Replies to ride reports - your chance to vote !

[Adrian]

I think *relevant* replies are good. I.e. not those that lead to NWS or invoke Godwin's law by the end of the first page.

As a general rule, this would be reasonable for every board.

[border-rider]

That's how it's meant to work now, but it means moving the replies out into a different board.  Which seems to me to be quite a serious thing to be doing.

But at least it allows you to moderate the board without having to make a value judgement.

Agreed.

As the board was originally set up, my task is to remove any replies and put them in a different thread somewhere else i.e on the rides & touring board, with links etc to the original RR.  I used to do that at first, but it  came to feel intrusive and more than a bit bossy, so I let it go.  This poll is really about whether that is what people want to happen - or not. 

[Pancho]

Ride reports are posts in a forum; not some sort of literary endeavour that need to be archived in their pristine, uncommented state.

Or rather, they may well also be a literary endeavour - in which case they will also be published elsewhere. But they are put onto a forum for discussion and comment. That's the whole point, surely?

[Oscar's dad]

Ride reports are posts in a forum; not some sort of literary endeavour that need to be archived in their pristine, uncommented state.

Or rather, they may well also be a literary endeavour - in which case they will also be published elsewhere. But they are put onto a forum for discussion and comment. That's the whole point, surely?

Quite so, nicely put.  100% agree.

[perpetual dan]

I agree that replies are OK, for the reasons others have put forward - largely that if we play nicely they add to the original post and that interacting is what brings me here. One can always not scroll down if the original post is all you want.

I like the separate reports board, as they are a good read even some time later and (again, as others have said) it saves sifting through all the other planning etc. Also, I think its nice to have a corner where a good story rather than brief notes is the norm.

Could we set up the moderation so that if the original poster thinks the follow-ups are going too far from the spirit of ride reports then they request movement to a spin-out thread somewhere else, which would point to the original report for context and be pointed to? That avoids the moderator making value judgements.

Now all I need to do is to get well enough to go for a ride interesting enough to write about 

[Jaded]

I like replies for many reasons that others have already posted. To have them in a different place just complicates matters.

[αdαmsκι]

I'm happy with replies.  If you don't want to read the replies then it's easy to ignore them.  On a personal note, the one ride report I've submitted got a few comments about the route, which IMO are relevant to the report and it makes most sense that these comments are directly below the report.

If people don't want comments being made on a report that they've submitted then a request to MV to lock the thread would be sufficient.

[Julian]

I like replies.  If I've written a RR I quite want to know whether people liked it or not.  I've always felt the no-replies rule is a little bit like telling an elaborate joke at a party, only to be met with silence and a change of subject. 

It's really pretty difficult for a RR thread to descend into NWS, name-calling or the invocation of he who is known as Godwin.  Either it was raining quite hard as the rider descended into Little Clumping on the B167792 or it wasn't, and the rider's contemplation of a Mars Bar at Seaman Green just before the R@T in Six Mile Bottom is hardly likely to summon the forum thought police. 

In fact, I've always found that whatever people's political, economic or sociological viewpoints, there's one safe topic:  cycling.  Isn't that amazing?

[Jurek]

Yes to replies.
'sall about share & exchange.

Innit?

[Oscar's dad]

In fact, I've always found that whatever people's political, economic or sociological viewpoints, there's one safe topic:  cycling.  Isn't that amazing?

Very true except if you mention Sustrans and / or The National Cycle Network.  Then the fur really starts to fly!

[chris]

In fact, I've always found that whatever people's political, economic or sociological viewpoints, there's one safe topic:  cycling.  Isn't that amazing?

Very true except if you mention Sustrans and / or The National Cycle Network.  Then the fur really starts to fly!

or he!$*ts or Shimano/Campag or Steel vs Alu vs Carbon vs Titanium.

[Julian]

In fact, I've always found that whatever people's political, economic or sociological viewpoints, there's one safe topic:  cycling.  Isn't that amazing?

