The Split Forum Discussion

[allenbrown]

Originally Posted by John Turner

IAllen, you must keep up; you haven't been around much for a month or so!

Well, that may be because the forum seemed so quiet. I visit at least once a day but if there are no threads of interest, I don't linger. Now I realise why it looked so quiet.

Did you announce this change?

Allen

[allenbrown]

Originally Posted by John Turner

Well, why not? Although linked, the split represents two quite different aspects of motorsport and I think the descriptions for the two on the Forum page clearly clearly identify this.

What forum page? My bookmark takes me straight into the forum; I never go to a forum page.

I really can't imagine TNF or Trackforum suddenly carving itself in half as they know they'd lose the crossover between the different interest groups.

To be frank, I think this is a mistake. The history forum just wasn't busy enough to justify a split.

Allen

[Andrew Kitson]

I think it needed the split as there seem to be far more current racers here of historics at 10/10ths than at TNF. They want to discuss regs, entry fees etc etc and historic racing today is the perfect place for that and for fans to discuss the revival and so on rather than the history.
May I suggest you change you bookmark Allen to this:
http://tentenths.com/forum/forumdisp...aysprune=&f=75
You will then see both forums! Nice to meet you at last at Stoneleigh by the way!

[allenbrown]

Hi Andrew

Yes, it was good to meet you too. I didn't get a chance after the 1.00 to chat to everyone I wanted to - you included.

I think 10 Tenths' History forum and TNF are quite different and quite complimentary. TNF is great for 1930s Alfas and Russian F3 and the Tripoli GP and Can-Am and many other things. 10 Tenths is stronger when it comes to F3, Atlantics, sprints and so on. I think of the stereotypical TNF person as a bit dusty from too much time in a newpaper library. I think of the stereotypical 10 Tenths person as a bit rusty from too much time standing in the rain at Snetterton.

With this change, there is a danger that the revised Motorsport History forum will lose out to TNF because its forum will appear much, much quieter than TNF. This would be a shame, as there is room for two fora, but the rule of social software is that the largest network always wins. Unless 10 Tenths' Motorsport History forum fills a distinct niche, it will lose out. It was the current racers that gave this forum its distinct feel - how often have we been talking about a car only for the present owner of it to chime in - and by separating them out we lose that.

I still believe we are all better off together.

Allen

[Andrew Kitson]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

Hi Andrew

I think of the stereotypical TNF person as a bit dusty from too much time in a newpaper library. I think of the stereotypical 10 Tenths person as a bit rusty from too much time standing in the rain at Snetterton.

I still believe we are all better off together.

Excellent!! I'm of the Snetterton variety, literally!
Hmmmm..difficult one. Let's see how it runs for a few months but I think it works great for now.

[allenbrown]

To give some concrete evidence for my concern, I just grabbed a list of the top threads over the history of what is now the Motorsport History forum. Of the 14 with 5000 views or more, only two have had a post in the last month.

All that buzz of conversation about Brabhams, Lola, Chevrons, Marchs, Moduses and Lotuses seems to have died away. The cars that the one group are trying to research are the very same cars that the other group are racing. New owners appealing for information was one way those threads kept going. Could the split have contributed to their recent silence?

Allen

[allenbrown]

Originally Posted by Andrew Kitson

Let's see how it runs for a few months but I think it works great for now.

OK. I've said my piece and you've been good enough to take it on board. Your call.

Originally Posted by Andrew Kitson

Excellent!! I'm of the Snetterton variety, literally!

Here's a question for you. Were you at the F5000 races in Aug 1971, Mar 1976, Aug 1976, Mar 1977 or Oct 1977? For some reason it's the Snetterton entry lists that are proving hardest to find. Full story here

Allen

PS Ok, you'd have been very young at the time of the 1971 one!

[Peter Mallett]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

OK. I've said my piece and you've been good enough to take it on board. Your call.

Here's a question for you. Were you at the F5000 races in Aug 1971, Mar 1976, Aug 1976, Mar 1977 or Oct 1977? For some reason it's the Snetterton entry lists that are proving hardest to find. Full story here

Allen

PS Ok, you'd have been very young at the time of the 1971 one!

Oddly enough there's a thread about this in Motorsport History.

