This forum

[julie_m]

I think an easy solution to the problem of pruning vs. data loss would be to have an "about to be deleted" area, where old posts would be kept on public display for some period of time before final deletion. At least then, anybody who desperately wants to can grab a local copy, and nobody gets to complain that they weren't warned of a thread's demise.

Also, when threads drift off-topic and get closed, it would be nice if the mods would allow one last link to the derailer's own blog or similar, for carrying on the discussion somewhere else.

[Alan Stepney]

I should like to comment on Jeffrey's post (#79)

I moderate a board that uses IPB.
IPB is a steep learning curve for Moderators/Admin, and is quite complex for them, far more than is neccessary (IMHO)
Also, they regularly update various features, some of which also mean regular changes for members.
Let me just say that it wouldnt be my first choice.

Accountability shouldnt be a problem.
The amounts discussed are modest, and I doubt that contributions would be enough to persuade the owner to skip the country after filling a Swiss bank account!

As for governance, it is all too easy to make things far more complex than they need to be.
The present model may, or may not, be the best, but if any changes are made, keep them simple.

One board I moderate (which uses IPB) relies upon donations, which work, and been sufficient to cover costs for the past 6 or 7 years.
The rules are minimal, and entirely at the discretion (whim) of the owner.
It works.
OK, as always, there are some members who complain about some aspects of the board, but that will always happen.

The more complicated one makes it, the less "user-friendly" it may tend to be.

[Dickie]

Seems to me letting the BVWS run it would be a good idea. Everyone could still have free access, but BVWS membership would give you the opportuntiy of some form of democratic governance and control via the AGM.

[evingar]

Originally Posted by Dickie

Seems to me letting the BVWS run it would be a good idea. Everyone could still have free access, but BVWS membership would give you the opportuntiy of some form of democratic governance and control via the AGM.

I would agree. Most clubs have an internet forum attached to their activities and this is a golden opportunity for the BVWS to obtain one "off the shelf". Surely part of the BVWS remit is to preserve information about old technology - How better than to run a forum like this ?

Technical books are fine, but "real life" experience puts the technology into context. However, the window of opportunity fro "harvesting" this experience is finite. I would have thought that the cost of running the forum could have been absorbed by the BVWS without the need for an "entry fee", or demanding membership as a pre requisite. Both of those things would undoubtedly restrict the forum user base, and hence information flow. T

Perhaps the BVWS could garner revenue by using the forum for advertising purposes, or as a traffic "pointer" to services such as component or technical data sales, maybe having a differential pricing system for members and non members.

Incidentally I am a BVWS member and would fully recommend membership.

[Cobaltblue]

I personally have no objection to the Forum being under the control of the BVWS and many of us are already members:

However if the BVWS were to make this a democratic forum that's a lot of work for somebody and the BVWS committee members already give a lot of their time to us all (Including Paul of course). So has anyone actually asked members of the BVWS committee if they want some additional work?

Secondly it would be unfair to expect current and future UKVRRR members to become BVWS members just in order to gain access to this Forum. Some may have no wish to join the BVWS, this may be due to reasons from financial to idealogical.

Thirdly asking the BVWS membership as a whole to fund the forum would need consultation with the membership. Paul may know the figures but I suspect currently less than half BVWS members engage in this Forum. I have been a BVWS member since 1985 but only joined this forum 18 months ago. Most of my immediate BVWS friends are not forum members

In terms of fleeting members lets remember they often offer up sets for free or low prices. OK some are folk who want advice on price and information so they can sell elsewhere, c'est la vie.
A suggestion is these fleeting posters should be offered say 10 posts for free without the need to become members.

I am in favour of an annual subscription, discounts offered to the retired, disabled, students and unemployed. No differentiation between members by how much they have paid.
This would not exclude the Forum from being associated with or run by the BVWS.

Despite some of the recent bad feeling, this is a great forum and a fantastic resource, lets not be in a hurry and take our time to get it right.

Cheers

Mike T

I'll chuck in a tenner too.

[GrimJosef]

I'm not convinced that there would be any actual benefit in handing the forum over to the BVWS. I'm not a BVWS member and don't expect to become one so this move would put further distance between me and the forum's management. It might also create two classes of member - those with influence and those without. I think there is also an argument for preserving a bit of 'biodiversity'. The ethos of this forum is different from that of the BVWS I believe and that difference is A Good Thing. Finally I don't think that the sort of issues that have divided us recently (the correction of posts for example) could be effectively resolved either at the BVWS AGM or through its management committee. Neither a motion listing in microscopic detail how every single aspect of the forum should be run nor a simple AGM decision to evict the current admin and mod team and replace them with another one is at all credible. The forum is run by volunteers who have a tough enough job as it is. They don't need any extra 'process' to be piled on their shoulders at all.

Again, just my two penn'orth.

Cheers,

GJ

[joe]

First let me say a big "thank you" to Paul, and to all the moderators, present and past who have given much of their time to making this one of the best run forums on the net.

I, like many others, would be most willing to chuck in a tenner or so annually to help keep this forum alive and to preserve the wealth of knowledge that is contained within it.

