How about a Bonneville/dry lakes category?

[Xingu]

Some folks would post in the wrong section, even if we only had a single category called "Models"

Too many categories would only cause more confusion.

[Casey]

5 hours ago, Xingu said:

Some folks would post in the wrong section, even if we only had a single category called "Models"

The only changes I would like to see made are the "General" board changed to "General Discussion", and the "Model Building Questions & Answers" board moved up and directly under "General Discussion", as part of the larger "General" category.

[StevenGuthmiller]

6 hours ago, Xingu said:

Some folks would post in the wrong section, even if we only had a single category called "Models"

Too many categories would only cause more confusion.

Exactly!

Which is why I am confused about why every different type of racing should have it's own category.

It would be a little like having separate categories for Mopar, GM, Ford, AMC, yadda, yadda yadda.

I'm not advocating for separate categories for factory stock, customs & rods, I'm advocating against adding all of these goofy "niche" categories.

 

Steve 

[Ace-Garageguy]

8 minutes ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

Exactly!

Which is why I am confused about why every different type of racing should have it's own category.

It would be a little like having separate categories for Mopar, GM, Ford, AMC, yadda, yadda yadda.

I'm not advocating for separate categories for factory stock, customs & rods, I'm advocating against adding all of these goofy "niche" categories.

Probably could have just said "niche" without prefacing it with "goofy".

Even though I have zero interest in building models of cars the way the factory made them look, I don't feel the need to call that particular category "goofy".

Edited November 29, 2018 by Ace-Garageguy

[Richard Bartrop]

Basically, "goofy niche category" means, "Stuff I'm not interested in"

Personally, I'm not sure there's a burning need for more categories.  I think the tag system works well for sorting out different interests.   Even the "goofy niche" ones.

If anything,  I think the categories could stand a little consolidation, because what we do have is kind of arbitrary.  Cars are divided up into Drag racing, NASCAR and....everything else?   Cars and trucks each have their own track,  because we wouldn't want those touching for some reason.  If you build anything bigger than 1/20, that goes into its own category wayyyy over in left field.   And if you make something that fits more than one category, invariably the admins will decide you put in the wrong one and move it.

I'm almost tempted to build a 1/16 drag truck, just to see how many times it gets cycled around the forum.

[StevenGuthmiller]

6 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

Probably could have just said "niche" without prefacing it with "goofy".

Even though I have zero interest in building models of cars the way the factory made them look, I don't feel the need to call that particular category "goofy".

I'll bet a lot of people here would consider it "goofy" if I were lobbying for a "cars with tail fins" or a "pre-war classics" category.

It's not the subject matter that makes it goofy.

It's the fact that people believe that their particular "niche" interests warrant special consideration that makes them goofy.

 

 

Steve

[StevenGuthmiller]

6 hours ago, Richard Bartrop said:

If anything,  I think the categories could stand a little consolidation, because what we do have is kind of arbitrary.  Cars are divided up into Drag racing, NASCAR and....everything else?   Cars and trucks each have their own track,  because we wouldn't want those touching for some reason.

That's my point.

Dividing up race cars into even more tiny sub-categories serves no purpose other than to meet the demands of the people interested in that particular subject & muddy the waters for everyone else.

In my opinion, race cars are cars built for racing.

Pretty simple.

One category.

And in the mean time, those of us who are not interested in racing or trucks still have no categories dedicated to our interests at all.

I'm perfectly happy to continue with that, but let's please not start adding a bunch more unnecessary categories.

 

 

Steve

Edited November 29, 2018 by StevenGuthmiller

[Richard Bartrop]

6 hours ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

I'll bet a lot of people here would consider it "goofy" if I were lobbying for a "cars with tail fins" or a "pre-war classics" category.

There are also people who think talking abojut model cars in a model car forum, or that buying them in a hobby shop is goofy, or that everyone whould stop talking about subject that they aren't interested in.

These are opinions that are best ignored.

Edited November 29, 2018 by Richard Bartrop

[Ace-Garageguy]

7 hours ago, StevenGuthmiller said:

...Dividing up race cars into even more tiny sub-categories serves no purpose other than to meet the demands of the people interested in that particular subject & muddy the waters for everyone else.

In my opinion, race cars are cars built for racing...

Solely in the context of how the board is organized now and how it could be LOGICALLY improved, I agree in principle (though just how more categories would "muddy the waters" for anyone I'm not clear on, as there's certainly no obligation to look at anything one isn't interested in).

But back to "race cars are cars built for racing".