[John Turner]

Allen your points are noted, and I don't want to go off the topic of this thread in too much detail. However, I can confirm that we discussed the issues of the split at some length and the decision would not have been made had there not been a consensus. In fact, it was an entirely logical thing to do and frankly, Motorsport History is such a potentially huge subject, it should be capable of standing on its own two feet. We accept that it is a 'slow burner' unlike the more immediacy of this new forum but it will only fail if people like you stop posting on it. 10-Tenths is a growing website; it is inevitable that it will evolve and develop.

In general the split has been well received, and yours is only the second expression of concern that we have received. However, you can blame me, as it was at my suggestion, so it will not surprise you to learn that I remain unrepentant! Besides, having spent literally hours sifting through the archives, and moving over 500 old threads, a task not yet entirely completed, I have a vested interest in the success of this split!

[David McKinney]

Originally Posted by John Turner

In general the split has been well received, and yours is only the second expression of concern that we have received.

Not an expression of concern - rather pique
Like Allen, I have the other ten-tenths historic forum bookmarked, and only discovered this one today. I'll add it to my favourites
Shouldn't there be a "sticky" at the top of each forum to catch people like Allen and me?

[Steve Wilkinson]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

Hi Andrew

Yes, it was good to meet you too. I didn't get a chance after the 1.00 to chat to everyone I wanted to - you included.

I think 10 Tenths' History forum and TNF are quite different and quite complimentary. TNF is great for 1930s Alfas and Russian F3 and the Tripoli GP and Can-Am and many other things. 10 Tenths is stronger when it comes to F3, Atlantics, sprints and so on. I think of the stereotypical TNF person as a bit dusty from too much time in a newpaper library. I think of the stereotypical 10 Tenths person as a bit rusty from too much time standing in the rain at Snetterton.

With this change, there is a danger that the revised Motorsport History forum will lose out to TNF because its forum will appear much, much quieter than TNF. This would be a shame, as there is room for two fora, but the rule of social software is that the largest network always wins. Unless 10 Tenths' Motorsport History forum fills a distinct niche, it will lose out. It was the current racers that gave this forum its distinct feel - how often have we been talking about a car only for the present owner of it to chime in - and by separating them out we lose that.

I still believe we are all better off together.

Allen

I agree with Allen. I now visit Ten Tenths far less than I used to. My next 'visit' is liable to be on Monday as it takes a few days for responses I am interested in to appear. I put this down to the seperation of what I think of now as two halves of Historic Racing. Whenever I visit Ten Tenths I do look in on both Historic sections and find threads in both that I find interesting.

[Peter Mallett]

Just a general observation from a racer.

The posts complaining seem to suggest that whilst there was a mix, the need to post was lessened because the info could be found elsewhere (the forum with no name).

Well surely the opposite applies? In Motorsport History you have a virtual blank canvas where all of our historic experts can paint their particular picture of the past. No need to keep skipping to that other forum.

[allenbrown]

Peter

I use both forums for the reasons I gave above. If I'm researching a Phoenix 100 or a SCCA National at Pueblo, 10 Tenths isn't the right place. However, for tracing a March 75S through a season of British sportscars or a Modus through British F3, this is the place to come.

The reason any forum works is because lots of people are here and one of them may just have the answer. If you separate the people into groups, you reduce the chance of an answer and therefore reduce the length of the conversation.

I will keep coming here every day and keep responding to other people's questions and keep posing my own. But if it goes the way of motorsport.com's historic forum or the way Trackforum's nostalgia forum is going or the way CMSHG is going, I'll find less and less to interest me. That would be a terrible loss.

However, I am not giving up. Absolutely not. I still think this place is great. This is just a moan, nothing more.

Allen

[Dan Rear]

Originally Posted by allenbrown

To give some concrete evidence for my concern, I just grabbed a list of the top threads over the history of what is now the Motorsport History forum. Of the 14 with 5000 views or more, only two have had a post in the last month.

All that buzz of conversation about Brabhams, Lola, Chevrons, Marchs, Moduses and Lotuses seems to have died away. The cars that the one group are trying to research are the very same cars that the other group are racing. New owners appealing for information was one way those threads kept going. Could the split have contributed to their recent silence?

