....Thought I was seeing things....I tried to find the "Railroads" location at the top of the page and could only find "General Discussion"....Was beginning to wonder...
Then I noticed the 3:20 time of creation and felt better.......
Quentin
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Another forum/board I'm on occasionally moves topics from the general discussion type board to more specific topic areas when appropriate - say, another GE vs EMD thread started on GD gets moved to Locomotives....
I'm sure I'll stop into general discussion the most, with an occasional foray into the more specific topics, especially if I'm following a specific thread.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
matthewsaggie wrote:I'm not so sure this is an improvement. I liked the "Trains" forum because it covered everything in one place, while others like railfan.net, are so fragmented. Now I have to check three sections to the forum each time to cover all my interests (general, transit, and passenger). Oh well, we will see how it goes.
I don't see any advantage of fragmenting into narrowly focused topic categories. On one hand, it may seem more orderly, but there is a downside to it as well. It is fine for those who want to start a discussion about a specific topic they have in mind. But many people who are inspired to contribute to a discussion would not even have thought about it prior to seeing the discussion. Those spontaneous contributions will not occur when the discussions are pigeon-holed into numerous, specific categories, unless they are all checked out by every member during every visit; and that will not be the case. The majority of members will just peruse the main general section because they are not looking for anything specific.
I post on another forum that also has topic categories for everything under the sun. Yet all the action is in the main "breaking news" section, and all the little pigeonholes are largely ignored because the users don't want to take the time to check them with every visit. Besides that, the moderators will move a post they disagree with to a tighter focus category under the pretext of making a better fit for the topic. Of course, the controversial post then dies for lack of visibility. New posts under these narrow focused topic categories often go nowhere. Generally equivalent posts placed under the main heading, "Breaking news," attract dozens of replies.
eolafan wrote:You say tomaTOE and I say tomato, you say potaTOE and I say potato...whatever trips your trigger.
NO!
I am not Dan Quayle!! I do not say Potatoe...
I'm also not sure if I like the thread chasing much.
As an aside to Bergie, I understand there is a Steak & Shake near St. Marys, Georgia and a couple of short lines nearby as well. Do I sense a story opportunity? Perhaps a photo op?
LC
Bucyrus wrote: matthewsaggie wrote:I'm not so sure this is an improvement. I liked the "Trains" forum because it covered everything in one place, while others like railfan.net, are so fragmented. Now I have to check three sections to the forum each time to cover all my interests (general, transit, and passenger). Oh well, we will see how it goes. I don't see any advantage of fragmenting into narrowly focused topic categories. On one hand, it may seem more orderly, but there is a downside to it as well. It is fine for those who want to start a discussion about a specific topic they have in mind. But many people who are inspired to contribute to a discussion would not even have thought about it prior to seeing the discussion. Those spontaneous contributions will not occur when the discussions are pigeon-holed into numerous, specific categories, unless they are all checked out by every member during every visit; and that will not be the case. The majority of members will just peruse the main general section because they are not looking for anything specific. I post on another forum that also has topic categories for everything under the sun. Yet all the action is in the main "breaking news" section, and all the little pigeonholes are largely ignored because the users don't want to take the time to check them with every visit. Besides that, the moderators will move a post they disagree with to a tighter focus category under the pretext of making a better fit for the topic. Of course, the controversial post then dies for lack of visibility. New posts under these narrow focused topic categories often go nowhere. Generally equivalent posts placed under the main heading, "Breaking news," attract dozens of replies.
Not sure of this new format,myself..The jurys still out on it.
The old format was comfortable, like a well worn pair of shoes, it fit well and got used alot.
This new format hurts my feet, i guess it will have to have a break-in period. We'll see...
....My thought in understanding this new format, perhaps one might come back thinking he will find a certain subject on this forum as he always has and miss it completely if it has been "moved".....Not really thinking to look somewhere else for it.
Limitedclear wrote: eolafan wrote:You say tomaTOE and I say tomato, you say potaTOE and I say potato...whatever trips your trigger.NO!I am not Dan Quayle!! I do not say Potatoe...I'm also not sure if I like the thread chasing much.As an aside to Bergie, I understand there is a Steak & Shake near St. Marys, Georgia and a couple of short lines nearby as well. Do I sense a story opportunity? Perhaps a photo op?LC
Well, it is obvious to me you never hear the old song from which this line about patato or tamatoe is taken (see below for entire song lyrics), so I will now take the final line from that song and suggest "let's call the whole thing off".
