Forum Satisfaction Poll


#1

What would you prefer on the forum?


#2

I would like to see different forums, but only a very limited amount. Broad categories would be best. I would be disappointed to see things like…THE POST-COLONIAL RIMFIRES SOLD (BUT NOT MANUFACTURED) IN FRANCO-PHONE AFRICA FORUM.


#3

I would be satisfied with “military” & “everything else”.


#4

I don’t want to throw too wet a blanket here, but this was discussed at length in the process of creating the new site.

[color=blue]IF[/color] all posters were religious about keeping their posts to the appropriate forum, it might work.

[color=blue]BUT[/color] there are several actual and potential downsides which we believed offset the expected benefit:

(1) It makes more work for staff and requires more staff.

(2) It gives spammers and trolls more places to hide.

(3) As things expand - and it certainly appears they will, dramatically compared to the previous forum - this makes searching for a particular topic more time consuming . . . and really a ROYAL PITA if people are not very assiduous in classifying their topics by forum / stating the topic in the subject line of the thread.

(4) It can - and almost always does - precipitate disagreements because Party A believes Party B should have listed the topic in a different forum or a staff member moves the topic to what they believe is the correct forum and the originator or another party doesn’t like the call.

(5) It tends to clutter the main page.

(6) The site as a whole tends to become fragmented, with several sub forums languishing and a few attracting the majority of traffic, “correctly” classified or not.

(7) MANY people - in all likelihood a substantial majority of the forum users!! - enjoy reading / learning about areas outside of their own specialties, so they would have to invest more time to cover the various resulting forums.

This is not to say it will never happen, but at this point, given the number of users, the available resources (human and machine), etc., it really is on the most rearward of burners with the heat off. When / if the volume of new threads climbs substantially more, such that a single forum becomes so cumbersome this outweighs the downsides, such a structure would obviously become “cost effective.”

We seriously considered adding a sub forum for the .22 box collectors at the outset, but decided to see how this developed. There have been few, if any, threads on this topic since the new site began, though.

Just as a side note, and partly to illustrate some of the points above, this thread really belongs on the other forum. Some would say this forum is appropriate because it has more views (and it does), but note the forum descriptions. That’s no criticism of you, Ray, or of anyone else; it’s just that the fewer the forums, the smoother things seem to go for many reasons.

.


#5

The guys have done a good job setting up this forum. Leave it the hell alone! Sorry to put it in those terms, but that’s how strongly I feel about it. My gosh - those of us who spend a lot of time looking at the forum would have to bring up eight and ten categoiries to be of any help to others. We spend enough time on this forum, and I am not begrudging of that - it is a great place to learn and increase one’s library. However, to have to search out different forums by subject matter would cost even more time. Also, who is to pick the subject of each forum? What if I want “auto pistol” my specialty, separate, but the next guy wants “Pistol and Revolver” joined together? Who gets his way, he or I? These things always lead to endless numbers of topics. It is easy to read, easy to use and easy to search out your interests right now! Why change it? I agree with Iconoclast 100% on the problems mentioned, and do NOT support changing it to topic-related mini-forums.


#6

I vote to leave it as it is. This way works fine.


#7

I have collected ammunition from Rocks to Rockets so it is all of interest to me. Many fields overlap in unexpected ways. The shotshell field is mostly unknown to me but there are very interesting military shotshells which are of interest.Broad strokes like MILITARY RIFLE or “37mm and over” could be of use as well for those who have no interest in the big stuff. The official start of artillery calibers is 37mm but there is a LOT of big ammo between .50 cal and 36mm. The standard collecting classifications from the IAA directory could be usefull. I am trying to mix up the items which I post to be of interest to a wide variety of collectors.


#8

When I posted this poll I was in no way advacating any changes. In fact, I prefer the presant format for many of the rasons stated by Iconclast and John Moss. I just thought it would be good to take a poll to see how the majority of the readership felt for the future guidance of the forum Admin’s.


#9

I like it the way it is for most of the reasons listed above. Also there doesn’t seem to be enough post frequency to justify splitting everything. Now if it got crowded…
My 2c
-Josh


#10

There are pro’s and con’s for everything. I personally would like to see more sub-forums, but the reasons that Iconoclast gives are very valid and fully understood.
Maybe as a compromise, at least one additional forum for foto galleries.

cheers
FD


#11

At least these subforums:
-Small arms ammos
-Bigger stuff
-WTB
-WTS/WTT


#12

Hammer (and others) - there are many issues involved with having one or more sections devoted to WTB / WTS / WTT topics. Several of these are policy matters which involve the parent organization. The subject has been, and continues to be, discussed by at least some of the officers, but there is a [color=blue][u]LOT[/u][/color] more to it than might be apparent on the surface.

It’s not my place to go beyond advising it is under consideration and saying I am in complete agreement with the cautionary approach which is being followed.

.


#13

I think the purpose of the forum is to discuss these matters. It wasn’t long ago there was strong sentiment to NOT CHANGE anything from the previous forum (which I did not support and sensed the “ain’t broke…don’t fix it” approach). I agree there are pro’s and cons to all and Teak writes some fine points. I believe an index category could be created for various posts and the reader could leave them as is (in the order thay are posted)…or upon discusion by the web site hierachy, there could be categories that could be indexed upon (as far as the imagination could run). I for one, would like to see what posts have great reference photos, and I would chose to index on those (if that was a capability)…per all the fine photos fron CSAEOD. Thus rimfire folks could index on rinfires (if that were a possible category to choose). Does anyone recall the resistance to look in to posting photos (?)…seems a long time ago. Let’s talk…how is it said ?..“those that don’t learn from the past, are doomed to repeat it”…change can be good.


#14

No doubt, the photos make the forum. A picture is worth HOW MANY words ? I have seen lots of this stuff but always see something new in another collection. KEEP IT COMING !


#15

as an old but new collector i enjoy the forum as it is…its a broad education and you can zero on what your interests are…


#16

For those who like some of the photos. The easy approach it to right click on the photo, and then click “Same Picture As” and store it in your computer in whatever kind of file structure you want!!! Remember, these photos are owned by somebody else so saving them isn’t the same as being able to use them for other purposes.

An interesting thread. The opinions are appreciated.


#17

keep it as it is.
Works a treat.
only problem I have is how to underline or bold words ! MAC here