Joe

[ppppenguin]

Originally Posted by Alan Stepney

......
The rules are minimal, and entirely at the discretion (whim) of the owner.
It works.
OK, as always, there are some members who complain about some aspects of the board, but that will always happen.

The more complicated one makes it, the less "user-friendly" it may tend to be.

Alan, you make some very good points. The rulebook here is long and complex. The enforcement can be erratic and capricious, I know from private correspondence that terms like "treading on eggshells" come up too often. Full proactive moderation on a forum this big is a substantial task.

May I make a practical suggestion that could help to reduce the load on moderators. Enlist all the forum users to be the eyes and ears of the moderators. Collectively we will spot most problems pretty quickly and we can report them using the red triangle. Trust the members. Treat them like adults (with a special nod to our valued younger members who may not technically be adults but generally behave as such). Forget about trivia such as spelling and grammar - too much work for a big forum. If a post is sufficiently badly written it will get ignored by people who don't want to bother to decipher it. OK, the s/n ratio will get a little worse but I don't feel that's too important. Search engines exist to deal with thread drift. As always there's detail to be worked out, no doubt with the odd devil, but I'll repeat it loud and clear: TRUST THE MEMBERS As a side effect this will also solve the dissent and disquiet issues. As Alan said, there will always be the grumblers and the professional pointy stick pokers but you'll lose the build ups of steam pressure that are currently happening and which can cause such ill feeling.

The BVWS question is contentious. I'll repeat my view that one possible solution to funding is that teh BVWS takes on the ownership but the forum is left open to all. Possibly invite donations from non-members and encourage people to join the BVWS but otherwise keep it free for all to join. Is the BVWS willing to take on this expense?

But most important of all, whatever the rules, governance or whatever, PLEASE don't discard information. Public libararies sling out old copies of books that we are often glad to buy. The internet doesn't have the same pressures on space. I would guess that this forum would fit many times over on a cheap HDD. Our worth at UKVRR, if there is any worth, is to provide a comprehensive record of what members have said about our shared interest, from the most detailed technical analysis all the way to the trivia.

[Patrick Dixon]

On Accountability & Governance, my view is that Paul & his team have run and bankrolled the forum for many years, and I'd be happy to make my donation(s) on the basis that it buys me no influence or favour, and it's Paul's to do with as he wishes. Obviously my intention would be that it's used to run the forum.

I think that's simplest and clearest, and if it were to be abused I think it would become obvious fairly quickly.

[Brian R Pateman]

Originally Posted by ppppenguin

Enlist all the forum users to be the eyes and ears of the moderators. Collectively we will spot most problems pretty quickly and we can report them using the red triangle.

The membership has always had the opportunity to do this. Reporting is open to all.

Since I have been a moderator I could count the number of times this happens per year on the fingers of one hand.

[GrimJosef]

Originally Posted by ppppenguin

TRUST THE MEMBERS As a side effect this will also solve the dissent and disquiet issues.

Sorry Jeffrey, it will simply replace them with a different set of dissent and disquiet issues. I rather like legible threads which, to a large extent, stay on topic. I would be disquieted by a move towards a free-for-all.

Cheers,

GJ

[whyperion]

If forum has to go to BVWS so be it , but I dont have enough interest in that. I like the usefulness of a place to post the odd question , find a bit of help for projects that might come off , assist better persons than I with bits and pieces I have accumulated over the years, all with information that covers just about everything from a fuse to generating plant with video , audio and beyond all getting an equal place. I might be able to find a tenner for the privilege of joining in ( though I would hope viewing would be free )

[Radio_Dave]

At the end of the day the proof of the pudding is in the eating and this forum hasn't got as popular as it is by tasting bad.

I would not be willing to pay a subscription/donation if there were to be any significant changes to the moderation team and/or its rules.

Regards
David

[ajs37]

I value this site - I look at it every day - I have learned much from it - and I am quite happy to donate or subscribe to it as a regular user - as long as it stays free for the casual user. Whichever way Paul and the mods want to go, that's fine with me - Pauls forum, Pauls rules - (and I have fallen foul of them in moderate ways and had posts deleted - but I really don't have a problem with that).
Count on my support
Cheers
Andy

[ppppenguin]

Originally Posted by whyperion

If forum has to go to BVWS so be it , but I dont have enough interest in that. I like the usefulness of a place to post the odd question , find a bit of help for projects that might come off........

I agree that a move to the BVWS could have undesireable side effects. My vision is that the basic concept and ethos of UKVRR would be unchanged by such a move. Of course it would evolve, just as it evolves now.

Brian Pateman has provided some useful information here:

The membership has always had the opportunity to do this. Reporting is open to all.

Since I have been a moderator I could count the number of times this happens per year on the fingers of one hand.

The idea that I suggested, of enlisting and trusting the members to police the forum would mark a significant change in the way the forum is run. From largely pro-active moderation to re-active. There would inevitably be a period of adjustment and dislocation as the new methods bedded down. It might not work well - I'm not clairvoyant.

