# Bonj's thoughts on a better technical section



## montage (6 Oct 2009)

[Admin Note]

I wanted to tidy this thread up and focus on the positive feedback aspect, rather than the initial tit-for-tat.

Apologies for removing your OP montage, but I can't delete the first post in a thread without crashing the entire thread.

Hopefully you understand and forgive .

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## bonj2 (7 Oct 2009)

Admin said:


> Well come on then Ben, let's not sit on the fence now, what EXACTLY is wrong with the way it is run?
> 
> Cheers,
> Shaun



Well, according to you, nothing. It's your forum, you run it how you want.
If you're confident that the way it's run is conducive to the type of threads and chat that you want, the atmosphere you want to foster, and the people you want to attract, then there isn't a problem, is there?

I could go into detail about how I would run a cycling forum if I had one, but I haven't, so I wont. At the end of the day, YOU'RE the one who runs a cycling forum, so you're the one who makes the decisions.

I could spend effort going into detail about changes I would make to THIS one, and if I did think you would implement all or some of them, then I probably would. But I don't, so I won't.

At the end of the day, it's a very popular forum, so you must be doing something right. If I ran a forum it might very well be absolutely loved by the few people that visited it, but they might get bored because it didn't appeal to "the masses" and generate a new influx of possible worthy acquaintances.


----------



## Shaun (7 Oct 2009)

So, reading between the lines, you think it's not focused enough on cycling?


----------



## bonj2 (7 Oct 2009)

Admin said:


> So, reading between the lines, you think it's not focused enough on cycling?



If I had to answer that question in one word, which I do, 'cos I could do with going to bed: yes.


----------



## yello (7 Oct 2009)

Admin said:


> So, reading between the lines, you think it's not focused enough on cycling?





bonj2 said:


> If I had to answer that question in one word, which I do, 'cos I could do with going to bed: yes.



To be fair to bonj, I know what he is saying. 

CycleChat is many things but, as I've said before, its strength is not its depth of cycling knowledge - be it mechanics, history, racing, audax, or whatever. That's not to say that there aren't some very knowledgeable people on here, because there are. Neither is it a criticism of CC, it is what it is. But suffice to say that if I want cycling related info, I don't rely on CC. Tbh I don't now even expect an answer! I google it, might ask on YACF (but that's pretty hit and miss too, topic depending) but CC isn't my first point of call.

All of that said, it's not in any way my wish to change CC. As I said, it is what it is and it's direction is both nothing to do with me and, I suspect, loosely determined. I simply amend my expectations accordingly. It seems to have a strong commuting element (a healthy reflection of the increase in numbers cycling methinks!) but as I no longer commute, it's not really something I can share in these days. My main interest these days (other than just riding my bike!) is probably the racing scene, and the forum is very lucky to have the astonishingly knowledgeable Skip Madness on that subject. He's worth the subscription fee alone!

I think bonj's mistake - if one can call it that - is to expect CC to meet his requirements. I flit in and out of CC, expecting little from it (and am rewarded accordingly ) - anything else is a bonus - but I don't take it seriously and am far better at ignoring threads than I used to be. I suggest bonj just takes some time out and takes a break from CC. If he comes back (again!), so be it. That's up to him and its not an issue for me either way. We've had our confrontations but, I have to say, he does have fresh, strongly held views that are often (imo at least) bang on the money.


----------



## Shaun (7 Oct 2009)

I'm open to criticism and discussion about CC, and as you've just proved it can be both insightful and constructive.

Bonj, if you've got similar thought or ideas, lets hear them.

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## Panter (7 Oct 2009)

I'm actually quite surprised at Yello's comments about CC not being first port of call with cycling questions.

I know it's one thing that CC does get criticised on, for being about anything other than cycling, but I've always had all my questions answered by knowledgeable and experience people.
I can honestly say that I don't turn anywhere else other than CC for technical queries, except.......
for MTB ones.

CC has some extremely knowledgeable MTBr's on here but the main focus is tarmac, which is fair enough.
For MTB questions I usually look to another forum although I did join that long before CC, so it's mainly through loyalty.

Maybe it's because I'm fairly new to cycling and therefore don't have any cutting edge questions, but I've always found CC to be an invauluable knowledge base for any cycling questions I've had so far.


----------



## bonj2 (7 Oct 2009)

Admin said:


> I'm open to criticism and discussion about CC, and as you've just proved it can be both insightful and constructive.
> 
> Bonj, if you've got similar thought or ideas, lets hear them.
> 
> ...



Well one thing that strikes me as the difference between this and yacf is this: the scope of the 'general' forum.
The 'general' forum on here is "cafe", and it is, by intent or by evolution or whatever means, largely NON-cycling related. It doesn't list itself as cycling related or non cycling related, but by fair means or foul, it IS largely non-cycling related - people just post in there about what's going on in their life.
Compare this to on yacf, on which I would say the 'general' forum is _probably_ 'freewheeling'. By contrast, this IS a cycling related forum.

People log onto a forum and, quite justifiably, either can't, can't be bothered to, or incorrectly, decide what sub-forum to post their thread in. So they post it in what they perceive to be the general forum. Maximum exposure is at a higher priority in people's minds than relevance and keeping the sub-forums on-topic.

So, I may be wrong here, but I think certainly my, and going by the atmosphere that has been fostered, a lot of people's, perception is that people log on to yacf, check 'freewheeling', and bugger off again. People log onto cc, check 'cafe', and bugger off again. ergo, if someone's got a 'general' post that's cycling related, they post it on yacf. If they've got a 'general' post that's NON-cycling related, they post it here.

That's my guess. It may not be 100% correct, but I think it's certainly got some element of a reflection of what's actually the case.


----------



## Andy in Sig (7 Oct 2009)

So we need a General Cycling forum alongside the cafe? Would that IYO resolve the matter?


----------



## bonj2 (7 Oct 2009)

Andy in Sig said:


> So we need a General Cycling forum alongside the cafe? Would that IYO resolve the matter?



Not overnight, no. It wouldn't instantly resolve a lot of the damage that has imho already been done. But it would certainly be a start, and crucially, would set future evolution of cyclechat off on a more worthy keel.
It would have to be thought about a bit, as well, rather than just plonked on there and left. For instance, I can see it being far too similar to commuting. Guidelines as to best usage would help to prevent it becoming polluted.


----------



## Shaun (7 Oct 2009)

Thanks Ben, that's a bit more like it.

I think you'll find Noodly has similar thoughts; keep the forums more on-topic. Keep the cycling stuff in the correct cycling related forums, instead of having them mixed-up with Cafe non-cycling posts (_for exposure's sake_).

