Does BT need a new forum? (Page 5)

I see a lot of people are getting the feeling that "we don't want change" (we is being used as a very unspecific generality). It's not that I don't want change - I'm always willing to give something new a go...but I think what is difficult to get your hands around is how to change things without changing the underlying tenor of the site. One of the reasons I so appreciate this site is it's fairly gentle nature. I'm a fairly well read, slow triathlete. I have things to offer, but hesitate to offer my feedback sometimes in threads that are being responded to by folks that I know are much faster than me. Would I feel "safer" in a introductory forum? Maybe. I also might be frustrated with the repetitive nature of the newbie questions. Who knows.

I really do think that some way of improving (and I'm putting that in air quotes) the Mentor Groups would be wonderful. I love the idea of a geographic grouping (being in Maine - finding training partners/people with similar challenges can be difficult), I also like the idea of a more year 'round approach. As I mentioned in a previous post to this thread - I found beginnertriathlete well after the Mentor season was in full swing, and as a result didn't get involved in a group when I could have used the involvement. Yanti has a good idea (ok - she has many good ideas...but one in one of her replies that struck a nerve with me) about the Introduce Yourself forum...could we link that with Mentor Groups in some fashion? I know that a challenge I have had with mentor groups is that out of the 20 people (your estimations may vary) that join a specific thread, only about 5 actively participate...how can we get the simultaneously running active threads to join together into a single community?

I completely agree with Fred_D's referring to the IMSG Q& A thread started by Bryan - that was pure gold. How can we get more threads like that - and not have them buried in Mentor Groups (because I don't know which mentor group threads to lurk on)?

More thoughts later - got to jump onto a conference call. This discussion is very worthwhile - please let's keep the open dialogue going.

Completely agree.

Everytime I see the comments...

1.  THIS IS BEGINNER TRIATHLETE
2.  (insert word here) much?
3.  elitist
4.  d-bag, douchy, or any form of the word

...I know the thread is going to take a mind of it's own, and be completely unrelated to training, racing, or us becoming better triathletes.  It's these type of passive aggressive comments that are allowed on BT that make it unappealing at times.   

Which are what?  They got their feelings hurt?  They don't like triathlon anymore?  Someone disagrees with them? They made the mods mad?  They stepped outside the rules? I'm asking because I keep seeing that written, but I don't see anyone explaining what they are other than in some generic watered down version of "it's just not the same". I bet it's more "the same" then most of the old timers realize....but THEY are not the same. It happens.

If you change a forum around to keep individuals happy, pretty soon you don't have a forum, you have a few individuals.  And besides, you can't keep everyone happy anyway.

BTW - this "problem" is not unique to BT, as I'm sure you know.  The fact is, interent chat boards reflect the status of whatever endeavor they are about....in this case, Triathlon.  With the huge influx of people into the sport lately, it should not come as a surprise to anyone that boards such as this go through growing pains.   Some will leave, more will come.....probably LOTS more before it's over.

Just for the record Fred, I actually do seek out Goose's posts. Dude. Is. Funny. But he has been kind of serious lately. Maybe THAT is the problem with BT of late?

Carry on - this discussion is refreshing, and hopefully provides actionable advice to Ron, et. al.

Ah, the good ol' days when a first post was met by snarkiness and/or sarcasm by The Bear.  Seems so quaint now.... 

I've wondered about that too as my son is interested in XTerra.

And it is appreciated!

Much prefer BT acceptance vs the verbal snot rockets commonly hurled on certain other tri site.

I personally don't like the idea of a veteran forum and a beginner forum and this is why...I've been here since 2005, and started hanging out on the threads to help here and there, but also to learn a new or unique angle to something I haven't thought of. I've been doing this sport for a long time and have learned from the very best, so when most veterans post something, it's usually either old news to me or complete bs that keeps getting spread on forums as gospel. From time to time though, someone, usually new to the sport, throws a curve ball and makes you think. Perfect example is many years ago in a thread here Rogillio (sp?) made an off handed remark that he tries to more or less fast on his long rides. He promptly got blasted for it. I started digging around and low and behold, there was some evidence behind this that had credibility. So I tried it (sorta) and it has changed the way I train. Had they not gotten heated here on BT I would have missed it.

Another good example of this site creating interest was that old TI thread where Terry chimed in. When called to back up his claims with results, he wilted. That thread was referenced all over the internet and still pops up on ST from time to time.

I guess what I'm getting at is that conflict is a good thing. Facts are fleshed out and new ideas are sprung. Manners are still needed and name calling isn't usually appropriate, but it seems the site has gone a little sterile for fear of stirring the pot. I can't tell you how many times I've replied to a thread with a long well thought out response, only to delete it before posting because someone might misconstrue something I said as mean spirited. Then I just log out and move on.

