Forum restructure

[Mojo]

As a result of a recent review carried out by forum staff regarding the structure and layout of RailUK Forums, we are today launching our most comprehensive revision to the forum since our launch in 2005.

The National Rail Forums category is now known as UK Railway Forums to better reflect the nature of many of the discussions in this area. This has also enabled us to create a new forum in this area; Railtours & Preservation. Changes to other forum names within this category is also intended to reduce confusion over the best location to create new threads on various aspects regarding the operational railway.

We now have a new category to replace the Fares Tickets & Routeing forum. The Fares Advice & Policy forum will form the bulk of discussion carried over from the previous single forum, and a new forum called Disputes & Prosecutions has been created, for people requesting advice concerning any issues which have arisen during a recent journey. The number of threads in this section is initially quite low, so its scope will be constantly reviewed by a newly-formed group of staff members and changes may be made later in the year depending on its success. This category will also host a guide which has been worked on by numerous members over the past year and is due to be launched on Monday 7 January 2013.

The Quiz Forum has been renamed to Quizzes and Games and continues to be overseen by our three 'Quizmasters,' who have been given additional moderation powers to better manage the quizzes and games in this forum.

There are also a few other changes to individual forum names.

Members are asked to double check that they are posting in the correct forum. In particular, we ask users to check if a new thread they are going to create in the UK Railway Discussion forum may be better placed in one of the other forums within the same category.

 

[radamfi]

Do the changes mean that discussion about railways in Northern Ireland no longer go into 'International Transport'?

 

[robertclark125]

I welcome the changes, the sub forum titles seem less cluttered. More evolution than revolution.

 

[trickyvegas]

I'm a bit disappointed that there is no longer an option to list the newest posts from all categories which is normally how I like to read the forum.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Actually I have just spotted it at the top of the page.

 

[Max]

Do the changes mean that discussion about railways in Northern Ireland no longer go into 'International Transport'?

radamfi, NI can be discussed in the UK Railway Discussion section. Cross-border trains such as enterprise go in International Transport.

 

[PR1Berske]

I think there's always a problem with any forum, not just this, having too many sub-forums

I visit a politics message-board which has recently doubled the number of sub-forums. There has been a considerable drop-off in the number of new threads and the popularity of certain discussions. This can't be down entirely to the Christmas period, as the changes were made just prior to the US elections in early November.

One of the things I've suffered since coming here as a regular poster is having otherwise popular threads killed off by moderators moving them from general discussion to elsewhere. Let's be honest, there are parts of this forum which aren't so high profile and threads there can wither and die, whilst in general discussion they can be sustained for weeks or even months.

It would be perhaps more sensible to consolidate the forums to encourage debate, rather than further fractioning what is already a fairly wide spectrum?

 

[brianthegiant]

not sure I completely agree with PR1berske.
I like that the forum is categorised. I'm more interested in infrastructure & international so I like that I don't have to scan through threads about preservation, fares, disputes, etc.

 

[PR1Berske]

Oh no, I agree there should be some sensible division so there's not one great pot of threads. But by the same token, there shouldn't be so many sub-forums that each becomes a 'ghetto'. If people only have one interest, fine, but the danger is having so many niche sub-forums that nobody goes elsewhere and the forum as a whole suffers as a result.

 

[Mojo]

We only actually have two Subforums; 'London Underground' and 'Photography Advice & Discussion;' and these exist because there is probably not enough discussion to warrant them being forums in their own right, yet there is still enough popularity and the nature of discussion is quite discrete to necessitate them being separate sections.

The actual number of forums is exactly the same as what we had at the end of November. This change has only created one new forum; Disputes & Prosecutions.

 

[paulypaul]

So long as the 'East Coast First Class service' thread is unaffected, then I'm happy.

 

[PR1Berske]

We only actually have two Subforums; 'London Underground' and 'Photography Advice & Discussion;' and these exist because there is probably not enough discussion to warrant them being forums in their own right, yet there is still enough popularity and the nature of discussion is quite discrete to necessitate them being separate sections.

The actual number of forums is exactly the same as what we had at the end of November. This change has only created one new forum; Disputes & Prosecutions.

I'm using "sub forum" to mean something slightly different but you know what I mean - in this messageboard, you have a number of forums, and that number might be too high, leading to a "ghettoisation", with people sticking to their own sub-forums and never going anywhere else.

 

[yorkie]

You mean forum, right. We removed one forum in November and this time we have done some re-organisation but there is only one new one this time, meaning we're back to the same number there was. So if we do have too many (which I am not convinced of) then we've had too many for a long time.