The only thing that stops this happening at the moment is my time to manage it. I spend a good deal of my time dealing with the technical elements of the forums, and member/external queries, so don't have too much free time to do a lot of thread-type housekeeping (for want of a better word).

If I ever manage to turn CC into a full-time enterprise, I'll see about. 

Cheers,
Shaun


----------



## theclaud (7 Oct 2009)

bonj2 said:


> Not overnight, no. It wouldn't instantly resolve a lot of the damage that has imho already been done. But it would certainly be a start, and crucially, would *set future evolution of cyclechat off on a more worthy keel*.
> It would have to be thought about a bit, as well, rather than just plonked on there and left. For instance, I can see it being far too similar to commuting. Guidelines as to best usage would help to prevent it becoming polluted.



Lighten up a bit, Bonjy! Is worthiness really what we want?


----------



## trustysteed (7 Oct 2009)

Admin said:


> The only thing that stops this happening at the moment is my time to manage it.



perhaps you could ask the moderators to volunteer for this task so they could spend more time housekeeping and less time being draconian  crazed with power?


----------



## Fab Foodie (7 Oct 2009)

bonj, There was once a forum called acf where everything was in its place, just like 'Duloc' in Shreck. CC is like the antodote, it's more open and rambling and light on rules. Some of us need that in a forum. If you need to post where things are more organised then use yacf. I for one am very comfortable with how CC is organised and that is one of the reasons I like it here (after the people). As most of your posts are rambling anyway I'd have thought the current set-up suited your style!


----------



## Andy in Sig (7 Oct 2009)

I think a good idea would be for Bonj to give his best shot at designing however many supplemetary fora he thinks necessary and most crucially, their accompanying guidelines. He could then put these to Shaun privately. Once they had agreed on something publishable it could be introduced. Perhaps, given the demands on Shaun's time, he could hand over the detailed implementation to Bonj/Noodley and anybody else who thinks the idea a worthy one.


----------



## John the Monkey (7 Oct 2009)

Damn.

I thought William Fotheringham had a new book out.

"Put my Mudguards Back on: In Search of Bonj"


----------



## TheDoctor (7 Oct 2009)

trustysteed said:


> perhaps you could ask the moderators to volunteer for this task so they could spend more time housekeeping and less time being draconian  crazed with power?



So, on the one hand you want Mods to micro-manage what thread goes where, but you don't them spending time being power-crazy?


----------



## trustysteed (7 Oct 2009)

i'd like them to do tasks that suit their status, yes.


----------



## Chuffy (7 Oct 2009)

TheDoctor said:


> So, on the one hand you want Mods to micro-manage what thread goes where, but you don't them spending time being power-crazy?


I think Bonj wants Total Control so that things are tidy, in the right place and just as he likes them. I bet he's stroking a white Persian even as I type. Once he's finished cataloging his CD collection and arranging everything in his house in order of size, price and date purchased.


----------



## Chuffy (7 Oct 2009)

TheDoctor said:


> So, on the one hand you want Mods to micro-manage what thread goes where, but you don't them spending time being power-crazy?


The definition of power-crazy, of course, being 'doing something that I don't want them to do'.....


----------



## Noodley (7 Oct 2009)

Wait a minute! How did I get involved in this? And how on earth did the Bonj/Noodley combo come about? 

I'm quite happy with my infrequent and ignored garbled protestations of a modicum of some order.....now leave me alone.


----------



## Chuffy (7 Oct 2009)

Noodley said:


> Wait a minute! How did I get involved in this? And how on earth did the Bonj/Noodley combo come about?
> 
> I'm quite happy with my infrequent and ignored garbled protestations of a modicum of some order.....now leave me alone.


NO! You're shaking the tree of power hoping that some of the monkeys will fall out! Away with you, you power-crazed loon!


----------



## Andy in Sig (7 Oct 2009)

Noodley said:


> Wait a minute! How did I get involved in this? And how on earth did the Bonj/Noodley combo come about?
> 
> I'm quite happy with my infrequent and ignored garbled protestations of a modicum of some order.....now leave me alone.



See #39. I based my presumption on that and apologise for distress caused. Go and lie down with a white hanky on your forehead and a decent glass of malt in your trembling hand and things will look up again.


----------



## Noodley (7 Oct 2009)

Chuffy said:


> NO! You're shaking the tree of power hoping that some of the monkeys will fall out! Away with you, you power-crazed loon!



fair point. I'll go.....


----------



## Fab Foodie (7 Oct 2009)

Chuffy said:


> NO! You're shaking the tree of power hoping that some of the monkeys will fall out! Away with you, you power-crazed loon!


Couldn't agree more chuffers, Noodley doesn't do 'modicums', they're for wimps


----------



## Chuffy (7 Oct 2009)

Fab Foodie said:


> Couldn't agree more chuffers, Noodley doesn't do 'modicums', they're for wimps


Hush Foodie. Please don't agree with me or someone will accuse us of being a left-wing PC clique.


----------



## bonj2 (7 Oct 2009)

Andy in Sig said:


> I think a good idea would be for Bonj to give his best shot at designing however many supplemetary fora he thinks necessary and most crucially, their accompanying guidelines. He could then put these to Shaun privately. Once they had agreed on something publishable it could be introduced. Perhaps, given the demands on Shaun's time, he could hand over the detailed implementation to Bonj/Noodley and anybody else who thinks the idea a worthy one.



Or maybe, people who want to could be given mandate to introduce their OWN sub forum.
It would be made clear that it would be their sub forum, so that people know that the creativity behind it is the responsibility of a certain person and cannot be blamed on cyclechat management as a whole. Equally, however, they would be expected to mod it themselves, and if the overall mods feel they are not doing a suitable job of modding it, then they would be warned, and maybe overridden.
If the overall mods have to step in too often, then that person would probably have their sub forum taken off them.
If the overall mods did step in, it would have to be with a lighter touch than they would use on the general CC forums, as the intention would have to be solely to remove anything that really can't go - for instance spam, libel etc, rather than to shape the way CC is intended to be. On a specific person's sub forum, CC management can wash their hands of 'the way it's intended to be shaped' to whoever's sub forum it is.
On the other hand, the modding that the sub forum owner applies may be MORE draconian than the general CC forums, which may be the decisive thing that shapes the character of that sub forum and may be what I see as what could make or break it.
Users can report in the same way they do now, but they have the option of either reporting to the sub forum owner, or escalating to the real mods.


----------



## Fab Foodie (7 Oct 2009)

Chuffy said:


> Hush Foodie. Please don't agree with me or someone will accuse us of being a left-wing PC clique.


