About a year and a half ago, there was a discussion regarding the possible 'demise' of this forum. Obviously, that hasn't occurred.
One thing regarding the forum does strike me as odd, the fact it seems things seemed to get posted here last, after in the NG section of RMWeb and on the NGRMOnline forum. I can understand that for non society members, but I would think society members would at least post here and on the other sites, if only to show the forum is relevant, and support it.
The example that made me think to post this were postings on RMweb and NGRMO that examples of the Bachmann Baldwins had arrived to a few folks for review. One person mentioned was Charlie Insley, the society's secretary. One would think he, at least, would have posted a note to the society's own forum. I'm not bashing Charlie about it, as I am not sure he posted anything on the other forums. Just read he had received one.
So, perhaps the forum is becoming irrelevant? I hope not, and if it stays around, it will be where I post any progress posts regarding my about to be started layout.
I guess I should also mention, that if in the future, folks get tired of the issues with other social media (hackings, 'fake news' postings, cyber bullying, et al) and we come full circle to using a Yahoo groups type method, I have started a 009 group on groups.io, more as a place holder, for now, than to start a active group. Just a FYI.
Jim F
I guess it all comes down to numbers.
There are 380 members of this forum.
There are 1,784 members of the facebook 009 Railway Modellers Group.
There are 3,304 members of NGRMon-line.
The activity on the faceboook group is also the highest by a long way and it is far easier to upload photos as well.
I do not use RMweb so I do not know about that one.
Brian Meldon
You'd have to drag me kicking and screaming to use Yahoo Groups, I'm afraid! Like Facebook it is hopeless if you want to find out information that has been posted before on a subject. Give me a Forum any day... I also find Forums tend to be more laid back and nicer places to be compared with the more "in your face" media such as YG, FB and Twit(er)...
I doubt this forum will go, it's useful for discussing "Society" only things and, whilst quiet (compared with NGRM) it still serves a purpose...
I post on the Facebook Group. It is much more 'user-friendly' than this forum. Can't be bothered with NGRM online now, far too cliquey and I really did NOT like the moderators. I can post photos and videos on the Facebook group. I don't know how to do that here and can't be bothered to try to learn. The Society Directors have indeed discussed this forum. Consensus is that it is not used by many but those that do use it use it a lot. It WILL be revamped in the future as the entire Society web presence is being revamped. So the style and format will inevitably change.
Brian, I realize the number of folks on fb and NGRMOn-line is much higher, but I wonder how many of the 1784 (fb) and the 3304 on NGRMO are society members.
Not being one who wants more pictures to look at, verses more actual modelling content, nor cares to post pictures so people can admire what I've done, I am the opposite to Hobby. I like being able to search just the photo section, the files sections, of the conversation section on yahoo groups, and being able to get all the postings via email. So I would be kicking and screaming (and probably just give up any modelling hobby interest), if all I had to rely on was fb.
I also prefer having a focused group, as in a 009 one, verses a one size fits all forum or group, with all scales discussed. Clicking on a new thread topic, for example, one titled "My new L&B Lew", only to find it concerns a garden scale one, is a waste of time, for me.
For the record, as well, I have been on ONElist, which became EGroups, which became Yahoo Groups. I have never, in all that time, found it difficult to upload files or photos, nor any problems doing so, except when Yahoo was having issues. From owning a few groups over the last 20 odd years, I've found most problems folks have are self created.
Be that as it may, I'll use the Society forum, as long as it is around, perhaps posting on the other forums as well, though not there 1st, and here after.
Jim F
I for one would be very unlikely to use a Yahoo group.
I was a member of another modelling related Yahoo group but I left it. I did not take out a Yahoo membership so could not use the past posts files, photos etc. I eventually got so fed up of the vociferous few who went out of their way to annoy other posters who held different views from their own, that I signed out permanently.
In my experience, therefore, Yahoo groups are neither useful nor friendly and I will not join one again.
Just my opinion.
Frank
I have been a member on here for several years but only recently joined RMweb. One thing I have noticed is that on the latter you can post pictures as attachments whereas here the maximum attachment size is more limited so that could be part of it. I quite like having a forum specific to 009 and which can be used for discussions about the Society which non-members would not want to read (and members might not want them to). It also provides a space for those unable to regularly get to area group meetings which is quite good.
Danny
As Jim said, fears about this forum's demise have (so far) not materialised. Given that it is the Society's own forum it would be a shame if it did, in my opinion. But clearly many Society members do not feel that way, which of course they are fully entitled to. As for posting, it's perhaps understandable that many will give NGRM Online and other sites priority as they can expect a wider audience there. It's a virtuous / vicious circle, of course - the more traffic a forum generates the more visits it will receive, and vice versa. But I am puzzled that some of the Socety's officers seem not to feel the need to have a presence here (just a statement of fact). But maybe they do monitor our discussions here without wanting to get involved.
The proposed changes to the Sales operation, recently posted on the 'Sales' thread here, may possibly help to improve the traffic figures since if members need to visit the Society website and have a password to access the sales lists and order items they may possibly take the opportunity to browse the forum while they're signed in. Possibly...
David.
One thing I have noticed is how erratic posting seems to be on the forum - so for instance there could be nothing for a few days then loads of posts within a few hours. Perhaps the officers/directors of the Society are keen to avoid being seen to unnecessarily interfere, as inevitably somebody would see fit to criticise them for this if they were present on the forum.
Danny
I am surprised that someone should complain that the Society's officers do not monitor or use this forum. Can I ask why they should? If any member has a question they wish to raise with the Committee, the correct way to do this is in writing to the Secretary, not as a gripe on these pages as quite often happens. As I understand it, the majority of the Committee members are not actually interested in the matters that are raised here. There is, of course, no reason why they ought to be so interested. I do not feel they should be obligated to have a presence here. This forum, after all, is only used by a very small percentage of the membership, considerably less in number than those registered to use it. I would guess, I do not know this, that the total number of members regularly posting here is considerably less than 100.
I would remind you that all Officers and Directors of the Society are unpaid, therefore work voluntarily and have other things in their lives as well as 009 modelling and their Society duties. The duties they perform are, for the most part, completely taken for granted by the membership, who, in some cases, seem very quick to complain if things are not done exactly as they would wish them to be. Having been on the receiving end of a very unpleasant personal attack recently I speak from personal experience on this matter!
Quote from: rod335 on February 28, 2018, 08:49
I am surprised that someone should complain that the Society's officers do not monitor or use this forum. Can I ask why they should? If any member has a question they wish to raise with the Committee, the correct way to do this is in writing to the Secretary, not as a gripe on these pages as quite often happens. As I understand it, the majority of the Committee members are not actually interested in the matters that are raised here. There is, of course, no reason why they ought to be so interested. I do not feel they should be obligated to have a presence here. This forum, after all, is only used by a very small percentage of the membership, considerably less in number than those registered to use it. I would guess, I do not know this, that the total number of members regularly posting here is considerably less than 100.
I would remind you that all Officers and Directors of the Society are unpaid, therefore work voluntarily and have other things in their lives as well as 009 modelling and their Society duties. The duties they perform are, for the most part, completely taken for granted by the membership, who, in some cases, seem very quick to complain if things are not done exactly as they would wish them to be. Having been on the receiving end of a very unpleasant personal attack recently I speak from personal experience on this matter!
Yes, I don't like the way some people seem to imply that membership of the forum should be compulsory for those who have given their time (as you quite rightly point out, unpaid) to serve the Society in a capacity which may have almost nothing to do with the forum.
Danny
I like our forum very much (although I wish posting pictures were easier). The tone and atmosphere is (very nearly always) congenial and I am only tempted to post here.
Frank, sorry, but your reasoning about your not using Yahoo groups would be like someone deciding to get into 009 for the 1st time. Goes out and buys a 009 rtr loco, gets home, finds it runs terrible. Decided, based on that, that all 009 locoas are garbage, and goes on to model a different scale/gauge.
My EarlyRail group have been around since 1999, started by someone else. I inherited it 12 or 13 years ago. In all that time, I have only had to chastise 2 members, and one was only for posting a business sale advert, against group rules.
And why would you not sign up with Yahoo? You have to register with most other forums and such, to use their photos and file features.
Like I said above, I think most problems folks have with Yahoo groups are self inflicted.
Rod, I agree with you, to a degree, regarding Committee members and monitoring the forum. But if part of it's purpose is not for the discussion of Society issues, for those who cannot get to any meetings where said discussions might occur, why even have a Society only forum? Telling someone who has a issue or question regarding the Society is fine, but if that person does write to a committee member, and never hears back, what other means does he or she have to get a answer, or raise a issue?
The fact that all Officers, Directors and committee members are all volunteers is, I think, well understood. But so are the same folks, in those positions, in other rail modelling Societies, Associations and Guilds. I have been a member of several over the past 6 or 7 years, as I explored which direction I would take with my UK rail modelling. The N Guage Society, the 2mm Association, Scalefour Society, O Gauge Guild, and I think maybe the EM Gauge Society, all have a member only forum or Yahoo group. and all have one sub forum which is for Society/Assoc./Guild business, and that sub section is and does have involved officers. So stating that they are volunteers should not be a reason for not participating, nor for saying Society business should not be discussed here.
Who knows, perhaps if there were more Society ideas, issues, etc.., being discussed here, it would draw in more members, as it might then feel like a Society benefit, instead of just another NG modelling forum.
Jim F
I think the concept of having a Society forum limited to members only is perfectly all right. The point I was trying to make about the Directors and Officers is that they have no obligation or duty to be on this forum and indeed many of them are not because they do not find it appealing or, dare I say it, interesting enough. The purpose of the forum, as I see it, is for members to seek help and advice from other members. It should not, to my mind, be abused by people with their own hobby horses (sorry Blair, that does NOT mean you!) to go tilting at windmills or airing grievances in public. And it should equally not involve attacks on other members, no matter how veiled.
;D
The way this Forum is set up is such that we can have discussions about Society Matters without any non-members joining in, which I think is as it should be. Jim makes a good point that many members can't get to the AGM and whilst sending a letter to the News is one way of raising something it's not a discussion and replies (and thus any discussion) is, by default, very long winded... That is one very good reason for the Forum and I do believe that the "Committee" (or whatever they are called these days) do look in even if they don't become involved which is also as it should be... We have a discussion and then, if people feel strongly enough about it, they write in... In effect it's the same as a local group but on a worldwide basis!
Jim, the way i look at the various online discussion "methods" is as follows:
Facebook (and i suppose twitter) is like a Pub, you go in, have a chat and go out again, information is there but hard to get at and not very convenient...
Forums such as this, NGRM or RMW are like Libraries in a Pub where you can chat and find out information at the same time, even if it's from a while ago! The information is there, easy to get at and you can have a chat at the same time...
Yahoo Groups is sort of inbetween the two, it's easy enough to chat but not as easy to get information from unless the discussion is ongoing...
I'm not a fan of FB (can't stand Twitter), I can live with Yahoo Groups (I have to as the Austrian Railways Group don't have a forum) but give me a proper forum any day for the best of both worlds...
I've not an issue re photos, it's easy enough to put your photos in a hosting site and use that, if you are in several Forums or Groups it's easier that way as you have the photo in just one place... Personally I use Imgur, though many use Flickr...
Just my views...
Quote from: Hobby on February 28, 2018, 14:27
The way this Forum is set up is such that we can have discussions about Society Matters without any non-members joining in, which I think is as it should be. Jim makes a good point that many members can't get to the AGM and whilst sending a letter to the News is one way of raising something it's not a discussion and replies (and thus any discussion) is, by default, very long winded... That is one very good reason for the Forum and I do believe that the "Committee" (or whatever they are called these days) do look in even if they don't become involved which is also as it should be... We have a discussion and then, if people feel strongly enough about it, they write in... In effect it's the same as a local group but on a worldwide basis!
Quote from: rod335 on February 28, 2018, 11:52
I think the concept of having a Society forum limited to members only is perfectly all right. The purpose of the forum, as I see it, is for members to seek help and advice from other members. It should not, to my mind, be abused by people with their own hobby horses (sorry Blair, that does NOT mean you!) to go tilting at windmills or airing grievances in public. And it should equally not involve attacks on other members, no matter how veiled.
Rod
I am getting a little confused with what we are "allowed" to discuss on this forum. I agree with you that the forum is for members to seek help and advice from other members but are you saying we should not discuss Society matters? Are you saying, to take the recent discussion regarding the Heritage Collection as an example, we should not have had that discussion? As far as I can see there is nothing in the rules governing this forum that prevents discussion of Society matters as long as we abide by the common rules of respect etc. and do not launch personal attacks. [Sorry to learn you have been on the receiving end of a very unpleasant personal attack recently]
Would appreciate clarification of the rules. This may be an appropriate time to say that if the forum is being upgraded it might be an opportune time to review the forum rules.
Malcolm
I was not laying down what can and cannot be discussed here. But since this is a MEMBERS forum, membership should be restricted to Society members. If procedural matters for the Society are to be raised, the correct way is to address matters to the Society Secretary, not try to publicly start a witch-hunt.
Thanks Rod. Fully agree non members should be excluded.
Malcolm
I don't think we've ever had a witch hunt, we've had discussions where differing views were expressed but that is not the same thing.
Quote from: rod335 on February 28, 2018, 08:49
As I understand it, the majority of the Committee members are not actually interested in the matters that are raised here.