There are indeed some people who stay in one section, for example some of our members only wish to discuss buses so stick to the Other Public Transport section. I don't have a problem with that at all; what's a feasible alternative?

 

[PR1Berske]

Just going to leave it now, don't worry, won't get into this any further.

 

[Crossover]

I'm sure in time it will become the accepted norm...I think the problem we are probably all having is finding where everything is! What with the forums all being juggled about, and working out what forum was under what name before, it can be a little confusing.

I personally feel that posts are slow at the moment anyway, but I am partially putting that down to a slowdown over the Christmas break

 

[jon0844]

How about a new thread "Should forum members be made to post on Christmas Day?"

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I'm sure in time it will become the accepted norm...I think the problem we are probably all having is finding where everything is! What with the forums all being juggled about, and working out what forum was under what name before, it can be a little confusing.

You have said above what I was intending to say. It is disconcerting at first view, but the subsequent visits to the forum index pages become far easier.

 

[Jordy]

I wouldn't worry, it's even confusing for me at the moment. Everybody will get used to it in time.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

My only gripe is that I am clicking by habit on the positions of the signals for where the sections of the forum I don't read are and, of course, marking as read bits I do want to read in the process!:roll:

But yes, I will get used to the new layout in time.

 

[Waddon]

How about a forum called 'pedantic arguments' as a lot of otherwise interesting threads often descend into slanging matches, usually over minor little technicalities... if we could immediately move those threads away from their current categories it would make life a lot more pleasant for those of us who don't want to get involved

 

[yorkie]

How about a forum called 'pedantic arguments' as a lot of otherwise interesting threads often descend into slanging matches, usually over minor little technicalities... if we could immediately move those threads away from their current categories it would make life a lot more pleasant for those of us who don't want to get involved

If you see anything that you think breaks our rules, or if any content causes you concern, please alert us to it, by reporting (

) it using the report button. We rely on these reports as we can only read a small fraction of the typically 1000+ posts per day. Thanks

 

[PR1Berske]

Although you seem pretty good at spotting mine

 

[Trainfan344]

^That's Just what Yorkie does, He can't help it, I reckon he has a 6th sense or something...

But anyway, I like the restructure, It is a good thing.

 

[Darandio]

As part of the restructuring effort, is there much of a drive to rename threads now? Or was it a regular occurence before but is just happening much more?

There are times now that there are threads with a perfectly acceptable title, but there is a clamour from a moderator to change it to something that suits the forum meaning that when you return to find the thread, it's harder to find because it's called something completely different.

 

[Mojo]

Do you have an example of what you are on about? I am struggling to understand.

 

[Mike395]

We have always tried to keep topic names relevant, and when renaming topics we do try and keep it as similar as possible to the original where possible - there certainly hasn't been a co-ordinated effort to do this more since the restructure, and where we do change them, there is always a reason behind it.

As Mojo says, please do inform us of any examples of where you feel a change was unnecessary.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I have noticed an occasional change of title to a thread and have welcomed the change! It has usually been because the original title did little to identify the content.

 

[wintonian]

I have noticed an occasional change of title to a thread and have welcomed the change! It has usually been because the original title did little to identify the content.

I agree that it can be beneficial but perhaps the addition of a note in the thread would help explain/ alleviate any confusion rather than them just magically changing by themselves?

 

[PaxVobiscum]

I think there is a case for correcting the title of a thread if it has an obvious typo/spelling mistake. It's very easy to hit a wrong key when working fast and I don't think anyone would be insulted. After all it would be in line with the spirit of the forum rules and help maintain standards - long threads where an obvious mistake is constantly repeated look rather sloppy.

EDIT: But I suppose that is what the "report post" button is for now that I think about it (beat you to it, Mods!)

 

[yorkie]

I agree that it can be beneficial but perhaps the addition of a note in the thread would help explain/ alleviate any confusion rather than them just magically changing by themselves?

This is nothing to do with the forum restructure, but...

I am not sure how that solves the problem described above.

If someone wants to get updates from a thread by remembering the name of it, a note providing the old name within the thread won't be visible unless you click on the thread!

The solution is simple: subscribe to a thread if you want updates from it

To do this, click "Thread Tools" at the top of the thread, then click "Subscribe to this thread". The default option is no email, which means updates appear in your subscriptions folder in UserCP.

 

[Lrd]

The default option is no email, which means updates appear in your subscriptions folder

The default option for me is "Daily Updates by E-Mail".