The underlying argument is that UKVRR is now too big to be operated on the current basis by a small team of volunteer moderators. I'm not sure that an expanded moderating team is the answer either. Since a paid editorial team is out of the question I am trying to find a way to free up moderator's time to concentrate on what matters. This includes good communication with members, solving technical problems, engendering a sense of trust on all sides.

As I've said before, I'm not experienced in the ways of governance, but the word that has just popped into my head is leadership. I'm not saying that's easy but the needs of UKVRR have changed. The simple "My forum my rules" model that we have at present can work very well with a small forum, especially with early enthusiasm. UKVRR is now large and hopefully mature. Such a model of leadership is now more problematic.

I'm not sure that democracy is the answer (I'll cite Churchill here about democracy being hte worst possible system of goverment apart from all the others that have been tried). The answer might well lie in the marketplace. GVR and VRAT would not have started at all except for problems, real or preceived, in the way that UKVRR is run. As Paul has said, if you don't like it here, there are alternatives.

My purpose here in this thread is to help to find ways in which UKVRR can overcome its growing pains but even more, to stop the loss of information. I don't mind sounding like a broken record here:

Don't destroy information.

I may have an undue conceit about the worth of what we have posted. I'm sure that many 1000s of posts have little or no value, but unlike a physical library where space it at a premium we don't have those constraints. We don't need to be rigorous editors.

[Alan Stepney]

I dont feel that the BVWS is the right "owner" for this forum, and indeed, wonder if the BVWS would want the task.
However, I do feel that there should be some links between the two, perhaps more formally than at present.

I found this forum, and only from here did I discover the BVWS, and suspect that may also be the case for others.
Hence, and assuming the BVWS didnt want the trouble and effort of running this forum, it might feel that some contribution to the costs would be appropriate. (Something that, as a BVWS member, I would support).

As for the "loss of informtion" issue, I can appreciate saving information for the future. Indeed, I have this week purchased several hundred Victorian/Edwardian magazines that were destined for the tip, just to ensure they were saved.
I am not so sure that anything that has been culled from this board is worthy of saving for posterity.
I know that any of my posts that have ended up on the cutting room floor, were of little or no value.

[ThePillenwerfer]

I too like the decent standards of posting which is required here and would not like to see that change.

As for emptying The Skip, given that the contents weren't accessible to most members or the public I can't see how it can be regarded as a loss. It seems odd that rubbish was being stored anyway as if these threads had been deleted immediately the hysteria about a mass cull could have been prevented. As ever, I don't know the full reasons so am not criticising the decisions or policies.

As to funding there is no way I would pay a subscription, either directly or to the BVWS. If a donation system were to be introduced I MAY contribute but if not I would do the honourable thing and resign my membership.

As other people have said, it's Paul's forum and his rules and nobody is compelled to be here.

- Joe

[ppppenguin]

Originally Posted by Alan Stepney

As for the "loss of informtion" issue, I can appreciate saving information for the future. Indeed, I have this week purchased several hundred Victorian/Edwardian magazines that were destined for the tip, just to ensure they were saved.
I am not so sure that anything that has been culled from this board is worthy of saving for posterity.
I know that any of my posts that have ended up on the cutting room floor, were of little or no value.

Alan, I've been reading about and listening to stuff about publication bias recently. This is most serious in the field of medical trials, where the fact that "positive" results are far more likely to be published than "negative" results in the efficacy of some new treatments being exaggerated. I wouldn't dare to give a similar importance to our writings at UKVRR but the cutting room floor can be a fascinating place. Those hilarious outtakes that were never intended for public consumption, the archeological gold in the latrines and rubbish dumps.

Perhaps I am overinflating our worth but we need to balance several things:

• Storage space. Should be negligible in practical terms but I'd like some numbers. Please!
• Editorial effort. It takes time and effort to perform a cull. Is this really good use of moderators' time?
• Drawing the line. Wherever you place the line, you can make an argument for moving it one way or the other
• Value to future generations of radio historians. And social historians, since online forums and their characterisitcs are a legitimate subject of such research. What seems trivial to us now, may not be so to our heirs.

That's why, if storage space isn't a problem, it's just easier to keep the lot, dealing only with the spam and abuse, which need to be killed at birth.

[kalee20]

Originally Posted by thermionic

I propose that any new member is allowed, say 2 - 4 posts free of charge, and if they wish to stay, then they will have to pay the annual subscription.

Good principle - but there would have to be then a system for detecting people from registering under a new user name every 2 - 4 posts ad infinitum, and getting effectively free membership.

Originally Posted by Alan Stepney

I dont feel that the BVWS is the right "owner" for this forum... However, I do feel that there should be some links between the two...

Hence my suggestion in post #8 that perhaps the Forum could be affiliated to the BVWS - thus recognising the Forum, but allowing the independence.

ppppenguin's concerns about loss of information are valid - the problem is that we as ordinary members just don't get to se wha is being junked. However, on the basis that the moderators are sensible folk, I do rely on their discernment. It's not much different from magazine editors wo prune and discard info at their discretion.

This thread seems to be throwing up a lot o helpful information and also demonstrates goodwill amongst the members - long may this continue!