Nobody would ever accuse me of being PC, but point taken...


----------



## Chuffy (7 Oct 2009)

bonj2 said:


> Or maybe, people who want to could be given mandate to introduce their OWN sub forum.
> It would be made clear that it would be their sub forum, so that people know that the creativity behind it is the responsibility of a certain person and cannot be blamed on cyclechat management as a whole. Equally, however, they would be expected to mod it themselves, and if the overall mods feel they are not doing a suitable job of modding it, then they would be warned, and maybe overridden.
> If the overall mods have to step in too often, then that person would probably have their sub forum taken off them.
> If the overall mods did step in, it would have to be with a lighter touch than they would use on the general CC forums, as the intention would have to be solely to remove anything that really can't go - for instance spam, libel etc, rather than to shape the way CC is intended to be. On a specific person's sub forum, CC management can wash their hands of 'the way it's intended to be shaped' to whoever's sub forum it is.
> ...



Then start your own forum. Or pay for Shaun to employ a team of lawyers to run the 'new and improved' MkII Cycle Chat.


----------



## Archie_tect (7 Oct 2009)

bonj2 said:


> Or maybe, people who want to could be given mandate to introduce their OWN sub forum.



Sounds like you need to start your own website bonj- you can't expect to have control over someone else's concept gaining all the benefits of the site created by Shaun over the years having expending time and expense setting up CC and keeping it running every day.


----------



## Andy in Sig (7 Oct 2009)

Bonj,

I think common courtesy demands that you ask Shaun for permission and approval to do whatever it is you want to get up to.


----------



## yello (7 Oct 2009)

bonj2 said:


> Or maybe, people who want to could be given mandate to introduce their OWN sub forum.



This is exactly what I like about bonj. It's a completely left field idea that might strike you at first as ludicrous or unworkable BUT if you let the idea sit a while, play with it a bit, then you might see that there's something there. It needn't/mightn't be in the exact form that is suggested but it's a starting point.

Look at many websites, forums, portals etc; personalising pages, customisable this that and t'other. You can do elements of the same on CC, you can even exclude sub-forums... having a personal sub-forum is a completely logical extension of that ethos! And quite simple to do I would have thought.

So, why not Shaun? Why not give "Bonj's Forum" a go?


----------



## Baggy (7 Oct 2009)

Fab Foodie said:


> If you need to post where things are more organised then use yacf.


He does...and posts like a very serious cyclist over there. But like a rubber ball he jus' keeps on bouncing back here 

I know many CC'ers are bi-foral (or tri-foral) but if all fora were arranged and managed the same way it would be get a bit boring. I like it here and find it easy to navigate, if I wanted more order and my mind worked in a "sub fora" kind of way, I'd probably spend more time on yacf.

I'm not over at yacf jumping up and down and demanding that the format is changed because it's not the way I want it.


----------



## Renard (7 Oct 2009)

Here's my take on this thread and the other thread about Joe24.

DOES ANY OF IT REALLY MATTER? A SENSE OF PERSPECTIVE IS NEEDED. ITS ONLY AN INTERNET FORUM FFS.

There said it! Carry on as you were...


----------



## Dayvo (7 Oct 2009)

Archie_tect said:


> Sounds like you need to start your own website bonj- you can't expect to have control over someone else's concept gaining all the benefits of the site created by Shaun over the years having expending time and expense setting up CC and keeping it running every day.



Good words, there, Archie! 

If he can do better himself, then let's see it! 

Bonj! I quite like you, and your slant on things, but as per above, put up, shut up, or just close the door quietly (once and for all) after you!


----------



## Gerry Attrick (7 Oct 2009)

Many times when I read a Bonj thread, my initial reaction is just that...a reaction. I think it's Bonj being Bonj and so I leave it a while before posting and making my feeling public. Often I then get an insight into the merits or demerits of his thread.

Unfortunately, the only feeling I get here having read all this is that he is barking up the wrong tree. The essence of this forum is diversity around a central theme of cycling. Anyone can post in a forum about cycling and get responses about cycling from cycling people. However, on many occasions, I and many others want to discuss other matters, be they lightweight and humerous or heavyweight and serious. That is why I enjoy Shaun's baby. The thing is, I have that choice.

Bonj's current scheme is not IMHO completely without merit, but it runs the risk of fragmenting what is mostly a united forum in that many "personalised" fora or pages will be set up and those pages would be visited probably only by fans and disciples of those individuals. Inevitably as time went on each personalised forum would evolve into a mini version of what we have now, but each visited by fewer people.

Is that what we really want? It is the all-embracing inclusiveness which is the forum's strength and is what attracts newbies (and sometimes weeds out the undesirables).

Sorry Bonj, no offence intended, but if you feel so strongly about this I think you should set up your own forum.


----------



## wafflycat (7 Oct 2009)

Archie_tect said:


> Sounds like you need to start your own website bonj- you can't expect to have control over someone else's concept gaining all the benefits of the site created by Shaun over the years having expending time and expense setting up CC and keeping it running every day.



+1


----------



## tdr1nka (7 Oct 2009)

I believe it has been said, "You can't please all of the people, all of the time."?

I also believe it has been said, "Sh*t or get off the pot."


----------



## Fab Foodie (7 Oct 2009)

yello said:


> This is exactly what I like about bonj. It's a completely left field idea that might strike you at first as ludicrous or unworkable BUT if you let the idea sit a while, play with it a bit, then you might see that there's something there. It needn't/mightn't be in the exact form that is suggested but it's a starting point.
> 
> Look at many websites, forums, portals etc; personalising pages, customisable this that and t'other. You can do elements of the same on CC, you can even exclude sub-forums... having a personal sub-forum is a completely logical extension of that ethos! And quite simple to do I would have thought.
> 
> So, why not Shaun? Why not give "Bonj's Forum" a go?



IIRC, this was done at acf in a minor way.


----------



## Fab Foodie (7 Oct 2009)

Baggy said:


> He does...and posts like a very serious cyclist over there. But like a rubber ball he jus' keeps on bouncing back here
> 
> I know many CC'ers are bi-foral (or tri-foral) but if all fora were arranged and managed the same way it would be get a bit boring. I like it here and find it easy to navigate, if I wanted more order and my mind worked in a "sub fora" kind of way, I'd probably spend more time on yacf.
> 
> I'm not over at yacf jumping up and down and demanding that the format is changed because it's not the way I want it.



Exactly!

BTW, who does he post as at yacf?


----------



## Andy in Sig (7 Oct 2009)

Praps bonjy's just having a grumpy few weeks and will be back to normal soon.


