Now just one section for Waterloo

Dylan Leblanc · #1 Posted: **Jun 29, 2011, 10:35 PM**

Because of a decrease of activity and by request of some members the SSP:Waterloo section has been reduced to just one section. All threads are in this one section now.

Thoughts, comments, opinions?

Lugnut · #2 Posted: **Jun 30, 2011, 3:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan Leblanc

Because of a decrease of activity and by request of some members the SSP:Waterloo section has been reduced to just one section. All threads are in this one section now.

Thoughts, comments, opinions?

Waterloo or Waterloo Region? There's a difference

Dylan Leblanc · #3 Posted: **Jun 30, 2011, 5:47 AM**

I don't know. You tell me!

rapid_business · #4 Posted: **Jun 30, 2011, 5:56 AM**

Region.

Thanks. The question is now, should we archive some of these inactive threads or let it happen naturally through the creation of a couple summarizing threads?

waterloowarrior · #5 Posted: **Jul 8, 2011, 12:55 AM**

there are a bunch of waterloo threads in the ottawa section
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/foru...er=desc&page=4

Lugnut · #6 Posted: **Jul 8, 2011, 3:02 PM**

Why did the traffic fall off in the local Waterloo Region section? Any ideas?

rapid_business · #7 Posted: **Jul 8, 2011, 8:33 PM**

Because a guy who invested all the time into the forums and got mad when people challenged him, so he 'took his ball and went home' --> deleted all his posts, pictures, etc. And created his own forum for waterloo-related development alone. People followed, and the section died.

Lugnut · #8 Posted: **Jul 8, 2011, 8:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by onishenko

Because a guy who invested all the time into the forums and got mad when people challenged him, so he 'took his ball and went home' --> deleted all his posts, pictures, etc. And created his own forum for waterloo-related development alone. People followed, and the section died.

Classy move.

I assume you're talking about Wonderful Waterloo? Things have changed over there too recently it seems. I noticed a few of their top posters are no longer around.

rapid_business · #9 Posted: **Jul 18, 2011, 12:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lugnut

Classy move.

I assume you're talking about Wonderful Waterloo? Things have changed over there too recently it seems. I noticed a few of their top posters are no longer around.

yup, that would be correct.

Duke-Of-Waterloo · #10 Posted: **Jul 20, 2011, 3:56 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lugnut

I assume you're talking about Wonderful Waterloo? Things have changed over there too recently it seems. I noticed a few of their top posters are no longer around.

Oh, I know

Lugnut · #11 Posted: **Jul 20, 2011, 1:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duke-Of-Waterloo

Oh, I know

You were one of them!!

Things seem to be slowing down a lot over there lately. Seems to be mostly the one guy posting. Is that the "took his ball and went home" guy referenced above?

Lugnut · #12 Posted: **Jul 20, 2011, 2:48 PM**

If this section can get busy again, would the powers that be consider re-adding one of the "Latest Active Threads" boxes?

rapid_business · #13 Posted: **Jul 20, 2011, 3:42 PM**

Why not just run one 'development' thread where we group everything that is happening, proposed, rumors, renderings, etc. all in one thread? It's easier to follow all development in the region then, and makes it more concise for a fairly barren section that KW now is. We can even do a summary on the first page with everything U/C, etc, that can be updated as needed.

Lugnut · #14 Posted: **Jul 20, 2011, 6:21 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by onishenko

Why not just run one 'development' thread where we group everything that is happening, proposed, rumors, renderings, etc. all in one thread? It's easier to follow all development in the region then, and makes it more concise for a fairly barren section that KW now is. We can even do a summary on the first page with everything U/C, etc, that can be updated as needed.

I'd keep it like this at a minimum for some sense of organization.

One single thread is kind of chaotic.

rapid_business · #15 Posted: **Jul 20, 2011, 7:36 PM**

Not really. It has worked really well for the Edmonton thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=177634

Lugnut · #16 Posted: **Jul 20, 2011, 8:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by onishenko

Not really. It has worked really well for the Edmonton thread: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=177634

But if you want to look back and find any past information it's a disaster.

rapid_business · #17 Posted: **Jul 20, 2011, 8:37 PM**

I guess the thing to do is run a 'daily' development thread where everything as mentioned above can happen and is the go to for daily KW discussion, and let the other threads be supplementary with updating project information that is itemized and easily searchable as you describe.

MolsonExport · #18 Posted: **Sep 29, 2011, 4:16 PM**

Wow, the waterloo local has really died. Went from one of the most vibrant locals to one of the deadest. A year ago, the london (ontario) local was deader than Abe Lincoln, but now it has an average of 10 postings per day, and a regular contingent of 20 contributors (plus another 10 or so semi-regulars).

rapid_business · #19 Posted: **Sep 29, 2011, 4:52 PM**

Yup. As described above, there is a reason why.