RMweb - what next?

[trisonic]

I basically agree with Gordon's comments too.

 

On the other hand I like they way that Groups has found a home for the "USA & Canadian Railroads Group" (when I last looked it was amongst the most popular) but then I admit that I had lobbied for a separate section for "North America" under the normal forum categories because coming under "Overseas" in two sections "Prototype" and "Modelling" made it look diffuse and relatively unimportant............

 

Best, Pete.

[PLD]

Another vote here for a period of consolidation.

 

There have been a lot of changes in the last few months, some well received and well used, others less so (so far). Give things time to settle down and establish themselves, and put the available time/effort into refining what we have by addressing the niggles around ease-of-use and presentation.

 

Paul

[Neil]

It is possible to collapse (an expand) the sidebar Neil with the small X or arrow at the top right of it to maximise the index page and a blog index can be found in the top menu - Content > Blog Index

 

 

 

 

Thank you Andy, I never realised that it was possible to customise the look to suit ones preferences. I think my ideal would be that, the forum opened at a pared down, simple level and that one would either add the bells and whistles according to taste and skill or come across them as one delved further into the site. However I realise that if I'm not in the minority yet with my technological skills and preferences then it won't be long before I am, and the ability to switch stuff off or opt out of some features is to be welcomed

[pirouets]

Picking up on Daves comment, Is there anyway for a thread to have dual homes, so it would show in the layout thread and the modelling real locations thread? The system would only store one copy of the content in the database, but it could be added to when accessed from either location.

[Oldddudders]

It’s early days for Groups, but already I don’t like some of the approaches taken. Jim SW’s New Street is now squirreled away on the ‘Modelling Real Locations’ Group, hardly mainsteam given the huge number of modellers who don’t actually model anywhere specific. Probably one of the finest layouts to be constructed in the UK hidden away on a sub-Group that doesn’t immediately stand out as a logical place to find it? Hmmm, not sure.

Glad you said this. I have only just realised that Active Content may now only be giving me those Groups that I have actually joined, so Welsh Broadgauge Monorails stuff is no longer being advised to me - interesting though it might be. Am I right?

[Pugsley]

I think the several suggestions around this might be missing something – if we couldn’t get sufficient content for Showcase, how are we going to get enough for a PDF ‘magazine’?

That was the point of mentioning 3 or 6 month timescales. With all of the content on RMweb, it should be possible to put together a pdf digest every 6 months, even I would hope to have a project complete every 6 months

 

I'll volunteer to help compile it, if it proves to be something that there would be interest in.

[Andy Y]

Am I right?

 

Basically yes; but the App developer is working on it.

 

 

 

[Xerces Fobe2]

Hi Andy,

 

How about a RMweb Alert (similar to a Google Alert) where a forum member could select a word or phrase relating to their specific sphere of interest with an e-mail sent to the member and/or an alert within RMweb when they next login? This would ensure that members do not miss any new content about subjects of interest to them.

 

I appreciate that this might cause a lot of additional load on the RMweb server so maybe each member could only have 2 alerts active at any one time. I suggest the alert should not contain more than 5 words. I will have Croxley & Class 501 please!

 

Nigel.

 

 

[10800]

It’s early days for Groups, but already I don’t like some of the approaches taken. Jim SW’s New Street is now squirreled away on the ‘Modelling Real Locations’ Group, hardly mainsteam given the huge number of modellers who don’t actually model anywhere specific. Probably one of the finest layouts to be constructed in the UK hidden away on a sub-Group that doesn’t immediately stand out as a logical place to find it? Hmmm, not sure.

 

Don't want to go off on a tangent about the groups area here, but what Graham Muz has done with the Southern group is just to link to layouts and blogs on the 'main' site rather than move them wholesale, for that very reason. This is also better if you have a layout that fits in more than one group (e.g. Southern, modelling real locations and large layouts in my case).

[Jamie]

There is a lot of past content in RMWeb (and the old forum, but that's a different kettle of fish) which is sadly overlooked because it drops out of the top few pages on each sub-forum. This is just the nature of the internet.

However, it would be nice if this content wasn't buried forever, and somehow made into a feature. Perhaps it could be automatic in a "on this day in RMWeb" style or just some random hidden gems plucked out manually by admin or editorial folks (though that risks falling by the wayside once other time demands bite).

