This forum...

[Chris Ford]

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.

[George Surridge]

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

[MickT]

(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

[Frank]

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

[Chris Ford]

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?

[cp.409067]

.... 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

[Chris Ford]

Branchlines: the 009 Society's version of Marmite. Let's not go there.

[Tom Haythornthwaite]

Sticky subject?

[Chris Ford]

 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.

[rander]

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?

[George Surridge]

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

[Chris Ford]

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...

[cnw6847]

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.

[Hugh Norwood]

(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.

[invercloy]

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.