I am surprised that you should suggest that our committee members might not be interested in the contents of an 009 forum, Rod!
David.
Why? Personally I don't often find much of the contents interesting. There are occasionaly items that appeal to me.
Quote from: rod335 on March 01, 2018, 11:13
Why? Personally I don't often find much of the contents interesting.
Some people would say this thread is turning into a case in point... :) :D
On looking into the Prototype section of this forum I was surprised at how many non-prototype threads there are dealing with cancelled exhibitions, the heritage collection etc. and, for that matter, this thread 'This Forum'. Indeed there is very little actually on prototype information!!
On this forum there is no particular section for general matters such as exhibition cancellations or for general discussion on Society matters such as the heritage collection or 009 News or any other Society matter members may wish to discuss therefore, as I mentioned in an earlier post, as an upgrade to the forum is being considered now might be an opportune time to review the forum rules and consider expanding the range of subjects allowed to be discussed without having to hide matters away under 'Prototype - General'. I am therefore eating humble pie and agreeing with Rod that the way this Forum is currently configured is to discuss prototypes and modelling items, exhibition and Society announcements and not much else. I feel a letter to the Hon. Sec. coming on..... :(
Malcolm
We had a discussion about the "Exhibitions" section many moons ago where we pointed out that the only way to find out the date of an exhibition in that section was to open the thread which wasn't very useful. We were told that it couldn't be done any other way. Personally i don't bother with that section of the forum at all, I use NGRM, UKModelshops or CM/RM magazines for exhibition info, or even the website, but not this forum. I can understand why people put the cancellations in the "General" section as it's the easier to see that it relates to a current exhibition or one last year or next year. John does a great job in updating the News and Website, but the Forum title entries need changing, I don't want to have to open every thread just to find a date.
On some forums they even have a section for discussions on random topics not directly related to railways or modelling, although I'm not sure that's the way to go here. Since it's a specific forum for the Society it might be better to create opportunities and functions that aren't found on other, similar forums.
Danny
So
You are not the only one who craves affirmation when posting, which is why "Like" buttons are ubiquitous on social media.
And the flip side to that craving is that readers are often sufficiently motivated to click the "Like" button in response to a post, but not motivated enough to post a reply - the result being that many posts remain unacknowledged.
So on a purely practical note, it might worth upgrading the software this forum run ons - presently version 1.1 (see footer of page) whilst the current release is version 2.0: https://download.simplemachines.org/
An upgrading of this forum is one of the things to be dealt with via the improvements to the Society website. But, of course, no matter what upgrading is done, you cannot MAKE members use the forum. As I have remarked before, the forum is not used by many members but those who do use it like and use, it a lot.
Would agree with much of what David says. But I regard it mainly as a place for us to discuss Society things rather than general Narrow Gauge. I will always plug NGRM Forum over this one, even to members, as the "input" is much greater sdue to the larger member's base and therefore more useful. Lets be honest, even if something is done to update the forum (software?) it will still never compete with another forum which has a much larger remit within our specialised interest.
I once commented on RMWeb about something having suggested asking the same question (NG related) be posted on NGRM and was taken to task by one of their regulars who asked why would anyone want to go elsewhere... I simply replied by quoting the daily number of NG related posts on RMW compared to NGRM. I never heard any more.
That's not to say I'm advocating closure of this one, there have been times when we've needed to discuss Society policy and an outside forum such as NGRM would be entirely inappropriate. Also some people might prefer this forum's "members only" format rather than an "open" one, so there's good reason to keep it open. But I don't think it needs a great deal of money spending on it, perhaps just an update to make it look nicer and be more user friendly.
Well...
There are a few main headers "missing" from this forum, which on occasion makes it difficult to post a topic.
And... perhaps we spend more time in the real world? (or in my case on the Discworld?)
This may come as a shock to some people who live on forums and the internet.
I did a small survey asking people who have attended our NG meetings.
These are the results.
009 Forum. 12 visit it.
NGRM. 16 visit it.
People not on any Forums = 23.
I have some comments from the latter,
Forums are full of people who want to see their name in lights.
Most talk a load of rubbish.
Some think they know everything in life and they are always right (in their opinion).
The expression looking good, when in fact, its a load of rubbish !
Maybe food for thought.
I must also point out, some that visit the forums have never contributed to it.
Stan.
Quote from: Stan Williams on October 27, 2018, 08:01
This may come as a shock to some people who live on forums and the internet.
I did a small survey asking people who have attended our NG meetings.
These are the results.
009 Forum. 12 visit it.
NGRM. 16 visit it.
People not on any Forums = 23.
I have some comments from the latter,
Forums are full of people who want to see their name in lights.
Most talk a load of rubbish.
Some think they know everything in life and they are always right (in their opinion).
The expression looking good, when in fact, its a load of rubbish !
Maybe food for thought.
I must also point out, some that visit the forums have never contributed to it.
Stan.
Did you ask them about any others? It doesn
Danny,
I should have mentioned, some of the 23 are not on the internet (that may shock some).
Most have been on the 009 Forum or the NGRM and have packed them in (see some of the remarks)
Some of above go on the RMWEB but only read it.
Stan.
Bit Harsh comments re forums Stan
Yes a lot of people merely read/watch topics on forums without contributing but that is their choice .
name in lights ,load of rubbish - what NG forums are you on ?
Alan
Alan,
Those comments are not mine, they are from people I have spoken to.
I am on this forum and the NGRM.
Stan.
Thanks for those observations, Stan.
People have their own reasons for visiting or not visiting forums like this, which they are fully entitled to. I presume some of those making negative comments have had bad experiences in the past which have influenced their views. I'm sure that if you approach a forum expecting to be irritated you will probably (?almost certainly!) find something to irritate you. We're probably all aware that a few posters appear to be there mainly to attract attention to themselves, but you soon learn who they are and it's not hard to avoid them. Personally I also don't bother with threads which simply don't interest me or which
My apologies Stan -misread your post .
Quote from: Stan Williams on October 27, 2018, 08:01
This may come as a shock to some people who live on forums and the internet.
I did a small survey asking people who have attended our NG meetings.
These are the results.
009 Forum. 12 visit it.
NGRM. 16 visit it.
People not on any Forums = 23.
I have some comments from the latter,
Forums are full of people who want to see their name in lights.
Most talk a load of rubbish.
Some think they know everything in life and they are always right (in their opinion).
The expression looking good, when in fact, its a load of rubbish !
Maybe food for thought.
I must also point out, some that visit the forums have never contributed to it.
Stan.
This, on the face of it, looks a bit disappointing.
I had a little unscientific ask around at ExpoNG yesterday which threw up some interesting/concerning results. In no particular order they are:
1. The number who visit here appear to be less than 10% of the membership.
2. Garry Whiting seems to be the only moderator
3. No one is maintaining the site or developing it in any way.
4. Joining is dead easy - an email to Mem Sec gets you an initial password which can be changed in a couple of days once the account has been set up.
5. As far I as I, or anyone I spoke to can ascertain, we are the only model railway society with its own interactive forum.
6. There needs to be a general 'chat area' similar to Bulrushes on NGRMO, and a realigning of the subject headings.
7. The site is not fit for purpose in this form and needs a bit of a tweek to make it more attractive/accessible to a possible 1,800+ 009 Society members.
I'll probably float these and other points in the Jan issue editorial. In the meantime any suggestions and
positive ideas welcome. We as a modelling group are not making the most of what could be a rich resource where parts/spares, advice etc. could be exhanged.
Quote from: Stan Williams on October 27, 2018, 08:01
009 Forum. 12 visit it.
NGRM. 16 visit it.
With respect, Stan, that's just use of statistics for the sake of them. It simply doesn't prove anything other than how many use Forums. To make it more usful many more questions need asking such as how many posts they make on each forum (which would indicate how useful they find them), for those not on yje 'net how many clubs or societies they are members off and how do they use them. Do they attend meetings within those societies or just use magazines such as the News to gain info or speak to others. Or are they just modellers who like to work alone...
Sorry but a straw poll like that doesn't really show us anything useful.
So far today there have been 44 different users on NGRM. What that proves I haven't a clue, but I just thought I'd throw it in to the discussion! ;)
Quote from: clayliner on October 27, 2018, 17:56
(what Mick T would call a 'b*gg*r thread)
David.
Moi?
I am not sure if I have been misquoted, or if I was talking in my sleep at the last Wessex NGM meeting? I think I may have referred to the Grrrrr and Yippee threads on NGRM Online at some point in the past, but can't remember calling any of them b*gg*r threads! Not that it really matters what they are called of course!
To strike a more sober/serious note, Chris is absolutely right in his observation that this forum is lacking in several areas and Rod was right in an earlier posting about it being (sic): "on the action list along with the website" for updating/refurb". One of the problems here however is that this has been on the action list and raised at several AGMs where members have requested progress reports (unsuccessfully) for at least the last 8 years that I can think of, possibly longer, and as for the Society Handbook - "in preparation" for at least the last 15 years that I remember, the planned/projected/in preparation Society booklets in similar vein to the excellent ones produced by the 7mm Assoc, the Heritage Collection terms of reference etc - don't even ask, the availability of digital back issues that have been promised for at least 12 years now - freely available nowadays in both the NGRS and 7mm Assoc by the way - there has been procrastination, prevarication and glacial activity on these fronts for donkeys years.
These are all matters that are in the hands of the management of the Society and rather than simply mutter about them, I would suggest that if members feel that strongly about any of them, then they should be raised directly to the Directors, either the Director responsible, either the Communications one or the Operations one as relevant, or via the official channel of the Society Secretary for raising.
I would hope that as the member who re-ignited this particular ball rolling again is a co-opted officer on the Committee, then I would be very surprised and disappointed if he had not also raised his concerns directly through the chain of command to his own "line manager" ie the Communications Director.
Mick
Sorry to drag you into this Mick, but you did say (albeit on NGRM!):
"Regrettably I won't be able to make it to either Bredgar or New Romney (do we have a "bugger" thread?) so for those that are fortunate enough to go to either of the events, I hope you have a great day and that the weather stays dry at least."
(- I'd just read it before posting here otherwise it would have long gone from my ageing memory...!) Apologies.
To get back to the topic, there have been several comments about the nature and set-up of the site and forum. When the promised new website arrives that would seem to be a good opportunity to put some of the suggestions made here in to practice. As Mick says, this has apparently been on 'the action list' for some time now - but one has to ask: whose action list?
I'm pleased to see that Chris has been reading the responses here to his editorial, but would also suggest that rather than wait for his January editorial to promote more discussion he also takes his useful ideas directly to those in a position to implement them.
I'm sure I'll be told - quite justifiably, I'm very happy to admit - that those concerned are only volunteers and busy people, but maybe some other people with the requisite skills and time could be co-opted to get these things moving? (If only more people visited this forum we could even advertise here! - but maybe the News is a better place to ask for help?)
David.
With respect Blair,
The comments do show us something and the reason some people drop forums.
I refer to the comment,
Some think they know everything in life and are always right !!
Perhaps some people should reflect on that !!
I do not intend to carry on this discussion further.
Stan.
You are of course correct David, I stand corrected and admit to the quote that you have published here! Apologies, my memory is now refreshed!
Mick
I'm on to it.
It does strike me that (sticks neck out) with several hundred pounds worth of desktop publishing software at the Society's disposal, that allowing for some collation of material, a handbook could be knocked up in a month. All it needs is the first part of that to be sorted.
Quote from: Stan Williams on October 28, 2018, 19:28
With respect Blair,
The comments do show us something and the reason some people drop forums.
I refer to the comment,
Some think they know everything in life and are always right !!
Perhaps some people should reflect on that !!
I do not intend to carry on this discussion further.
Stan.
What I said, Stan, is that it doesn't show enough information to make any reasoned discussion possible, as your response above shows. Why did those people you mention leave the forums for instance, though some said some reasons were all of the 23 non users ex members or have some of them not tried them. What would they need to get them back. Yes, there are "experts" on the forums, but they are the ones us lesser folk use to find out more about our hobby. As long as you ban discussion on things like Politics and Religion then you've a fair chance of relative harmony but life's not perfect and you'll always have the occassional hiccup. Then it's down to how the Mods deal with it!
You have a good idea, one of a Survey, but for it to be of any use to develop the matters Chris raised in his editorial it has to go beyond the simple question and delve deeper. Hence my comments about one question not being of much use when asked on it's own.
I applaud your initiative though and would suggest that some sort of (compulsory so as to get meaningful results?!!) questionnaire would be a good idea for the Society to take forward if they really want to find out what we feel. It could be done in paper form (included with the News) or electronically on the Website for those who use the 'net, perhaps password protected to stop outsiders getting involved.
Over to you Chris, you started it!
Going back to the subject of the Forum, am I alone in thinking that we have too many forums trying to cover the same ground these days? As I mentioned earlier I tend to use this one for Society business only and the other for day to day chat, am I the only one to do that?
I have to say that I have NEVER heard such an idiotic suggestion as a compulsory survey of the membership. Can we please exist in the real world?
My editorial was really a comment of surprise that as a recent sign up I was slightly disappointed. I don't necessarily think that there are too many forums, but my point is that this is OUR forum - as you say a place to discuss 009 business and to harrang the hapless News editor. We are unique in having the resource, so we as members should gently encourage its use. I think this is, at a basic level, one of publicity and encouragement. It simply does not get mentioned past the early membership stage. From where I'm standing this is a three part game.