----------



## Fnaar (7 Oct 2009)

I've found out a lot of cycling stuff I didn't know on here... true, I spend most of my time on here typing inanities here in the caff bit, but I go to the other bits now and then to learn stuff/ask about best pumps, tyres etc...
Good forum, I reckon.


----------



## Chuffy (7 Oct 2009)

Fab Foodie said:


> IIRC, this was done at acf in a minor way.


Yes, but the owner objected to some of the people who were allowed to join the 'user maintained' forum areas. Naming no names...


----------



## alecstilleyedye (7 Oct 2009)

and we all know what happened to acf…


----------



## yello (7 Oct 2009)

... yep, the lunatics took over the asylum!


----------



## Renard (7 Oct 2009)

Fnaar said:


> I've found out a lot of cycling stuff I didn't know on here... true, I spend most of my time on here typing inanities here in the caff bit, but I go to the other bits now and then to learn stuff/ask about best pumps, tyres etc...
> Good forum, I reckon.



Me too


----------



## Sittingduck (7 Oct 2009)

Gerry Attrick said:


> Unfortunately, the only feeling I get here having read all this is that he is barking up the wrong tree. The essence of this forum is diversity around a central theme of cycling. Anyone can post in a forum about cycling and get responses about cycling from cycling people. However, on many occasions, I and many others want to discuss other matters, be they lightweight and humerous or heavyweight and serious. That is why I enjoy Shaun's baby. The thing is, I have that choice.
> 
> Bonj's current scheme is not IMHO completely without merit, but it runs the risk of fragmenting what is mostly a united forum in that many "personalised" fora or pages will be set up and those pages would be visited probably only by fans and disciples of those individuals. Inevitably as time went on each personalised forum would evolve into a mini version of what we have now, but each visited by fewer people.
> 
> Is that what we really want? It is the all-embracing inclusiveness which is the forum's strength and is what attracts newbies (and sometimes weeds out the undesirables).



Spot on, me thinks.


----------



## Crackle (7 Oct 2009)

Bonj's idea already exists in the social groups, he just needs to set up a few relevant groups, make them invite only and he's away.


----------



## badkitty (7 Oct 2009)

Crackle said:


> Bonj's idea already exists in the social groups, he just needs to set up a few relevant groups, make them invite only and he's away.



I wish him good luck with that!


----------



## Jonathan M (7 Oct 2009)

Crankarm said:


> Why doesn't this guy set up his own forum if he so dislikes this one or take up residence elsewhere? Maybe if he can't get his own way he just wants to be oh so au contraire instead .


+1


----------



## tdr1nka (7 Oct 2009)

The sad fact is that Bonj simply would like everything to change to suit his ideas and for everyone else to do the work.


----------



## Auntie Helen (7 Oct 2009)

trustysteed said:


> perhaps you could ask the moderators to volunteer for this task so they could spend more time housekeeping and less time being draconian  crazed with power?


Do you think the Moderators would REALLY want to do this? Don't you think they've probably got enough to do getting rid of spam and trying to be fair and sensible about various postings that may have got up other peoples' noses? And do you _really_ think they are crazed with power?


----------



## Rhythm Thief (7 Oct 2009)

tdr1nka said:


> The sad fact is that Bonj simply would like everything to change to suit his ideas and for everyone else to do the work.



Do you know, I think you might be right. That's certainly what it looks like.


----------



## Speicher (7 Oct 2009)

I think you are right. Otherwise would he not just abandon us, and move on to a subject far more worthy of his attentions. He obviously has a lot of intellectual energy and emotional energy which would be far better employed in the eradication of poverty, the provision of fresh water for all, and the removal of third world debt.

After lunch he could tackle world peace, and HIV.


----------



## wafflycat (7 Oct 2009)

You forgot climate change.


----------



## Speicher (7 Oct 2009)

wafflycat said:


> You forgot climate change.



So I did, thank you for correcting me.  See how lost I am without his guidance and supervision.


----------



## Crackle (7 Oct 2009)

wafflycat said:


> You forgot climate change.



We'll employ him to scan in some ships logs.


----------



## Danny (7 Oct 2009)

Personally I think CC would be a lot less fun if Bonj wasn't around. So I think the way tor resolve all this is for:

1. Admin to create a "Serious Cyclists" forum with Bonj and Noodley as moderators

2. Bonj and Noodley could also form a "standards sub-committee" which could monitor the whole of CC and report back on a periodic basis on numbers of incorrect posting, badly chosen avatars, etc. The time spent on this and moderating the serious cyclist discussions would keep both of them out of mischief.

3. Bonj should cycle over to Hull and buy Admin a pint (or 5).


----------



## Noodley (7 Oct 2009)

Danny said:


> 2. Bonj and Noodley could also form a "standards sub-committee" which....would keep both of them out of mischief.



I've nothing to do with this! 

Could people stop associating me with bonj please....


----------



## Dayvo (7 Oct 2009)

Noodley said:


> I've nothing to do with this!
> 
> Could people stop associating me with bonj please....



Resistance is futile, and you know it! 

And did you not also have a bonj quote in your sig line!?


----------



## marinyork (7 Oct 2009)

Danny said:


> 1. Admin to create a "Serious Cyclists" forum with Bonj and Noodley as moderators
> 
> 2. Bonj and Noodley could also form a "standards sub-committee" which could monitor the whole of CC and report back on a periodic basis on numbers of incorrect posting, badly chosen avatars, etc. The time spent on this and moderating the serious cyclist discussions would keep both of them out of mischief.



Why is this so ridiculous? The subsections such as cafe and beginners (and other sections) have evolved so particular people go into particular places, they have their own standards, etiquette and so on, their own cliques. Where there isn't a niche for what people want you see people posting in the wrong section/getting offended. There is actually a lack of a "serious cyclists" area if you look at the subcategories.


----------



## wafflycat (7 Oct 2009)

No, absolutely nothing for *serious cyclists* on this forum. Why there's absolutely no catering for the sporty racer, the off-roader, the touring & expidition cyclist, the audaxer.. no, nothing like this on CC. Shaun should be ashamed of his piddlingly-poor forum provision


----------



## montage (7 Oct 2009)

This site is great - and I am glad that I contribute such useful and informative posts to it.

Bonj is a great character on this site - so stay bonj  ..... I see what bonj means about it not being serious enough.... if you ask a question on the health and fitness forums, all you get is "go to the doctors" or "train slowly" ....but this isn't a forum full of professional grand tour riders...it is full of fat gits with beards and brookes (hides....I didn't mean that...honest) ... and it is a hilarious place to spend cyber time.


----------



## Baggy (7 Oct 2009)

montage said:


> ....but this isn't a forum full of professional grand tour riders...it is full of fat gits with beards and brookes


How _very_ dare you. Brooks saddles are evil!


----------



## tdr1nka (7 Oct 2009)

The problem with having a 'serious cyclist' section is that, as has been ground out in the past is there are too many variables in what actually constitutes being 'serious' and the only ones that honestly matter to Bonj are the ones that exist, almost solely, in his head.

It also constitutes Admin doing the all work just so Bonj can have a soapbox, which frankly no one member of this forum should demand.


----------



## bonj2 (7 Oct 2009)

montage said:


> ... if you ask a question on the health and fitness forums, all you get is "go to the doctors" or "train slowly" ....


By the same token, I don't see the value in replies to technical questions advising no more than "just take it back to the LBS - it should be under warranty".
That may be mentioned, and it may even be the first port of call. But it should at least be qualified with a technical analysis of what the problem is, and what to do if the LBS are no use.
JUST telling someone to go to the LBS exhibits no amount of passing on of cycling knowledge, and is a lazy way to appear to have answered the question without having actually put any thought into it.


----------



## marinyork (7 Oct 2009)

wafflycat said:


> No, absolutely nothing for *serious cyclists* on this forum. Why there's absolutely no catering for the sporty racer, the off-roader, the touring & expidition cyclist, the audaxer.. no, nothing like this on CC. Shaun should be ashamed of his piddlingly-poor forum provision



I know very well the subcategories are there, but they aren't well developed. The whole point when someone says this such subsection should be created/modified is on what is posted/isn't posted. They aren't very vibrant sections/enough expertise/friendly enough/serious enough so someone posts in a different section that is busier and someone gets cheesed off with it. Ask yourself if you felt that you couldn't post in the cafe would your view be different? If someone didn't feel like they should post in beginners, was an outlaw in the cafe, couldn't stand the hotheadedness of commuting and just isn't interested in P&L, are the other sections vibrant enough to sustain interest?


----------



## TheDoctor (7 Oct 2009)

bonj2 said:


> Tedious wibbling and general You-don't-want-to-do-that-you-should-do-this-ing


I thought you'd gone?


----------



## bonj2 (7 Oct 2009)

tdr1nka said:


> The problem with having a 'serious cyclist' section is that, as has been ground out in the past is there are too many variables in what actually constitutes being 'serious' and the only ones that honestly matter to Bonj are the ones that exist, almost solely, in his head.
> 
> It also constitutes Admin doing the all work just so Bonj can have a soapbox, which frankly no one member of this forum should demand.



My _original_ idea stems from not so much the desire to have my own personal soapbox, but a trial of "sandbox moderation" - i.e. what we're saying is, this area of the forum is moderated by xxx, therefore if you don't like xxx's moderation, don't go in that area of the forum. The person who moderates the sub-forum would write a blurb for it, as an abstract/introduction to the type of topics that are likely to spring up there.

I suggested it on the thinking that it wouldn't be too much work to set up and it might be popular. I'm not solely thinking of just me having a sub forum, I would look forward to posting in other people's sub-fora as well.

The idea would live or die by its own merits, really. If people didn't like my sub-forum, no-one would post in it, and it would be closed down. Similar to the Tea? thread. I don't like it, so I never read it or post in it. That doesn't mean it should be closed down. If no-one liked it, it would simply drop off the bottom of the page. That wouldn't happen with a sub forum, but the same principle could be applied manually - if it was noticed it was unpopular, it would be deemed pointless and closed down.


----------



## MacB (7 Oct 2009)

what would be really classy is for Bonj to create his own 'serious cyclist' section where seekers of knowledge would be rewarded. For a change I'm not totally mocking here, I've considered the creation of a similar facility myself. Kind of an ultimate knowledge base covering all the information that you need to shlep through the web finding out. Almost as if you took all the best from Sheldon Brown, Wiki, forums, review sites, articles, instructional sites, and rolled it all into one. A great addition would be ordering the data chronologically and also adding in CC'ers real life experiences with various bits of kit. 

Realistically this would be a monumental task, possibly one only the skills of a Bonj could cope with. The great SB never finished and that was a seriously longterm project.

I also take the Noodly/Bonj view re staying on track, it can be frustrating when looking for info. Certainly not unique to CC, I find the same on YACF, CTC, Bike Radar and Bike Magic. Technical threads smothered by garbage, whether it's in-jokes, side issues or smartass, generally very short, answers. Though all of these forums are a walk in the park to elicit info from compared to LFGSS. It takes serious patience to find the gems within the dungpile there. 

I may be in a minority of those wanting to know the real nitty gritty details. Those that have met me can probably vouch for my 'inquisitive' nature, Dell, TC1 and Teef became a captive audience all the way to Sheffield

Oh yeah, on the OP, you may go in search of Bonj, you may even find him, but can you keep hold of him?


----------



## tdr1nka (8 Oct 2009)

Ok then, maybe it's not about you having your own sub forum but then it's not far off being about you having your own way. As has been said before, if you really don't like it, you can always go elsewhere or set up your own forum. Build it and they will come.


----------



## marinyork (8 Oct 2009)

tdr1nka said:


> Ok then, maybe it's not about you having your own sub forum but then it's not far off being about you having your own way. As has been said before, if you really don't like it, you can always go elsewhere or set up your own forum. Build it and they will come.



I think you're biased. What is qualitatively different about that to the tea thread for example? Or even, the cafe itself?


----------



## bonj2 (8 Oct 2009)

tdr1nka said:


> *Ok then, maybe it's not about you having your own sub forum but then it's not far off being about you having your own way*. As has been said before, if you really don't like it, you can always go elsewhere or set up your own forum. Build it and they will come.



So whether it's a good idea or not is irrelevant, it just wouldn't be right for me to be seen to be 'having my own way'. That's the sort of mentality we're dealing with, obviously.


----------



## TheDoctor (8 Oct 2009)

Yes, that's the mentality we're dealing with - that of a spoiled toddler who wants everything thier own way, but wants someone else to do all the work and pay for it all.. Set your forum up. Let's see if it lasts as long as your blog - about a week, wasn't it?


----------



## Archie_tect (8 Oct 2009)

It's 3 o'clock in the morning, I've just finished a set of presentation drawings so I'm feeling tired but happy... I call into CC for a diversion and a bit of fun, to be entertained and enjoy the musings and rantings of fellow cyclists. It doesn't bother me that people have different views or opinions to mine because, let's face it, it's all very trivial compared to the important things and it's all the better for it... 

So keep a sense of perspective and have the grace to let people be different and express themselves how they want. 

If Shaun has the time and the technical expertise to set up the sub-forum Bonj wants then so be it. If he can't Bonj will have to accept that it isn't going to happen and let it go.... 

As Cat Stevens so eloquently said, "You'll still be here tomorrow but your dreams may not..." Apologies for being patronising if that's how this reads, it wasn't intended- good night all, see you tomorrow, and have a cuppa tea! [Where are all the fish?]


----------



## Andy in Sig (8 Oct 2009)

Noodley said:


> I've nothing to do with this!
> 
> Could people stop associating me with bonj please....



I think you've been outed as Bonj's mole. Resistance is futile so you might as well come clean and do as you're told. Bonj might even let you stroke the Persian cat.


----------



## Andy in Sig (8 Oct 2009)

bonj2 said:


> By the same token, I don't see the value in replies to technical questions advising no more than "just take it back to the LBS - it should be under warranty".
> That may be mentioned, and it may even be the first port of call. But it should at least be qualified with a technical analysis of what the problem is, and what to do if the LBS are no use.
> JUST telling someone to go to the LBS exhibits no amount of passing on of cycling knowledge, and is a lazy way to appear to have answered the question without having actually put any thought into it.



I think that that is a valid whinge about the standard of some replies and I can see why it might irritate somebody who really wants to get down to the nuts and bolts. Most people would say: "Well just ignore the vacuous posts". However in a spirit of understanding your irritation, here's a suggestion for you and Shaun to consider.

How about a reference forum on all matters technical? i.e. as advice on a topic comes up it is quality checked and collated (by you and anybody else who wants to work with you on it) indexed and displayed as a quick source of reference material. We already have the idea in principle with the hotels fixed thread but imagine if that were broken down into listings by country and then town.

I suspect that you would make a very good job of such a thing and most importantly, I reckon you would keep the quality up. I know people will say "but Sheldon Brown is there already" as indeed he is/was but I can see no harm in this site having its equivalent but in our idiom. What do you reckon?


----------



## Fab Foodie (8 Oct 2009)

wafflycat said:


> No, absolutely nothing for *serious cyclists* on this forum. Why there's absolutely no catering for the sporty racer, the off-roader, the touring & expidition cyclist, the audaxer.. no, nothing like this on CC. Shaun should be ashamed of his piddlingly-poor forum provision



I find plenty here for the *Grumpy* cyclist though... I post much of it!


----------



## Danny (8 Oct 2009)

TheDoctor said:


> Yes, that's the mentality we're dealing with - that of a spoiled toddler who wants everything thier own way, but wants someone else to do all the work and pay for it all.. Set your forum up. Let's see if it lasts as long as your blog - about a week, wasn't it?


Shaun did ask Bonj to come forward with suggestions of changes he would like to see in CC.

I don't think it is very helpful to attack him in a personal way like this, when he does come up with ideas.


----------



## Danny (8 Oct 2009)

wafflycat said:


> No, absolutely nothing for *serious cyclists* on this forum. Why there's absolutely no catering for the sporty racer, the off-roader, the touring & expidition cyclist, the audaxer.. no, nothing like this on CC. Shaun should be ashamed of his piddlingly-poor forum provision


Point taken. To differentiate it from the serious discussions elsewhere on CC, the new forum could be called "Ultra Serious Cyclists" or perhaps "Cycling Obsessions". 

I am keen to have this up and running asap as I want to see what it takes for Bonj and Noodley to ban me


----------



## wafflycat (8 Oct 2009)

marinyork said:


> I know very well the subcategories are there, but they aren't well developed. The whole point when someone says this such subsection should be created/modified is on what is posted/isn't posted. They aren't very vibrant sections/enough expertise/friendly enough/serious enough so someone posts in a different section that is busier and someone gets cheesed off with it. Ask yourself if you felt that you couldn't post in the cafe would your view be different? If someone didn't feel like they should post in beginners, was an outlaw in the cafe, couldn't stand the hotheadedness of commuting and just isn't interested in P&L, are the other sections vibrant enough to sustain interest?



I can post in *any* section I feel like.There is no section where I feel I cannot post. In the various sections I have found many useful questions/answers/advice given and usually in a prettty friendly way. There is no section that says 'bog off, you're not welcome, as we're not serious/friendly/useful/etc., etc. And if I felt that the *multitude* of cycling boards here were not sufficiently serious/vibrant/interesting enough, then I'd bugger off elsewhere rather than whinge about it.


----------



## John the Monkey (8 Oct 2009)

Andy in Sig said:


> How about a reference forum on all matters technical? i.e. as advice on a topic comes up it is quality checked and collated (by you and anybody else who wants to work with you on it) indexed and displayed as a quick source of reference material. We already have the idea in principle with the hotels fixed thread but imagine if that were broken down into listings by country and then town.


Panter had an idea for technical stickes, I think, in the know how section (e.g. gear adjustment advice and tutorials, brake adjustment &c).

TBH, I don't mind answering things as they come up (in beginners, know how), but maybe that's just me.


----------



## Andy in Sig (8 Oct 2009)

I agree that it is good to give answers to beginners as it is part of making them feel welcome. That said, maybe it wouldn't hurt to give them an answer _and_ point out that we have an indexed library of further knowledge.


----------



## bonj2 (8 Oct 2009)

TheDoctor said:


> Yes, that's the mentality we're dealing with - that of a spoiled toddler who wants everything thier own way, but wants someone else to do all the work and pay for it all.. Set your forum up. Let's see if it lasts as long as your blog - about a week, wasn't it?



To be fair, the sub forums idea was only a light hearted suggestion that I never expected anybody to take seriously. As it turns out, I'm quite surprised they have. I was expecting it to be laughed off - instead, a lot of people seem to be getting fairly combative about it, they seem to be worried it might actually be implemented?
I'm not asking for someone to do lots of work and pay money for stuff that hardly anybody wants. I'm not asking for anybody to put lots of effort into giving me my own personal soapbox.
Far from it.
It's just a suggestion for something for which it *might* be the case that it would cost no money, hardly any effort, but be quite popular. If that _isn't_ the case, then it can just be dismissed as an idea that never took off - I wouldn't (and haven't) take(n) offence at that, so there's no need to be so defensive.
It's not _exactly_ like I've spent ages militantly campaigning for it either, I've simply suggested it and provided details for how it could work.


