It seems to me that quite a few of the sections on here get little traffic from relatively few people. I'd like to suggest that the admin consider a bit of spring cleaning to tidy up the forum a bit. Some sections like the "Armoured Warfare before WWII" and "Post-WWII and Modern Tanks" could easily be amalgamated into "Non-WWII and modern Armour". "World War II" and "Leaders of WW II" could also be combined quite easily. Before anyone accuses me of a bias, yes "The War at Sea" and "Air Warfare in WW II" could also be combined into "Non-Land warfare" or something similar. Other sections it seems to me clearly do not generate enough independant posts to warrant their existence as separate entities, perhaps re-enactment and modelling could be combined into a "Military Hobbies" section. This could also encompass Wargaming and Collectables. Overall this would tidy up the forum a bit which at the moment seems a bit cluttered with many separate sections that individually generate few posts. Less is sometimes more.
Ah, the changing fortunes of a forum... The Forum as it appears now is the result of such a Spring-clean, where various sections were sorted out and parcelled up by how much trade they got. And now we are in slump... As it stands, I am inclned to agree that, at the very least, post-WW2 and pre-WW2 should be joined. The problem with mixing things like modelling & re-enacting is that they are quite seperate things, and it gets jumbled. I personally quite like how the forum is currently laid out - most major areas have their section, and it is not yet so big that there are too many sections to keep track of. Plus, while many sections can go for days without traffic, there is plenty of room for growth... However, my opinion is not set in obstinacy, and I am willing to change that which is necessary.
The problem is that many areas, such as re-enactment/modelling on their own really don't generate enough interest to justify sections on their own. Seriously look at Re-enactment and how many posts are made by Kreigspfarrer, now consider does that really warrant a section by itself? I'd suggest no, it doesn't. Equally, the modelling section is pretty quiet to say the least. The thing is the forum as a whole is in a period of stagnation and people looking at it will see a whole load of dead sections that haven't seen new posts in a month or separate sections that seem dominated by one individual. People as a whole are not going to look deeper than that, they are going to see a dead forum, one that gets little traffic. Trim it down a smaller number of sections and the forum will seem more active, the more active it seems the more members it is likely to attract. People on the whole are not likely to post on the "Leaders of WWII" section in the hope that someone will answer their question or comment in a week or three. But if they can post on the "WWII General Knowledge" section their post might be commented on in a week (For current example) or so it will seem so they will be more likely to comment in the first place. Leave it the way it is if you want, but it's too general to attract specialist knowledge whilst appearing too specialist to attract general knowledge. I think the proof is there to see, the number of active members participating in the forum is steadily declining. Something is going wrong, and if it carries on the way it is I can only see that continuing. There are 18 forums (Fora? Sp?) in 7 separate sections, it is too much and too messy.
I agree on account of the Modelling and Reenactment sections, but I would like to keep air, sea, post and pre WWII tank warfare separated.
Simon, I think you have a few good points, I'm discussing them with the other mods right now. You're bound to see some result soon, or the explanation for the absence of result. Thank you for your constructive criticism!
Thank you Gentlemen for your feedback so far. Panzerman, "Armoured Warfare before WWII" currently has no posts more recent than April 11th, that is well over a month (pretty much 6 weeks) with no activity. Could you honestly say that such an apparently unpopular subject deserves a section to itself? Equally I'd suggest it clearly doesn't deserve to be consigned to obscurity, therefore combining it into a "Non-WWII Armour" section seems a better option than omitting it altogether or continuing it in a redundant section of its own. It seems to me that around 1/3rd of the separate sections could be combined with little or no loss of scope, infact some such as combining Re-enactment and Modelling into a Hobbies section could even open the appeal of the forum, as an extra bonus this may attract new interest by making the forum appear busier. I'm not claiming that it will help, just that it might.
I like the forum the way it is.Every section has slow periods.The Members Lounge is usually busy with new topics,but not lately.I personally love the Modelling section.How much armored warfare was there before WWII?This topic by it's nature shouldn't be very active.This forum covers a lot of ground and I think it would be very easy for topics to get buried quickly if we didn't have the specific areas of interest to post them in.
We used to have a 'secret weapons' topic that was amalgamated with something else, and sank without a trace! Mind you, I am warming to a bit of a spring clean. Please everybody keep all suggestions/comments/opinions coming in.
So do I, and it would still be there it would just be the likely dominant subject in a combined Hobbies Section that would encompass more that the two sections separately would (Forum Gaming could possibly be combined as well as a Military Hobby section of sorts). We'd still get to enjoy Me262's stunning work all the while he remains willing to share it with us. As there was so little does it really warrant a section to itself? Even in a combined Non-WWII armour section the most recent Pre-WWII post would still be in the top 4 (Excluding the stickied Forum Rules), so it's not like it would get buried, the ground doesn't get covered that quickly really, quite a few of the sections have had no posts for over a week! Ricky mentioned the Secret Weapons section, fair enough but again how much discussion was there to be had on Secret Weapons? The discussions still happen, probably cropping up as often as they would in their own section, they're just in the closest relevant section rather than a separate redundant one. I'm not suggesting a total purge here, just a rationalisation of those sections that don't get many independant posts. Air War and War at Sea probably get enough interest to warrant their continued existence as separate entities, Pre-WWII Tanks doesn't.
This section was really an experiment to try to stop the pre-WW2 stuff just getting lost in the clutter or not getting talked about. As an experiment it was a failure... I'll rather pointlessly explain again that the last time the forum was re-arranged we were 'booming', so a fair few sections were created that seemed to have real promise at the time. To quote a Scottish poet: "The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men Gang aft agley" My thoughts are that guns, planes & ships are all quite specialised areas within the forum, and all get reasonably regular posts (although guns does go in fits & starts).
As you can see we have made a few changes, most of them simple rearrangements. The two non-WW2 Armour sections have been grouped and moved down to stand with Non-WW2 History, to which they seem more closely related. The Anti-Tank Warfare and Tank Battles sections have been rejoined to form a Tank Warfare of WW2 section. This should improve general oversight and it removes at least one unfortunately failed experiment from the list. Whether or not we should merge the Reenactment and Modelling sections is still being debated.
Ricky, I agree, and I think that the Guns, Planes and Ships sections generate enough interest on their own to warrant separate sections in any case. The shuffle around so far is an improvement I think, I still believe that fewer busier looking sections would be better, but that's up to you.
If you want an unpleasant visit from the local Imperial Garrison,go ahead and mess with the modelling section.The Force will not be with you!
As you can see the sections are now merged (sorry SturmTiger, the Toast was stronger! ) The 'welcome to Re-Enactment' Sticky was deleted (as it no longer applied) so we've lost the topic about the pros & cons of merging the two. Basically, it was more 'Pro' than 'Con', which was why we merged them. And I must confess the hold-up was with me - I thought a merge would just serve to clog up the Modelling section. Who says that logical argument can't change somebody's mind?
is there any way that you can remove the members with no post at all? many of them are yous spamers! there are over 600 members but only 420 with a post
We delete spammers from the member list every now and again, but there is no reason why those who aren't spammers and who haven't posted can't stay.
