads looking for the one you want.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob on Mar 5, 2015 18:43:06 GMT
I don't really see the difference between one long thread and multiple threads. Both are exactly the same thing, a number of posts, whether they be under one heading or a number of headings.
Either can be searched easily using either the in built forum search or Google.
If I'm following a build thread, I don't want to have to go and search for the next chapter, I like to be able to follow the thread start to finish, as I have done with the numerous build threads out there. If a thread isn't kept on the first few pages (and the first page ideally) it gets forgotten about, so earlier progress would likely never be seen by anyone who wasn't present when it was first discussed.
Also, regarding posting a lot of topics under 'General' rather than the subsections - that's because the General section is the most viewed and therefore you're more likely to get a reply. Other subsections see less traffic, so you reach a much narrower audience.
|
|
|
|
Post by joanlluch on Mar 5, 2015 18:57:59 GMT
Isn't it already like that?. Not sure what you mean. Maybe you can bring an example... Particularly, I like the current way because if we keep starting a new topic for every single deviation we would loss the ability to follow the flow of posts. In my opinion, what you propose is more useful on "question -> response" like forums. This is the model of the "stack overflow" forums, and given their nature they are as they should. But in this case we tend to produce more conversational posts and as such it is interesting to keep the flow of them in single, longer threads. When something different occurs to somebody that requires a new thread, it is made. So this is already done. Well a good example would probably be after about page four of help with speedy valve gear. But I see that’s now become “and other issues”, when did that happen? I do not see the "Speedy" thread as being an issue. I can't imagine everything in it split into multiple (hundreds?) or threads, that would be far more difficult to read than the current approach. Also thread titles tend to be misleading after a while if we allow conversations to evolve. As far as they match the initial intent of the thread I am fine with them. So the current approach is definitely my preferred one. For builds, another approach would be to use a blog instead of a forum. Blogs keep things cleaner but they are less interactive, so I still prefer a forum. At the opposite side I already mentioned the "stack overflow" forum (about computer programming). That forum is extremely useful as a question and answer information source where tens of thousands of people participate, you almost always find your questions already answered before, and all questions/answers are also well referenced in google. But this requires the forum to be conducted with very strict rules. I doubt this is the kind of forum we need or the one we would like for our ME subjects and discussions. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2015 21:06:00 GMT
Hello JIMMY------- I've just had a read from page 1 through to page 7 but can't see the point you're making ??--Quote}------ " Well a good example would probably be after about page four of help with speedy valve gear."
|
|
Tony K
Elder Statesman
Posts: 1,572
|
Post by Tony K on Mar 6, 2015 8:06:01 GMT
....Consider Roger's epic Speedy thread; now a sort of discursive generalised build thread. It started off as a query about valve movement design. Had it been relegated to the Valve movement chat room it would never have developed as it has and that would have been a great shame with all sorts of stuff never coming to light.... Mike Agree. I always get suspicious when threads get many posts and have a look. The Speedy valve gear thread is a good example where, not being particularly interested in the title, I neglected it and later got inquisitive because there cannot be more than say five pages of posts on the subject. Then I found it had lots of interesting stuff in it. Similarly with sections of the site. A discussion in the Simplex section on, say, C.I. cylinders will get missed by me, although I might have read it if it was in General. A case for less sections I think. It would be nice to have a perfect world, but all we can do is try to keep on topic - this works best I think. Does it just go off topic when a person thinks it is not worth a unique topic? Are people reluctant to start their own topic? Do you only find out afterwards? Dunno, but better to be written than not. Like letters in the paper, I think the likelihood of a post being read is inversely proportional to its length, so enjoy your day! |
|
|
|
Post by houstonceng on Mar 6, 2015 9:37:41 GMT
Perhaps it's my pedantic way of understanding English grammar, but I thought ".- - Speedy valve gear and other issues - - -" meant other issue with Speedy.
Since I don't have a Speedy, I stopped reading the thread.
|
|
dc309
Seasoned Member
Posts: 146 
|
Post by dc309 on Mar 6, 2015 10:25:55 GMT
I can see the point in a build log if anyone was bothering with them anymore but I won’t pick that scab again. As uninteresting as you might find it, I'm actually trying to compile a build log for my 3 1/2" gauge LBSC Juliet No.1 - it might be a bit "rough and ready" and not be an award winning 5" gauge loco build but I'm trying to contribute and share my work with others. I've seen numerous posts recently that talk about "the lack of build posts" yet people who are making the effort don't really get recognised. Granted there are regular contributors such as Roger, Greenglade, Julian etc, with their locos (who are making a fantastic job - keep it up guys!  ), but with some of the long winded discussions that go on, the people who can't contribute every day/week get pushed down the list and forgotten about. |
|
|
|
Post by 3405jimmy on Mar 6, 2015 13:24:12 GMT
I can see the point in a build log if anyone was bothering with them anymore but I won’t pick that scab again. As uninteresting as you might find it, I'm actually trying to compile a build log for my 3 1/2" gauge LBSC Juliet No.1 - it might be a bit "rough and ready" and not be an award winning 5" gauge loco build but I'm trying to contribute and share my work with others. I've seen numerous posts recently that talk about "the lack of build posts" yet people who are making the effort don't really get recognised. Granted there are regular contributors such as Roger, Greenglade, Julian etc, with their locos (who are making a fantastic job - keep it up guys! ), but with some of the long winded discussions that go on, the people who can't contribute every day/week get pushed down the list and forgotten about. Actually the throw away comment was in support the build loggers not against them. That subject was explored recently in a locked post that ended up in acrimony if I remember which is why I did not want to go there again. So yes you probably do suffer, I use the latest post button and after a couple of pages of ping pong responses by the usual suspects on the usual threads log off in boredom. Missing your probably far more interesting contribution in the process. Just another reason why endless post should end perhaps? |
|
), but with some of the long winded discussions that go on, the people who can't contribute every day/week get pushed down the list and forgotten about.