I understand the word forum has many meanings but in the context of communication on the internet I think it was reasonable to assume that it was web forum that were being discussed.
-----------------------
The problem with this particular form of forum is that when the inevitable brawl breaks out (like this one), the exchange of blows by email is never going to be as satisfying as going into the pub's car park and using one's fists to make the argument really, really personal....
The advantage of Usenet(uk.rec.models.rail)is that I have opened my newsreader, seen your post, and replied to it in about 30 seconds. In a web based forum I would have to open a browser, go to the forum url, sign in, be re-directed back to the forum page, find the thread (possibly having to go to a second or third page as it is now old), reply to the message, and submit. I have been to some forums where if you type a lot of text which takes time, you sometimes get logged out because you have taken too long and then have to sign in again losing you reply in the process! I guess this is just poor design but to combat that, I now ALWAYS open notebook in which to type the reply, then copy and paste the text into the forum reply pane later if it is going to be a long diatribe.
Web forums do have their place and can be useful but Usenet scores for it's simplistic and basic uncluttered appearance.
I've given up on the brawl outside, now at the bar enjoying a pint :-)
Well Eric, no doubt your views (like mine) are sacred. If you can find any = comment related to the original post which is pertinent (except Simon's) th= en I would be pleased to read it.
Too often the posters here ignore the main subject of this group in order t= o diverge into some pseudo intellectual dialogue worthy of a greek forum. = I found that the posters (up to my remark) to be out of order and to be blu= nt and sailorlike "bloody rude!"!
Perhaps Eric, you could add something which is pertinent and not impertine= nt!
Sacred is probably too strong a word, but I am entitled to my opinions, and if you care enough about a fact that I seem to have wrong, please prove it wrong.
Simon's comment isn't pertinent to the original post, it's a mild comment on the ongoing conversational drift.
And that is your less-than-mild comment on the conversational drift. All anyone has done (including you!) is respond directly to one of the things they have read. In no way is this out of order (that's a fact, this is Usenet) and in no way is it "bloody rude". Also, your "pseudo intellectual" is just a bit more name-calling; now that might be considered rude by some people.
Impertinent to whom? As for pertinent:
1) I suggested that you should quote some of what you were replying to so that we would know which message it was. You neither did this nor objected to doing it.
2) The OP has set up a new web forum. Why do we need another one, there are too many already?
3) The OP is a dealer and did not say so. In some places that would be out of order, here it merely provokes a certain level of cynicism.
And given the level of take-up it would seem many people agree :) My own comment was intended as feedback as to why I personally would not be frequenting it ...
While it is obvious as soon as one hits the links that this is an 'advertising site' ( as soon as a link says 'advertisements' it gets wiped here and they loose any chance of business from me! But he is too small for me anyway ), the fact that people don't already know about 'The Branchline Goods Yard' as a supplier is a little harsh. But a 'sig' that identifies the fact would be an extra courtesy ;)
I think the fact that many people remain loyal to these 'old school' type feeds is probably an indication that new forums are not necessary, but I think that there is still a place for some improvement in the way 'lists' are handled in general? Linking to information on a particular product and it's problems even if that is provided by a dealer is useful, as long as that material is not sanitised and that is where usenet does come into it's own? However some means of filtering things to a finer level would at least address the 'complaint' that web forum evangelists push for forums with hundreds of sub forums :( Difficult to add here, but a tag for scale or something like that - not that there is much
I don't know about "... this is it ...", there may be another one out there somewhere!
Forums and picture galleries are an important contribution to the resources available to model railway enthusiasts. I have usually found that people who share this interest are helpful and supportive of each other, sharing knowledge and offering encouragement to fellow enthusiasts. I was only asking for help in adding, in my own small way, to these resources.
True, but it doesn't address the question as to why *yet another* web forum helps in any way. Don't you think this proliferation is in some way responsible for the dearth of discussion in this newsgroup?
Not necessarily, I think you could equate newsgroups/forums/whatever to say pubs - you find one that you like the look of, feel comfortable in and like the company and the conversation. If the topics are interesting or you think you can make a useful contribution it becomes your 'local', if not, you move on. In some cases, people enjoy sparing with others, whatever the topic. That's ok but it may dilute the original purpose of the group. IMHO a forum on a model railway website tends to stay on topic.
To others that have pointed out that The Branchline Goods Yard is a 'commercial site' and a 'small one' at that well, yes it is. This site, along with the fledgling forum and photo gallery developed from my interest in railway modelling. I make no apologies for that. If anyone is interested, my own model railway ('Beckenthwaite') is featured in the gallery (tblgy-modelrailways.co.uk/gallery). At 15' x
8' it will probably be dismissed as 'a small one' also, but it is on two levels (passing places & fiddle yard are directly under the visible layout and accessed via a tunnel. It is DCC with optional computer control using Railroad & Co Software. I only tell you this in a last desperate attempt to get back on topic! Geoff
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.