• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Non-Project Posts in Project Forum Sections - some thoughts on a Forum reorganisation

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,878
Reaction score
4,824
It's been brought to my attention that some of the non-aviation Secret Project sections are heavily contaminated with non-project topics.

To be clear, the meaning of "Secret Projects" on the forum stems from the Midland "Secret Projects" series, and refers specifically to unbuilt projects.

In the past, I set up the Aerospace and Military sections to cover non-project posts, but it seems that this isn't working that well.

I am therefore amending the descriptions and names of the sections to be more obvious.

I am also considering making separated topics for non-project discussions that mirror the Projects sections, and moving them up to be next to the Secret Projects forums in aplace of greater e.g. replace Aerospace with:

Early Aviation (up to 1945)
Postwar Aviation (1945 - now)
Space


and possibly split Military into Navy, Air Force, etc.

I'd like feedback on names (lets get better ones) and whether people think this is a good idea.

In order to stop the forum growing too segregated, I'm thinking of merging some of the low traffic sections together e..g.
 

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,189
Reaction score
1,920
I thought a couple of years back it was agreed that one-off experimentals, tesbeds and prototypes could be included in the project threads (especially lesser known ones)?

The military and naval threads seem less badly affected from stray items, the missile thread maybe a little more so, but given the relatively lower traffic on these sections I don't think they would warrant any further subdivision.

My only comment is would have five aircraft topics be confusing? Early and postwar projects and early and postwar aviation makes perfect sense and I like the idea, but where would that leave the Aerospace topic? Purely for generic aerospace questions and discussions as now?

I'm sure a lot of the large super threads on B-21, T-X, 6th Gen etc. in Aerospace have quite a bit of projects material squirreled away within the 100s of pages of discussion and speculation. At what point do we mine out and archive what is news now to the postwar projects thread for posterity?
 

Schneiderman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
1,526
Reaction score
706
Provided the Search function is working (and it generally does if you are careful with search terms) I'm not fussed how the topics and threads are organised. Whatever system is devised it soon goes off track regardless of how hard the admins try to keep things logical.
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,878
Reaction score
4,824
The main culprit is the Space Projects forum which is 80% current programs.
Perhaps a simpler fix would be to rename General Aerospace as Aviation and create a Space forum for current space programs?

What about the other merges I suggested?
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
14,575
Reaction score
4,304
Perhaps a simpler fix would be to rename General Aerospace as Aviation and create a Space forum for current space programs?
I think that might be a drastic step. Maybe a Current Programs sub-forum of Secret Space Projects for those programs that haven't reached launch or otherwise operational status yet? And when they do, move them over to Aerospace. Would it be possible for a user to flag a thread in the sub-forum when it's subject reaches such a point, in order to make the life of the mods easier? Or perhaps even automate the process so a thread would be moved over to Aerospace the moment it's flagged as being a now operational program?
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,878
Reaction score
4,824
Current programs don’t belong in Space Projects at any stage. I’m not sure why this is tricky to understand. They only become ‘unbuilt’ when they are cancelled. So current Space programs belong in Aerospace (note the ‘space’ component of the name) until it is clear that the program will not produce hardware.

if a small number of posters can alter their posting behaviour we wouldn’t need to alter anything.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
14,575
Reaction score
4,304
Fair enough. I for one will be a bit more careful about posting current programs in Secret Space Projects in future. I had thought we could only put in programs that had reached the hardware stage in Aerospace, and was putting proposed programs, or programs that had gotten initial approval but were not yet near major hardware (as opposed to lab test models and the like) in Space Projects. My apologies for the misunderstanding.
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
12,878
Reaction score
4,824
I’m open for discussion on this, but when 80% of the posts are on current programs it dilutes the purpose of the forum which is to document space projects of the past. If the name was Cancelled Space Projects I guess that would be clearer.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
14,575
Reaction score
4,304
I think with the misunderstanding over whether or not programs that haven't reached hardware being able to go into General Aerospace having been clarified, the current name for Secret Space Projects is just fine. In my humble opinion of course.
 

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
27,805
Reaction score
4,972
My dear Paul,

I have this suggesting from long time ago,I complained before from many well known and built aircraft
was put in Early & Postwar sections,so you can open a new sections as you suppose,and the main Project
sections will be use as usual for prototypes,un-finished aircraft (never completed) or Projects only.
 

Antonio

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,543
Reaction score
331
The forum’s core subject are unbuilt projects. That means to me those non fully series produced projects: proposals, paper, prototype, even pre production series. Current developments are in this category until entering series production and operational service.

Aerspace, Military and the Bar could be confusing categories because only the Bar should exist in a hard version of secret projects forum.

If the idea is to became a more general subject forum we should mirror the unbuilt categories into the non secret projects. Possibly the name secret is in the origin of confusion because secret isn’t a synonym for unbuilt.

My vote is for going back to the bar section alone and preserve the genuine core. That makes the forum genuine and valuable as a research institution.
 

Similar threads

Top