[Xelebes]

Right now the moderators and administrators are pushing for more locally specialised forums across the regional forums. The Alberta forumers, for a large part, have resisted any moves toward any more divisions of this forum. However, I have been somewhat for a form of a Local but exactly unsure how to go about this. For a large part, I do agree that the current Local set-up is divided into too many parts and that many of these divisions that have been made on topics that bear little to no resemblance to discussions aimed towards skyscrapers and highrises.

On the other hand, one of the most important positives I saw for the whole concept is the chance to do away with the large cumbersome lists that begin each of the construction threads with images and renders slowing down the loading of threads. We have an opportunity to clean up those gregarious first posts and to rid of the ever so bothersome wait for the right person to post the updated lists. We must seize this opportunity to be able to go more in-depth with the lists, directories and indexes of the projects so we can find ourselves interested in.

So, let's provide the options available before us.

The first option is to keep it the same. It gets us nowhere forward, but we like it since change is always a bother. The administrators don't want this - they want change on this forum. But how?

The second option is to start full-fledged SSP:Locals for Edmonton and Calgary, with promotion of two local moderators, one for each forum. This has been debated over and there has been much resistance.

The third option is to not have full-fledged SSP:Locals, but rather smaller ones with less forums. There is two ways we can go about this.

===

Option 1

Take the SSP:Local forums but pare it down such as that we only have 4-6 forums on a local basis. By doing this, we hope to have more discussions outside of the mega-threads and to have mega-threads not dominate any particular forum.

For example, let's take Edmonton's potential set up:

Edmonton Development
Edmonton Transit [Discussions on Issues Pertaining to Public Transportation]
Edmonton Infrastructure [Index and Discussions on Infrastructure Projects throughout the Edmonton Region]
Edmonton Events [Index and Discussions on Events Concerning Developments]
Edmonton General Discussion

On the Events forum addition that is not seen on current Local set-ups, this forum is specifically for the purpose of announcing any public consultation meetings, grand openings and any other events of that theme. However, it can also serve to cover current events regarding structures in the city like fires, collapses and demolitions.

===

Option 2

Keep it to a minimal divisional set-up and allow megathreads, with the promotion of two local moderators, one for each local. The minimal set up would be:

Edmonton Development [Index and Discussions on Particular Projects, including towers, institutions, gentrification and sub-divisions]
Edmonton Transportation [Index and Discussions on Particular Projects, including Rail, Roads, Transit and Airports]
Calgary Development [Index and Discussions on Particular projects, including towers, institutions, gentrification and sub-divisions]
Calgary Transportation [Index and Discussions on Particular Projects, including Rail, Roads, Transit and Airports]

Megathreads would be allowed in the Development forums, more specifically to carry on any discussions concerning with rumours. Megathreads are also encouraged by the moderators to not become [i]dominant in the forums.

With that in mind, I have opened up a poll with the exclusion of the first two options. Those two options have been discussed to bits and we pretty much have an agreeance that both those options are not for the future of the Alberta forum. I am also going to include in this thread the notion mentioned by the moderators and administrators of the site that the likelihood of the Western Provinces forum being re-united. I think that is important to consider when you are voting in the poll.

[Xelebes]

Can those voting Neither please state their criticisms of these 2 options?

[frinkprof]

Alright, I'll bite on this one.

I think I know why the moderators want to adopt the same general SSP:Local format for all cities. It's because, as evidenced in the other threads on this topic, everyone wants something different. However, I think the consensus seems to be that the general format seen in other cities such as Vancouver is way over the top with at least a handful too many subforums.

I think the aim, then, should not be to please everyone, but give us a format that most people would be somewhat comfortable navigating. I think that is something resembling your option 2, so I will vote for that.

[Boris2k7]

I think that this poll loses validity in the fact that it isn't open. We can't see who's voting for what.

The opening post is also somewhat misleading. The first half of the post leads the reader to believe that there is an entirely different set of options, before they are given them in the second half.

I can see why some people would want change. Still, I am opposed to splitting up the two cities, though I like how you would allow for the megathreads to continue. However, I think that you would quickly come to realize that the megathreads are naturally dominant as they draw more people in than individual threads do. Massive threads just do better simply because the information is centralized. For Calgary, we have one food thread, one construction thread, one airport thread, one public transit thread, maybe a half dozen news threads and a few more individual project threads. Overflow from the Construction threads led to the creation of almost all the rest. In this light, a fully active construction thread is a good thing. In general, the local format is contrived and doesn't work well with the way people post.

A good example of what hasn't worked. Look at the Local Philly. A city with a huge number of posters, very active threads in other parts of the forum, but the Local is a dismal failure thus far. The Vancouver section has worked, but they have always had both a smaller, less active membership (seriously, its a chore for them to have to wade past threads from other cities to find old posts from months beforehand).