----------



## bonj2 (8 Oct 2009)

Andy in Sig said:


> I think that that is a valid whinge about the standard of some replies and I can see why it might irritate somebody who really wants to get down to the nuts and bolts. Most people would say: "Well just ignore the vacuous posts". However in a spirit of understanding your irritation, here's a suggestion for you and Shaun to consider.
> 
> How about a reference forum on all matters technical? i.e. as advice on a topic comes up it is quality checked and collated (by you and anybody else who wants to work with you on it) indexed and displayed as a quick source of reference material. We already have the idea in principle with the hotels fixed thread but imagine if that were broken down into listings by country and then town.
> 
> I suspect that you would make a very good job of such a thing and most importantly, I reckon you would keep the quality up. I know people will say "but Sheldon Brown is there already" as indeed he is/was but I can see no harm in this site having its equivalent but in our idiom. What do you reckon?


I think in principle it's a good idea. Its success though would live or die off how inclined people would be to use it. That would be driven by how easy and user friendly it is to use, and that in turn would probably be driven by how much time went into it.
There will be those that will say "but people just want a personalized response which is why the same questions get asked again and again" and to some extent, they're right.
Although having a searchable reference would be no bad thing. Hopefully there could be some way of using existing, good, replies as the content, but having some mechanism of cataloguing them. Maybe initially by having a 'wrapper' thread which groups up links to similar good replies on a subject.


----------



## Andy in Sig (8 Oct 2009)

There you go then. Have a chat with Shaun. I reckon he might give you his blessing to get on with it. How much it got used would be dependant on how good it was.


----------



## Chuffy (8 Oct 2009)

Danny said:


> I don't think it is very helpful to attack him in a personal way like this, when he does come up with ideas.


After arguing with Bonj for a while reasoned debate just wants to hide under a rock and cry, while unreasonable irritation comes out to play…

The main weakness of this place is the Know How and Accessories sections. They don’t seem to have a high turnover of threads and they do suffer from the accumulation of off-topic posts and diversions into silliness. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that those two areas should be monitored and Modded quite strictly within clear guidelines. On C+ there seemed to be a general understanding that the Know How section wasn’t for banter and I think the section was stronger and better used on account of it. That might settle some of Bonj’s grumbles as well as making those two areas more valuable to people coming here for help and advice.


----------



## John the Monkey (8 Oct 2009)

Chuffy said:


> The main weakness of this place is the Know How and Accessories sections. They don’t seem to have a high turnover of threads and they do suffer from the accumulation of off-topic posts and diversions into silliness. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that those two areas should be monitored and Modded quite strictly within clear guidelines. On C+ there seemed to be a general understanding that the Know How section wasn’t for banter and I think the section was stronger and better used on account of it.



Off topic posts yes, silliness? Maybe. I'd agree that there's no place for ironic comments &c in Beginners though.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (8 Oct 2009)

Andy in Sig said:


> I think that that is a valid whinge about the standard of some replies and I can see why it might irritate somebody who really wants to get down to the nuts and bolts.



I don't think it is, really. If Bonj (or anyone else) is unhappy with other people's posts and still wants to stay, then he should simply make better posts. Or, if he wants a purely technical forum, he can go and set one up. Easy.


----------



## Andy in Sig (8 Oct 2009)

That's a fair enough alternative take. I am perhaps more inclined to see if his concerns are reasonable enough to make sense and be accommodated.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (8 Oct 2009)

Andy in Sig said:


> That's a fair enough alternative take. I am perhaps more inclined to see if his concerns are reasonable enough to make sense and be accommodated.



Perhaps they are, in isolation. But where does it stop? Do we then give Linf a sub forum where he can talk about 4X4s and horses? Do we give User482 his own sub forum for green issues? Or Do we just throw it open to everyone who wants to ask for one? It seems to me to be the height of rudeness to come onto someone else's forum, flounce off, then come back and start saying how it's not quite how you'd like it to be, and could we possibly run it a bit more the way I like it, please?


----------



## Panter (8 Oct 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> Panter had an idea for technical stickes, I think, in the know how section (e.g. gear adjustment advice and tutorials, brake adjustment &c).
> 
> TBH, I don't mind answering things as they come up (in beginners, know how), but maybe that's just me.



That really came from when I was trying to find that gear indexing guide you'd posted before but couldn't find in the end.

I just thought that it would be of use, not just for newbies, but for anyone who wanted a quick way of finding that sort of information.

To be honest, an "Ask John-The-Monkey" sub forum would cover it as 99.9% of those really helpful links/answers came from you!


----------



## John the Monkey (8 Oct 2009)

Panter said:


> To be honest, an "Ask John-The-Monkey" sub forum would cover it as 99.9% of those really helpful links/answers came from you!


I'd crack under the pressure.

Now an "Ask Mickle" section...


----------



## Dayvo (8 Oct 2009)

Uncle Mort said:


> Well that cigar will have to *go* for a start!



_Go_ where, exactly?


----------



## Chuffy (8 Oct 2009)

John the Monkey said:


> Off topic posts yes, silliness? Maybe. I'd agree that there's no place for ironic comments &c in Beginners though.


There is a thread in Know How about cutting mudguard stays which has now run to 70 posts. It's very funny (shaped explosive charges, anglegrinders, Plax's dad etc) but it's not really appropriate for Know How. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. I don't know how hard it would be for the Mods to split the thread, leaving relevant technical replies in Know How and moving the silly stuff in Cafe, but that would seem sensible. 

Technical Stickies - I've never been a fan of the idea. Too many subjects to cover and it doesn't encourage new blood to start answering questions when the old lags have got tired of answering yet another 'which tyre?' thread, or whatever. The answer might be to create a technical library for detailed articles on aspects of repairs (or just a load of links to Sheldon Brown and Park Tools etc) but creating a load of stickies isn't the answer.


----------



## bonj2 (8 Oct 2009)

Rhythm Thief said:


> Perhaps they are, in isolation. But where does it stop? Do we then give Linf a sub forum where he can talk about 4X4s and horses? Do we give User482 his own sub forum for green issues? Or Do we just throw it open to everyone who wants to ask for one? It seems to me to be the height of rudeness to come onto someone else's forum, flounce off, then come back and start saying how it's not quite how you'd like it to be, and could we possibly run it a bit more the way I like it, please?



Well, the idea being that yes, we do throw it open to anybody that wants - but possibly with the proviso that they have to get a certain amount of nominations, like MPs do to stand for parliament. (And/or just be approved by the existing mods.)
Therefore they could have those if they wanted, but if they were unpopular, then they would be binned off.
Or if, as is likely to be the case with linf's sub forum, it just turned into an endless argument between him and Mr P about whether drivers are victimized or not, then it could simply be moved into a single thread in Room 101 on grounds of exclusion.
I'm not sure User482 would want his own sub forum for green issues, as I'm not sure he particularly wants the USP that it offers, namely the ability to mod it the way he wants. Perhaps if he does, then it should be taken as a warning that he intends to, for example, ban any opinions that are not backed up by evidence - although that being the case, it should possibly be explained in his blurb.


