This forum...

[rod335]

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?

[Chris Ford]

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.

[BrianE]

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.

[MickT]

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

[MickT]

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!

[Chris Ford]

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

[BrianE]

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.

[Malcolm]

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

[MickT]

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

[Stan Williams]

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.

[MickT]

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

[MickT]

Steve, Brian, Chris,

PM sent to you all

Mick

[George Surridge]

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

[BrianE]

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.

[Chris Ford]

[/quote]

Full agreement with this.  But room for articles about member's modelling activities too. We all learn from each other.
[/quote]

Indeed.