I think TriAya nailed one of the problems here.  Is not that a "somewhat accomplished overconfident" poster disagrees with a very experience/knowlegdeable/fast poster (EKFP, if you will), it's that the forum's culture doesn't really allow a sharp rebuke.  If the EKFP dresses someone down (usually deservedly), the EKFP is meet with the rallying cry of "this is BEGINNER triathlete" or "that may be true is you're fast" or some other such silliness.  It's almost a systemic bias against the EKFP.  Whether it be by the owners, the moderators or the posters, I don't think that's good.

Now wait a minute......if "change" means we all get to be a bit more ignorant when the situation calls for it......I'M IN!!!     

AAAAAAH NO! PM it to me, I'll be your shill!

In my experience it's never a problem if someONE construes something as mean-spirited. If a bunch of people agree that it's flat-out mean-to-be-mean, without any useful information, then it's a problem.

I think for me, a lot of the Tri Talk forum posts are of the "tell me I'm pretty" variety.  The poster wants re-assurance that what they are doing / want to do is "correct" and when someone brings up a contrary view point (often the EKFP poster to use the term) that person is shot down. 

If the purpose of the Tri Talk forum is to disseminate information/opinions/view points and to have a discussion, then all view points should be considered and sometimes the answer (or one of the answers) is (and should be) "no, you're not pretty."

Yeah, I think that's my point.  It doesn't really become a debate on the merits.  As tri808 pointed out, once the passive/aggressive statements come out, it just falls apart.

I think we're talking about two different types of threads.  I get your expensive equipment example.  Although, I do think the original question, but not the implication, is valid.  Regardless, I'm talking about a situtation where the EFKP does know how to defend their position.  However, once enough people chime in with "this is BEGINNER triathlete" or similar, the effort isn't worth it.  I don't see that as retreat, but being shouted down with a non-substantive mentality that seems to be fostered by the site.  I don't have specific thread examples, and I'm talking in generalities, but I've brought this up before on those threads.

I agree it won't be fixed by sub-forums.

This point is, in part, what motivated my original post. The "hey, this is BEGINNERtriathlete.com" and the like does get thrown around a good bit, and after someone has been around a while, the prospect of provoking that reaction is one (and only one) reason that some people do exactly what TJ described and eventually cut their losses and stop posting. (I've done exactly the same thing several times -- yes I am aware that one likely response is 'nothing lost'.)

The original thought behind something like a 'getting faster' forum (not beginner vs. elite -- when I was a beginner I wanted nothing more than to get faster!) was to avoid that sort of reaction. The idea was that the understanding would be, within such a forum, that anybody posting there had, as his or her primary aim (at least for the purpose of the post) to get faster. No calling out the guy (or gal) who wants to go sub-20 in the next 5K as 'non-beginner'. But equally, no lambasting someone who is struggling for a 30 minute 5K (or whatever).

But, the idea was trashed pretty quickly.  FWIW, I would still love to see it happen as part of a reorganization (not more sub-forums; different sub-forums).

ETA (missed a couple of recent posts):  The deterrent isn't about defending against the 'this is a beginner's site' remark.  The deterrent is twofold:  (1) the need to do so becomes very wearisome; (2) as Jason pointed out, once that reaction gets provoked, it can be too late -- the thread often takes a dive.

I wonder if some of the concerns could be addressed by a modification to the way that thread prominence/hot-ness is figured. It seems that what many of the experienced old-timers want is for more threads that are engaging for their knowledge level. If there are more threads that do that, and give them something to discuss, then they'll keep coming back for more.

Currently, threads in TT are ranked simply based on the timing of the most recent post. This works reasonably well as a way of targeting active discussions. But it skews in favor of threads where anybody can post a trivial comment (like "you so rock") vs. threads that provide new and interesting material, possibly quite substantive discussion, but less likely to generate new posts every 5 minutes. These threads are likely of interest to old-timers and beginners alike, but probably fewer people feel able to contribute posts of their own. If there was a way of keeping such threads "hot", then that could improve the quality of the threads that appear on the front page of TT. A "like" button might not do the trick, but a "helpful" button might be closer. It might be as simple as having a "helpful" vote count as equivalent to a new post in the current system. Threads that are more meaty would then be able to survive for longer on the front page, and threads that are less meaty but still a useful part of the BT vibe would still be visible to all, but have a shorter half life. It would be a way of recognizing that what makes a thread hot is the value of its content as much as the timing of the most recent remark.

Like others, I would favor flattening rather than splitting of forums.

That's a great idea - I have frequently wanted to "tag" something as exceptionally useful...

I also concur that flattening vs. splitting of forums would better serve me.

Actually, I like the tag idea.

All the threads still sit in TT.  But if you're looking for a specific type of thread...like a "getting faster", "bike porn", "rant", etc...you can filter for it with a few clicks.  And those people who just want a one forum for everything without searching too much, can still have it.  If it turns out that people are not tagging things right, you just ignore it and we are back where we started...no harm done.

Not sure how hard that would be to design...but I like the idea.