1. Make sure everyone knows that it's here and how to sign up.
2. Those that are already on it... use it.
3. Tweek it to improve the interface. Like button; just to know people are reading seems to be a common complaint especially from one guy who grabbed me at Expong who was quite, let's say... definite about it.
Obviously not all 1,800 members will be interested - that's irrelevant, it's not a bean counting excersise. But we should aim to draw in the people who are.
Chris, You can lead a horse to water....
Quote from: rod335 on October 29, 2018, 10:09
Chris, You can lead a horse to water....
1. Yes indeed Rod, but let's say it how it is - there isn't much actual leading going on from the 009 Towers Executive Boardroom is there? (Refer to my posting above citing just a small selection of "agreed actions" over the past up to 15 years in some cases)
2. Sorry, I don't know how to do a multiple quote in the same reply on this forum:
Chris posted: "I'm on to it. It does strike me that (sticks neck out) with several hundred pounds worth of desktop publishing software at the Society's disposal, that allowing for some collation of material, a handbook could be knocked up in a month. All it needs is the first part of that to be sorted."
Fantastic Chris, thank you for volunteering..............................
In the absence of a "like"button - yes, I have read this, and do read most posts. However, I find the members on here the most argumentative bunch of all, and am thoroughly cheesed off , so prefer NGRMO, where at least there is a little respite!
The fact that I have responded this way shows how even the mildest person can be stresssed beyond restraint.
Tim
As for the Handbook, if I recall correctly, we took a decision that production should be suspended pending the new website so the handbook could be published electronically with constant updating since 009 matters are evolving so quickly at the present time. Any hard copy publication would be out of date in a few months.
Mick, as for your comments, apart from 'more leadership required', which of course is very easy to say, could you make positive suggestions as to the format you and others would like that leadership to take? We do discuss many topics, sometimes in great detail, which are pertinent to the Society but for various reasons they are not and cannot be made public. As far as the MAJORITY of the members are concerned, it seems to me they are only concerned with receiving their 009 News promptly each month and having access to the Sales operation. It is, of course, very easy to demand 'more' without, firstly, having any part of delivering the 'more' and secondly, without specifying what form the 'more' should take.
Regrettably, it seems to me that there is a small but noisy hard core of members who are perpetually complaining that the Society doesn't do enough for them, or in the alternative, exactly what they want, without being prepared to do anything themselves and at the same time complaining about anything and everything that IS being done. I would suggest to you and anyone else for that matter that the vast majority of the membership, which currently stands at marginly under 2000, are actually quite content with matters as they are. I would estimate that those making all the noise probably total less than 15. Do they consider the Society should be run solely in accordance with their attitudes and wishes? Of course it is relatively easy to stir up discontent amongst the membership with a few suitably worded posts but with respect to all those concerned, that is a rather negative way of going about matters.
I'm sorry Rod, my posting has obviously hit a reactive nerve. I do hope that I am not considered to be one of the 15 or so you allude to that are perpetually moaning and stirring up discontent without offering any positive suggestions. I have made many positive suggestions at AGM's and to committee members directly towards the progress and benefit of the Society and have always tried to keep the managing committee alerted to any feedback that I pick up on my travels around, which I do frequently due I suppose to my "visibility" with my camera, until recently at least when family health matters caused what I hope is only a temporary constraint.
I am very well aware from my own experiences in the Society that there are certain members who are very quick to throw bombs from behind the sofa but are also quick to go to ground and "retreat to the rear ranks" as we used to say in the Service. I am however NOT one of these and am as concerned about the wellbeing of the Society as a whole as I know you are.
In response to your "challenge" to "give some positive suggestions about the format that I would like the leadership to take", I'll offer just 2 to avoid this becoming a long running war of attrition, which I do NOT seek:
1. Communications to the membership. 009 News is the official newsletter of the Society. Often I feel that the NEWS element of it has been forgotten, or at least left to lie fallow. I have no problem with your comment that the Board often meets behind closed doors under Chatham House rules, but how often is at least a summary of progress with ongoing agenda items published in the News? Easy answer - Never! Good example being what you just said about the Handbook being suspended pending the new website. I don't remember this ever being notified to the membership through the News. I remember the new website being reported as "under development" at AGMs annually for several years now, but don't remember any actual progress reports about it. Same goes for all the other agenda items that I mentioned. I'm sure that there is work going on behind the scenes, but don't you agree that it would be good, and may even encourage more to volunteer their skills/services, if all members were aware of developments.
2. Complacency. You said yourself that you consider that the majority of members (and by your own maths in the same posting - inference that just under 2000 members (I think it is currently around 1800), less 15 = a clear majority) - are content and only interested in the regular arrival of the News and access to the sales operation. How do you know? My own observations amongst the membership suggest that of course most of them are content with what they pay their subscriptions for, but there is a significant number who would like to actually see an up to date handbook, a refurbished website (compare ours to both the NGRS and 7mm Assoc websites - we currently come a poor 3rd), regular feedback from the top table in the News etc etc
As there is now a great deal more interest in 009 thanks to the "ready to run revolution" I cannot for example understand why it has been decided at this time of all times, to allow the Trade Liaison Officer post to remain fallow. Surely this is a clear case of "wake up and smell the coffee" isn't it? I feel that as a Society we should be at the forefront of encouraging and developing the hobby - certainly our members who have layouts published in the commercial press are doing an excellent publicity job for the Society and most of them do the Society proud by including the benefits of being a member in their acknowledgements in their articles. Some of our area Groups are also very proactive in publicising the Society, no names no pack drill but we all know there are half a dozen or so, including the one that you are in, who do a really outstanding job of being visible and encouraging membership of the Society.
In this context, a few years ago it was decided (and announced at an AGM, so we did all know about that one!) that publishing a Society advert in Narrow Gauge World had recruited nil members, so the advert would be withdrawn. However, in recent years NGW has gone from strength to strength, has a vastly increased readership to what it was and a number of societies/associations regularly advertise in it. Has a re-visit to possibly advertising again in NGW been considered by anyone? If not, then maybe it should be suggested, even if it is simply an aid to maintaining our visibility to what we might call the "as yet unconverted". We can certainly afford to splash a bit of cash in generally increasing our visibility and if ever there was a time to get on the bus and not let the world pass us by, then surely it is now.
Well there's 2 suggested areas for attention. I have not intended to create any rifts, start arguments or using your own words, to stir up discontent amongst members. If you think I am guilty of this, then I apologise, I merely intended to give my own opinion in response to the original posting - I think it was Chris's editorial and his posting about the perceived moribund state of the forum actually. I certainly did not intend to have diplomatic relations severed so will now back off and hope we can all continue the serene journey on our calm and increasingly geriatric ways towards Nirvana, and I've got a pugbash that needs attention.
Mick
Quote from: rod335 on October 29, 2018, 10:09
Chris, You can lead a horse to water....
... but a pencil must be lead.
My post wasn't aimed at you particularly Mick and you didn't strike a reactive nerve. But I do get pretty fed up with the usual suspects continually moaning and sniping without any positive input. And I have a pretty good idea who the puppet master is.
As for membership figures, as far as I can recall, the total stood in the high 1900s at our last Directors Meeting in the late summer. So it may well be over 2000 now.
Advertising for new members is a difficult one and, in reality, the only way to test it is to suck it and see. The trouble is there are, relatively, a lot of publications one could make a case for advertising in. And do we want/need to expand the membership, other than for reasons of vanity? Unless I have misunderstood matters we are probably at about optimum size economically at present. To keep the same scale of economics we would have to see an increase to some 5000 members, not likely at present. And I don't want to start a discussion on that. As an old Chairman of mine used to say 'Turnover is vanity, profit is sanity'.
Rod,
Yes, a 'hard copy' would be out of date, anything would. But... my point is, getting something out would be very straightforward. And is initially digital - it's not hot type at 009 News Towers - so anything can be stretched/deleted/updated in a matter of hours. If there was a 'root' paper handbook, say 32 pages, for years 1,2,3 an update added at the end of year three and this combined with the 'root' at year 4-5. An initial print run of say 500 could be put out for new members and to put on Society stands @
Thanks Chris, and everybody else on this thread so far.
I suggest the best format / forum / platform for a 'handbook' would be an interactive Wiki approach. Mr Chris, I'm not sure your proposed 'timetable' would be quite dynamic enough.
There could still be perhaps quarterly extracts to a .pdf file that anybody could download or have posted to them.
I hereby offer to help.
Tom
I'm not sure that things move THAT quickly. The handbook (I'm looking at the 16mm boys one) should be general tips and techniques outlined in a series of short chapters for the beginner/novice to 009, not a running report on new products, that is what the News should do. PDF updates to members would be good though. You could print out and insert until an updated root copy becomes available.
I'm very aware that a) a surprising number of people are not on the net as Stan indicated further up this thread b) people like paper and increasingly spend a lot of time on screen (me). Paper copies are tactile. c) If it's available to flog off the stand it balances the cost and someone is far more likely to join/get interested if they can take a small booklet with a membership form away with them then and there. The 'look us up online' is a quick way to wave people off into the distance. Give them something to hold and it stays.
I suggest we move this thread to somewhere else if this particular subject is to be discussed further.
Your offer is noted.
Chris
If I had/have a gripe with how you produce the news I would contact you personally NOT wash dirty linen in public. i have had problems with previous editors (pre digital camera days )where i took a lot of time and effort taking pictures of models I had made to find that when i sent these to the editor they were completely ignored .Now I accept that the editor wields the blue pencil ,but I think there should have been some kind of feedback rather than just being ignored .I therefore stopped sending anything in to be published until Tom Dauben persuaded me to send him photos/details of my CGR Hunslet build.
I therefore changed to publishing details direct to a forum ,where unless i step over the lines , I cannot be censured . I must admit that I started posting on NGRM on line (as opposed to TedP who publishes on both there and here ) purely because of the time involved .
I tend to spend far more time on NGRM as it covers a much wider spectrum ,particularly on the actual railways/locos etc than just models, but still look on here from time to time .Mick's post was interesting particularly as I can no longer attend A G M s and perhaps there should be more feedback from the Board (where they can of course )
i am not of course aware of who the "troublemakers" are but there are ways of making them feel uncomfortable or just plain ignoring them .
Alan Feldon member no 009
Hi
To pick up on a few points.
Firstly
Chris said:
1. The number who visit here appear to be less than 10% of the membership.
Really, that would mean about 180 - that would make a very active forum I think. Maybe 1% are active posters but I've got no data. (it looks like some data maybe available by reading the stats but life's too short)
2. Garry Whiting seems to be the only moderator
Agreed. There are others and if you read the stats the mem sec admin is still called Alan. So whilst Alan and Brian did / do a fine job using the forum to contact Brain might not be a good idea. I personally don't trust information that I can see is out of date.
3. No one is maintaining the site or developing it in any way.
Agreed that seems to be the case. There are one or two bits of the information on the site out of date, no where near as bad as some (lack of) efforts I've seen.
Generally the site looks old and fuddy (gulps as he types).
The forum software is old ish SMF 2.0.15 is in the wild, however if it ain't bust no need to fix it. but what does the newer version bring to the party? (Software update may be NonTrivial!)
4. Joining is dead easy - an email to Mem Sec gets you an initial password which can be changed in a couple of days once the account has been set up.
It must be. I'm here! Well it was years ago. (The web site mem sec info is up to date)
5. As far I as I, or anyone I spoke to can ascertain, we are the only model railway society with its own interactive forum.
Not so.
The Model Electronic Railway Group (MERG) have a very active forum. Their website is huge and upto date and if someone finds something wrong there's a mechanism to put it right.
And the Scalefour society have one.
OK so maybe they are a different branches of the hobby.
6. There needs to be a general 'chat area' similar to Bulrushes on NGRMO, and a realigning of the subject headings.
Not so sure. Subject headings seem ok to me. Bulrushes, so far I've avoided that bit.
7. The site is not fit for purpose in this form and needs a bit of a tweek to make it more attractive/accessible to a possible 1,800+ 009 Society members.
Without knowing what its supposed to be fit for I cant argue whether is fit for purpose or not. I can say it should be
A. OUR shop window (where interested parties can be made to feel welcome and enroll)
B. The place to administer my membership. (So if its wrong its likely my fault and somebody else's time is not wasted thus making somebody else's job easier).
C. An information resource for members. Surely this is where trade news should be. (swallows something sharp and jagged)
D. A trusted, up to date calendar of members events. (i.e. in the members area).
E. A gallery of achievement.
F. Logical and attractive in design.
OK I'm persuaded.
Also whilst I'm at it may I ask 'what use is the facebook page?'
I offer this in good faith as food for thought, no criticism of the the Society, Its Officers or members is intended.
I was at ExpoNG but I wasn't one of those 'polled' and a good job too, filled the day looking at the exhibition.
Andy
Quote from: rod335 on October 29, 2018, 09:02
I have to say that I have NEVER heard such an idiotic suggestion as a compulsory survey of the membership. Can we please exist in the real world?
Yes you are right, it is an idiotic suggestion with hindsight. But for a survey to be worthwhile you have to have a decent return, how would you suggest we do that, Rod? Perhaps a Prize Draw?! :)
Quote from: rod335 on October 29, 2018, 12:42
But I do get pretty fed up with the usual suspects continually moaning and sniping without any positive input. And I have a pretty good idea who the puppet master is.