 

I feel that within the existing site framework/facilities/software, the RMWeb blogs should have been used in the manner showcase is, self contained articles or partwork series articles. Many are, but others are written of tiny updates (eg. "today I painted the widget. Photos tomorrow, once the camera batteries charge") which are more suited to the flow of a topic, in my opinion anyway and irrespective of the wider internet use of blogs. Showcase remains a nice idea but not sufficiently integral to the rest of the site.

 

 

(Agreed re. loss of topics into groups, risk of being counter-productive)

[Dave777]

Don't want to go off on a tangent about the groups area here, but what Graham Muz has done with the Southern group is just to link to layouts and blogs on the 'main' site rather than move them wholesale, for that very reason. This is also better if you have a layout that fits in more than one group (e.g. Southern, modelling real locations and large layouts in my case).

 

Yup, good to hear Rod, because that's exactly the approach I'm taking with my 'Modelling BR Blue' Group - effectively I'm just creating a resource, like a library. I too could have hoovered up Jim's layout, but I don't want to get into a race of grabbing stuff before other groups do. It just makes a thread less accessible/harder to find and further dilutes down the content. This is where we run into problems with Groups - Pirouets' suggestion of 'mirror' threads makes sense, because does Jim's layout belong in 'Modelling Real Locations', 'Modelling BR Blue'... or left where it was in 'Layout topics'?

 

There is an irony here - we created Showcase to focus the good content, but with Groups we're in danger of scattering that good content even further around the place. I appreciate Andy's reluctance to define how Groups should be used as it lets the concept develop in whatever direction people wish, but maybe we need some guidelines about grabbing certain threads and other behaviours before things get out of hand. I don't model GWR in the 1930s, but I'd be sad to miss a cracking layout set in that period and it could be sitting in a Group somewhere where I might not think to look... particularly when there's a bloomin' lot of them to click through...

[Barry Ten]

This isn't intended as a moan but I would echo Gordon and other posters who I think have been pushing for a bit more simplicity and less fragmentation.

 

I jumped on the blogs area when it was introduced as I wasn't intimidated by the concept, and have continued to post updates there ever since. But it's clear that a good number of the members regard the blogs as "not for me" and hence never go and look at the content. I don't really get that because to me there's no radical difference between a blog and a thread, they're just somewhat differing approaches to the problem of presentation of web content, but it's not like they're chalk and cheese. However, we've had the blogs in place long enough for it to be clear that they haven't been accepted by the majority. Equally, I'm not sure the advantages of the blog content outweigh the fact that these postings are nigh-on invisible to a good percentage of the members. Put it another way, if I was starting a new layout topic today, I'd now do it as a normal thread, not a blog.

 

I'm agnostic about the groups, too. While it's nice to be invited to join, to me it still looks like more fragmentation where none was really required. The groups have been welcomed by many members, though, so it's clear that I'm missing something. (But what? If I wanted to join a GWR modelling group, there was already one running on Yahoo groups). However, I should give them a chance.

 

All I can say is that there are two American forums I use quite a bit, but whereas one is very fragmented, with lots of different categories and sub-topics, the one I find easiest to just dip into has only six categories: N. HO, O, DCC, admin and news. It's the simple one I tend to visit the most often.

 

######, it's turned into a bit of a moan, hasn't it?

[Ohmisterporter]

Some interesting thoughts in this topic, so I will stop the trend by adding my own. I also think that RMWeb has become too fragmented. With sections spawning subsections and now Groups appearing to add to the fragmentation it is becoming difficult to keep track on what is happening. On my occasional visits to the "old" forum one is struck by the simple and clean look of the page. In answering the calls for seperate sections for every damn thing the forum is becoming a mess. Are we changing things because we need to or because we can?

Please Andy, let things settle for a while before anything else changes.

 

Geoff.

[Kenton]

Put it another way, if I was starting a new layout topic today, I'd now do it as a normal thread, not a blog.

In a way that is a shame, as you are a supporter.

But, I maintain, it is not the concept of blogs or their content that is at fault.

The problems arise from the completely different format and the loss of standard functionality that is standard with forum topics.