Exactly, and the two existing categories of NASCAR and drag-racing deny by implication the existence of road racing (whether it be European F1 or other formula cars, stateside SCCA, FIA closed course production and prototype cars {LeMans etc.}, vintage CanAm and TransAm, European saloon racing, etc.), LSR competition, drifting, rally cars, , USAC midgets and champ cars, contemporary Indy cars, and a host of other classes of competition that simply DO NOT FIT in either of the two categories we currently have to choose from.

My carefully considered suggestions:

I would advocate for a single category for "Competition Vehicles", whether they be any of the above, or even off-road crawlers and high-speed desert racers...except motorcycles. Encourage intelligent titles that clearly identify what the thing is supposed to be.

I'd change "cars" to "Cars, SUVs and Small Trucks" as I believe most people tend to think of these three as being related, and as evidenced by a lot of folks who refer to anything with smallish, steerable wheels as a "car".

I'd probably tend towards a separate section for "Hot Rods and Customs" as well. Though these are currently lumped together under generic "cars", builders of out-of-the-box and/or factory stock have a very different mindset from those who modify everything. Of course, this opens the floodgates to more muddy water. Exactly what constitutes a hot-rod or a custom? Different wheels? Not usually, but if extreme, then yes. Intricate scalloped paint on an otherwise stock body? Yes. Engine swap in an otherwise stock-appearing car? Definitely yes. In short, anything with significant modifications. This really isn't hard.

I'd still have a separate category for "Large Trucks" or "Heavy Trucks". Though relatively small, some of the best work on the board is presented under that heading, and I simply believe heavy commercial vehicles are different enough from anything else on wheels to deserve their own space.

I'd split "everything else" into "Motorcycles" and "Everything Else", as boats, ships, trains and aircraft do NOT logically fit with motorcycles on a forum geared to powered surface vehicles in general.

I'd dump the separate category for "resin and diecast", as some of the heavily modified diecasts BELONG in the respective categories of their subject matter, and resin models are already all over the board anyway. Talk about muddy waters.

If it's believed diecast or other pre-built collectors still need their own corner, a topic labeled "diecast or other collectibles, bought-not-built" should do the job nicely.

I'd also dump the "big boyz" category, as it's tiny, rarely visited by many members, and any of the subjects fit the above categories. Encourage posters to state the scale of the model in the thread title, if it's not obvious.

As already noted, some people will indeed post in the wrong place no matter what you do, but I believe these changes would make things simpler and more rational, and easier for some to get their work in the right place. I also think it would encourage the more casual visitors to get a sampling of a broader cross-section of what's being built than the current arrangement does.

Edited November 29, 2018 by Ace-Garageguy

[Richard Bartrop]

As far as different scales go, people post 1/32 and 1/43 models in the regular forum, and it doesn't seem to be causing any problems.

[Mr. Metallic]

I think the multitude of categories is a direct result of people not using the "tag" function (which I am guilty of). If ALL members were using the tags there wouldn't be a need to have so many separate categories. So maybe the board can be set up so that it forces the poster to apply at least 1 tag to their thread when they start one. It should be able to be done because it already won't allow you to start a thread without having a title, so the code exists.

I think a "refine" and "combine" process needs to be applied to the current categories and sub-categories on the board. Renaming, re-contenting and consolidating would make the board more intuitive to use, and foster more cross-pollination. It would allow better sharing of ideas, techniques and in turn would make for a stronger hobby overall. Just because someone is building a model based on a die-cast doesn't mean there's not something to learn from what they're building. Maybe they've introduced a better paint technique that could help make my model better. But because that thread is currently housed in the resin/diecast category, i might have missed it. I'm not advocating  to combine everything into one big General category, but i think it's time to make some refinements that make sense.

[Richard Bartrop]

I have absolutely no problem with models based on resit or diecast sharing space with styrene.    Prebuilt stuff can still keep its own category.

[StevenGuthmiller]

1 hour ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

(though just how more categories would "muddy the waters" for anyone I'm not clear on, as there's certainly no obligation to look at anything one isn't interested in).

All that I mean by "muddying the waters" is that if we set a new precedence by continuing to allow the addition of more and more niche categories, we could wind up with 50 categories to weed through.

If that wouldn't muddy the waters, I don't know what would.

 

Steve

[StevenGuthmiller]

1 hour ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

 

I would advocate for a single category for "Competition Vehicles", whether they be any of the above, or even off-road crawlers and high-speed desert racers.

Works for me.