I suspect I am one of those you refer to as I'm prepared to put my head above the parapet and say things about the Society which might upset. However i always try to make sure that I also make suggestions that can be then discussed and dismissed or acted on (your "positive input"?). Without people like us things would stagnate, and whilst we may not agree on some things rest assured none of it is personal against anyone.
Despite what you say there is definitely no "ringleader" or group of people out there to get you, Rod, or at least not one I know of! But surely you must understand that in a society like ours we are allowed to make comments and criticise, constructively (i.e. by suggesting alternatives), though I only think we should do if we have something constructive to say. You may not agree with our comments but others may do. Yes, in an ideal world I would volunteer to take up one of the posts, if other members felt I was acceptable in that post, but at the moment Real Life gets in the way, perhaps in the future I'll try to help. In the meantime you can take my comments as criticism if that's the way you see them or the way i intend them, as ideas for taking the Society forward, some will be daft (compulsory questionnaires!) some may be more useful. Such is life.
The Directors have already considered the subject and the concept of a prize draw as an incentive. I am embarrassed to say that I cannot recall what decision, if any, was made. And just to clarify matters, I believe the figure of 180 members is the number REGISTERED to use the forum, not the number who actually do. And I should add that I DO look at the forum just about every day, but rarely feel there is anything I want to post. As I have remarked on several occasions before, a very small number of members use the forum but those who do use and like it a lot.
As Andy says, joining the forum is not difficult, but I wonder why new members aren't simply sent a website password with their membership number when they join? - it might encourage them to go on-line early on and remove an (admittedly minor) disincentive to do so.
David.
Quote from: rod335 on October 29, 2018, 17:11
The Directors have already considered the subject and the concept of a prize draw as an incentive.
To what?
As an incentive to take part in a membership survey as stated in the previous post.
Thanks for clarifying.
I think the society needs to sort out what the Forum is for. NGRMOnline is a very vibrant forum on general narrow gauge modelling and so this forum needs to be something different.
It could be just 009 specific modelling issues, but this is more or less what it is now and the number of members interested in this forum as well as NGRMOnline is fairly small it seems.
It could be a place to update members on society sales activities, and is used for this occasionally. It could also highlight trade developments.
It could be about Society issues, which is I think the real difference between this and NGRMOnline. However it would need new topic headings to legitimise this and also a more direct link to the Committee which currently does not seem to exist. As far as I know the Committee does not frequent this forum nor have any report on what is being discussed, and neither is there any feedback from the Committee to this Forum.
I'm glad to see Chris taking an interest and hope this may result in improvements!
Frank
Someone raised the Handbook ...
I have written a fairly detailed section for this on Radio Control. This was submitted as a draft some time ago (years not months) and is now undoubtedly in need of an update. I am very happy to update it but someone needs to tell me that now is the time to do it as it will soon be published. I only want to update it once.
If it was online and in effect continuosly updatable this would not be a problem but as Chris says, people do like paper copies and if you have it as a book you can sell it.
Frank
I spoke to Comm's yesterday. There are no plans to change the forum, but due to Society website alterations coming up it will (digitally) separate at some point, but the actual interface should stay the same.
I want to push the forum slightly and will gently do so over the next couple of months in the NEWS. As I outlined earlier the main problem is lack of use: on its own it's inert - it needs people to make it work, and that does mean nice people who don't shout others down or trivialise questions that may be asked. It's not a trivial question if you don't know the answer. I understand there were some problems with this in the past and this may have tarred it with a negative brush for some people. The people that DO use it now, have to act as ambassadors to some extent if it is to remain and move on.
In the meantime here's a photo of Ted, just to see if the photo transfer works OK.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uiXJoB-2N4s/W9WEEhpwtOI/AAAAAAAAF1w/4d1DOcNlYtsqarii9oy-Uf8SSHdICZw-QCLcBGAs/s1600/IMG_1134.JPG)
Chris, whilst I appreciate WHAT you are trying to do, I am not sure I understand WHY you are doing it. People will use this forum if they want to. There is no rule that says they HAVE to, unless of course use is made compulsory.
As for Frank's comment that the Committee don't monitor the forum, this is just plain untrue. Several of the Committee and the Directors regularly view the forum. Just because they do not post all the time (unlike some) that does not mean they are not keeping up with it. For example I don't usually post often but that is because there is rarely a topic I feel I either want or need to post on. As for his comment about the committee (etc) not being visible, why should they be? Are the Directors and their actions visible in industry? As I have said before, it is very easy to sit on the sidelines and carp just for the sake of doing it. I am aware of Frank's extensive postings about radio control. This, as an example, is a subject I would never post on because I have no interest in it and do not find the subject appealing in any way. Are you suggesting I should post on it because the topic is there even though I have no interest in it?
[A little while back Chris very sensibly suggested we move discussion of a handbook to somewhere else. I have posted some thoughts in the existing 'Just an Idea' thread.]
Quote from: rod335 on October 30, 2018, 10:25
Chris, whilst I appreciate WHAT you are trying to do, I am not sure I understand WHY you are doing it. People will use this forum if they want to. There is no rule that says they HAVE to, unless of course use is made compulsory.
I'm suggesting nothing of the sort. What I am questioning is the low percentage of registration in the first place and the subsequent (natural) low percentage of posting. 180 registered has been mentioned, so I'm guessing at about 30-40 regular 'attendees'. That's what 3% of 1,800 odd Society members? That playing against 2,000 registered on the 009 FB group. So it's not as if there is a lack of online desire. My feeling as I've said several times is that it may be a lack of awareness that it exists.
Why am I doing it? Why not? Help me out. Lets make it move.
I'm still not quite sure of the reasoning. I think the percentage registered for the forum and also the much smaller percentage actually using it have remained static for several years now. But does that matter? It seems to me you are saying more members should use the forum just because it is there. A couple of years ago, I think, the 009 Yahoo group closed because of lack of support. I would suggest to you that those who are interested in the forum use it and those that are not interested, the vast majority of the members, do not use it. Would there be any benefit to the society, or indeed the members, if more used it?
It has been suggested that the forum be used for discussing society matters. That, to my mind, is not the way things should be done as it opens the door to political lobbying. If members wish to raise society matters in any form, the correct way to do this is by contact with any of the Directors, especially the Chairman or Secretary, not by public discussion.
Second point: Agree. To a degree. See my last point.
First point: More people, more discussion, more interchange. To me that is the fundamental point of this or any other similar organisation - connection. i.e. if I need some brushes for a Minitrix 2-6-0 (which I do) asking a possible 30 people is going to result in less positive response than if I ask 1,000. Add a dozen other examples here.
The 009 Society is fundamentally about connection and little else; here that connection is almost instant. Hence my earlier point about if we don't keep moving forward it will cease to be relevant. And to pick up a sub-point; the society is there to benefit the members, not the other way around. 'Would this benefit the society?' shouldn't come into it. The members are the Society.
BTW the metal wheels worked a treat.
Quote from: rod335 on October 30, 2018, 12:36
It has been suggested that the forum be used for discussing society matters. That, to my mind, is not the way things should be done as it opens the door to political lobbying. If members wish to raise society matters in any form, the correct way to do this is by contact with any of the Directors, especially the Chairman or Secretary, not by public discussion.
I was wondering when we would get back round to the 'official channels' argument. Some on here will remember the discussion a year ago regarding the Society Heritage Collection which resulted in myself and others writing to the Hon Sec. The matter was discussed at the Jan 2018 Directors Meeting and other than a brief note on this forum that suggested some information would forthcoming we have heard absolutely nothing. So why should we go through 'official channels if we get no feedback? It is like sitting on a train in the middle of nowhere for ages without any explanation as to the cause of the delay other than 'there has been an incident'. It makes for at best a frustrated membership and Directors that are seen as aloof.
That said I did find one 'official channel' that did work. I had cause earlier in the year to contact Chris regarding the lack of 009 News Front page photo captions. Whilst Chris did not publish the letter I do note that there have been brief captions for the front page since then. I am of course now wondering whether a letter to the Editor concerning the Heritage Collection would be an appropriate course of action ::) but before I go down that route I will contact the Hon Sec for an update.
For those of us who live out with the boundaries of the area groups and whose nearest narrow gauge exhibitions are Leeds and Rainhill we miss all the usual interaction (and gossip) so 009 News and the Forum are what keeps us in touch with our fellow modellers and are therefore essential lifelines. With regard to news both are only partially successful, for example I would agree that the lack of a Trade Liason Ofiicer at the present time is leaving a large information gap that needs to be filled asap. It was one of my must read pages in the News.
Malcolm
Quote from: rod335 on October 30, 2018, 12:36
I'm still not quite sure of the reasoning. I think the percentage registered for the forum and also the much smaller percentage actually using it have remained static for several years now. But does that matter? It seems to me you are saying more members should use the forum just because it is there. A couple of years ago, I think, the 009 Yahoo group closed because of lack of support. I would suggest to you that those who are interested in the forum use it and those that are not interested, the vast majority of the members, do not use it. Would there be any benefit to the society, or indeed the members, if more used it?
As the person responsible for the running of the old 009 Society Yahoo group the main reason for the lack of support was a migration of members from that type of e-mail based system to online forums (fora?) like this one (and NGRM online). Once these got up and running the Yahoo group saw less and less traffic to the point that the only messages were the automated monthly reminder of the Yahoo group's rules.
Full details can be found here (http://www.009society.com/forum/index.php?topic=2750.0).
As to there being any benefit to the society by exapansion of this forum and thereby improving communications between members I find it hard to think how having more of our fellow members taking part could be detrimental...
I wholeheartedly take your point about connection. But and it's a very big but, for the vast majority of the members they have all the connection they want via the News. To my mind, they are aware of the forum and would use it if they wanted to. And, as has been admitted, there are some very aggressive people on this forum who seem to delight in causing unrest. That is the, probably major, reason I gave up on NGRM, the sheer unpleasantness of some of the contributors. That and the fact that most of the topics held no interest for me. But, as I stated previously, many of the posts on here do not interest me. And before anyone screams 'elitism', there is no law that says I do have to find all the posts interesting.
I am still not sure about the numbers thing. It is not axiomatic that the more members who use the forum, the better the forum/society will be. It will just mean more members are using the forum. There will be more posts on more subjects but that doesn't automatically make it better. We have who knows how many television channels now but how often is anything broadcast that is worth watching? Bigger is by no means always better.
Quote from: Malcolm on October 30, 2018, 13:48
<snipped>
For those of us who live out with the boundaries of the area groups and whose nearest narrow gauge exhibitions are Leeds and Rainhill we miss all the usual interaction (and gossip) so 009 News and the Forum are what keeps us in touch with our fellow modellers and are therefore essential lifelines.
Malcolm
Q.E.D. ....
Malcolm: Things ARE happening with the Heritage Collection. Having been curtly informed that any photographs I took were not good enough for publication (although good enough for Facebook etc) I arranged for a good photographer to do the work (in his own time and for nothing). These photos were not satisfactory so I have now had the items photographed again and am in the process of preparing the necessary articles. You should reflect on the fact that everyone involved is working for nothing and giving their time freely. As such it is not really possible to pressurise them into delivering to deadlines as if too much pressure is put on them they will just walk away.
Quote from: Chris Ford on October 30, 2018, 13:30
First point: More people, more discussion, more interchange.
Absolutely - says it all.
Rod's point about television channels is well made, but the difference here is that forum activity is
interactive. My intuition (and I'm no mathematician!) is that doubling (for example) the number of active members would not just double the number of posts but might more likely square the number, or at least head somewhere in that direction.
I'm also not sure where all these aggressive and unpleasant forum people are. Both this forum and NGRM-Online seem generally remarkably friendly and civil to me, and on the rare occasions when someone does overstep the mark others are quick to rebuke them (usually with the desired effect). The moderators seem to have little to do, and self-policing is anyway much more desirable.
David.
Quote from: rod335 on October 30, 2018, 14:04
Malcolm: Things ARE happening with the Heritage Collection. Having been curtly informed that any photographs I took were not good enough for publication (although good enough for Facebook etc) I arranged for a good photographer to do the work (in his own time and for nothing). These photos were not satisfactory so I have now had the items photographed again and am in the process of preparing the necessary articles. You should reflect on the fact that everyone involved is working for nothing and giving their time freely. As such it is not really possible to pressurise them into delivering to deadlines as if too much pressure is put on them they will just walk away.
Rod
The point I was trying to make was the lack of communication from the Directors. If there had been an announcement that matters relating to the Heritage Collection were in hand, photographs and articles being prepared then we would have known that the matter was on the radar and moving forward instead nothing, so frustration and the feeling the Directors are sitting on their hands. I am sure the Directors do not wish to be seen to be doing nothing especially if they are actually moving heaven and earth. I appreciate they all do it in their free time etc. but all I am suggesting is a little communication. If the pressures on the Directors are so great then perhaps it is time to look at expanding the number of directors, delegate work etc. and spread the load more evenly.
Malcolm
WARNING DRASTIC THREAD DRIFT!
Malcolm,
Yes I did indeed respond to your caption request. I hadn't thought a cover caption important, but it has been restored as you note.
