Bonj's thoughts on a better technical section

[montage]

[Admin Note]

I wanted to tidy this thread up and focus on the positive feedback aspect, rather than the initial tit-for-tat.

Apologies for removing your OP montage, but I can't delete the first post in a thread without crashing the entire thread.

Hopefully you understand and forgive .

Cheers,
Shaun

 

[bonj2]

Well come on then Ben, let's not sit on the fence now, what EXACTLY is wrong with the way it is run?

Cheers,
Shaun

Well, according to you, nothing. It's your forum, you run it how you want.
If you're confident that the way it's run is conducive to the type of threads and chat that you want, the atmosphere you want to foster, and the people you want to attract, then there isn't a problem, is there?

I could go into detail about how I would run a cycling forum if I had one, but I haven't, so I wont. At the end of the day, YOU'RE the one who runs a cycling forum, so you're the one who makes the decisions.

I could spend effort going into detail about changes I would make to THIS one, and if I did think you would implement all or some of them, then I probably would. But I don't, so I won't.

At the end of the day, it's a very popular forum, so you must be doing something right. If I ran a forum it might very well be absolutely loved by the few people that visited it, but they might get bored because it didn't appeal to "the masses" and generate a new influx of possible worthy acquaintances.

 

[Shaun]

So, reading between the lines, you think it's not focused enough on cycling?

 

[bonj2]

So, reading between the lines, you think it's not focused enough on cycling?

If I had to answer that question in one word, which I do, 'cos I could do with going to bed: yes.

 

[yello]

So, reading between the lines, you think it's not focused enough on cycling?

If I had to answer that question in one word, which I do, 'cos I could do with going to bed: yes.

To be fair to bonj, I know what he is saying.

CycleChat is many things but, as I've said before, its strength is not its depth of cycling knowledge - be it mechanics, history, racing, audax, or whatever. That's not to say that there aren't some very knowledgeable people on here, because there are. Neither is it a criticism of CC, it is what it is. But suffice to say that if I want cycling related info, I don't rely on CC. Tbh I don't now even expect an answer! I google it, might ask on YACF (but that's pretty hit and miss too, topic depending) but CC isn't my first point of call.

All of that said, it's not in any way my wish to change CC. As I said, it is what it is and it's direction is both nothing to do with me and, I suspect, loosely determined. I simply amend my expectations accordingly. It seems to have a strong commuting element (a healthy reflection of the increase in numbers cycling methinks!) but as I no longer commute, it's not really something I can share in these days. My main interest these days (other than just riding my bike!) is probably the racing scene, and the forum is very lucky to have the astonishingly knowledgeable Skip Madness on that subject. He's worth the subscription fee alone!

I think bonj's mistake - if one can call it that - is to expect CC to meet his requirements. I flit in and out of CC, expecting little from it (and am rewarded accordingly ) - anything else is a bonus - but I don't take it seriously and am far better at ignoring threads than I used to be. I suggest bonj just takes some time out and takes a break from CC. If he comes back (again!), so be it. That's up to him and its not an issue for me either way. We've had our confrontations but, I have to say, he does have fresh, strongly held views that are often (imo at least) bang on the money.

 

[Shaun]

I'm open to criticism and discussion about CC, and as you've just proved it can be both insightful and constructive.

Bonj, if you've got similar thought or ideas, lets hear them.

Cheers,
Shaun

 

[Panter]

I'm actually quite surprised at Yello's comments about CC not being first port of call with cycling questions.

I know it's one thing that CC does get criticised on, for being about anything other than cycling, but I've always had all my questions answered by knowledgeable and experience people.
I can honestly say that I don't turn anywhere else other than CC for technical queries, except.......
for MTB ones.

CC has some extremely knowledgeable MTBr's on here but the main focus is tarmac, which is fair enough.
For MTB questions I usually look to another forum although I did join that long before CC, so it's mainly through loyalty.

Maybe it's because I'm fairly new to cycling and therefore don't have any cutting edge questions, but I've always found CC to be an invauluable knowledge base for any cycling questions I've had so far.

