by Bob Sihler » Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:28 pm
Fletch wrote:So no real suprises here, but it does look like places like the midwest are heavy in people and light in mountains and vice versa for places like the Rockies. Either way though it looks like you can make a case to divide up the CA forum.
by Bob Sihler » Wed Jan 19, 2011 10:33 pm
Arthur Digbee wrote:On a more serious note, the real question is: what's the advantage of sorting into boards? Is it to keep people within socializing distance together? (Then split N/S CA by all means, but why not have a Chicago Board, a DC Board, an Atlanta Board, and so on.) Is each board a driving radius board? The LA people drive to the Sierras, so keep CA together.
And in either case the Midwest board is too big. Those of us in the Great Lakes mostly recreate in the Great Lakes on weekends; when we go to Texas or the Dakotas (also Midwest board) for big trips we might also go to Northern Rockies or Colorado.
I know the Midwest board is often quiet. But so is Africa and some other international boards. It doesn't cost anything to add a board.
by MarkDidier » Wed Jan 19, 2011 11:54 pm
Bob Sihler wrote:I think the advantage of having more specific boards is to help people find information more easily, not to group populations. Although I live in the East, I rarely look at that board, but I check the Northern Rockies frequently.
To me, the driving reason to split should be traffic. So while I see the sense in splitting the Midwest and the East, I don't see that the traffic justifies the additional sorting. It's not to say that it won't happen; this thread is about finding out if there's much interest in these ideas at all. No, it doesn't cost anything to add a board, but there can be a fine line between variety and clutter, and I want to avoid going overboard, ha ha.
by Bubba Suess » Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:10 am
by Sakkinen » Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:27 am
by Buz Groshong » Thu Jan 20, 2011 3:19 pm
Bob Sihler wrote:Fletch wrote:So no real suprises here, but it does look like places like the midwest are heavy in people and light in mountains and vice versa for places like the Rockies. Either way though it looks like you can make a case to divide up the CA forum.
Thanks for doing that legwork; it's both helpful and interesting.
Right now, if I do anything, I'll separate Utah.
I really, really, really don't want to split California, but if there were a big demand for it, I would consider it. It would be a ton of work sorting existing threads, especially the Sierra ones. It would almost make more sense to split the Sierra Nevada from the rest of CA, but even that could be problematic or at least tedious.
by ZeeJay » Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:35 pm
by WouterB » Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:45 pm
by JasonH » Thu Jan 20, 2011 6:49 pm
WouterB wrote:I'd love to see a gear selling section for Europe. I'm always looking for stuff, but every single time I click on gear I need, it's in the US. An extra column in the title displaying the sellers location would do too!
by lcarreau » Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:20 pm
ZeeJay wrote:My vote would be to split out Utah. I live in Utah and almost never travel anyplace else, so being lumped in with Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, and especially Texas, does nothing for me. But, I can see how non Utahns might like southern Utah lumped with Arizona and New Mexico, but I for one would not.
by lcarreau » Thu Jan 20, 2011 9:36 pm
Fletch wrote:Based on the current set up North America has the following "subdivisions:
by Clark_Griswold » Sat Jan 22, 2011 4:05 pm
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests