Cannot start a new topic

Ruston · November 3, 2009

Hi all,

I want to transfer my layout topic from the old forum to this one. I've downloaded the transfer programme and got as far as copying the HTML but when I go to start a new topic to post it in, it won't let me. The button on the layout topics section is in white, rather than blue, and says "you cannot start a new topic". I'm obviously logged in otherwise I wouldn't be able to post this message.

How do I start a new topic or create a new topic on this forum to put the transferred one from the old forum in?

Thanks.

Ruston · November 3, 2009

Sorry, scrub that.

It seems that I can now start a new topic. The problem is that when I preview the post it appears with a lot of gobbledegook and no pictures.

I take it that pictures aren't transferred? It appears that I have to go through it all to edit out the gobbledegook, which is too much hassle.?

So much for my attempt to get to grips with this technology. I'll have to forget it. FAIL.

Jamie · November 3, 2009

Dave whilst possibly not what you want to do, a link to the old thread will allow people to cross reference with your new stuff to allow you some form of continuity. I understand the old forum is to remain "in storage" if you will.

Those of us on Macs* or other non-Windows users can't copy stuff across. (* without a windows emulator or similar)

martin_wynne · November 3, 2009

It seems that I can now start a new topic. The problem is that when I preview the post it appears with a lot of gobbledegook and no pictures.

Hi,

Did you set the RTE editor option?

Did you click the HTML icon before pasting the code?

Did you click the Update button after pasting the code?

The detailed instructions are here: http://www.templot.c...ansfer_help.htm

(Hold down the Ctrl key while you click that -- it will then be in a separate tab so that you can easily swap to and fro.)

It's all explained in bright orange in numerical order, so it's quite difficult to go wrong if you just follow it through.

regards,

Martin.

Ruston · November 3, 2009

Hi,

Did you set the RTE editor option?

Did you click the HTML icon before pasting the code?

Did you click the Update button after pasting the code?

The detailed instructions are here: http://www.templot.c...ansfer_help.htm

(Hold down the Ctrl key while you click that -- it will then be in a separate tab so that you can easily swap to and fro.)

It's all explained in bright orange in numerical order, so it's quite difficult to go wrong if you just follow it through.

regards,

Martin.

Set RTE. YES.

Clicked HTML - the button 4 - "copy HTML code"? - if so, YES.

Started new topic in Layout Topics section, right clicked mouse an pasted .

This is what I get. ? A load of gobbledegook and no pictures.?

Rotherbrook - 70s BR and industrial in N / Ruston's WB by Ruston <a href="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=1282&start=0">original page on Old RMweb</a> __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:24 pm

Since joining this forum and seeing the work of others on here, it has inspired me to get on with my own layout, which I have not done much on for a few months - so here are a couple of pics of progress so far. <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43088.jpg" alt="Image" /> <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43087.jpg" alt="Image" />Scale:N gauge Size: Scenic section of 8' 6" x 2' 0" Time period: Somewhere 1970-75 Region: South Yorkshire - Barnsley/Rotherham/Sheffield - ish Stock: BR blue and green diesels on the mainline (cl.20, 25, 45 so far) Hunslet Austerity 0-6-0STs in the foundry. I know that steam had al but died out, even in industry by the mid 70s but there are no industrial diesels available in N gauge. <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/rmw2.jpg" alt="Image" /> Works locomotives with varying degrees of weathering, still unfinished. <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/rmw1.jpg" alt="Image" /> Some wagons for internal use on scrap traffic for the electric arc furnace.

The main part will be a large steel foundry and heavy engineering works internal railway with a double track British Rail mainline. It was originally going to be an end to end run with hidden sidings at both ends but I decided to make the tracks run back through the end backscenes to have it look like an end to end but enable continuous running of an oval so I can sit back and watch the trains go round when I get bored of shunting. The pics show as far as I have got with tracklaying and show some of the structures just sat on to give an impression of how things will be. The tracks next to the wall will continue on a viaduct and embankment and in the foreground, where the tools are, is where the mainline will continue to form the oval at the front.

Still required to build are some more low-relief works buildings, another gantry crane for a scrapyard, a viaduct, some locks for the canal...

I am going to try and get something running soon before I lose interest again and the weather gets too warm to be working in the loft... <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_confused.gif"> __________________________________________ Comment posted by Pennine MC on Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:00 pm

I like the split levels and the slope connecting them <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_idea.gif">

I like the steel industry connections and the big shed at the back <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif">

I love the period and location <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_cool.gif">

I like the locos <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif">

I dont like 2mm <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif">

Looks good Dave, will keep an eye on this. BTW the last working industrial steam was 1980 I think, at some Midlands colliery. It was only a reserve loco though __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Tue May 01, 2007 5:36 pm

It's exactly a month since I did anything on this and in a sudden fit of enthusiasm yesterday, I began to make the canal and lock that will fit in the gap that you can see between the baseboards in the pic ^ (where the bridge is laid over). <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43564.jpg" alt="Image" /> __________________________________________ Comment posted by Jules on Tue May 01, 2007 5:44 pm

Looking forward to seeing more of this - I like a bit of industry! __________________________________________ Comment posted by James on Wed May 02, 2007 9:08 am

<blockquote><cite>Pennine 50C wrote:</cite> Looks good Dave, will keep an eye on this. BTW the last working industrial steam was 1980 I think, at some Midlands colliery. It was only a reserve loco though</blockquote> Being awkward the last working steam loco was a fireless engine that was 'til working in the nineties iirc <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif">

However Industrial Railway in Colour by Adrian Boothsays that an RSH tank at Castle Doinnington Power station worked the last revenue earning duty by an Industrial steam locomotive anywhere in the UK.

Many colleries continues with steam into the early eighties. A layout with BR blue locos, even red stripe just, with industrial steam has a certain appeal to me!

The layout looks very nice indeed and the Austerity tanks look right at home! (And I'm so pleased you said "Hunslet Austerity 0-6-0STs " and not J94s! Only those owned by the LNER, and BR, were J94s the rest weren't!) __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Wed May 02, 2007 6:09 pm

<blockquote><cite>tractor basher wrote:</cite> ...The layout looks very nice indeed and the Austerity tanks look right at home! (And I'm so pleased you said "Hunslet Austerity 0-6-0STs " and not J94s! Only those owned by the LNER, and BR, were J94s the rest weren't!)</blockquote> Ah! Another industrial loco pedant, like myself <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif"> Actually I would have liked to have set it in the late 80s but the non availabilty of industrial diesels in RTR and kit form prevented this so 1970-75 seemed to suit blue and green BR diesels with some industrial steam. Some people would probably just modify an old Lima 4w shunter or something and call it an "industrial" but I won't. It annoys me greatly when I see layouts that are otherwise fantastically modelled and where great attention to detail is paid to the mainline locos on them but anything will do for an "industrial" <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_evil.gif"> . I think that industrial locos deserve to be modelled properly but I am finding this is not so easy in N gauge. I am still waiting for the Bachman/Farish class 04 as that chassis has great potential to be altered in to some real industrials. Or maybe just lop the chimney off and repaint it to be a Drewry/RSH. <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif">

Anyway, here is the canal lock as of 18:30 today. <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43566.jpg" alt="Image" /> __________________________________________ Comment posted by James on Wed May 02, 2007 6:52 pm

Dave, you have the same feelings about industrials on layouts as I do! It always annoys me when I see a reapinted L&Y pug on a layout! Have you thought about converting the austerity into a 50550 for a bit of variety? Or even a 48150 (think I've remembered that number correctly!). I did the former in four mil' using a Dapol model - it was written up for the modeller a few years back. It worked quite well and is that little bit different too.

I'm looking forward to seeing more of your layout! __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Thu May 03, 2007 4:21 pm

<blockquote><cite>tractor basher wrote:</cite> Have you thought about converting the austerity into a 50550 for a bit of variety? Or even a 48150...</blockquote> I've thought about it but that's all. I have a Fleischman 0-4-0T that I am converting to an RSH saddletank but work stopped on that when I broke my last milling cutter <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_cry.gif"> But the good news is that, according to the rep who was in my local model shop this afternoon, the Farish 04 is on its way! They are on the boat from China as I type. <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif"> Depending on how the chassis is laid out I think that various Hudswell Clarkes, Barclays and Ruston LSSE (Class 07) could be built on it.

Another pic of progress today: <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43571.jpg" alt="Image" /> Various types of bridge. Rearmost - stone arch, then plate girder (when railway was widened to three tracks), Steel truss roadbridge, pre-stressed concrete and finally a smaller plate girder.

I can't decide how to best paint the concrete bridge (what colours etc. ). Any ideas? __________________________________________ Comment posted by Lambton58 on Thu May 03, 2007 8:51 pm

<blockquote><cite>RustonsRUs wrote:</cite> <blockquote><cite>tractor basher wrote:</cite> ...The layout looks very nice indeed and the Austerity tanks look right at home! (And I'm so pleased you said "Hunslet Austerity 0-6-0STs " and not J94s! Only those owned by the LNER, and BR, were J94s the rest weren't!)</blockquote> Ah! Another industrial loco pedant, like myself <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif"> It annoys me greatly when I see layouts that are otherwise fantastically modelled and where great attention to detail is paid to the mainline locos on them but anything will do for an "industrial" <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_evil.gif"> . I think that industrial locos deserve to be modelled properly ... </blockquote> You're preaching to the converted here! <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif">

Nice looking layout. That bank looks fiercesome though - will you be double-heading the austerities? <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif">

Ralph Lambton58 __________________________________________ Comment posted by Flying Pig on Thu May 03, 2007 9:16 pm

<blockquote><cite>Lambton58 wrote:</cite> Nice looking layout. That bank looks fiercesome though - will you be double-heading the austerities? <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif"></blockquote> Wot - <a href="http://www.trainweb.org/drs/Copperas%20Hill.htm" >only two</a> <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_surprised.gif">

The canal lock is looking very good indeed - I love the multiple bridges. __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Thu May 10, 2007 6:04 pm

I was asking about blue brickpapers to use in building a viaduct in the HELP bit yesterday but decided to use red brick with sandstone arches.

There were two reasons for this;

1)I need to get on with it. 2)I had some red in stock. 3)I am a skint.

Three, three reasons... (Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition etc...) <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif">

Still a lot to do but here's the progress made this afternoon. <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43620.jpg" alt="Image" /> <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43622.jpg" alt="Image" /> <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43624.jpg" alt="Image" /> And yes, it was as much fun scoffing the contents of the tube as making the viaduct. <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif"> __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Thu May 17, 2007 8:16 pm

This week I have been working on the scrap siding. <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43659.jpg" alt="Image" /> The scrap pile with concrete (plastruct) bases ready for the gantry crane. <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43658.jpg" alt="Image" /> End view with the siding and a headshunt to an oil store, which would provide fuel for the boilers for steam hammers etc. in the main works. __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Tue May 29, 2007 6:37 pm

With the poor weather over this bank holiday I stayed in and had a brainstorm. The viaduct in red brick just didn't seem right for the Sheffield area so I scrapped it and started again (more crisps eaten <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif"> ). This time I've done it in stone with brick arches. It still needs finishing and painting . The bridge will go over the canal. <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43819.jpg" alt="Image" /> <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43820.jpg" alt="Image" /> Once this part is fixed onto the baseboard I should be able to get the tracklaying finished and maybe, finally see something run. <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_eek.gif"> __________________________________________ Comment posted by Flying Pig on Tue May 29, 2007 11:05 pm

That's going to look much more the thing, Dave. The canal bridge looks spot on, too. __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:09 pm

Although the track layout will have a continuous run, I wanted to give the impression that it is two seperate lines and decided to attempt to make one line appear as if it was originally built by another company. The station and line at the rear are meant to be of Midland origin (I'll be buying the Ratio kit for that signal box) so this one will be Great Central. Here's my attempt at a signalbox. It's not very good by the standards of most people on here but it'll have to do <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_confused.gif"> <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43821.jpg" alt="Image" /> <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43834.jpg" alt="Image" /> It's not finished yet but I thought I'd take a break and put some pics up here. It's a bit fiddly doing all that glazing in N gauge. You O and OO boys don't know yer born... <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif">

A Big Thank You to Nick Holliday for the signal box photos and diagrams that I asked for in the help section. __________________________________________ Comment posted by imberclub on Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:44 pm

Scratchbuilt and in N gauge, that looks pretty good if u ask me. I recently made my first building in OO gauge and that was bloody fiddly. __________________________________________ Comment posted by Diesel Mechanical on Wed Jun 06, 2007 1:21 pm

I like your fleet of J94s. we have one of that version, 'Robert', he is one of my pet engines and works in my quarry with the other NCB J94. keep up the good work! __________________________________________ Comment posted by Diesel Mechanical on Wed Jun 06, 2007 1:21 pm

I like your fleet of J94s. we have one of that version, 'Robert', he is one of my pet engines and works in my quarry with the other NCB J94. keep up the good work! __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Fri Jun 08, 2007 7:51 pm

<blockquote><cite>Diesel Mechanical wrote:</cite> I like your fleet of J94s. we have one of that version, 'Robert', he is one of my pet engines and works in my quarry with the other NCB J94. keep up the good work!</blockquote> I'd like to see the NCB Austerity (Not J94! <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif"> )

I sometimes think that this should be in the workbench section but the way I work on the layout means I build large sections on the bench, such as the canal and scrap siding, and transfer them to the baseboards when they are ready.

Anyway, progress on the signalbox - almost finished now and It's turned out better then I expected for once. <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif"> Some things are not exact such as the finials and the lack of windows in the end gables but I hope it at least gives the flavour of a GC 'box. <img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/sb1.jpg" alt="Image" /> __________________________________________ Comment posted by Diesel Mechanical on Sat Jun 09, 2007 10:04 pm

J94 is easier to say then austerity, and easier to spell! its the same thing anyway! __________________________________________ Comment posted by James on Sat Jun 09, 2007 10:17 pm

<blockquote><cite>Diesel Mechanical wrote:</cite> J94 is easier to say then austerity, and easier to spell! its the same thing anyway!</blockquote> NO IT'S NOT!!!

J94 only refers to those taken into LNER stock, and then owned by BR - if it wasn't in their ownership it was not a J94.

I know it's a small issue, but it's one that really annoys me - if we know how to correctly refer to something, why not just use the correct term? __________________________________________ Comment posted by Pennine MC on Sat Jun 09, 2007 10:27 pm

<blockquote><cite>RustonsRUs wrote:</cite> [i hope it at least gives the flavour of a GC 'box.]</blockquote> Oh, I think it does that <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif"> __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:54 pm

The last few days have seen a bit more progress on the layout itself, rather than buildings to put on it.

<img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43946.jpg" alt="Image" /> Compared with the pic at the top of the page, I now have the viaduct and embankment in place in the foreground. The canal lock and the scrap siding are also in place. Maybe I would have got something running by now if I didn't keep getting distracted by little things such as the signalbox, which aren't needed at this stage. <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_confused.gif">

<img src="http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l5/soddit36/SSA43947.jpg" alt="Image" /> A view from the top of the embankment, looking toward the station and the furnace. <blockquote><cite>Lambton58 wrote:</cite> Nice looking layout. That bank looks fiercesome though - will you be double-heading the austerities? </blockquote>

The track on the bank isn't properly laid yet and this zoom shot makes it look steeper than it really is but yes, it is a bit steep, it's about a 1 in 20, which is prototypical for some industrial railways. The headshunt behind the furnace can only take one loco and 4 wagons so I won't have space for double heading <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif"> __________________________________________ Comment posted by Diesel Mechanical on Wed Jun 13, 2007 8:03 pm

<blockquote><cite>tractor basher wrote:</cite> <blockquote><cite>Diesel Mechanical wrote:</cite> J94 is easier to say then austerity, and easier to spell! its the same thing anyway!</blockquote> NO IT'S NOT!!!

J94 only refers to those taken into LNER stock, and then owned by BR - if it wasn't in their ownership it was not a J94.

I know it's a small issue, but it's one that really annoys me - if we know how to correctly refer to something, why not just use the correct term?</blockquote> Ah, but, how do you know that dave's collection wern't in LNER ownership at some point in their lives? so indeed thay could be J94s __________________________________________ <font? ? color="#808080">• posted on Wed Jun 13, 2007 8:18 pm

<blockquote><cite>Diesel Mechanical wrote:</cite> Ah, but, how do you know that dave's collection wern't in LNER ownership at some point in their lives? so indeed thay could be J94s</blockquote> Because they are all listed in the Industrial Railway Society regional handbook as being built by the Hunslet Engine Co. in 1948 and delivered new to Rotherbrook Engineering Ltd., Rotherbrook works, West Riding. <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif"> <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif"> <img src="http://www.rmweb.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif"> __________________________________________

martin_wynne · November 3, 2009

Hi Dave,

Did you find the page of instructions?

It's at: http://www.templot.c...ansfer_help.htm

Here are the relevant bits to solve your problem.

After using the Transfer Utility and returning to RMweb, do this (follow the numbers):

regards,

Martin.

coachmann · November 3, 2009

I made the same mistake Ruston a few weeks ago, or thats how it seems now! In the end I asked myself if I really wanted to transfer nine pages over to this new RMweb. The old thread had developed rather haphazardly, as they do, and it seemed a better idea to 'construct' a new WB thread. This I've been doing (Coach WB) over the past two nights but one certainly needs to do it in peace and quiet without any distractions.

Larry G.

Ruston · November 4, 2009

Thanks, Martin. I think the <> icon was the problem. I think it's sorted now. http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php/topic/2341-rotherbrook/

allan downes · March 9, 2013

Don't think you're alone with these problems Dave, I can't even introduce myself on here, and as for starting a new topic- well forget it!!!

Think I'll stick to 'YOUR MODEL RAILWAY CLUB' - so much easier to use, uploading your pictures onto the main message boards etc ( galleries are useless, nobody ever bothers to view them)

So I'm off of here as well.

Allan

martin_wynne · March 9, 2013

Hi Allan,

You have resurrected a 4-year-old topic which is no longer relevant. The RMweb software has gone through several upgrades and iterations since then.

regards,

Martin.

Oldddudders · March 9, 2013

Don't think you're alone with these problems Dave, I can't even introduce myself on here, and as for starting a new topic- well forget it!!!

Think I'll stick to 'YOUR MODEL RAILWAY CLUB' - so much easier to use, uploading your pictures onto the main message boards etc ( galleries are useless, nobody ever bothers to view them)

So I'm off of here as well.

Allan

What was that all about? People - even new people - start new topics all day every day, and many of them go on to be very valuable members. This is a pity.

martin_wynne · March 9, 2013

What was that all about? People - even new people - start new topics all day every day, and many of them go on to be very valuable members. This is a pity.

Hi Ian,

Allan is a well-known and gifted modeller, but he finds computers a bit of a challenge. He eventually got going on YMR and has posted some smashing stuff:

http://yourmodelrailway.net/view_topic.php?id=10856&forum_id=14

If you stand back and look at the IPB software on RMweb from the point of view of a computer beginner there is no denying that it can look baffling. To take just one example -- the same function is variously called "following", "watching", "subscribing" on different parts of the site.

Allan strayed onto this obsolete topic. There are many such, and ideally they would all be deleted each time the software changes.

regards,

Martin.

Oldddudders · March 9, 2013

His pedigree is what makes it a particular pity. RMweb will never be desperate for members, but no forum can have enough acknowledged modellers like him. Their experience enriches us all.

Andy Y · March 9, 2013

I gather there was some head-scratching at the point of registration. I did leave my contact details (including phone number) via another member who was trying to assist but I didn't hear anything further.

Talltim · March 9, 2013

The big black Start New Topic button is one of the easier IPB functions

allan downes · March 9, 2013

IF, you can find the BIG BLACK START NEW TOPIC BUTTON!

trisonic · March 9, 2013

Give it another chance Allan; there are some good people on here.

Don't get me started on Digital Guitar Amps...

Best, Pete.

martin_wynne · March 9, 2013

IF, you can find the BIG BLACK START NEW TOPIC BUTTON!

Hi Allan,

First of all you have to go to a suitable forum, in which to start your topic. I suggest you go to the New members forum.

You can go there by clicking this link now: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/forum/67-new-members/

Then the Start New Topic button is near the top right.

If someone was helping you to get started, they should have given you that link.

regards,

Martin.

buffalo · March 9, 2013

IF, you can find the BIG BLACK START NEW TOPIC BUTTON!
First of all you have to go to a suitable forum, in which to start your topic. I suggest you go to the New members forum.

You can go there by clicking this link now: http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/forum/67-new-members/.

Yes, Martin, the link may help Allan find that single forum area, but it won't provide any understanding of how or why he got there, or any clue as to how to find any other part of the site.

You can only post a new topic once you've found the area in which you want to post. Use the "Forums" tab, second from the left at the top of any page below the banner picture. This will take you to the page that lists all the different areas. "New members" is in the first group under "About RMweb". Click on "New members" and you will reach the same place as Martin's shortcut. There are plenty of distracting flashing adverts on this page. Just ignore them and focus on the text in between.

Later, you might want to post somewhere else, perhaps "Scenery, Structures and Transport". This is further down the "Forums" page under "Modelling Zone".

Later still, you may find the "View New Content" button useful, it's at the top right of most pages.

Nick

ps. if you ever work out what the "portal" page is for, do let us know...

martin_wynne · March 9, 2013

Yes, Martin, the link may help Allan find that single forum area, but it won't provide any understanding of how or why he got there, or any clue as to how to find any other part of the site.