I'm quite confused about the Heritage collection photos 'refusal' - before my time. However, Rod and I have been in contact just this week already and there will be a first instalment of Peco studio photos in the new year. (read: as soon as I get them)
Malcolm, when I mentioned the the people concerned working for nothing I was referring to the photographers, one of whom is not even a Society member.
Chris, I emailed you a photograph a few months ago asking if the quality (not the content) was fit for publication and felt that the response I got was quite offensive.
Quote from: rod335 on October 30, 2018, 17:15
Chris, I emailed you a photograph a few months ago asking if the quality (not the content) was fit for publication and felt that the response I got was quite offensive.
Quote from: rod335 on October 30, 2018, 12:36
It has been suggested that the forum be used for discussing society matters. That, to my mind, is not the way things should be done as it opens the door to political lobbying. If members wish to raise society matters in any form, the correct way to do this is by contact with any of the Directors, especially the Chairman or Secretary, not by public discussion.
I'll just leave those there, shall I....
That was a response to Chris's post. Nothing more. I would have thought you of all people would by now be more circumspect. I was not going to mention it but I have been on the receiving end of various pernicious and untrue public accusations from you. Sorry, I did not want to get personal as this is not the place.
Such as?
Edit - actually Rod don't bother. I don't really know what you are on about, nor do I really care anymore.
Just reel it in and consider if these comments would be made face to face- doubtful
Moving on...
I think there was a very valid question asked a page or two back which got glossed over somewhat: "what is the purpose of the forum?".
As many others have also said, I use NGRM, there's more interaction and more content - although at times some of it can be irrelevant and unncessary, but that can happen on any forum (cough). I guess the question the Society needs to ask is what can it offer through its own forum?
Chris's suggestion of editorial content on here is interesting. Personally when I was editor I would have happily deleted Branchlines from the News and moved it here, but when people complained about a font change I realised that change wasn't going to go too well. At the moment the forum is set up with boards themed around traditional model railway subject matter areas. If the Society wants to offer something different to that to give a greater value to this place why not find other ways of providing Society specific content? However, how about giving the Groups their own space on here? Chris' editorial space is a good one. There must be more...
Well one thing is clear, this discussion has certainly fanned some flames from the embers and brought the forum to life, there's been more posts over the past couple of days than there normally are in a month!
Rod, Chris - I've sent you both an email
Mick
Trigger Warnings for Thread Drift, Off-Topic Rambling, Incitement and Dictionary Abuse
Clayliner kindly alerted me to this thread so I've read it all through. A number of things strike me as relevant:
As of this evening we have 1935 Society members. Not all the 420 registered forum users are still members - I'm sure many of you will fondly remember 'pilotfriend'.
It's obvious that what we need more of is vitriol, invective and spite. This should be closely followed by the stamping of feet, throwing toys out of prams, and general ya-booing. Cries of 'fight, fight' should resound to the virtual rafters and eventually someone will throw a custard pie jpeg.
On the other hand, maybe not. Whatever strategy you adopt, if this forum isn't open to all shades of opinion then what's the point? It is, after all, members only and therefore should allow any member to say whatever they want. Whether your language is courteous and polite or aggressive and disrespectful is a matter of choice. We have a moderator who is perfectly capable of exercising their judgement and we are free to agree or disagree.
There's been a lot lately in the news (the real news, that is) about Non Disclosure Agreements (NDAs). As a way of keeping sensitive proprietry information secret they're reasonably effective. As a way of shutting people up and hiding wrongdoing they're just nasty. I don't think we're ready for NDAs here yet but if a question asked privately doesn't get answered then a public appeal seems in order and this forum serves that purpose.
The last point I wish to make concerns volunteers. If you volunteer to do a job, in whatever field takes your fancy, you're not doing it for the material reward because there isn't any. So there must be some other factor driving you on; something you are doing must be giving you a non-material reward. So in fact you are being paid, just not with money. And if that job you do is a position of some responsiblity then you should be open to both praise and criticism. Basically if you volunteer to do a job then do the job else why did you volunteer.
Of course, being a grown-up now doesn't mean you're always right, eh.
Brian,
I take it that the now non-members are registered, but are unable to contribute. Not in an exclusive way of thinking, just in a tidy way.
All,
I started posting at about No30 of this thread and as Mick pointed out there has been a flurry of comment in the last two days. As a newbie with an interest, this has confirmed my best and worst expectations. Basically it all works well until THAT point in the discussion. I refer you back to Tim Sanderson's pithy observation earlier.
I still think that my original line (of study and investigation?) has been worth it and I'm going to push the forum in the News for a couple of months and see what happens. Despite a couple of misgivings that the last two days have underlined, I still think we've got something worth making the most of.
I was surprised by the News editors comments about this forum and perceived them as negative, not what one would expect from the Editor unless he saw the forum as 'competition'to his mag. In my opinion they should complement each other. One as a permanent record the other as a link between publication dates and for more fluidity in discussions topics etc.
I agree with the comment that the 009 News contains little news (other than which area group had which cakes etc). Where do I read about the latest new models from Fourdees ? Railway Modeller. Why? Is RTR maybe not regarded as 'special' enough (even though it is likely to be the catalyst bringing new entrants into 009 modelling.
The News could introduce topics and then invite discussion on the Forum thus involving more members participation.
There has also been heated discussion here about the remoteness of the Board / Committee. Are Minutes of meetings available to members? If so Where? If not why not?
Coordination of the printed News and the online Forum seems a basic requirement for good communication (two way) within the Society.
Just a few thoughts occurring in my little mind right now.
Finally I have been a member since the year before Kegworth, which as a novice to the scale I found superb and inspirational. I remain disappointed that the planned 45th failed to materialise.
George Surridge
Quote from: briane on October 30, 2018, 22:27
(1) Not all the 420 registered forum users are still members.
(2) It's obvious that what we need more of is vitriol, invective and spite. This should be closely followed by the stamping of feet, throwing toys out of prams, and general ya-booing. Cries of 'fight, fight' should resound to the virtual rafters and eventually someone will throw a custard pie jpeg.
(3) ....................... And if that job you do is a position of some responsibility then you should be open to both praise and criticism. Basically if you volunteer to do a job then do the job else why did you volunteer.
Welcome to the forum Brian! (Maybe I am the only one who noticed that this was your first posting on here!). Usual forum welcome statement - "hope you will enjoy your stay, we are all friends here................."
Good posting anyway! There are a couple of things you said as I've quoted above that prompt me to make a response comment, I've added my own numbering to the quote extracts I'm referring to:
(1) - Registered members who are no longer in the Society. This concerns me. Chris has already touched on this in his reply. As nobody seems to know who actually owns/maintains this forum, is there an assurance that if somebody is registered here, then they are barred from access once their membership lapses? One of the key factors of this forum, as has been discussed at some length earlier this year or maybe even longer ago is that this forum is a closed one that is only open to members of the Society. For obvious reasons in that if members want to discuss anything pertaining to how the Society conducts itself (as in this topic for instance) then it's Chatham House Rules - ie what goes on here stays in here and is not for dissemination to those who have no business with it.
One has to ask the question, but I don't know who should be answering it - if a member leaves the Society, then why is he/she still listed as a registered member on this forum, why hasn't he/she been removed?
(2) - Cries of fight fight etc etc. Clearly spoken from personal experience, PTSD and etc like a true retired teacher!
(3) You've hit the nail on the head. Too often when anyone makes any critical comment about inaction, absence of communication etc etc, the stock answer is "but everyone on the committee is an unpaid volunteer". Yes indeed, many of us have done and do unpaid voluntary work in many areas, including "behind the scenes sub-committee stuff for the benefit of the members of the Society".
Your own point about (sic): "volunteering to do a particular job also comes with a requirement to commit to actually doing that job, otherwise why did you volunteer to hold that post?" is both relevant and totally key to why in some quarters there appears to be a bit of dissent fermenting.
Resolution is simple - communication! In the course of this discussion I have learned that at least a couple of items of issue HAVE indeed been discussed at Directors meetings and decisions made on action. BUT do the members know about this, do they know what the action decisions were, do they even know that there have been Directors meetings? Were there ever minutes or at least a summary of action decisions published in the official communication outlet, 009 News, to all the members? We all know the answer to that!
However.......... it is very refreshing to see the forum, following Chris's initial foray into re-activating this thread, generating such a lot of discussion and lively debate and for a change, raising itself from its slumbers!
Mick
It has to be said that the Society seems to work very well in lots of ways and "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
However, I belong to a number of Societies of one sort or another and most have a periodic communication from the Chairman in their equivalent of the Newsletter or similar. Why not ours?
Or put it on the Forum if this would be easier and less public.
Frank
Quote from: George Surridge on October 31, 2018, 10:25
I was surprised by the News editors comments about this forum and perceived them as negative, not what one would expect from the Editor unless he saw the forum as 'competition'to his mag. In my opinion they should complement each other. One as a permanent record the other as a link between publication dates and for more fluidity in discussions topics etc.
I agree with the comment that the 009 News contains little news (other than which area group had which cakes etc). Where do I read about the latest new models from Fourdees ? Railway Modeller. Why? Is RTR maybe not regarded as 'special' enough (even though it is likely to be the catalyst bringing new entrants into 009 modelling.
The News could introduce topics and then invite discussion on the Forum thus involving more members participation.
There has also been heated discussion here about the remoteness of the Board / Committee. Are Minutes of meetings available to members? If so Where? If not why not?
Coordination of the printed News and the online Forum seems a basic requirement for good communication (two way) within the Society.
Just a few thoughts occurring in my little mind right now.
Finally I have been a member since the year before Kegworth, which as a novice to the scale I found superb and inspirational. I remain disappointed that the planned 45th failed to materialise.
George Surridge
George, Please read my final comment directly above yours. I'm definitely not negative - concerned possibly, but not negative. BTW it's not my magazine, it's our magazine. I'm just the paste-up monkey. FYI I've only refused stuff on technical grounds and everything that I get goes in at some point. I can only print what I get sent. If Fourdees send to Peco and not me - who gets to print it?
Quote from: invercloy on October 30, 2018, 21:37
.... when I was editor I would have happily deleted Branchlines from the News and moved it here, .....
*
That was an excellent idea and it is tragic it was not enacted.
CP
Branchlines: the 009 Society's version of Marmite. Let's not go there.
Sticky subject?
Some people love Branchlines, some (see Mr Payne above) positively hate it. Two pages of pure yeast extract.
Thanks for bringing that up Tom...
I've opened up a new thread in this section for this sort of thing.
I just wonder how many of the registered members do not visit the forum because they've forgotten their username or password?
I've lost count of the number of web pages I no longer visit because I have forgotten my password. Am I alone in this?
If Fourdees send to Peco and not me - who gets to print it?
[/quote]
Point taken Chris- but let's ask WHY they (named simply as an example, not singled out) do not value sending in their news releases to 009 News. And should such new products be reviewed subsequently in 009 News since all members receive it but not RM etc. Result...greater involvement by 009 News in the developments affecting us.
George Surridge
I have asked the same question myself and this is part of a wider concern of mine. I have approached varios suppliers in the past year or so but with little effect. A1 have a piece coming up in the News as do Robex when I get to talk to Alex and likewise Worsley Works. But that is me doing stuff. We used to have a Trade Liaison Officer...
I believe John Bruce used to be the product announcer/reviewer but stepped down earlier in the year.
I assume no one has taken over the role?
There must be enough new releases a month for a page of product news.
Quote from: MickT on October 31, 2018, 11:20
(1) - Registered members who are no longer in the Society. This concerns me. Chris has already touched on this in his reply. As nobody seems to know who actually owns/maintains this forum, is there an assurance that if somebody is registered here, then they are barred from access once their membership lapses? One of the key factors of this forum, as has been discussed at some length earlier this year or maybe even longer ago is that this forum is a closed one that is only open to members of the Society. For obvious reasons in that if members want to discuss anything pertaining to how the Society conducts itself (as in this topic for instance) then it's Chatham House Rules - ie what goes on here stays in here and is not for dissemination to those who have no business with it.
One has to ask the question, but I don't know who should be answering it - if a member leaves the Society, then why is he/she still listed as a registered member on this forum, why hasn't he/she been removed?
Mick
I can see why a member who has left the Society should be barred from the forum, but I can also see that their content should not be deleted just because they have left. Their contributions could be useful.
Quote from: Chris Ford on October 31, 2018, 13:55
Some people love Branchlines, some (see Mr Payne above) positively hate it. Two pages of pure yeast extract.
Thanks for bringing that up Tom...
I've opened up a new thread in this section for this sort of thing.
You're welcome Chris :) You wanted some debate, after all...
To stir things up further - my view was that it was wasted space in the magazine. Tea and cake reviews are all well and good, but often they lacked so much detail that they'd only make sense to those in that group without full names or info on meetings dates etc. We made small improvements, but that's just my personal opinion. The forum could offer an outlet for that sort of content and would encourage readers to make use of the forum whilst either resulting in a smaller magazine which costs less to print (and uses less paper etc) or in more content on a monthly basis that's actually interesting.
Personally I think Branchlines should be restricted to a list of the local groups together with contact details and perhaps dates of forthcoming meetings. Could be done in half a column rather than two pages as at present. Is anyone interested apart from the members of the group concerned?
