New Forums?

[Bob Sihler]

In the past, there was sometimes talk of splitting forums such as Southwest and East into other, more specific ones.

Is there still any interest in that? Any need? Any other climbing-related forums people might like to see?

Constructive ideas are most welcome.

[MarkDidier]

I always thought it would make sense to break the East into at least 2 areas. I don't know that 3 are necessary (as in the regional board title - New England, Mid-Atlantic and Southeast). It seems that there are two main discussions that go on - either New England or Southeast - and there is enough distance between the two areas (and topics) that IMO it makes sense to separate them. If you just wanted to keep it to 2 areas then a logical cutoff could be made for the Mid-Atlantic.

[Buz Groshong]

I always thought it would make sense to break the East into at least 2 areas. I don't know that 3 are necessary (as in the regional board title - New England, Mid-Atlantic and Southeast). It seems that there are two main discussions that go on - either New England or Southeast - and there is enough distance between the two areas (and topics) that IMO it makes sense to separate them. If you just wanted to keep it to 2 areas then a logical cutoff could be made for the Mid-Atlantic.

The East regional board gets very few posts as it is. Splitting it would make two (or three) boards with even fewer posts. Doesn't really work for me. Doesn't take long to check the board and see that none of the posts interest me.

[Bob Sihler]

I agree with Mark that it could make sense to split the East into Northeast and Southeast, but Buz is also right that the East gets few hits and therefore may not need to be split.

What about splitting Utah from the very broad Southwest board?

What about, as was once suggested, splitting California into North and South? I think that would be a huge job and a potential mess, but I'm interested to hear what people think.

More subforums for Europe? That would be a job better handled by a European elf, but please speak up if you have any thoughts.

Other ideas?

[Deleted User]

Bob - what about subtopics within geographic regions? (i.e. peakbaggers, hikers, climbers, mountaineers, etc all have slightly different motivations). Keep the geography topics broad (as they are now or even broader), but then sub-categorize by (potential) user?

I don't know if thats worth pursuing or not.

If we do split it up by geography, then I would think it would be easiest for you guys if the forums were geared towards the number of potential users (I would say that SP's membership is probably 60-75% CA, CO, WA, UT, OR, and AZ). Therefore, split those states up into very precise categories and keep everything else more general. As general membership changes (i.e. if more European members join, then get more specialized in breaking up the geographic areas in Europe), we could re-draw the lines of division.

A third option would be to divide the forums into regions with the most posts. This might be a big hairball because a few users make a large number of posts, but then again, if they are the ones using the forum, then cater to them... who knows?

Sorry I don't have any concrete ideas... just rambling... (killing time on a conference call really!)

[Buz Groshong]

One of the problems I have with splitting up any of the forums is that my interest and those of others is often broader than the potential split up forums would be. When I go to the East board, I'm looking primarily for Mid-Atlantic stuff (usually none there) but I do like looking at some of the new England and Southeastern stuff as well. The big problem, though, that I see with splitting up the East board is that some of the split up boards will be so sparse that newcomers (and possibly others) will be more reluctant to post anything.

[anita]

I think we should split it up like this
- Mount Washington is deadly
- Everything else

[mrchad9]

What about, as was once suggested, splitting California into North and South? I think that would be a huge job and a potential mess, but I'm interested to hear what people think.

I would vote no. It isn't as if the board is so crowded it is difficult to find something (to me that is the only justification to split something), and there are seldom more than 5 or so threads active at a time. Seems OK as is.

And then you have the issues around the Sierra, which is both, and dealing with all the existing threads. Seems like a lot of work and risk for next to nothing (and possibly a step backwards).

[Bob Sihler]

Anita, no thanks for you!

[butitsadryheat]

I could just imagine the battle that would ensue around where to divide California

[Deleted User]

I could just imagine the battle that would ensue around where to divide California

Seeeriously...

Maybe interstate 5? East v West. Republican v Democrat. Regan v Brown. OOOOOOOOOHHH... the Chief v Vitaly... LOVE IT!

Just like the good old days! I miss Ron.

[Arthur Digbee]

We could split the Midwest. Right now it has the Great Lakes, the Great Plains, and, well, Texas.

None of which would mix very well at a party.

[JasonH]

How about merging Texas with Mexico.

[Joseph Bullough]

What about splitting Utah from the very broad Southwest board?

It would be nice to have a separate board for Utah, but IMHO it's probably not necessary. It's not too difficult to find the Utah related stuff as it is.

[Arthur Digbee]

What about splitting Utah from the very broad Southwest board?

It would be nice to have a separate board for Utah, but IMHO it's probably not necessary. It's not too difficult to find the Utah related stuff as it is.

Utah people are their own, tight group? I've heard that before.

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.