Song: Let's Call the Whole Thing Off LyricsYou say "either" and I say "either" You say "neither" I say "neither" "Either" "either", "neither" "neither" Let's call the whole thing off You say "potato," I say "patattah" You say "tomato", I say "creole tomata" Oh, let's call the whole thing off Oh, if we call the whole thing off Then we must part and oh If we ever part, that would break my heart So, I say "ursta" you say "oyster" I'm not gonna stop eatin' urstas just cause you say oyster, Oh, let's call the whole thing off Oh, I say "pajamas", you say "pajamas" Sugar, what's the problem? Oh, for we know we need each other so We'd better call the calling off off So let's call it off, oh let's call it off Oh, let's call it off, baby let's call it off Sugar why don't we call it off, I'm talking baby why call it off Call it off¡ Let's call the whole thing off
It just means you'll have to open three windows in your browser instead of the one when you log in to the site. That way you can still cut and paste quotes from one thread into another if such is relevant. Just make sure to reference which section you got it from.
futuremodal wrote: matthewsaggie wrote:I'm not so sure this is an improvement. I liked the "Trains" forum because it covered everything in one place, while others like railfan.net, are so fragmented. Now I have to check three sections to the forum each time to cover all my interests (general, transit, and passenger). Oh well, we will see how it goes. It just means you'll have to open three windows in your browser instead of the one when you log in to the site. That way you can still cut and paste quotes from one thread into another if such is relevant. Just make sure to reference which section you got it from.
Murphy Siding wrote: futuremodal wrote: matthewsaggie wrote:I'm not so sure this is an improvement. I liked the "Trains" forum because it covered everything in one place, while others like railfan.net, are so fragmented. Now I have to check three sections to the forum each time to cover all my interests (general, transit, and passenger). Oh well, we will see how it goes. It just means you'll have to open three windows in your browser instead of the one when you log in to the site. That way you can still cut and paste quotes from one thread into another if such is relevant. Just make sure to reference which section you got it from. You mean I can't just make this stuff up?
You can continue to make up stuff all you want.
But say we have a situation where we're talking about....oh, let's see, something that has a cross sectional characteristic, oh! I know.........modern steam locomotives to avoid using foreign sources of oil. In the other section they might be discussing how the T1 could have beaten diesels if it had gone further into development. In this one we might be discussing what type of modern steam could allow lower cost operation than diesel. If one posts something in the former that has merit for discussion in the latter, we can cut and paste it. But then it might confuse some people who can't find that quote in the GD section, which may bring on charges of "making it up". But if we reference it from the other section, then everyone's happy.
futuremodal wrote: Murphy Siding wrote: futuremodal wrote: matthewsaggie wrote:I'm not so sure this is an improvement. I liked the "Trains" forum because it covered everything in one place, while others like railfan.net, are so fragmented. Now I have to check three sections to the forum each time to cover all my interests (general, transit, and passenger). Oh well, we will see how it goes. It just means you'll have to open three windows in your browser instead of the one when you log in to the site. That way you can still cut and paste quotes from one thread into another if such is relevant. Just make sure to reference which section you got it from. You mean I can't just make this stuff up?You can continue to make up stuff all you want.But say we have a situation where we're talking about....oh, let's see, something that has a cross sectional characteristic, oh! I know.........modern steam locomotives to avoid using foreign sources of oil. In the other section they might be discussing how the T1 could have beaten diesels if it had gone further into development. In this one we might be discussing what type of modern steam could allow lower cost operation than diesel. If one posts something in the former that has merit for discussion in the latter, we can cut and paste it. But then it might confuse some people who can't find that quote in the GD section, which may bring on charges of "making it up". But if we reference it from the other section, then everyone's happy.
I was really, REALLY mad when I saw they had broken the Trains board into all these little segments. May as well be honest! I liked how everything was in one spot, therefore making it really easy to see what's going on. There have been many things I have heard about on the train board before I hear about it anywhere else, for example the Centennial going through Iowa last month. Now, I'll have to look in the "Locomotives" segment for any locomotive news. This really stinks. In sharp contrast, I also post a bit on the Classic Toy Trains forum, and they only have ONE segment! But that's a good thing...anything posted on that board is seen by all active members. If you break a forum into a bunch of little segments like they have done with Trains, people will likely look at the section they like the best and never look at the others...it will be a lot harder to just "surf around" the threads like I used to.
Did I miss it or has there been no explanation of the advantage of subdividing the forum? If there is an advantage, I cannot see what it is. One of the problems from having too many places to put things is that it is sometimes difficult to decide which place is best.