See my replies to this topic elsewhere. But a further thought. The people here asking for it to move here are already here, and thanks to SF's clarification earlier it's been established that those here are possibly only around 3% of the total.
For the sake of completeness and to allow for accurate commenting I have done some work today on statistics:
Of the 420 registered forum users 35 are definitely ex-members, and a further 9 are status unknown because I cannot work out who they are because their username is obscure and their email is not what I've got.
We now have 1940 members - yes, it's gone up since last night - so the 385 'real' forum members gives us as near as dammit 20% of the total membership.
I know that Chris has opened a new topic about The News but as the matter of Branchlines has been discussed here, as late as an hour or so ago (it is currently 12.45 night time as I type this), then I will chuck my little bit in here as well.
Some of you are missing the point! It doesn't matter if you like or loathe Branchlines, it seems to often be forgotten that 009 News is called that for a very simple reason - it is the NEWS letter of the Society, it is not a magazine, although it has evolved into a very good one, the reason why 009 News has always been monthly, alone amongst all the societies/associations in the hobby that I am aware of, is precisely because for many it is recognised that it is the only means they have to stay in touch with the hobby.
The attitude of migrating everything away from the News to this forum for instance is a bit like the endemic problem with lots of areas in life nowadays where the powers that be think that the whole country lives in London. If you live in rural areas, there are still parts of the country where you can't get internet at all, let alone broadband, there are MANY places where you simply cannot jump on a bus because either there isn't one at all, or it only runs 4 or 5 times a day, not 4 or 5 times an hour.
Chris has already said that Branchlines will stay so the thing to do is stop expressing futile opinions about whether it should be binned, or moved onto a forum that only a small percentage of the membership will see, but to consider what Branchlines should contain.
When I was involved with the News as assistant editor for a couple of years or so, under Simon Coward's editorship, we constantly had probs with group reports and Simon did try to introduce guidelines, which were frequently ignored and I note still are by some group secretaries. He attempted to blueline any reports that were more than 250 words in length, this had some success, but I do see that it is common at the moment for this to be exceeded more often than not.
I am not alone in actually enjoying reading group reports when they cover activities, models etc as it is good to see what groups are up to, some more than others but it does give a good view of how the Society is running out there "in the sticks".
My own preferences for what I would or would not like to see in Branchlines is:
1. Keep it succinct and reduce the matey waffle. 250 words max is a fair enough one for routine reports. If something has been going on that warrants a big report possibly with photos, that is fine, but it should then be published as an article and taken out of Branchlines for that issue.
2. Use FULL names the first time people are mentioned if they are going to be mentioned in the report, but use common sense! If the group meeting had 4 attending, then fine, tell us who they were. If there were 44, then don't! But in any case please DON'T put "Bill, Fred, 5 Bellies and Gormless attended our meeting", as without their full names at the beginning at least, we haven't got a clue who they are.
3. Contributors should comply with the editorial deadline and get their reports submitted IN GOOD TIME. I know from my own brief personal experience on the editing team how frustrating and annoying it is to get emails in with reports for branchlines sometimes late in the evening of deadline day. Any that come in after the deadline DO get rejected and by the time of the next issue then the report is valueless as it is no longer topical anyway.
4. Contributors should also be aware of both the editorial deadline and the publishing date which we all know is nowadays anytime after around the 20th of the month preceeding the issue date, ie the December issue will arrive with members sometime between approx the 20th and 30th of November. We all know this, so why do I often read reports in Branchlines advising eg that the next meeting will be at Scrungebuckets house on the 14th November, all are welcome, when this notice is received on the 24th of November and although I would love to attend, I have no idea what Scrungebucket's address is. Get the point?
I think that's about enough for now.
Mick
Quote from: briane on November 01, 2018, 00:45
For the sake of completeness and to allow for accurate commenting I have done some work today on statistics:
Of the 420 registered forum users 35 are definitely ex-members,
Thanks Brian, but the question is: have the known 35 who are non members been barred from accessing the forum? If not then somebody on the Directorship (Comms?) must be made aware and get something in action to protect this, otherwise we really do not have any point in keeping a members own forum and might as well bin it now and carry on moaning about stuff on a public forum such as NGRM or RMWeb!
My brief to B/L writers is the same as I was given when I used to write the SDG notes in the early 90s.
300 words max. Full names, no tea and biscuits. I've have just put DEC issue to bed and a couple did breach the word count, but one of those did include an obit'.
I totally agree with Mick's comments on this. We call it a mag (or I do) but is a 24 page newssheet at its heart and should reflect this. There are wider issues being discussed about the newsyness of it, particularly trade, but it is
Quote from: MickT on November 01, 2018, 01:11
Quote from: briane on November 01, 2018, 00:45
For the sake of completeness and to allow for accurate commenting I have done some work today on statistics:
Of the 420 registered forum users 35 are definitely ex-members,
Thanks Brian, but the question is: have the known 35 who are non members been barred from accessing the forum? If not then somebody on the Directorship (Comms?) must be made aware and get something in action to protect this, otherwise we really do not have any point in keeping a members own forum and might as well bin it now and carry on moaning about stuff on a public forum such as NGRM or RMWeb!
If I were ForumMaster (or whatever the appropriate title is) I'd know the answer and do something about it. As it is I am only 'He Who Adds Names' and cannot help. I don't know if deleting a user also deletes their content (which I wouldn't want to happen) or if there is a mechanism for simply not allowing access. Does 'Guest' access allow non-members to read stuff? If so then we're already partially public and maybe that option should be rescinded.
Important personal note: If I knew how to delete users without deleting content I'd be happy to do it. But I do not wish to be i/c Forum. Adding and subtracting users seems a perfectly reasonable task for MemSec.
Quote from: Chris Ford on November 01, 2018, 01:24
My brief to B/L writers is the same as I was given when I used to write the SDG notes in the early 90s.
300 words max. Full names, no tea and biscuits. I've have just put DEC issue to bed and a couple did breach the word count, but one of those did include an obit'.
I totally agree with Mick's comments on this. We call it a mag (or I do) but is a 24 page newssheet at its heart and should reflect this. There are wider issues being discussed about the newsyness of it, particularly trade, but it is
Spot on Malcolm, agree totally - so that appears to be at least 4 of us out of the 1940 members then!
Brian - thanks for your input, totally understand and wasn't trying to pressgang you into being webmaster and forum gruppenfuhrer - but SOMEBODY is surely responsible for managing/maintaining this forum?
I agree regarding past members previous postings on here, I have no desire to see good information removed on the basis that the originator is no longer a member, for whatever reason. But if the forum is to remain a closed one, as it should be, then it must not be accessible to anyone who is not a member. After all, some who have visited, joined, created mayhem and then unjoined and taken themselves off to annoy or subvert others may have more than just mischief on their agendas.
And in case there are those who would dismiss this concern as irrelevant and unimportant, then ask any long standing member who was active in the Society in the 1970's about the damage that can be caused by unfriendly ex-members, such as the notice that was published by somebody in RM announcing the cancellation of an 009 Society exhibition in Leeds which was in the issue published a week before the event - and very nearly bankrupted the Society. This is just one example of several incidents that happened to disrupt and damage the Society in its early formative years.
Perhaps one of you appointed/co-opted committee bods may agree to pick up the hotline to whichever of our two executive Directors are responsible for this forum (I have no idea where the dividing line is between "communications" and "operations" - has anyone seen the job descriptions/terms of reference for these elected posts?) and raise this aspect as a worrying concern?
I would do it myself but I don't have the key to the executive bog any more and I have learned through experience that raising a matter in the "proper way" by letter to the Society Secretary must be recorded under the rules of the Society (if they are still valid and maintained?) but does not often result in prompt action if it is something that requires some urgent attention.
Mick
Steve,
Surely the remit of the 009 communications officer would include the Newsletter and the Forum ?
Or is the remit to only communicate to people outside the Society ?
Confused from Eccleston.
Stan.
Quote from: cornelius on November 01, 2018, 13:53
I have some moderation ability but not full admin access to the forum - I have contacted ex-Memsec Alan to clarify who has the keys as I would like to know the answer as well!
Thanks Steve.
I think that now this aspect has been identified (potential security breach if we want to be dramatic!), it does need to be sorted quickly as a safeguard.
Mick
Steve, Brian, Chris,
PM sent to you all
Mick
Quote from: Malcolm on November 01, 2018, 11:53
Quote from: Chris Ford on November 01, 2018, 01:24
My brief to B/L writers is the same as I was given when I used to write the SDG notes in the early 90s.
300 words max. Full names, no tea and biscuits. I've have just put DEC issue to bed and a couple did breach the word count, but one of those did include an obit'.
I totally agree with Mick's comments on this. We call it a mag (or I do) but is a 24 page newssheet at its heart and should reflect this. There are wider issues being discussed about the newsyness of it, particularly trade, but it is
OK, have now found the keys to the cupboard. Also have found 7 of the unknown 9. So, there are 38 non-members on the forum and I can now BAN them. Basically they will only have Guest access ie not much, but if they return to the fold I can easily let them back on. My full title now becomes 'Putter Onner and Taker Offer'.
By the way, if you ever see a user called 'memsec' that'll be Alan Rolfe, not me. He stopped being MemSec in March but he was the one who started the forum and of course managed it all himself.
[/quote]
Full agreement with this. But room for articles about member's modelling activities too. We all learn from each other.
[/quote]
Indeed.
I think chaps you are taking the name '009 News' a trifle too literally. I would submit there is not enough '009 news' to fill 24 pages each month and the content, as it is at present, is about right.
With regard to the question of the 'Trade Liason Officer'. We discussed this recently and it is slated for further discussion. The conclusion we have reached so far, and I hope I am not speaking out of turn here, is that there need to be two distinctly separate posts here. Product reviews should not be the Trade Liason Officer's job, that is a separate job and should be described as such. The Trade Liason Officer should liase with the trade. that is he should be the point of contact for the trade with the Society. At present, several of the members actually unofficially perform this function and whilst we are considering giving the post to a single person, it is questionable if that is the best course of action. But, be assured, just because the position appears as 'Post vacant' in the News, it does not mean nothing is happening.
Quote from: briane on November 01, 2018, 16:39
OK, have now found the keys to the cupboard. Also have found 7 of the unknown 9. So, there are 38 non-members on the forum and I can now BAN them.
Thanks Brian and thanks for the prompt action to all who may have been involved.
Apologies if I gave the impression the News should only contain news, my post got cut short by a long awaited call from BT. I fully agree about room for members modelling activities which reminds me I promised the Editor an article back in the Spring.
Malcolm
O K a view from an overseas member .
1)The branchlines mean absolutely nothing to me as I don't know who most of them are and I am not really interested -however .... sometimes I see tantalising bits like Ken bought along his recently completed Belgian Congo loco say BUT why is there never a photo/write up in the news by Ken ?Which brings me to :-
2) Over the years I have noticed less and less construction details of what and how people have made -is this because no articles are submitted or do people now only post these on line ?
3)There seems to be a very high proportion of exhibition photos .Whilst these can be interesting again sometimes there can be views of intriguing rolling stock in them without explanations as to what they are .
In much earlier days there was much more emphasis on construction details than there are now (Yes I'm old ! ) I appreciate the editor can only print what he is sent so are members more reluctant now to see their endeavours in print ?
Alan
Yes, I can only publish what I get sent, and I do try to include one constructional piece per issue i.e. Hugh Norwood's Road-railer in the current and Ben Powell's Skylark in the upcoming. Tying that up with the Branchlines Q, there have been a couple of occasions where I've done exactly what you've said and approach someone in the group to write something about an item that's been mentioned in the report - see how useful they are? Though it is surprising how reticent people are to actually 'write'. My counter to that is now to suggest extended caption pieces as opposed to full written articles which has suited a few. In some ways there are a couple of thousand pairs of eyes out there spotting new products and new techniques, the tricky bit can often be to get them to share that.
Quote from: Alan Feldon on November 02, 2018, 15:31
.... sometimes I see tantalising bits like Ken bought along his recently completed Belgian Congo loco say BUT why is there never a photo/write up in the news by Ken
As a fairly recent newcomer to the Society and News, I have never understood who the the regional/area reports are aimed at other than to keep the local (to that area) members up to date and I suspect I am not alone when I skip most of them. Like Alan it seems to me that there may be info worth further report or detail. I would like to see more reports of new items in the News but understand that someone has to do the work to enable that.
That brings me to this forum; there is little that I have read on the forum since I joined it that I had not seen elsewhere and it seems to me that repeating posts on other forums is common to them all, perhaps to obtain a cross view of opinion - I do not know.
I wonder how many, like me, are occasional readers but not contributors ?
Mac
Moved from the "'News" thread as I feel it's more appropriate on here:
Quote from: Chris Ford on November 03, 2018, 10:16BTW the 009 Society is a limited company. See p24 of the News. This was done to prevent the membership losing if there was a litigation case against us. One or two other societies have also done this, I assume for similar reasons; the Gauge O Guild comes to mind. Hence the committee are now Directors and have to jump through the legal hoops to qualify for this in legal terms.
The comment regarding the status of the Society was meant to remind people that we are a Society first and foremost and whilst we are set up as a Limited Company (I believe to prevent any problems if the Society went bust or was sued?) we should not be run as though we are a business to make money where the "Management" make the decisions and the members just sit back and accept whatever they are given. I sometimes feel that the latter is the way some people want it to be run (such as by limiting when and where we can raise matters affecting or about the working of the Society). In effect the "Limited Company" bit is just a "flag of convenience" to protect the Society and it's Members, not a pointer to how it should be run. Surely we are better than that?
