Suggestion Forum threshold increase

[Oceanus]

Current Rules per FAQ

You need to think about the following:

* Is the subject suitable for ScubaBoard?
* Is it necessary, isn't this subject already covered by another forum?
* Is it to be a private forum? If so, for which group? Any specific access restrictions (ie read-only etc.)?

Got that covered?

Good, next thing you need to do is to start a thread in Suggestions (part of Site Support).

Also, you'll need at least a dozen members who'll back your proposal.

Finally, the ScubaBoard Staff will consider your proposal and create the forum if approved.

I find this threshold ridiculously low, specifically the 12 member aspect, and would like the community to reconsider what is a reasonable threshold for such a significant change of the 'board.

The goal is to create/determine what a reasonable threshold should be. I submit that any forum must first clearly prove it's necessity/viability/legitimacy with demonstrable community support, such as but not limited to:

• a 3 month "running thread"
• 36 member participation (actively participating in thread/discussion, not just 'me too' posts)
• should not significantly diminish another/similar forum
• a public poll in 'parent' forum with majority support (2 week vote?)

Just a start, please comment/discuss...

 

[Oceanus]

I totally agree. I brought this up recently, although with not as much thought put into it. They do have an inactive forum purge every now and then, but doesn't it make more sense to nip it in the bud? Although, perhaps it's better to give the forum a chance to develop.

I propose the "running thread" is an appropriate way for a forum to start. If you can't maintain a running thread you certainly can't maintain a forum regardless of how many "me too" support posts it gets.

 

[SeaYoda]

The Florida forum was barely able to scrape up 12 people to get it started way back when. It would have been a shame to not have that forum.

I would hope in the case of the Florida forum that some thought went into the reason for its existence. A geographic split for ease of finding posts is not the same as 12 buddies wanting a segregated area to post. I think goals need to be clarified if the answer to this question is to be reached. Here are my questions:

Does it hurt the computer function of the board to have so many subforums?

Does it hurt the flow of information (for users) to have so many subforums?

Do we need to allow segregation of such small groups on a large board?

Should we be more specific as to the description of the use of the small group forum and not allow general dive plans and reports to stay in the small forum? If it truly is a "club" dive not open to all, that thread would fit the subforum. If the intent of the dive is to be open to all divers it should be in the main forum.

What volume of threads constitutes the main forum needing to be split for better management and use by members?

Are we focused on where we live, where we dive, or who we dive with? This will determine how splits are made.

I'm not against "clubs" or "restructuring". I just think clear, consistent, meaningful, workable end goals are needed before we can decide the particulars.

 

[El Orans]

1. a 3 month "running thread"
2. 36 member participation (actively participating in thread/discussion, not just 'me too' posts)
3. should not significantly diminish another/similar forum
4. a public poll in 'parent' forum with majority support (2 week vote?)

#2 A minimum of 12 members is required, we have requests with far more backers. It varies.

#3 is already a part of the requirements.

#4 If I were to ask SB for a club forum, meant for my group, I wouldn't be to pleased to have to ask for approval from strangers. :28:

 

[Oceanus]

#2 A minimum of 12 members is required, we have requests with far more backers. It varies.

#3 is already a part of the requirements.

#4 If I were to ask SB for a club forum, meant for my group, I wouldn't be to pleased to have to ask for approval from strangers. :28:

#2 Agreed, even 2 people could generate enough posts/threads to necessitate a forum, but 12 sounds low for a board of "over 65,000 divers"

#4 A vote probably is unreasonable, that was just an over the top instigation. Maybe a sticky about the proposed forum, just a chance to allow the larger community to comment/discuss before it's created (and only after the running thread test)

Perhaps the "running thread" test could be enough all on it's own... make it 6 months and members may decide a thread is good enough... multiple running threads will clearly show that a forum is needed to get the threads 'out of the way'

 

[do it easy]

A few more posts and we'll have a new forum right here

 

[SeaYoda]

.... sound of crickets chirping ......

 

[Missdirected]

The Florida forum was barely able to scrape up 12 people to get it started way back when. It would have been a shame to not have that forum.

:yelclap: :yelclap:

One must leave room for growth and look to the future. If not, nothing will grow. and we can have a hundred more of these conversations without people doing their homework.

Beyond that, I don't think it is right for a bunch of new people to go and get a club. I just don't feel they have enough board experience to know what may or may not work.

 

[DandyDon]

I started this thread once upon a time Malaysia! Everyone there post here http://www.scubaboard.com/showthread.php?t=81073&highlight=Malaysia and it kept getting enough activity that a new sub forum was formed....