Here is a question: When someone starts a new thread, are they free to place it in the general discussion even though there is a specific sub-category forum available for it? Or is the general discussion only for threads that don't fit into the sub-categories? I have noticed that some threads that started out in the general discussion forum a week or so ago have been moved to sub-categories.
This forum change will work right when all the old posts are sorted out by category and moved to the right category. Who has that responsibilty?
Andrew
Watch my videos on-line at https://www.youtube.com/user/AndrewNeilFalconer
Bergie wrote: Trains magazine is pleased to announce the expansion of its online forum section to include dedicated discussion sections for these topics: Steam & Preservation, Locomotives, Transit, and Passenger. These discussion pages will allow participants a broader opportunity to discuss these specialized topics with more depth than they could in our general discussion pages. General Discussion will remain open to all subjects, but for specific questions and topics, these new forum sections will provide a new opportunity for participants. Steam & Preservation will cover museums and tourist railroads, contemporary mainline steam, and other topics of interest to those interested in saving our railroad heritage. Locomotives will provide a platform to discuss freight and passenger diesels and electrics. Transit will provide a forum for those interested in commuter trains and light rail. Passenger will provide a place to discuss Amtrak and high speed rail. We hope you enjoy these new forums. -- Jim Wrinn, Editor
Trains magazine is pleased to announce the expansion of its online forum section to include dedicated discussion sections for these topics: Steam & Preservation, Locomotives, Transit, and Passenger. These discussion pages will allow participants a broader opportunity to discuss these specialized topics with more depth than they could in our general discussion pages.
General Discussion will remain open to all subjects, but for specific questions and topics, these new forum sections will provide a new opportunity for participants.
We hope you enjoy these new forums. -- Jim Wrinn, Editor
Even though it is stated that "General Discussion will remain open to all subjects," by the way it sounds you won't be able to ask any questions that would fall into the subcategories, so in the end you'll have to ask your questions there. The downside to this I'm afraid, and what many others have already stated, is that most likely active users will look at the one category they like the best (probably general discussion), and not even look at any others, so your question would go unanswered. True, the new sections could "allow participants a broader opportunity to discuss these specialized topics with more depth than they could in our general discussion pages," but I do not think many members (myself included) want to spend the time looking through a bunch of different subcategories.
SchemerBob wrote: General Discussion will remain open to all subjects, but for specific questions and topics, .
General Discussion will remain open to all subjects, but for specific questions and topics, .
COOOL! so then, religion and politics are acceptable fare once again?
SchemerBob wrote: Bergie wrote: Trains magazine is pleased to announce the expansion of its online forum section to include dedicated discussion sections for these topics: Steam & Preservation, Locomotives, Transit, and Passenger. These discussion pages will allow participants a broader opportunity to discuss these specialized topics with more depth than they could in our general discussion pages. General Discussion will remain open to all subjects, but for specific questions and topics, these new forum sections will provide a new opportunity for participants. Steam & Preservation will cover museums and tourist railroads, contemporary mainline steam, and other topics of interest to those interested in saving our railroad heritage. Locomotives will provide a platform to discuss freight and passenger diesels and electrics. Transit will provide a forum for those interested in commuter trains and light rail. Passenger will provide a place to discuss Amtrak and high speed rail. We hope you enjoy these new forums. -- Jim Wrinn, Editor Even though it is stated that "General Discussion will remain open to all subjects," by the way it sounds you won't be able to ask any questions that would fall into the subcategories, so in the end you'll have to ask your questions there. The downside to this I'm afraid, and what many others have already stated, is that most likely active users will look at the one category they like the best (probably general discussion), and not even look at any others, so your question would go unanswered. True, the new sections could "allow participants a broader opportunity to discuss these specialized topics with more depth than they could in our general discussion pages," but I do not think many members (myself included) want to spend the time looking through a bunch of different subcategories.
Bob,
I am not sure how to interpret Bergie's notice. He says that for specific questions and topics, these new forums will provide a new opportunity for participants. "opportunity" sounds optional rather than mandatory. And what exactly is new about the opportunity?
And then there is this part: "These discussion pages will allow participants a broader opportunity to discuss these specialized topics with more depth than they could in our general discussion pages." Why would the opportunity to discuss be broader and allow more depth in the sub-categories than it would in the Gereral Discussion section? It seems like topics in the General Discussion section have had all the opportunity that they have ever needed.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.