As someone else has already said we don't hear anything about what is being discussed unless we happen to mention something here and we are then told it was "discussed"... Perhaps there should also be a section on the Forum and the News for matters that have been discussed and the outcome of those discussions?
Can I ask the basis of the assumption that members are entitled to have (any) details of Directors' Meetings? For the present purposes I am assuming that members' rights are the same as employees' rights in a Limited Company. How many such employees are given details of Directors' meetings? When I worked in industry (for several companies over the years) it was not until I reached (very) Senior Management that I received even edited copies of Directors' Meeting minutes.
I assume members know that they can attend Committee Meetings as an observer only by prior written request to the Society Secretary? Clearly, the Secretary must retain an element of discretion about the numbers involved at any one time. I do not know offhand if the same applies for Directors' Meetings, I will have to check the Articles of Association, which will involve finding them, to see. At the last Committee Meeting, only two of the Committee Members attended in addition to the five Directors.
I do wonder just how many of the membership do actually care about these matters. In addition, I would state that this situation is by no means new. Before we adopted Limited Company status, the Society was administered by the Committee. I do not recall details of any of their meetings being publicised either.
For those who are unaware of it I should point out that the Society is run by five Directors, who are elected by the membership and an additional number of Committee members who are appointed or co-opted by the Directors and not elected by the membership. By our Articles of Association we must legally have a minimum of five Directors.
Apologies - mis-post.
Re: Committee / Board / Directors' meetings - is the question 'What is the minimum amount of information we are obliged to make public?' or 'How much of our deliberations can we usefully share with members?'
Re: Branchlines - I would have thought that members fall into one of three groups, namely -
(1) those who were at the recent group meeting(s) so don't need to be told what went on, or
(2) those who live locally but didn't make the meeting - who might best be told via a group e-mail, perhaps? or
(3) those who don't live locally and so have little or no interest in what went on in the group anyway.
However, I take Mick's point - I imagine if you've been a member as long as he has (that's a compliment, Mick, not an insult!) you may have chums all over the country and still like to keep tabs on what they're up to (and indeed perhaps whether they're still alive...)
David.
With regard to your first paragraph, with respect, this seems a strange question. As far as I am aware the point you raise has never even been considered by the Board, certainly not whilst I have been a member. And why should the Board's discussions and deliberations be made public, apart from satisfying the idle curiosity of a small number? As I have said before, any member who is genuinely interested in the acivities of the management of the Society has the right to atted, by prior agreement, Committee meetings and, I think, Board meetings. During my tenure the number of such attendees and indeed those seeking to attend has been nil.
I strongly suspect a political motivation behind some of these posts.
Quote from: rod335 on November 03, 2018, 18:46
Can I ask the basis of the assumption that members are entitled to have (any) details of Directors' Meetings? For the present purposes I am assuming that members' rights are the same as employees' rights in a Limited Company. How many such employees are given details of Directors' meetings? When I worked in industry (for several companies over the years) it was not until I reached (very) Senior Management that I received even edited copies of Directors' Meeting minutes.
I do wonder just how many of the membership do actually care about these matters. In addition, I would state that this situation is by no means new. Before we adopted Limited Company status, the Society was administered by the Committee. I do not recall details of any of their meetings being publicised either.
Thanks, Rod, you proved my point perfectly, both with the quoted post above and your latest post. Whilst we are set up as a Limited Company, this was done to protect the Membership and those running it from being sued if something went wrong, not so we could behave like a Ltd Co where the "Management" run the "business"(!) and the rest just do as we are told.
We are a Society, not a Business.In what way are the Society in any way a commercial business and bound by the rules of such enterprises. we are not. We are a Society set up for the benefit of it's Members, not a for profit organisation. Therefore we do not have to abide by the rules of such businesses.
As regards the second paragraph, to me that comes across as very arrogant. To turn your comment on it's head no-one has asked us what we want from the Society so how do our Directors/Committee know what to discuss, or are they just doing what they personally feel is the right thing? Please note I am not criticising what they are doing pre se, I can't as i don't know what they do as no-one has told us!! As far as I am concerned the News should also be used to keep us up to date on what the Directors are discussing, not full minutes, just a brief note so if we want to add to their discussions with ideas we can.
To give an example I only found out by accident that the Society was looking into producing kits (this was many years ago!), why wasn't this info passed down to the membership? Why weren't we asked what sort of kit we wanted? OK there would have been lots of impractical suggestions no doubt, but of the Socity had told us what the constraints were beforehand we could have made reasonable suggestions. That's not to say their choices haven't been OK, but what have we missed by not asking the Membership I wonder...
BTW there's nothing "political" about any of this, where you get that from I don't know!
I think we need to remember that we are not a Business but a Society, run by the Membership for the Membership. Perhaps we need to get back to basics and ask them what they want instead of assuming that we know better? We might find the majority are happy with things the way they are, we may not, who knows...
Rod
Comparing the 009 Society with a public company is like chalk and cheese ,but even a public company will publish
details of decisions made .
MickT has made some genuine points of questions he has raised (including at AGM's ) which have never been answered .
No one expects every single word recorded at a directors meeting to be advised to the members but when a decision is made or even if its no decision on a point raised then the membership should be advised .
Its called keeping in touch with the members and nothing to do with politics .
Alan
I am sorry my comments appear to have upset some people. Whatever anyone may think there is no obligation on the Directors or Committee members to make their deliberations public. And I stand by my comment that matters in this connection are no different from what they have always been.
I wonder how many of the membership care about this question? Ay present about three or four of the 30-odd members who regularly use this forum are making comments. I have no doubt now that someone will question my figures with detailed analysis.
As a point of accuracy, when I stated that no members had attended Board of Committee meetings, I realise I was wrong. Lee Bryant attended the last Committee meeting in January but I honestly cannot remember whether or not he did so as an invited guest.
Quote from: rod335 on November 04, 2018, 10:42
I wonder how many of the membership care about this question?
You could always ask them...
Just because it was done that way in the past doesn't make it right to continue doing it that way, either.
Surely as all members have paid a subscription to the 009 Society that makes us all shareholders in the company (with full voting rights), rather than employees?
Just a though...
I think all this began because Chris Ford wrote that the Forum seemed dull. Well that problem has been cured!
I am astonished by Rod's comment that the Directors are elected by the members if the Society, but are under no obligation to publish any account of their deliberations and activities. The clue to this surely lies in the words Members, and Elected.
I asked some days back if and when Minutes are ever published and if not why not, apparently the answer is no, because it's none of your business Mr. Member.
And all this just when I receive my annual subscription renewal.
Will I renew? Well,, this forum alone is currently worth the money!
It's a pity we don't have a Grrrrr topic and also that there are no "like" buttons (maybe a "dislike" button would be very appropriate as well).
Within the past hour or so I have posted a passionate outburst on the other topic that Chris opened up which is supposed to concentrate just on The News. I'm sure I will now be blackballed and vilified in some quarters, but there you go!
I do not want to open up all sorts of new cracks in the fabric here but there are one or two things that have been said that do need to be commented on.
Rod has several times expressed his view about how or even if the Directors should be responsible for passing information to the membership. Sorry Rod, I appreciate and understand what you say (I think) but have to gently try to correct you.
1. The policy of the Society regarding minutes dissemination has been announced at AGM's - Either Charlie or David (both I think) have stated that AGM minutes will not be published in 009 News but are available to members on request to the Secretary. Unfortunately as this statement has been made at several AGMs that I have attended, so 50 or so members are or should be aware, the other 1900 aren't as I don't think this policy has ever been stated in The News! Some may not agree with this policy and consider that minutes should be distributed to all members, as happens in some other Societies/Associations. "You may very well think this, I could not possibly comment" .
2. Some years ago I raised a query at an AGM and also in direct correspondence reference promulgation of Director's meetings and dissemination of the minutes thereof. The answer I received, so should be recorded in minutes of whatever AGM this was raised at (I haven't checked!) was that minutes of Directors meetings are made, but not disseminated, for good reason, BUT, a summary record can be provided to any member who requests such. Unfortunately this was not published in the News either, but that was indeed a statement that was made. I have not tested this out, other life matters got in the way, but in the light of clearly recent dissatisfaction about communications within the Society, I will probably do this and suggest that any other member who is concerned about information dissemination from the Board does the same - this will actually probably support your own view Rod, that hardly anybody cares and apathy rules actually!
3. Regarding attendance at Board meetings. You are not quite correct here. The rules, if anybody bothers to comply with them nowadays, state (or the only PUBLISHED set that I am aware of do) that (sic): a Group may send ONE representative as an observer to Society Board meetings by previous request/notification ie you can't just turn up unannounced., this happened once at a Committee meeting that I chaired when I was a member of the Committee and the gentleman concerned had to be "asked" to leave. The rules of the constitution of Recognised Groups also make it clear that a member of one of these Groups who is not a member of the 009 Society may not represent that Group in Society matters, so only a Society member who is also a member of a Group, either Affiliated or Recognised, may attend. There is no provision for individual members, not a member of an area group, to attend. This may be something that one of our members, who is not a member of a group, but would like to attend a meeting may like to raise themselves.
4. You mentioned Lee Bryant as an example of a member who attended a meeting. Not quite right, Lee is the co-opted/appointed Sales Officer and attended in that position.
5. This brings me to what looks like a misunderstanding of where "Commitee members" who are not Directors, since the Society became a limited company, stand. As most of us know, there are 5 Elected Directors who form the Board. If anyone does not know this, then clearly they are not reading page 2 of 009 News as this is quite clearly laid out! What is not actually explained is that the 5 elected Directors are the ONLY ones who have a vote on executive decisions at Board meetings. This IS stated in the constitution but I would have to go back several years to when the new constitution was distributed with The News to get the wording exact - which supports the several statements that have been made about lack of communication, particularly to members who may have joined in the last 8 or 9 years (and that is probably about half the current membership!).
6. Since the Society voted to agree to become a Limited Company (Yes, they did, democratic decision, stop moaning, abide by it!! - shades of Brexit Referendum here!) it has never been made clear where we are regarding any difference between what used to be either Co-opted and Appointed committee members.
Basically I don't think there is a difference now, but for the benefit of anyone who is confused, anyone who is not one of the Elected five Directors who is undertaking a task that is necessary for the wellbeing and function of the Society is termed an Appointed Committee Member, who has been "co-opted" and "appointed" by the board to do that task - and I emphasise, THAT task and that task alone!. The appointed committee member does NOT have voting powers at Board meetings although obviously the member may be involved with and contribute towards any decision making that does take place. I have been present at a meeting in pre-limited company days where that rule has been blatantly ignored and have even seen a co-opted committee member exercise a veto on a proposal when it went to a vote! I trust and hope that this does not and has not happened under the current management!
Examples of appointed posts are: Editor 009 News, Trade Liaison Officer (why was that post allowed to stay vacant at this time of all times?), Sales Officer, Publicity Officer, Membership Secretary and Archivist. There may be others who are co-opted/appointed by the board from time to time as if you like "sub-committee" members for specific roles, for example there was a member who produced a number of informative and useful booklets for the Society (why wasn't this continued and developed?) and another who was appointed to produce the long awaited new Handbook (also seems to have faded away as far as anyone in the overall membership is aware - communications again). And, dare I say it, an appointed Heritage Collection officer.
Just to also clarify for the benefit of those who may not be aware, Elected Directors are required to be re-elected (should they wish to remain on the Board) at the AGM annually, Appointed officers are not elected and having been appointed by the Board, undertake the appointment for as long as the Board requires and of course as long as the officer wishes to remain in the post. Appointed officers work under the guidance/control of the relevant Director who is responsible for that function, ie Operations, Communications and in one case, Treasurer. I think it would be very useful if the Board could publish the exact chain of command and areas of responsibility for each of the Directors, I certainly find a border definition between Operations and Communications Directors TOR's very difficult to identify, I'm sure I'm not alone.
ANY member may put themselves forward for any of the five Director posts. All they have to do is have a proposer and at least one seconder. You could propose yourself as long as you have somebody who is willing to second you. This should be submitted 3 months (if I remember correctly) before the AGM at the time that the Secretary announces the AGM in the News and invites proposals. If there is more than one member applying for election to one of the posts, then there is a democratic ballot and the winner gets the job. Yippee, great fun! EDIT: ADDENDUM TO THAT STATEMENT: I should add that, this is then ratified by vote of acceptance (or rejection - it has happened!*) by those members present at the AGM or EGM, provided there are sufficient members present to constitute a quorum.
* Some 10 years ago after the then sitting Chairman retired, only one member responded to the invite for proposals for the post, this therefore only needed ratification by vote at the AGM, which was rejected by those present by a considerable margin, if not unanimously (I can't remember, I'm sure there are members here who were present and can clarify). This then resulted in a new ballot, where there was more than one candidate this time and an EGM was convened (It was the 2nd of only 3 EGMs that have been convened (to date!) in the history of the Society), to vote the successful candidate in. Failing memory may have distorted my recollection, but in essence, that is what happened (I think!)