[Xelebes]

I think that this poll loses validity in the fact that it isn't open. We can't see who's voting for what.

Fair enough. I may have rushed the poll off a bit with not checking that off. I will keep that in mind if I need to do a second run of polls. By no means does this poll actually mean anything - just trying to get a sense of where we want to take this new direction that the administrators want to lead us in.

The opening post is also somewhat misleading. The first half of the post leads the reader to believe that there is an entirely different set of options, before they are given them in the second half.

Good point. I will edit it when I come up with a run off poll.

I can see why some people would want change. Still, I am opposed to splitting up the two cities, though I like how you would allow for the megathreads to continue. However, I think that you would quickly come to realize that the megathreads are naturally dominant as they draw more people in than individual threads do. Massive threads just do better simply because the information is centralized. For Calgary, we have one food thread, one construction thread, one airport thread, one public transit thread, maybe a half dozen news threads and a few more individual project threads. Overflow from the Construction threads led to the creation of almost all the rest. In this light, a fully active construction thread is a good thing. In general, the local format is contrived and doesn't work well with the way people post.

I see the megathreads as only being a function of containing large amounts of information with confined spaces. The megathreads only happened when it was felt that there was not enough space to be shared with the rest of the cities listed on the forum. At one point, Calgary and Edmonton posters were sharing the same forum with Toronto and Montreal. The split came and much resistance was had but it was for the better. After the split, Calgary and Edmonton only had to share with Winnipeg, Saskatchewan and Vancouver and much openness eventually came to be had and new threads popped up without having to feel constrained by Eastern Canada's sensibilities. The division of Western Canada has had mixed results.

When I say a that mega-threads are being dominant, I mean to say that they become the only places to collect information. Megathreads, in their current state also lose information when they become archived. How is a newbie to catch up on all that was said three months ago if it is all in the archive forums, tucked under another Philadelphia megathread, another Portland megathread in the archives? It's unfair to expect a newbie to debrief themselves relying on the megathreads.

The solution is to have a thread for each project and to occasionally be updated by the regulars whenever they feel it needs to be done or they can choose to debate that particular project's merits or what not. That opportunity has to be there for the unaccustomed Calgary newbie - who then has to ask in the Calgary construction megathread to be debriefed on everything that he is interested - and often times, as I have experienced in the Edmonton Construction thread, the newbie's questions will be overlooked because the thread is moving too fast.

It's all about expanding the scope and detail which questions can be asked and updates to not be rushed. It would be the moderator's task to make all that information available outside of the megathread.

A good example of what hasn't worked. Look at the Local Philly. A city with a huge number of posters, very active threads in other parts of the forum, but the Local is a dismal failure thus far. The Vancouver section has worked, but they have always had both a smaller, less active membership (seriously, its a chore for them to have to wade past threads from other cities to find old posts from months beforehand).

Duly noted.

[Boris2k7]

I can see what you are saying, and I agree with a lot of. I still don't want Calgary and Edmonton split up though. I don't have any further comments really.

[frinkprof]

Another thing. I'd be willing to try a SSP:Local format if there was a mechanism for judging its success and if it was unsuccessful, to change back to what we have now. I asked the mods a couple questions regarding this in one of the other threads and they went unanswered. Boris brought up the Philly Local forum and how it is a failure thus far. Are the mods ever going to say whether it is a failure or not and if they agree, to change it back?

[Xelebes]

Well, I guess we then get rid of the general discussion forums and have all the general and general architectural discussions in the Western Provinces forum? That way the two cities aren't necessarily ripped apart?

[Xelebes]

Another thing. I'd be willing to try a SSP:Local format if there was a mechanism for judging its success and if it was unsuccessful, to change back to what we have now. I asked the mods a couple questions regarding this in one of the other threads and they went unanswered. Boris brought up the Philly Local forum and how it is a failure thus far. Are the mods ever going to say whether it is a failure or not and if they agree, to change it back?

I think it has to be made clear to the moderator(s) of that Local to have goals and have a plan to achieve those goals. In the case of the Philly forum, I don't think the moderators made it without a plan other than "hey, this looks rather sweet! let's do it!"

[Edmonchuck]

splitting it up will make it harder for people who want to see what's going on in other cities....

I have absolutely no problem with things as they are. There are only 3-4 threads that are posted frequently on anyway - the topical ones are momentary then fall off.

[Xelebes]

Most of the topicary threads that you mention would most likely be put in the Western Provinces forum, if we were to not have the General Discussions. That is, the re-unification of the Western Provinces forum has been discussed and the administrators are open to that idea.

Edit - how will it make it harder to know what's going on? If we keep the projects indexed like we do on the lists on the first posts, except linking to images, we'd be linking to threads. The thread-titles will have all pertinent information needed to browse the projects accordingly.