Very true except if you mention Sustrans and / or The National Cycle Network.  Then the fur really starts to fly!

or he!$*ts or Shimano/Campag or Steel vs Alu vs Carbon vs Titanium.

Set of bloody pedants you lot are; alright, there's one safe topic:  saying you've been out for a bike ride. 

[border-rider]

saying you've been out for a bike ride. 

Was it onna cycle track ?  Did you obey the red lights and stoplines ?

Wouldn't it have  been   more of a challenge on fixed ?

Did you go to France ?

Hmm ?

[Julian]

*shakes head sadly*

You've combined to shatter my illusions.

Nothing is safe. 

[Oscar's dad]

At the recent Essex YACF Xmas do we talked about politics, it was all very civilised!  I tried to bring in religion but didn't get far, probably too boring. I think sex was mentioned too. Had we talked about cycling we would no doubt started fighting and all received life bans from Victor our genial host!!!

[Wowbagger]

*shakes head sadly*

You've combined to shatter my illusions.

Nothing is safe. 

Cake.

[Hot Flatus]

Seaman Green

Hur hur hur... she said seaman  


Coat please.  

[delthebike]

Nothing is safe. 

Cake.
[/quote]
And alienate FatBloke! 

At the recent Essex YACF Xmas do we talked about politics, it was all very civilised!  I tried to bring in religion

Politics and religion in a pub is a no no!

[andrew w]

I've voted in favour of replies, and in case anyone's interested, my reasons are as follows (originally posted in the thread on this topic in Office Reception):

1. Having a separate board for ride reports is a good idea, because then they don't get lost or submerged within all the general rubbish in "rides and touring".  By "general rubbish", I mean all the stuff about proposed rides, and all the negotiations about starting points, dates and times, who's coming and who isn't, and thank yous to the organiser etc after the event.

2. The decision to post a report in ride reports shold rest solely with the author.  I don't see any reason why somebody (a moderator or a committee of forum members?) need be given the task of deciding which reports are meritorious enough to deserve a place in "ride reports".

3. The "no follow-up posts" rule is a silly rule, which serves no purpose.  Sometimes a ride report is so good that readers feel the need to give the writer a pat on the back for what he or she has written, or to comment on the ride for some other reason.  I don't see how these follow-up posts cause any problems - if you're not interested in them, then don't read them.  As long as each topic starts with a ride report, and as long all other topics are excluded from the ride reports board, then what's the problem?

Andrew

[Regulator]

At the recent Essex YACF Xmas do we talked about politics, it was all very civilised!  I tried to bring in religion but didn't get far, probably too boring. I think sex was mentioned too. Had we talked about cycling we would no doubt started fighting and all received life bans from Victor our genial host!!!

Given your topics of conversation, perhaps it was a good thing I didn't make it to the do.... 

[Crumbling Nick]

I've voted in favour of replies, but am not convinced that the Reports board needs to be separate.

Some ride reports have been placed in the Rides & Touring board, often since they were part of existing threads. Is the "Have you been out today" thread anything more than a series of short ride reports? I can't see a clear distinction between the two boards that might allow a mod. to move threads around or would justify splitting an established thread.

Would merging the boards make the moderators' task more difficult?

[hugo15]

I voted in favour of being able to add replies.

[fred the great]

Ruddy'ell, I was nee aware that replies were discouraged so I'm sure that I broke the rule somewhere.

Stands in corner with dunces hat on

[mossy200]

Replies are to be welcomed in the spirit of the ride.

[Tourist Tony]

I agree with so much here: the pat on the back, the encouragement to finish a write up (I at least get a bit lost sometimes in my epics....), but with that restriction to discourage going off at a tangent already mentioned.
Have the board, allow relevant and concise replies, and if anyone wants to expand/digress they can link it to a thread on the general "rides" board.

Perhaps I'm being a little arrogant....but while I love to read a reply like"Yeah, I remember that, nice one!" I would prefer the "Yeah, I remember that, when I was there in....." for four pages replies to be ride reports in their own right.
I know I'm as guilty as anyone else, so I promise I'll do my best, honest....