This disjointedness makes it appear a totally different area, almost different site, and I am convinced this is the work of the software providers. It is a sort of either/or bolt on approach rather than a fully integrated solution.

 

It is probably true that 99% or more of the membership are not into the "how to" of why the pages display in the way they do or where the content is located. They just see a black box connection to the internet, want to primarily read the content of RMWeb without having to perform somersaults with the keyboard and skipping exercises with their mouse, and those few who wish to respond in the spirit of the community simply want to be able to type their contribution a click send. They do not want to learn an alien language or click their way round half the world simply to get back to the same place they started from.

 

It is not that blogs are a bad thing, it is just that they are not working in their current form or appear as exclusive (to those who have the skills/set-up to make it work. That is why I feel that effort has to be more focussed in making them work rather before implementing any other change to the basic cohesion.

 

My thoughts on the front page are very much I don't really care - if I end up there it is a bad key mistake a waste of a mouse click and I'm out of there before the page loads. However the page format IS important when it is the "landing" page for new comers - for that it really has to be fast and appealing to the new reader. The rest of us can bookmark a better page to jump to. I really do mean simple here one good image edited and pulled from a current thread and a few other "index" links is all that is required - just like the magazines. All the gallery thumbs, the verbal diarrhea in the right-hand column, who's online list, and yes even the forum list should be on a more appropriate page. The removal of which would go along way to speeding the load time of this critical (to new users) page.

[Andy Y]

Are we changing things because we need to or because we can?

 

My view was that there was no demarcation at all with the old way with just more and more stuff being piled in; and some of it, being frank, wasn't very good. I've tried to give some clarity as to what areas are for, to give authors more control through blogs or showcase so that decent stuff isn't subsumed beneath that which is average or below.

 

Some of the core issue is that many readers just dive straight to the forums and do not explore the areas provided. Earlier in the topic I made reference to http://cs.trains.com/trccs/ which I believe is the world's largest and I'm sure you can see similar problems approached in a different way but to me it isn't clear where I'd need to go to follow a specific interest. Is their index better than here?

 

 

 

[Tim V]

OK, for my thoughts.

 

It has been briefly mentioned, but I'm finding the site increasingly difficult to navigate on my Android (or other smart) phone. A lot of people are using such devices, at work for example I'm not allowed to visit the site on the corporate machines. I can though visit on the phone.

 

I'm trying not to turn this into a moan, but in the future as people turn away from large desktop machines, we need to consider smaller devices. One option is to turn off pictures. Or even a RMweb app that delivers the content into a suitable form?

[martin_wynne]

There is a lot of past content in RMWeb (and the old forum, but that's a different kettle of fish) which is sadly overlooked because it drops out of the top few pages on each sub-forum.

I agree with Jamie. For me the overwhelming single problem with RMweb is the lack of an alphabetical index which would make it easy to find those golden nuggets buried deep in the database. Whether they are posts, blog entries, gallery pictures, attached files, whatever, doesn't really make much difference. It's valuable information, compiled and contributed at some effort by many, but it may as well not exist if you can't find it.

 

I know there are search functions but they always rely on inspired guesswork and knowing that what you are looking for does actually exist.

 

Imagine instead a browsable A-Z index which you could scroll through to find everything related to a specific subject?

 

A year ago I tried to create such a thing, and the embryo attempt is still online: http://85a.co.uk/rmweb_index/

 

It uses keywords (similar to tags), the essential point being that each post or topic appears at several different places in the index -- places chosen by a knowledgeable human brain because there is no automated indexing software in existence which is anywhere near as good, or in fact any good at all.

 

It failed because there just wasn't the volunteer support needed to develop it. I would be willing to give it another go and perhaps simplify the submission process if enough members are interested.

 

An example of such an A-Z index on a forum of similar size to RMweb is here: http://www.goldwingfacts.com/forums/drwIndex.php

 

Apart from the present site with 400,000 posts, there are some 650,000 posts on Old RMweb in 44,000 topics there. Over a million posts in total built up over several years -- a superb modelling resource, but normally accessed by most users via an Active Content list which shows only activity in the last day or two. It's such a shame to see all that past effort almost totally ignored. If you visit Old RMweb ( http://rmweb.co.uk/forum/ ) you are lucky to find anyone else online there, and you will be outnumbered by the robots.