Allen

Allen, as you might expect, I fully agree with your comment re the type of old cars you mention. Nothing posted on them for a good while. Have we answered all the questions, are is there nothing else left to discuss?? I sincerely hope not.

Great to meet you by the way, I even managed to buy something from Andrew this year !!

[allenbrown]

Hi Dan

It was good to meet you and interesting how close we were to the same age. Barry's database thread on TNF has shown me that I'm just a year younger than the average "old fart" so my interest in the 1970s was somehow inevitable.

I think it's possible that all those seven or so threads just got too long and cluttered to make sense out of. Maybe they need someone to summarise where we'd got to and list out what we still don't know. It is odd that they've all stopped at about the same time.

The libre March one, which I think you started, has only scratched the surface of its topic.

Allen

[Peter Mallett]

There you go gents.

[John Turner]

I must confess to some perplexity at the suggestion that responses to specific thread questions will reduce or take longer because the forums are split. However, I take on board the points made by Allen, David and Steve about bookmarks. I admit that, since this is not something I do, this aspect never arose above my horizon, so my sincere apologies. I will now put an announcement in the Motorsport History Forum to ensure that others similarly attired (with bookmarks, I mean!) will be able to follow you here!

[allenbrown]

John

I'll try to explain the point about threads reducing post split. Let's take the Tui thread. It was started IIRC by an current owner asking for info on his historic racing car but the historians quickly piled in with what they knew. It then went quiet until another owner mentioned what he had and the historians went to work again trying to put the pieces together. As a result, it kept going with owners both giving information (chassis numbers, past owners from log books) and receiving.

Now those two groups, the owners and the historians, are in separate paddocks. That's why we are concerned that threads will go quiet.

Allen

[Peter Mallett]

But that's not the case unless you are saying that owners still won't want to find out about their cars, in which case it wouldn't make any difference.

There is no barrier stopping someone talking about a particular car seen at a race and talking about it in here.

One of the problems with 10/10s is that people do tend to boookmark one forum and forget about the others. So its always good to look around sometimes.

[John Turner]

Ok, I've split this now so that you can discuss it further if you wish. I really rather hope that what you suggest Allen won't happen, especially once word gets around. I hope that you can all enjoy the attributes of both forums - I recognise the link, and, of course, there will inevitably be overlap, but I still feel confident to say that they are entirely different and identifiable subject groups.

[allenbrown]

Peter, John

Thanks for starting this separate thread. I sincerely agree with you and hope that everyone visits both forums.

Allen

[h4887]

Originally Posted by Steve Wilkinson

I agree with Allen.

Me too. I think the split is unnecessarily confusing, and I'd now like to know when a classic car becomes a historic car

[John Turner]

What is confusing or difficult about differentiating between Motorsport History,(ie the races, the drivers and the cars of the past, going back to the turn of the 19th Century), and the Historic Racing as it occurs today, i.e the drivers, the cars and the events as they appear (and have appeared in recent years), now. One is History, the other Contemporary.

As for the comment intended to be sarcastic, I really don't know relevance or point that you are trying to make, there.

[MagnetON]

The decision to add additional forums or sub-forums is not taken lightly, and the decision to not only split the historic forum but to "promote" it to its own major category was most certainly not taken lightly. We (site admins and moderators) feel that this subject is one where the mix of posters on Tenths is so rich that we feel it is worth of expansion.

JT has put a lot of effort into going over the threads in the previous forum and categorising them and moving them where appropriate and I take my hat off to his efforts.

Give it time, change your bookmarks to: http://tentenths.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=75 where you will see what's going on in both forums and post in both

Yes, there will be threads that span both forums but I believe our moderators have the knowledge of the subject and of the users to decide where a particular thread should reside and move it accordingly. Remember, if you "subscribe" to a thread and get the e-mail notifications you'll be taken to it automagically and our moderators will always leave a re-direct when they move something.

At the end of the day, if the split of forums doesn't work out it takes only a few clicks of the mouse to merge the two back into one forum.

[Eddy V]

Well for somebody like me (agewise historic), but just getting the hang of Historic / Classic / Vintage racing properly, the split is good.
Makes everything a bit easier for me.

I know, I know I should be ashamed, and I am, sort of.

Eddy, you have nothing to be ashamed of; that was one of the stated aims of the split. Sorry that was supposed to be a post not an edit!