This Forum - etiquette & evolution...?

[rkk01]

By "this forum" I mean the General Discussion forum...

I've often posted on here, when perhaps the question thread might have been better posts in the Routes, Scenarios, computing etc sub-fora.

But, traffic on the other bits of the site can be very low. Posts might not be seen, or perhaps by not a very wide selection of the user-base.

Has the forum etiquette gradually evolved to suit usage?
Is it better to direct questions in this section on the basis that they'll get a wider audience?

[brysonman46]

I am a relative "newbie" on this site, and still finding my way. I have a load of bookmarks to threads that are of interest, and will go through these about once a week. Only recently have I started going to the main TS13/TS14/TS15/TS16 forum http://forums.uktrainsim.com/viewforum.php?f=358. I then have to check latest dates of posting to see what need to be explored. I am sure that I do miss some things. Compared to the Steam forum, there a far fewer posts here (what it lacks in quantity it more than makes up for in quality). My own preference would be for all the sub forums for the TS13/TS14/TS15/TS16 forum to collapse into the main one. With the latest posting date shown, we would not miss any posts in any of the current sub forums. In the end analysis, you do not have to explore a thread if you do not wish to do so.

[pjt1974]

I have to admit that in the past 12 months or so, if I've got a question to ask I'll avoid the specialist sub forums and post it here because the sub forums seem to be less and less active than they ever were before.

May be it is just a case that less and less users are developing now. The old MSTS production line attitude that many brought with them to Rail Simulator and then Railworks seems to be dying out as they move on to pastures new. Just a natural progression I suppose or maybe a sign of the times and change in attitudes where many, not all I must stress, new users want everything served to them on a plate and don't have the patience, or the time, to produce content.

[Carinthia]

Each to their own, I guess, but I get irritated by those who to my eyes seem to not bother using the correct sub-forums (should that be sub-fora?) when they are there for the purpose and I frequently don't respond to those who to me seem too lazy to use them when they are there ready to be used.

But at the end of the day it is down to the forum administrators. It is the easiest thing in the world to move posts into appropriate sub-forums and if they choose not to do that I guess we can accept they don't care where things are posted. Personally, I see a forum as a useful work of reference and I think sub-dividing by category makes it so much easier to find something when you need an answer. And that saves asking a question that has been asked before.

Just my three-pennyworth.

John

[brysonman46]

Each to their own, I guess, but I get irritated by those who to my eyes seem to not bother using the correct sub-forums (should that be sub-fora?) when they are there for the purpose and I frequently don't respond to those who to me seem too lazy to use them when they are there ready to be used.
John

Fora and forums are both plurals of forum. The former conforms to the original Latin, which some people prefer, while others like the Anglicized form. Neither is right or wrong, and choosing between them is mostly a matter of preference. Forums is by far the more common form in most types of writing throughout the English-speaking world. Fora still has the edge in scientific and scholarly contexts, though. This is not surprising, as Latin forms are typically more common in these types of writing. Outside these contexts, fora can be distracting and even confusing to readers who are used to seeing the English word.

Of course, there are some Latin plurals conventionally used in English even outside science and scholarly writing. Memoranda, for instance, is more common than memorandums (sic), and phenomena is considered the only correct plural of phenomenon (though some people seem to use it to signify the singular form). Fora is not among these, though. It is clear that most English speakers prefer to pluralize this word in the English manner.

Nick

[gptech]

but I get irritated by those who to my eyes seem to not bother using the correct sub-forums

Not everybody who may know the answer to a question posts in the sub-folders though, so a secondary post in the general forum can't go amiss. Many would say that not bothering to use the 'search' facility to see if an existing thread on any particular topic already exists is worse then 'getting the section wrong'.

It is the easiest thing in the world to move posts into appropriate sub-forums and if they choose not to do that I guess we can accept they don't care where things are posted

Or accept that they do this on a voluntary basis, and won't/can't ensure every single post is in the right place and/or duplicated if/where necessary due to time constraints. It's a bit unfair to say they don't care.

I see a forum as a useful work of reference and I think sub-dividing by category makes it so much easier to find something when you need an answer.

We agree on something!! Particularly with a question of a specialist nature, posting in a dedicated forum will increase the odds of getting the *right* answer, so merging everything into a single forum could dilute that knowledge base---as well as making things rather 'messy'.

I've often posted on here, when perhaps the question thread might have been better posts in the Routes, Scenarios, computing etc sub-fora...................Is it better to direct questions in this section on the basis that they'll get a wider audience?

Do both; hope for an authoritative answer in the 'specialist' forum, but hedge your bets and post in the general section too. A sentence explaining that you've posted this way helps avoid any confusion.

[AndiS]

I would say in General Discussion, you get much attention for a short time, in the subforums, you get some attention - and by people who are interested and maybe know something - over a longer period of time.

I, too, prefer the structured approach, sharing the view of a forum as a knowledge repository. But then again, I often use search, and I generally use it on all forums, or the whole TS/RW tree(s) if too many MSTS solutions pop up (which gets less and less of a problem).

[AndyUK]

I've often posted on here, when perhaps the question thread might have been better posts in the Routes, Scenarios, computing etc sub-fora...................Is it better to direct questions in this section on the basis that they'll get a wider audience?

Do both; hope for an authoritative answer in the 'specialist' forum, but hedge your bets and post in the general section too. A sentence explaining that you've posted this way helps avoid any confusion.

The forum rules specifically advise against such a course of action and appear to support the approach advocated by Carinthia which I favour as well:

"6) If you wish to start a new thread, please pick the most relevant forum for the subject. If you are unsure which forum is appropriate, use the General Discussions forum for the product concerned and say you were not sure where it belonged. If necessary a Moderator will then move the thread to the most appropriate forum. It is not necessary to start a thread on one subject in more than one forum."

Andy L

[gptech]

"6) If you wish to start a new thread, please pick the most relevant forum for the subject. If you are unsure which forum is appropriate, use the General Discussions forum for the product concerned and say you were not sure where it belonged. If necessary a Moderator will then move the thread to the most appropriate forum. It is not necessary to start a thread on one subject in more than one forum."

Then the answer to the question already exists---if in doubt post in the general section---and learn how 'Search' works!

[holzroller]

and yet IIRC we have examples of threads being moved to the General subforum precisely to get attention. Personally I prefer the structure used by our German peers, although even there, I preferred the original structure. Ultimately though it is Atomic's forum and their choice how to present it.

[rkk01]

Some well considered responses, thanks all...

The rules are the rules, but I guess they were developed a while ago, and forum use is very different now.
Having topic specific items in each sub-forum is very sensible, but these do seem to suffer from lower usage.

As far as the search function is concerned - does anyone find that it works? I've searched for my own threads before, e.g. "DT 2251", and failed to find it... Numeric loco classes seem particularly problematic!

[AndiS]

The rules are the rules, but I guess they were developed a while ago, and forum use is very different now.

Maybe the rules are like that just to make people use subforums.

Underusage results from a reduction of independent developers. Also from the ripeness of the product. There is not too much to be discovered and there are few beginners compared to many years before when we all were beginners.

It is certainly true that TSxxxx strongly attracts players - they are the ones who bring the money after all. Whether developers are turned off or joining payware setups or hired by DTG, or simply working away on their own, using the Search function, is a hot topic and we will not find the answer.

Regarding the search function, I found these limitations for short terms, too. It is in the software.

To use Google as a replacement, append site:.uktrainsim.com to your search term. The first hit must be the thread you referred to.