 

So my message to Andy? Enough new stuff for now. Please find an easier way to discover and access the old stuff.

 

regards,

 

Martin.

[Lady_Ava_Hay]

 

2mm operating signals - Sharon Housebrick's blog entry shows that it IS possible!

 

 

You wouldn't happen to have Sharon's phone number would you? If this is true, she will become seriously rich and I will offer her a much nicer surname in exchange for the cash. You can't say fairer than that..........

 

can you?

[PaulRhB]

I tend to use the VNC as my homepage so I can quickly see what's new and it often means I end up reading threads from sections I don't tend to go to off the main menu. For example the WFRM area is so far down I tend to forget it but I will always look to see what they are up to when a new item appears.

I agree that too many separated areas tends to mean I miss stuff as I browse the forum like a magazine grabbing a quick look now and again with it open in the desktop in the background, hence why I use VNC.

The galleries seem to have become effectively a thread without the words with too many random photos with no explanation. I would suggest that rather than creating a magazine and taking up lots of Andy's time becoming a magazine publisher that people could submit a photo of a good model and a link to the relevant thread. The Mods can then choose a selection each week and put say 10 on a front showcase page so there are nice pics that lead straight into an explanation of how it was done. You then have a nice introduction page for new visitors and somewhere members can look to see a showcase of new pics without being bombarded with info too regularly. This type of approach might consist of a few pics of locos or stock on the workbench or a picture of a culvert built into a layout. Use the picture to draw people in much like a well titled thread does.

I agree a news banner with say the weeks, say 4 new, major releases would be a nice touch too and just an index to the type of photo review that you already do.

I'd be wary of anything that requires too much input from an editorial standpoint as you are turning it more into a job than it must already seem at times Simplicity really is an advantage and I think the current grouping by subject rather than scale is the best for cross fertilisation of ideas.

[PaulRhB]

On another forum I compile a sticky DCC thread where I read new posts about Dcc problems and fitting and post in order of manufacturer so people wanting to fit a chip to a manufacturers loco can quickly search the index page to see if there is a relevant group of threads. Possibly could a set of tags be created that would work with the search engine so that when someone creates a how to thread they can index it with a quicker search and these tags could be provided in the search engine page as hot links?

 

Things like

DCC decoder fitting (+sound)

 

DCC system tutorial - to include things like programmers, RR&co controls systems etc

 

Scenery

 

Stock build and detailing

 

Layout 1968-2010

Layout 1923-1968

 

etc etc and allow people to tag a topic with two max if it's relevant

 

I know there's the search engine but it may encourage people to think about titles that will help find their thread too as many still are just names and give you no clue as to what's 'in there' and they get missed as they don't use the sub heading, (or it's edited out as the mobile version of the site software does)

[Jamie]

I agree with Jamie. For me the overwhelming single problem with RMweb is the lack of an alphabetical index which would make it easy to find those golden nuggets buried deep in the database. Whether they are posts, blog entries, gallery pictures, attached files, whatever, doesn't really make much difference. It's valuable information, compiled and contributed at some effort by many, but it may as well not exist if you can't find it.

 

We've got that, to an extent. For instance in the layout topics sub forum you can find layouts by alphabetical listing "topics wall" it seems to be called, for reasons unknown to me.

 

Your index is an admirable proposal Martin, but even over time I feel the same about it as I did at the start - too much effort and the majority will never look at it.

 

- - - -

 

As for the front page, I have a strong suspicion that if something isn't readily or immediately available from that screen, it'll barely register with 95% of the readership. Have a watch at the view count on any given blog entry - loads while it's one of the top five, soon as it slips off the homepage and visits drop to a trickle.

 

So strip back the front page, "lose" more content.

 

It's a tough one.

[PhilH]

I've just got a horrible feeling that with 12000 members you are going to get 12000 differing opinions on 'What's next'.

 

 

 

 

Good luck!

[Guest dilbert]

For me the overwhelming single problem with RMweb is the lack of an alphabetical index which would make it easy to find those golden nuggets buried deep in the database. Whether they are posts, blog entries, gallery pictures, attached files, whatever, doesn't really make much difference. It's valuable information, compiled and contributed at some effort by many, but it may as well not exist if you can't find it.

 

I agree that an indexing system would prove very useful but that it is ultimately the responsibility of the membership to ensure a semblance of accuracy to avoid such a feature becoming 'organised chaos'.

 

Volunteers can keep the RMWeb ship on an even keel but this should not become an onerous task with posts such as 'if I have used incorrect keyword terminology please feel free to change'.

 

 

Is it possible for such a system to be 'intelligent' ? For example, if someone posted a topic on Barry Railway Iron Minks, could this be automatically tagged for the GWR ?...dilbert

[Kenton]

It uses keywords (similar to tags), the essential point being that each post or topic appears at several different places in the index -- places chosen by a knowledgeable human brain because there is no automated indexing software in existence which is anywhere near as good, or in fact any good at all.

 

It failed because there just wasn't the volunteer support needed to develop it. I would be willing to give it another go and perhaps simplify the submission process if enough members are interested.

It was/is a mammoth task to index, even spread over many "volunteers" - athough I applauded the attempt I never felt it was quite going to be up to the massive job and fully integrated. This is really one, I think, IPB should have built in, Perhaps they are moving that way with the tagging system? Perhaps I have too high hopes for that.

 

It is extremely difficult to retrospectively tag every topic - let alone the more useful every "relevant" post. That is what is required as many topics wander slightly off topic with some real gems. Just look at the South Wales Industrials thread for an example of that. I have performed a number of Google searches off site lately and it is a bit of a surprise to see that thread coming up in the list time and again.

 

I even have a copy of RMWeb2 (or was it 2.5? - the one with the original Layout in 6 weeks thread) extracted somewhere and there is even good stuff in there. It saddens me when I think of all those contributions in earlier incarnations lost to the ether.

 

We then hav the problem that all libraries encounter the index itself becomes too big and defeats its own purpose.

 

There is also a great deal of repetitiveness throughout. A sort of, if I have answered this once but many times type of weariness. As important and new a question is to a new member (or even an old one) it is nearly certain that it will have been asked before and answered. Do you index all the questions/answers, the latest, the most "experienced" member's answer?

 

It was because indexing the web was so impossible that Google was invented, but that has also hit the buffers - who wades through all the pages of results or simply gets diverted by a different interesting read.

[Edwin_m]

I feel a bit as if I've was left behind sometimes around the introduction of Showcase etc - I still haven't worked out the point of Groups. So my comments may be impractical in one way or other, or just plain stupid, but it's just possible they could throw up some ideas.

 

My starting point is always the new content so I'm unlikely to see anything that doesn't appear there.

 

From my point of view the main potential advantage of a blog over a layout/workbench topic is that only new contributions by the originator appear in "new content". I find I rarely visit these topics because when I do all I find is a stack of comments that aren't particularly interesting. But with blogs the need to open the RSS fetcher and then jump to the actual blog is a barrier. So would it be possible to make the layout/workbench topics update into the new content only when the "owner" makes a new post, or distinguish the owner's posts in the new content in some way (allowing for the fact that others might have commented since, so the name of the last poster isn't enough)? I presume this happens with Showcase blogs (though as noted below I haven't seen any) but again the RSS fetcher is involved so it's not as quick and simple as one might expect.

 

I think "Showcase" is a good idea in principle but I also see people saying it is difficult to update. Since it was launched I have seen some alerts about comments but I don't recall anyone updating their own content or adding new topics! Perhaps one way round these problems might be for the showcase content to work in the same way as the normal content but perhaps with a different look (Pullman livery?) to set it apart. As well as making it easier for people to update, a promising blog/thread in the normal forum could more easily be "elevated" to the Showcase. Perhaps create a new look for the Showcase part with a different colour scheme (Pullman livery?!) but basically working the same as the rest of the forum.

 

A couple of niggles. I don't know why, but the search feature in the forum never seems to find what I want. Typing my search with site:www.rmweb.co.uk into the googlebox on the browser works a lot better for some reason, even though I think the forum search uses Google anyway! And the "related content" feature doesn't seem to be picking up anything of value - unless it has some sort of learning feature that makes it get better over time then it's not going to be of much use. Maybe a "people who looked at this also looked at" like you find on some e-commerce sites would be better?