PDA

View Full Version : Another Poll...please let us know


watt_the?!
04-19-2006, 12:11 PM
Hi All,

well as you can see and have navigated through, we have several forums that somewhat loosely and also tightly overlap each other and its causing a bit of a conundrum on what to do.

We want to make WF easy to navigate, which means easy to post and easy to browse.

Currently we have a dilemma over where to put warbirds (aka WWII planes), WWI era ''warbirds'', Pioneer and Vintage age models and also between war, pseudo Golden Era types.

Of course they all fit into the Scale Category.

However, since there is a definite genre split between Scale Military/Civilian and Eras, and an obvious fan base for tne pre WWII types, we thought that this era deserved some focus.

I guess part of the problem is that we have a single thread that has been acting as the catch all for fans of these types since we started.

On behalf of WF, I'd like to request that members start new threads where possible (i.e. for discussion of new planes etc), so we can collect and compartmentalise (organise) the topics, but we'd also like your feedback on how to setup the fora.

Please take a minute to post your thoughts and place your ticket in the ballot box.

Thanks all,

Tim

fli48rc
04-19-2006, 12:52 PM
My 2 cents -
WWI
Golden Age
WWII
Seeing I was the first to post a reply in the poll, I have 100% agreement :D

tim hooper
04-19-2006, 01:04 PM
Of course they all fit into the Scale Category.

Tim

Tim,

I think you've answered your own question! :)

Ideally, I really can't see the need for any fora other than an all-encompassing "Scale" section. Why bother with sub-fora at all?

tim

Twmaster
04-20-2006, 04:05 AM
One danger is that WF will get too many forums and become an ungodly behemoth to navigate (like other well known RC places). IMHO there are already too many forums here.

I agree with Tim Hooper on this one.

PETERRAKE
04-22-2006, 10:12 AM
As long as members post individual threads, instead of clumping together a batch of only loosely related threads - as in the WW1 thread - there is no need for other than a 'sclae' thread.
If it's a build thread of a particular model, post it as such. Otherwise it will only get lost in the miriad of other WW1 topics and anyone interested in that particular item will have trawl through umpteen pages to find it. It's much easier to find an individual topic if it is within a known section, under its' own heading.

Pete

qban_flyer
04-22-2006, 03:59 PM
One danger is that WF will get too many forums and become an ungodly behemoth to navigate (like other well known RC places). IMHO there are already too many forums here.

I agree with Tim Hooper on this one.Same here. :)

buzzard bombshell
04-22-2006, 04:17 PM
A Warbid is a Warbird. Makes little difference whether flown in WW-I, WW-II, Korea or Vietnam.

All Warbirds belong in the same group. I see no reason to segregate and put them into different categories. What's gonna be next? Individual WW-I, WW-II, Korea and Vietnam Warbird's Fora?

PBY-5A
04-22-2006, 04:26 PM
My $0.02 worth of opinion.

I like the "Golden Aviation Era" forum idea. Clump all early aviation planes into a group and call it so.

It won't be hard to identify what belongs there.

watt_the?!
04-23-2006, 09:58 AM
A Warbid is a Warbird. Makes little difference whether flown in WW-I, WW-II, Korea or Vietnam.

All Warbirds belong in the same group. I see no reason to segregate and put them into different categories. What's gonna be next? Individual WW-I, WW-II, Korea and Vietnam Warbird's Fora?

ahhh...this old chestnut. This argument has been raised before and the consensus was that the types associated with the term warbird were very much related to the beasts of WWII.

While by definition it is any plane used for combat or destruction, when they come up in conversation, everyone assumes that we're talking spitfires, mustangs, zeros, corsairs, 109s,190s etc..

Hence the confusion. In my opinion, as more of an aviation enthusiast than RCer, warbirds existed between 1939 and 1945.

And the development of technology seems to fit nicely into those categories, with each war spurring evolution.

Tim

qban_flyer
04-23-2006, 02:58 PM
While I agree with Tim and Mike in their assessments, I must also concur with BB and his. Any plane used in a battle, whether a dog fight or for destructive purposes is a Warbird and not limited to WW-II types alone.

The current crop of fighters being used in Iraq these days are Warbirds by their very nature. So are the old B-52s still being used for the sheer destructive power they can wreak on the enemy.

tim hooper
04-23-2006, 09:50 PM
For me it's not a problem of definitions (we could define and re-define the terms 'warbird', 'golden age', vintage' etc ad infinitum).

For me the real problem is that at this stage of the young WattFlyers evolution, there just isn't enough traffic to justify the splitting of the Scale forum into sub-fora. It's not as if there are hundreds of posts every day, now is it?

I'd far rather see a single forum with a steady rate of posts, than several sub-fora that only get updated sporadically. Just makes the place look empty....

When the traffic picks up and threads fall off the page too rapidly then, by all means, start forum-splitting out of pure necessity.

Just my twopence......

tim ;)

tim

Gonnacrash
06-06-2006, 04:18 AM
Admin,

I agree with Tim. Compact and lots of traffic looks good and I view them. Too many... too empty... don't look at them.

Don-Basehor, Ks
PS Keep up the good work !

Cowboy
06-06-2006, 04:52 AM
I agree with Tim also.