----------



## Andy in Sig (8 Oct 2009)

RT is making a sensible enough point and bonj has his views. Perhaps the way ahead would be for Shaun to come to some sort of decision, which if it is other than "no chance" he could then put to a poll.


----------



## Rhythm Thief (8 Oct 2009)

bonj2 said:


> Well, the idea being that yes, we do throw it open to anybody that wants - but possibly with the proviso that they have to get a certain amount of nominations, like MPs do to stand for parliament. (And/or just be approved by the existing mods.)
> Therefore they could have those if they wanted, but if they were unpopular, then they would be binned off.
> Or if, as is likely to be the case with linf's sub forum, it just turned into an endless argument between him and Mr P about whether drivers are victimized or not, then it could simply be moved into a single thread in Room 101 on grounds of exclusion.
> I'm not sure User482 would want his own sub forum for green issues, as I'm not sure he particularly wants the USP that it offers, namely the ability to mod it the way he wants. Perhaps if he does, then it should be taken as a warning that he intends to, for example, ban any opinions that are not backed up by evidence - although that being the case, it should possibly be explained in his blurb.



Ok, fair enough. You've thought it through and explained it well, I'll give you that.


----------



## Shaun (8 Oct 2009)

I'm addressing some of the points here by creating a framework of Rules and Guidelines for CC.

I've never felt the need for them before, but as we've grown and more and more people arrive without prior knowledge of how CC works, the lines are have become a little blurred.

The new rules (_which I'll publish and announce soon_) will give everyone an idea of what is acceptable and what is not, and hopefully allow for better forum and thread management. It won't account for absolutely everything, but it's much more comprehensive than "Be nice to each other ... " 

The rules will also help the moderators to take swifter action when people transgress, and offer a more structured approach to managing threads and posts within the forums. There will be less need to discuss and deliberate, because more often now it will be clear when a specific rule has been broken.

That being said, me and the mods volunteer our free time and there is absolutely no way we can ever manage to moderate every thread and post in every forum, so if you seen things, you've got to report them to us.

Within the rules there will be specific reference to the Know How and Technical forums, addressing the issue of non-technical replies and off-topic rambling. This is based on Bonj's thoughts for a cleaner, clearer technical aspect to CC.

I will not be taking up the idea of sub-forums, however I have previously discussed the idea of a knowledge base that is managed by CC members, and think this, in essence, is what you're talking about.

Technically, this is entirely possible and I think would be a good asset to CC. A sort of extended library of advice and tips, that could be managed by one or more members. (Ha, Bonj the librarian .... )

However, just now I simply don't have the time to set this up. I've got it in my to-do folder, but can't see me getting around to this before the end of this year.

I do have plans to take a couple of days off in the new year to re-work the site and to add some new features so it may be that next year we get the chance to make a start on this.

Thanks for the feedback,
Shaun


----------



## goo_mason (8 Oct 2009)

That sounds pretty good to me!

I think we were getting to the 'we need some rules' stage anyway, as the 'Friendly Place' was starting to get pretty unfriendly in certain places lately, and some people just seem far too keen to keep pushing the boundaries.

Nice one, Shaun


----------



## Archie_tect (8 Oct 2009)

Excellent- much appreciated Shaun.


----------



## alecstilleyedye (8 Oct 2009)

bonj2 said:


> Well one thing that strikes me as the difference between this and yacf is this: the scope of the 'general' forum.
> The 'general' forum on here is "cafe", and it is, by intent or by evolution or whatever means, largely NON-cycling related. It doesn't list itself as cycling related or non cycling related, but by fair means or foul, it IS largely non-cycling related - people just post in there about what's going on in their life.
> *Compare this to on yacf, on which I would say the 'general' forum is probably 'freewheeling'. By contrast, this IS a cycling related forum.*
> 
> ...



just as a point of order, i think you'll find _the pub_ is yacf's general non-cycling forum, with sub fora including a politics and life style debating forum.


----------



## MacB (8 Oct 2009)

Chuffy said:


> There is a thread in Know How about cutting mudguard stays which has now run to 70 posts. It's very funny (shaped explosive charges, anglegrinders, Plax's dad etc) but it's not really appropriate for Know How. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. I don't know how hard it would be for the Mods to split the thread, leaving relevant technical replies in Know How and moving the silly stuff in Cafe, but that would seem sensible.
> 
> Technical Stickies - I've never been a fan of the idea. Too many subjects to cover and it doesn't encourage new blood to start answering questions when the old lags have got tired of answering yet another 'which tyre?' thread, or whatever. The answer might be to create a technical library for detailed articles on aspects of repairs (or just a load of links to Sheldon Brown and Park Tools etc) but creating a load of stickies isn't the answer.



I think Chuffy, with this and his other post, has grasped the essence of the issue re Know How stuff. Having tried to explore via the search function here I can verify how unproductive this can be. I think Shauns idea of a clean up and more orderly posting in Knowhow makes sense. If the techie bit expands to more I think this will only be as a result of voluntary work by CC members. I've been collating all the info I've come across and will happily write it up. I do think a few stickies would be good, just the basics, something like:-

bike parts - a detailed post, with diagrams, listing all component parts of a bike, the various names they're known by and what is compatible with what
LBS's - a list of bike shops with CC member reviews that are dated
bike types - list the types, use and pros/cons of each type
frame materials - list the options and pros/cons including the specific type of steel/alu/titanium/carbon


I would love CC to be a one stop shop but do understand it's not practical to recreate vast swathes of data from elsewhere on the net, links would be needed.


----------



## Chuffy (9 Oct 2009)

MacB said:


> I think Chuffy, with this and his other post, has grasped the essence of the issue re Know How stuff. Having tried to explore via the search function here I can verify how unproductive this can be.


Having grasped the essence I hope that it can be tugged to a satisfactory conclusion. 

CC has enough bikey stuff to give it a two wheeled core around which everything else revolves but avoids being a playground for bike geeks swapping tracknut serial numbers. I like that.


----------



## MacB (9 Oct 2009)

Chuffy said:


> Having grasped the essence I hope that it can be tugged to a satisfactory conclusion.
> 
> CC has enough bikey stuff to give it a two wheeled core around which everything else revolves but avoids being a playground for bike geeks swapping tracknut serial numbers. I like that.



yep, and more succinctly put than I managed, hence why I think a 'Wiki' style editing function would need to be incorporated. Not a free for all edit but one via mod/s appointed for that section.


----------