"Racing" or "Competition Vehicles".

Whatever floats your boat.

Either way, I don't see any valid argument for why we need a bunch of separate sub-categories for the racing section.

If it's not built to be driven down the street in front of my house, it belongs in the competition section.

Easy peasy.

 

Steve

[Lunajammer]

On 11/28/2018 at 6:02 AM, W-409 said:

...and even though it sounds pretty good at first, at least I get tired of clicking through the several subcategories before opening the first thread. And because of that, I usually stop visiting on those forums.

Pretty much hits the nail on the head.

[MeatMan]

1 hour ago, Mr. Metallic said:

I think the multitude of categories is a direct result of people not using the "tag" function (which I am guilty of). If ALL members were using the tags there wouldn't be a need to have so many separate categories. So maybe the board can be set up so that it forces the poster to apply at least 1 tag to their thread when they start one. It should be able to be done because it already won't allow you to start a thread without having a title, so the code exists.

I think a "refine" and "combine" process needs to be applied to the current categories and sub-categories on the board. Renaming, re-contenting and consolidating would make the board more intuitive to use, and foster more cross-pollination. It would allow better sharing of ideas, techniques and in turn would make for a stronger hobby overall. Just because someone is building a model based on a die-cast doesn't mean there's not something to learn from what they're building. Maybe they've introduced a better paint technique that could help make my model better. But because that thread is currently housed in the resin/diecast category, i might have missed it. I'm not advocating  to combine everything into one big General category, but i think it's time to make some refinements that make sense.

 

2 hours ago, Ace-Garageguy said:

Solely in the context of how the board is organized now and how it could be LOGICALLY improved, I agree in principle (though just how more categories would "muddy the waters" for anyone I'm not clear on, as there's certainly no obligation to look at anything one isn't interested in).

But back to "race cars are cars built for racing".

Exactly, and the two existing categories of NASCAR and drag-racing deny by implication the existence of road racing (whether it be European F1 or other formula cars, stateside SCCA, FIA closed course production and prototype cars {LeMans etc.}, vintage CanAm and TransAm, European saloon racing, etc.), LSR competition, drifting, rally cars, , USAC midgets and champ cars, contemporary Indy cars, and a host of other classes of competition that simply DO NOT FIT in either of the two categories we currently have to choose from.

My carefully considered suggestions:

I would advocate for a single category for "Competition Vehicles", whether they be any of the above, or even off-road crawlers and high-speed desert racers...except motorcycles. Encourage intelligent titles that clearly identify what the thing is supposed to be.

I'd change "cars" to "Cars, SUVs and Small Trucks" as I believe most people tend to think of these three as being related, and as evidenced by a lot of folks who refer to anything with smallish, steerable wheels as a "car".

I'd probably tend towards a separate section for "Hot Rods and Customs" as well. Though these are currently lumped together under generic "cars", builders of out-of-the-box and/or factory stock have a very different mindset from those who modify everything. Of course, this opens the floodgates to more muddy water. Exactly what constitutes a hot-rod or a custom? Different wheels? Not usually, but if extreme, then yes. Intricate scalloped paint on an otherwise stock body? Yes. Engine swap in an otherwise stock-appearing car? Definitely yes. In short, anything with significant modifications. This really isn't hard.

I'd still have a separate category for "Large Trucks" or "Heavy Trucks". Though relatively small, some of the best work on the board is presented under that heading, and I simply believe heavy commercial vehicles are different enough from anything else on wheels to deserve their own space.

I'd split "everything else" into "Motorcycles" and "Everything Else", as boats, ships, trains and aircraft do NOT logically fit with motorcycles on a forum geared to powered surface vehicles in general.

I'd dump the separate category for "resin and diecast", as some of the heavily modified diecasts BELONG in the respective categories of their subject matter, and resin models are already all over the board anyway. Talk about muddy waters.

If it's believed diecast or other pre-built collectors still need their own corner, a topic labeled "diecast or other collectibles, bought-not-built" should do the job nicely.

I'd also dump the "big boyz" category, as it's tiny, rarely visited by many members, and any of the subjects fit the above categories. Encourage posters to state the scale of the model in the thread title, if it's not obvious.

As already noted, some people will indeed post in the wrong place no matter what you do, but I believe these changes would make things simpler and more rational, and easier for some to get their work in the right place. I also think it would encourage the more casual visitors to get a sampling of a broader cross-section of what's being built than the current arrangement does.

I agree! I don't use the tagging either, so maybe it needs to be emphasized.