 

[bonj2]

I'm open to criticism and discussion about CC, and as you've just proved it can be both insightful and constructive.

Bonj, if you've got similar thought or ideas, lets hear them.

Cheers,
Shaun

Well one thing that strikes me as the difference between this and yacf is this: the scope of the 'general' forum.
The 'general' forum on here is "cafe", and it is, by intent or by evolution or whatever means, largely NON-cycling related. It doesn't list itself as cycling related or non cycling related, but by fair means or foul, it IS largely non-cycling related - people just post in there about what's going on in their life.
Compare this to on yacf, on which I would say the 'general' forum is probably 'freewheeling'. By contrast, this IS a cycling related forum.

People log onto a forum and, quite justifiably, either can't, can't be bothered to, or incorrectly, decide what sub-forum to post their thread in. So they post it in what they perceive to be the general forum. Maximum exposure is at a higher priority in people's minds than relevance and keeping the sub-forums on-topic.

So, I may be wrong here, but I think certainly my, and going by the atmosphere that has been fostered, a lot of people's, perception is that people log on to yacf, check 'freewheeling', and bugger off again. People log onto cc, check 'cafe', and bugger off again. ergo, if someone's got a 'general' post that's cycling related, they post it on yacf. If they've got a 'general' post that's NON-cycling related, they post it here.

That's my guess. It may not be 100% correct, but I think it's certainly got some element of a reflection of what's actually the case.

 

[Andy in Sig]

So we need a General Cycling forum alongside the cafe? Would that IYO resolve the matter?

 

[bonj2]

So we need a General Cycling forum alongside the cafe? Would that IYO resolve the matter?

Not overnight, no. It wouldn't instantly resolve a lot of the damage that has imho already been done. But it would certainly be a start, and crucially, would set future evolution of cyclechat off on a more worthy keel.
It would have to be thought about a bit, as well, rather than just plonked on there and left. For instance, I can see it being far too similar to commuting. Guidelines as to best usage would help to prevent it becoming polluted.

 

[Shaun]

Thanks Ben, that's a bit more like it.

I think you'll find Noodly has similar thoughts; keep the forums more on-topic. Keep the cycling stuff in the correct cycling related forums, instead of having them mixed-up with Cafe non-cycling posts (for exposure's sake).

The only thing that stops this happening at the moment is my time to manage it. I spend a good deal of my time dealing with the technical elements of the forums, and member/external queries, so don't have too much free time to do a lot of thread-type housekeeping (for want of a better word).

If I ever manage to turn CC into a full-time enterprise, I'll see about.

Cheers,
Shaun

 

[theclaud]

Not overnight, no. It wouldn't instantly resolve a lot of the damage that has imho already been done. But it would certainly be a start, and crucially, would set future evolution of cyclechat off on a more worthy keel.
It would have to be thought about a bit, as well, rather than just plonked on there and left. For instance, I can see it being far too similar to commuting. Guidelines as to best usage would help to prevent it becoming polluted.

Lighten up a bit, Bonjy! Is worthiness really what we want?

 

[trustysteed]

The only thing that stops this happening at the moment is my time to manage it.

perhaps you could ask the moderators to volunteer for this task so they could spend more time housekeeping and less time being draconian crazed with power?

 

[Fab Foodie]

bonj, There was once a forum called acf where everything was in its place, just like 'Duloc' in Shreck. CC is like the antodote, it's more open and rambling and light on rules. Some of us need that in a forum. If you need to post where things are more organised then use yacf. I for one am very comfortable with how CC is organised and that is one of the reasons I like it here (after the people). As most of your posts are rambling anyway I'd have thought the current set-up suited your style!

 

[Andy in Sig]

I think a good idea would be for Bonj to give his best shot at designing however many supplemetary fora he thinks necessary and most crucially, their accompanying guidelines. He could then put these to Shaun privately. Once they had agreed on something publishable it could be introduced. Perhaps, given the demands on Shaun's time, he could hand over the detailed implementation to Bonj/Noodley and anybody else who thinks the idea a worthy one.