7. "If you don't like it, don't moan about it, do something about it - within the bracket of the Society Rules - if you don't like the Society Rules, then do something about that - in the proper way! If you don't like the way the Board goes about its business, then again - do something about it! Put your own name forward for election if you think you could do better!"
8. And finally before I duck under the parapet, regarding Groups, which have been mentioned in some posts: It's on the Society website but as I've already hijacked a lot of bandwidth I might as well carry on. Here is what the Society's position on Groups is:
"Affiliated and Recognised Groups
The 009 Society has always encouraged local groups; historically these would have been solely composed of members of the Society. However, as time has gone on some groups have included non-members with the groups having their own financial and organisational structures separate from the 009 Society. The Society has no view either way on this issue; the only distinction is that only 009 Society members can attend meetings of the 009 Society committee.
Each local group is free to decide how it is linked to the Society and is encouraged to use the method that best suits the local group. The two groups follow different regulations as listed below. Groups are asked to update the secretary on the status of their group and their primary contact.
a. Affiliated Groups: These are groups that are formally constituted as part of the 009 Society. Their membership shall consist solely of 009 Society members and they will be required to submit their annual accounts to the Society Treasurer and follow the Society's governance on the protection of vulnerable groups. They are welcome to call on Society support (including Sales support and publicity) for members' days and are welcome to send a representative to meetings of the 009 Society Committee.
b. Recognised Groups: These are groups that are not formally constituted as part of the 009 Society, although the Society recognises and supports their activities. To be of 'Recognised' status, membership of the group must have a minimum of three 009 Society members. There is no requirement to either submit accounts or follow the Society's governance on the protection of vulnerable groups (although they are welcome to follow the Society's policy). They are welcome to call on Society support (including Sales support and publicity) for members' days and are welcome to send a representative to meetings of the 009 Society Committee providing that representative is a member of the 009 Society."
There is also a list of the Area Groups on the website. Rather concerning however that I know of at least one current Group, that is actually very active, that is NOT included on the list! Should somebody be looking into this and sorting it out? I believe there is one area that actually has two groups that have the same name! Unless there has been movements and progress that is known to the Board, but again, not disseminated or published to the membership, how are the Society members expected to know?
Finally..............by the way, I believe this topic was supposed to be about The Forum wasn't it? It now appears to be about the conduct and constitution of the Society as a whole! Should we call a halt and take some time out to reflect? I think I will.
Mick
A lot of sense there Mick. I will correct you on one point, the Committee meeting Lee attended was (just) before his appointment, I think we took that decision in the afternoon after he had left.
I have tried to answer points made fairly, honestly and impartially. That is apparently not good enough for some people. As you say, there seems little point in continuing this thread now.
Thank you Rod, I stand corrected about Lee!
Can't resist a mischievous follow up to what you said:
"The committee meeting Lee attended was (just) before his appointment, I think we took that decision in the afternoon after he had left."
Did Lee get told?.................................... ::)
Mick
Thanks, Mick, that was very clear and no doubt as concise as it could be!
One thing, though, I (and I think the others) never asked for the Minutes of the meetings to be published, all we ask is that the Board keep us informed of developments and what is discussed that affects us. That can (and sometimes in the past used to be) done via the News (in the Chairman's chat if I remember rightly?). I'm not asking for reams of paper, just a basic summary.. It's the lack of information about what is going on that causes most of the issues. I'm sure the Board don't just sit there and drink tea and coffee, so what's going on? (I know that some stuff can't be released for confidentiality purposes but surely we can be told something?! :)
Mick
Thank you for that. Just because some of us have been members since what seems like the year dot does not mean that we are conversant with Society policy, rules and convention so it was most helpful to have matters set out in such a clear and concise way. Your typing finger must be red and throbbing.
Blair
I could not put it better.
Malcolm
Edit - They could of course use the forum. ;)
Quote from: Hobby on November 04, 2018, 14:13
One thing, though, I (and I think the others) never asked for the Minutes of the meetings to be published, all we ask is that the Board keep us informed of developments and what is discussed that affects us. That can (and sometimes in the past used to be) done via the News (in the Chairman's chat if I remember rightly?). I'm not asking for reams of paper, just a basic summary.. It's the lack of information about what is going on that causes most of the issues. I'm sure the Board don't just sit there and drink tea and coffee, so what's going on? (I know that some stuff can't be released for confidentiality purposes but surely we can be told something?! :)
I don't know why you're telling me Blair, that, in essence is what I have often said myself.
I didn't infer that you or anyone else asked for minutes of meetings to be published (I assume you are referring to Committee/Board meetings rather than AGM). I actually asked at an AGM for minutes to be distributed with the News and the response was as I reported in my long tome above. I have also asked for summary reports of actions arising from Board meetings to be published so that the membership knows what is happening - which is exactly the same as what you are referring to with Chairman's Chat of years ago. The response was the same - They are available on request to the Secretary.
I haven't tested this out as life has got in the way but after all this furore I will probably be doing that, and I can only repeat what I said before: if other members feel that they want to receive either AGM minutes or a summary report of committee meetings, then apparently all they have to do is ask the Secretary, no good complaining to me that you have done this and not received responses, nothing to do with me and I am not the Secretary, in fact I am not anything, I am just a member, same as you are.
Quote from: rod335 on November 04, 2018, 10:42
Whatever anyone may think there is no obligation on the Directors or Committee members to make their deliberations public. And I stand by my comment that matters in this connection are no different from what they have always been.
Rod,
I can see you are doing your best to defend what some people seem to think is the indefensible but I must make one comment on this.
I also see the 009 Society as actually a very successful society and part of me is thinking "it ain't broke so don't try to fix it ...". However I do think there is an important issue here.
I am a member of a number of societies in the railway world and in other areas. Almost all of them have some way of communicating routinely with their members on what is going on within the society and what the Committee who run it are doing.
Usually this is by way of a "letter" or update from the Chairman in the periodic newsletters. If there is nothing much going on then the Chairman says that, but otherwise he can tell them about current issues, recent developments, decisions the Committee has taken etc. as appropriate. He can appeal for assistance, for example, to fill vacant posts such as Trade Liaison.
This is not the same as the minutes, it does not include all the details of what goes on, but it is what the Chairman thinks is important enough to let the Members know about.
This is not a matter of obligation, right, entitlement, or something written into the society's constitution. It is just common sense and good manners to tell the people who are your members and (hopefully) supporters what you are doing.
The single exception I am aware of is the 009 Society.
Frank
Getting back to the actual topic ie This Forum, I'm going to throw a few statistics at you. Make of them what you will but I've added my thoughts at the bottom
Year A B C D E
2008 28 28 27 20 11
2009 18 16 14 10 4
2010 11 9 7 6 2
2011 13 11 8 6 1
2012 14 13 13 8 3
2013 26 21 18 10 3
2014 21 15 12 4 1
2015 26 15 11 5 1
2016 53 25 21 5 0
2017 82 45 21 3 0
2018 93 82 30 4 0
Year: The year in which forum members registered. Roughly 100 (varies 80-120) Society members register each year.
Column A: The number of members still on the forum. I have cleared out the few ex-members now and so this is what we're left with.
Column B: The number of members who have logged in this year. Obviously the 2018 figure is high but some haven't got round to logging in yet so the figure is not typical.
Column C: The number of members who have made any contribution at all ie at least one posting.
Column D: The number of members who have made at least 10 postings.
Column E: The number of members who have made at least 100 postings.
I think the data is interesting; before 2014 those on the forum log in and often contribute. After that there seems to be a lowering of the 'retention rate' despite the actual numbers being up. I wonder if this is because the forum is not seen as being relevant or useful. It's pretty obvious that there is a hard core of say 40 people who do most of the running. That's 2% of Society membership. If you think having the forum is worthwhile then you have no argument against Branchlines!
Anyway, I'll just leave this here as it is. I'm not going to scrabble around with the figures any more and I don't have any further historical data to rummage through. You can ponder the meaning of the data yourselves.
Thanks for the data Brian - always better to have facts to work on!
One thing that I keep coming back to is the relationship between this forum and NGRM-Online. NGRM-Online is much bigger, many more posts are made, and of course it covers a lot more than just 009. So the chances are that most people will spend more time on NGRM-Online than here, and if they don't have much time then most of it will be spent there.
It is tempting to say that the decline in recent joiners' retention rate in this forum mirrors an increase in NGRM-Online activity. I don't have the data on NGRM-Online but it is suggestive of that.
So if this forum is to thrive, it has to be as something more than just a pale shadow of NGRM-Online.
The one thing that is different about this forum is that it is The 009 Society Forum and so I think that we should make as much of this difference as we can.
So the discussion about communications within the Society is for me bang on target. This forum should be an important part of that communications, but at present the upper levels of the Society try to ignore it it seems.
That is not just bad for the Forum, it is also bad for the Society.
Frank
Quote from: MickT on November 04, 2018, 17:01
I don't know why you're telling me Blair, that, in essence is what I have often said myself.
I know, Mick, that comment was directed at those who can do something about it, if they choose to! ;)
Interesting stats, Brian. So generally the forum is growing (slowly) in terms of membership, but being posted on less frequently.
To my mind that begs the questions:
- is it still needed?
- if so, what does the Society want it to be for
- how different is that to what it contains/does now
Brian,
Thanks for kindly posting the figures. I wish I'd had that table to hand when I first mentioned it in the editorial. Shown as a graph it could almost be summed up by two opposing diagonal lines, and looks as though two things are happening: as the society grows, more sign up, but fewer stay or feel it worth posting as the time elapses. This makes me feel that Tom's conclusions may well be well founded and his questions pertinent. My experiences of the last few day here may explain why, and my fellow Sussex Downs member, Tim Sanderson's comments higher in this thread have rung in my ears in the last 24 hours.
My editorial for the December issue (now with the printers) mentions it for a second time and was written a week ago. I'm not so sure that I would have worded it thus if I'd written it today.
I wouldn't worry, unless there's someone new who hasn't read last months, at least they've got some reading to do before they reply!
I said earlier that i feel it still has it's uses:
- A place where Society matters can be discussed and has the advantage of instant responses unlike the letters page of the News
- A "quieter" place than NGRM for those who prefer it that way (as long as they avoid threads like this one!)
- As Stan has pointed out a place for "full" branch reports - perhaps this is something that could be plugged in the News to boost new members?
Just for completeness, and hopefully accuracy, I have added an addendum to the last sub para in paragraph 6 of my rather long tome about Society rules and procedural protocol of a couple of days ago (apologies for the length), which I have put in for the benefit of those who have shown interest by responding either on here, or directly to me, for which I thank you.
I wish to make the point here that my posting was made purely for the reasons of providing information about the rules and routine protocols of the Society, from my own unofficial perspective simply as a member, because it had become obvious during the process of this and the News thread that many (maybe most?) of our members are not aware of them, which personally I find quite shocking - for whatever reason.
As this thread was started in order to generate discussion/debate about this forum, I think that the original objective has been aired sufficiently for a general consensus of opinion to be gathered and has morphed into wider matters. My own feeling is that I think it has run its course and various issues have been brought to the attention of those that have an interest in them which one hopes may generate some remedial activity, so rather than continue to fuel debate, which was not intended, I am now intending to gently withdraw back under my own stone.
Mick
Quote from: Malcolm on November 04, 2018, 16:58Edit - They could of course use the forum. ;)
I'm sure briane would be happy to provide anyone with a password if they needed one.
(I keep thinking of the newspaper headlines after Princess Di's death: 'Where are you, Ma'am?')
David.
WARNING THREAD DRIFT
I hope folk don't mind but seeing as I seem to have received an honorable mention earlier in this thread I thought I would just cross the T's and dot the I's.
I gave up the TLO post back at the AGM as due to work I was unable to attend as many exhibitions as I would wish to fulfill the TLO role, well work commitments have now got worse and better.....don't ask!
I also had a sneaking feeling that the roll needed to change or split to allow for the growth of forums, simply put lets just say that a new RTR (really) loco has come out, given the lead times for producing the News it might not appear therein until a couple of months after release. By which time it has been thoroughly splashed and examined on various internet forums, so it's no longer newsworthy.
Also some producers both large and small scale were quite keen on getting news of their products out there, while others promised more than they actually delivered. Hopefully the directors will be sorting the role out to make it fit for purpose in the coming years.
John Bruce No7 former TLO.
Quote from: Turin 60 on November 06, 2018, 14:23that a new RTR (really) loco has come out, given the lead times for producing the News it might not appear therein until a couple of months after release. By which time it has been thoroughly splashed and examined on various internet forums, so it's no longer newsworthy.
Surely as Branchlines has a lot shorter lead time the same could be done for such news, John? Perhaps have an article ready to put in if there's "no news"! Also many people don't use the internet (so we've been told) so a paper version of the launch would be their only way of seeing it?
Quote from: Hobby on November 06, 2018, 19:01
Quote from: Turin 60 on November 06, 2018, 14:23that a new RTR (really) loco has come out, given the lead times for producing the News it might not appear therein until a couple of months after release. By which time it has been thoroughly splashed and examined on various internet forums, so it's no longer newsworthy.
Surely as Branchlines has a lot shorter lead time the same could be done for such news, John? Perhaps have an article ready to put in if there's "no news"! Also many people don't use the internet (so we've been told) so a paper version of the launch would be their only way of seeing it?
Oh I don't know, ask Chris about how close I came to the deadlines on many an occasion!!
John Bruce.