But one thing at a time. I would suggest your post contains far too much information for a beginner to take in. Once he has his own topic, made some friends in it, and gained some confidence, a beginner can ask how to do more or go exploring other areas himself.

Martin.

allan downes · March 9, 2013

Hi Martin

With all due respect, shouldn't a Forum be self explanitory without the need for 'trial and error'?

I have no doubt that this is indeed a good Forum, a very good Forum - untill you try and use it.

I have now tried THREE times to make any sense out of it and if it was'nt for your appreciated links, I would still be right back were I started which, in a sense, I still am!

No, enough is enough, and as much as I would really liked to have been a member, I am going to give this Forum a miss before I burst a blood vessel!

Best regards, and thank you for trying to help.

Allan

NICK.

Indeed, I will let you know what the "Portal" page is for if ever I, or anyone else for that matter, ever finds out, but I wouldn't pin any hopes on it!

Regards.

Allan

martin_wynne · March 9, 2013

Hi Martin

With all due respect, shouldn't a Forum be self explanatory without the need for 'trial and error'?

Hi Allan,

I wouldn't disagree with you. I think a prominent "New members start here" button near the top of the RMweb front page would be very helpful. Leading to a page of simple explanations, with a list of useful links which are obviously clickable, i.e.in bold blue underlined text.

The biggest problem here is the IPB software which runs RMweb. Not to beat about the bush, it's flaky and unreliable, a tangled mess of styles and types, with pages covered in mouse-over Ajax popups, identified only by faint grey mystery icons. Even the regulars get in a muddle and frequently ask for help. It's not surprising that newcomers get lost.

The snag is that there isn't any obvious alternative software which offers the same range of features. Even if there was, the task of converting the existing database to it wouldn't bear thinking about.

The reason you find YMR easier to use it that the UltraBB software on there is so much simpler. It's old tried and tested rock-solid code. It's now over 10 years since Aycan wrote it, and it has hardly changed in all that time. Jim added some useful extras, but the essential core remains unchanged. The downside of that of course is that a lot of the latest features which members like here are not available on there -- no Like buttons, no links to social networks, no blogs, no way of seeing who is reading what, who is posting where.

But RMweb is an amazing resource for any modeller. It would be a shame to turn your back on it just because of a few teething problems in getting started.

regards,

Martin.

Salopian · March 9, 2013

Questions could arise from this episode. Do we actually need links to social networks, or to see who is reading what? When they post we see it anyway so why do we need to see that they are posting? Are all the bells and whistles necessary, or are they just glitz?

I'm sure that most mature modellers will already recognise that a respected modeller such as Allan could be as much, or more, of a resource to the forum than the forum would be to him. What a pity he's decided to go elsewhere.

March 9, 2013

Probably not.

Its probably worth asking the membership as when Martin says "The downside of that of course is that a lot of the latest features which members like here are not available on there -- no Like buttons, no links to social networks, no blogs, no way of seeing who is reading what, who is posting where." I dont actually know anyone who 'likes' these things - Most people I speak to would just like a forum where they can talk trains, put pictures and more importantly is RELIABLE. I nearly fell off my chair when it was suggested that the best way to read RMweb is to open all your topics and read one while the others load up - Are we all back on dial up or something. It might be a sensible way to read stuff here (because its so damn slow) but really?

yes its big for a model railway forum but its not a big forum and others dont have anything like the problems RMweb does. So do we as members really want all this 'value added stuff' or do we just want a forum? (Appolgies for stepping on Andy Y's toes but these questions need to be asked every now and then)

Cheers

Jim

beast66606 · March 9, 2013

Questions could arise from this episode. Do we actually need links to social networks, or to see who is reading what? When they post we see it anyway so why do we need to see that they are posting? Are all the bells and whistles necessary, or are they just glitz?

I'm sure that most mature modellers will already recognise that a respected modeller such as Allan could be as much, or more, of a resource to the forum than the forum would be to him. What a pity he's decided to go elsewhere.

I would hope that Alan would persevere, with assistance it does become easier in time, I'm sure Allan didn't pick up raw materials and make one of his exquisite structures the first time round, he stuck with it and gained the knowledge necessary, I would ask he does the same here.

Cannot start a new topic

Recommended Posts

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest jim s-w

Link to post

Share on other sites

Link to post

Share on other sites

Archived