cblaisd

I would suggest that any such guidelines (not hard and fast criteria) would include something like the ones I suggested above. Metrics would (threads about a topic along with page views) become one among several guidelines that the TB could use in discerning both need and desireablity (not always the same thing) of a new forum.

MSPeconomist

I don't think anyone has suggested that the metrics (and more generally the questionnaire) be considered hard and fast criteria, but I've always believed that we should have the applicable data from the questionnaire before going forward to formally consider a new forum. At times, I've voted no or abstained when this data wasn't there. The questionnaire especially shouldn't be used as a "requirement" to discourage forum proposals that one doesn't like while ignoring it if one has a favorable preconception. It's troubling when this happens and I would imagine that it discourages participation.

cblaisd

Agree, but sometimes the actions around forum creation/retention have certainly made it seem as if that were the case.

bdschobel

I didn't run for TalkBoard so that I could become a slave to statistics (or a robot). I have judgment and plan to exercise it.

Bruce

Canarsie

I could not have said it better myself.

Dovster

Many moons ago, when I first ran for TB, the guidelines were posted here as being more than just guidelines -- they were hard and fast requirements.

I vehemently objected to that and after getting elected I told TB that I would not feel bound by them -- if I thought that a forum was a good idea I would vote for it no matter what.

The requirement in the guidelines I found most objectionable was the demand to show a large number of threads that would be appropriate for the suggested forum but had no other forum where they would not be off topic.

Huh? If there were no other forums where these threads could appear, then how could someone show a large number of such threads? It was, IMHO, an idiotic requirement then and still remains one.

I can't say that all the other TB members at the time agreed with me, but they did, at least, change the status of the requirements to suggestions.

UA1K_no_more

When the votes were based on a "build it and they will come" premise that has turned out to be false, the decision to have a smokers lounge forum should be reevaluated.
The opponents of the smoking forum have been proven correct; there isn't enough traffic to justify a separate forum. The smokers forum is less lively than the Cuyahoga River flowing through Cleveland in 1969...
If any TB members were convinced by the "build it and they will come" crowd, you were "curevballed". Will the TB members take steps to correct their mistake?

CMK10

That's not why everyone voted on the measure. I voted because there was vocal support for a niche forum as well as enough vitriol in this own thread at the idea of smoking that the idea made sense. Several people have posted recently about how helpful the forum has been to it. I'm not sure what "mistake" you're referring to especially as even if we accept your premise, was it "build it and they'll come within 3 months?".

Mary2e

This thread reminded me to post some smoking information in the forum and I just did. I also have another idea which I'll work on.

It is a good resource, and though I originally didn't think it was needed, I have changed my mind after being chastised, once again, for the mere mention of smoking at some hotel.

If anything, this forum needs more publicity, not to go away.

goalie

Bolding mine: Agreed ^

Thank you ^. Yes, there is a big "line in the sand" when it comes to smoking but that is NOT what the forum is about. As stated in the welcome sticky thread with the bolding mine

And with that, as others have mentioned, we're re-hashing all of the post-TalkBpard voting mishegas and that imho doesn't belong here

And yes, afaic, 3 months is not enough time to make any type of decision

RichMSN

Here's one more former TB member who never paid a single lick of attention to that huge list of questions.

To me, they were nothing but a barrier thrown up for someone who showed interest in creating a forum. Like others on this thread have stated, I was elected to TalkBoard to use my judgment and I wasn't about to let some questionnaire or raw numbers supplant that.

tom911

Yet we do have a Talk Board member that just yesterday asked for the questionnaire to be completed in a proposal for a new Copa forum. Is there even agreement among the Talk Board members about that questionnaire? A member not on the Talk Board posted the entire questionnaire in the Copa thread. Clearly some want it to be used. I just wish the policy was consistent across all proposals for new forums.

If a majority of the Talk Board finds no value in the questionnaire, which was voted in by the 2009 Talk Board, get rid of it.

SkiAdcock

I think the questionnaire can definitely be valuable in helping determine whether a forum should be created & it has been successfully used over the years. However I don't think it's the only criteria. As others have noted, FTers also vote for us to use our judgment.

However, none of that pertains to shutting down the smoker's forum which I do think brings value to FTers that smoke (and I say that as a nonsmoker). My input would be to keep the smokers forum open, and even if there is consideration re: closing it, 3 months is too soon.

Cheers.

CMK10

What a silly thing to get worked up over. The questionnaire is a guideline, the answers to it are helpful but they're not definitive. What we call in legal research persuasive, not mandatory authority. I too want to see answers to the questionnaire but I realize that they're best paired with common sense and numerous other factors.

QtownDave

Hate is the perfect word. Let's face it, in our overly PC world we still have one group left that is ok to hate.

I smoke and read that forum often. When I have anything useful to add I will.

As pointed out, why not the same hate of other sub forums with low traffic? Hate. Pushing an agenda. Bringing this thread to life with an attempt to say 'I told you so' is a better example of serving no purpose.

The smoking forum is not hurting anybody but it's very exsistance does seem to offend some nevertheless. Why?

I remain greatful that the resource is there for those that one it. Thank you FT ^