Register here

Author Topic: Revised Posting Guidelines - PLEASE READ!  (Read 24459 times)

Offline pometablava

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 3305
Revised Posting Guidelines - PLEASE READ!
« on: October 24, 2006, 05:48:54 am »
Dear topic starters,

In my opinion, we should take one minute to choose the most precisse and informative tittle and descriptions for every new topic.
This would be a benefit for all the comunity here because it would be easier to find particular information in the forum.Organized info it is also more pleasant to read.
And please, try to avoid dispersion and off topic.

Thanks :)
« Last Edit: January 05, 2018, 02:09:53 am by PaulMM (Overscan) »

Offline frank

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 618
Re: Posting Guidelines - PLEASE READ!
« Reply #1 on: October 24, 2006, 07:35:17 am »

     I agree! It's frustrating to see new postings to a subject of interest, only to find it's totally irrelevant!


I think Overscan should consider to rename this topic ;)

Dear topic starters,

In my opinion, we should take one minute to choose the most precisse and informative tittle and descriptions for every new topic.
This would be a benefit for all the comunity here because it would be easier to find particular information in the forum.Organized info it is also more pleasant to read.
And please, try to avoid dispersion and off topic.

Thanks :)

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10755
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: Posting Guidelines - PLEASE READ!
« Reply #2 on: January 05, 2018, 02:08:48 am »
If a post is worth posting, its worth creating a topic which is appropriate for it. These multi-page "Various Dornier Projects" type threads are really annoying. By all means, post related designs in one topic, but if the only link is that they share a manufacturer, that's really not useful.

Consider individual topics per design, or per requirement / design competition.

When posting in general, consider -

what is the source of this information? Wikipedia is not usually a suitable source, nor deviantart or similar sites.
Does this post actually add to the existing knowledge in the topic? Have you checked earlier posts to make sure the image or information hasn't already been posted?
Is the image a photo or an original manufacturer-originated drawing? If it's 'fan art' it isn't appropriate here.

Repeated breach of these guidelines will result in post moderation, and posts which do not meet the guidelines will be deleted.
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline iverson

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 223
Re: Revised Posting Guidelines - PLEASE READ!
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2018, 01:09:34 pm »
I agree that the "Various Dornier projects..." style of posting causes duplication and makes the forum harder to use overall. But I also understand the urge to create these types of post--They provoke some of our more interesting discussions. So perhaps we should try to accommodate the urge while still achieving the degree of separation desired? 

I suggest something like the following:

* Always create or use an existing, narrowly defined subject topic to describe a specific project in detail ("Gloster P.248 F.43/46 single-seat interceptor with 4.5-in recoilless gun", "Lockheed CL-1400 A-X contender").

* As needed, create/update broad, collation topics that provide links to the narrow topics, while allowing discussion ("Gloster fighter projects", "UK Interceptor projects 1945-55", "Projects to Specification F.43/46", "A-X Contenders", "USAF Close-Support projects").

The broad topics could go in the existing index section (perhaps renamed to make its use more intuitive, since it isn't a true index) or they could go in the existing historical/subject categories with a standard keyword in the subject line ("SURVEY", "GENERAL", or some some such). Personally, I think they would be most useful within the historical/subject categories. The index section could then be turned into something more like a true index.

Either way, the posting rule should be "create as many broad topics as you want PROVIDED that each individual project is in a separate linked topic."




Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 13244
Re: Revised Posting Guidelines - PLEASE READ!
« Reply #4 on: April 28, 2018, 07:25:02 am »
The idea behind the "Various..." topics seems to have been misunderstood, so as the person who christened or created most of these, I feel compelled to explain the logic that presided over their existence.

It may not seem obvious these days, because of the many months worth of effort put into making some sense of it, but the early years of this forum generated hundreds of topics such as "German projects", "Pre-war bombers", "Little-known transports" and the likes, which contained all and sundry, typically strings of posts with pics that had little or no text enabling to find their contents in a forum search.
Some of these topics could be over 20 pages long.
As a result, it wasn't unusual to have posts about the same aircraft or project in three or four separate topics, sometimes spread over two or three different sections of this forum.

The first task was to split each of those threads into meaningful groups of posts that could stay together; then regroup these new temporary threads with other existing threads on the same subjects; then rename the resulting topics and make sure they were now in the right section of the forum.
When the whole thing was over and done with, there usually remained standalone posts that did not contain enough info or images to justify the creation of a topic of their own. This typically happened with projects whose manufacturer was identified but the type designation unknown.
So, instead of having 15 separate topics called "Unidentified Junkers project", "Unknown Junkers bomber", "Undesignated Junkers fighter" and so forth (as was also often the case previously), it seemed coherent to temporarily regroup them in generic topics by company and era, such as "Pre-war Junkers combat types", so that people could add new elements with time, and discuss the existing contents.

I do not know if my activity as an global moderator can be traced back (nor if anyone cares) but if someone could go back over it, they could see literally thousands of splits, merges, posts moved and/or renamed. This was the core of my activity as a global moderator on this forum for years, and in fact the sole reason why I wasn't simply a regular moderator. This change of status was made to enable my reorganizing the old topics and trying to make sense of a lot of orphaned threads.

BUT the logic has ALWAYS been that when a type or project has enough contents to justify a separate topic, it then gets split away from the generic post to start a life of its own. The generic topics exist only to keep together in one place the pics and bits of information that are too sparse, too isolated, too insignificant to justify the creation of a topic. They have NEVER been the place of choice to start sharing about a project that is well-documented.

I hope this clarifies the subject somehow.