SkyscraperCity Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

What Conditions are required to set up a sub-forum

24K views 173 replies 35 participants last post by  bobalania 
#1 ·
This issue has started a bit of debate on the Hull thread.

Just wondering what exactly the conditions for a sub-forum are. Is it:

1. Amount of posts
2. city populations,
3. number of proposals
or
4. height of proposals?


or a combination of all of them? Our case goes like this:

1. Hull is the second most popular thread in projects and construction when measured by 'amount of posts', it also scores fairly well on the views counter. We reckon a 'Hull Metro' or 'Hull and East Yorkshire' sub-forum would boost this even more.

2. Built up urban area - 320,000. Hull & East. Yorks 600,000+. Not massive, but big in UK terms, and an undoubted regional centre.

3. Lots and Lots! Off the top of our heads, we came up with:

1) St Stephens Shopping Centre
2) St Stephens Hotel
3) Paragon Station Transport Interchange
4) Hull Truck Theatre
5) Albemarle Music Centre
6) Ferensway Refurbishment
7) St Stephens Apartments
8) Spring Bank Apartments
9) Anlaby Road Flats Reclad.
10) New York Hotel Refurb.

11) Hotel, East Bank
12) The Boom Apartments, East Bank (Imminent)
13) Footbridge, East Bank (Imminent)
14) The Deep Submarium
15) Streetlife Museum
16) Clarence Flour Mill (tbc)
17) River Hull Impoundment

18) Humber Quays 1
19) Humber Quays 2
20) Freedom Quay Apartments
21) Wellington Street Refurbishment
22) Hotel (4 star) Humber Quays
23) HC Conference Centre

24) Fruit Market (numerous small developments)
25) Large Casino
26) Boutique Hotel

27) Albion Street Refurbishment
28) Albion Square
29) Bond Street Tower
30) Co-op Building Apartments
31) Kingston House (Reclad)
32) Hull History Centre
33) Queens Gardens
34) BBC Centre / Apartments

35) Burnett House
36) Whitefriargate
37) Arc

38) Hull New Town (Retail / Leisure)
39) Hull Old Town (Leisure / residential)
40) Avenues (Spring Bank / Princes / Newland)
41) West Hull regeneration (Clive Sullivan Way / Derringham / St Andrews Apartments )

42) Quay West Retail (£300M Princes Quay Expansion)
43) Hotel Quay West
44) Castle Street Improvement (Tunnel)
45) KC Stadium (Expansion, events)
46) Hull Sport (Hull City, Hull FC, Hull KR, Ice Hockey, Speedway)
47) Hull Museums (Town Docks, Ferens Art Gallery, Wilberforce, Streetlife)

48) University of Hull
49) Hull Schools (£200M plan)

50) Port of Hull
51) Hull Business

52) Central Library refurbishment (phase one completed)
53) The Institute Building (Currently being transformed into a pioneering 4* 'owner hotel')

54) Proposed works on the Guildhall
55) Mytongate upgrade
56) Office developments on the A63 corridor
57) Upgrade in rail freight from the docks
58) Possibility of Hull to York (via beverley) railway line re-opening?
59) Dock Office Row (behind hull college - planning permission granted for two areas of resi development between three dry docks

60) There is also the Newington and St Andrews Pathfinder regeneration scheme


Again, these are limited to Hulls restrictive city boundaries, if the metro area was included, the list would be over a hundred schemes long.

4. Surely this is a daft criteria to use?

Personally I'd completely support the idea of the likes of Leicester, Hull and other medium-large sized urban hubs being able to discuss things on a bigger platform,mwhilst also giving a regional focus for their surrounding areas. It is an easier way to cover more developments accross more of the country.
 
See less See more
#27 ·
Northwest England 6.7m (3 sub-forums Gtr Manchester / Merseyside / Rest)
Yorkshire 5m (3 sub-forums West Yorks./ South Yorks. / East Yorks)
Scotland 5m (2 sub-forums West / East)
Wales 2.9m (1 sub-forum)
Northeast England 2.5m (1 sub-forum)
Northern Ireland 1,7m (1 sub-forum)
Are you being forreal? You would include the Northeast and Northern Ireland...?? But no Birmingham... nor the east midlands....??? Non of the Midlands at all???
 
#28 ·
This forum structure is designed to create city v city argument. The north is ill served by overrepresenting Liverpool (3 forums), Manchester, Leeds and Sheffield and scraps for everyone else. Here is a sub-forum structure which attempts reflect the political landscape of Britain in 2007. It's acknowledges population and cultural differences.

Northwest England 6.7m (3 sub-forums Gtr Manchester / Merseyside / Rest)
Yorkshire 5m (3 sub-forums West Yorks./ South Yorks. / East Yorks)
Scotland 5m (2 sub-forums West / East)
Wales 2.9m (1 sub-forum)
Northeast England 2.5m (1 sub-forum)
Northern Ireland 1,7m (1 sub-forum)
I agree with you completely there. I think that structure would work well and would be more logical, although a Northern Ireland sub-forum might be a bit quiet, as might a ROI sub-forum.
 
#29 ·
Cardiff is bigger, has more developments planned (including tall ones), and has so many more forumers than in the Hull thread where only a few hardcore members including yourself are keeping the postings up by posting anything and everything related to Hull, which is fine but I don't think it's enough to earn yourself a Hull sub forum.
Common misconception. Yorkshire has 4 cities which are larger than Cardiff. Cardiff is a similar city to Hull in many ways, so I'm stunned how it still gets the stadium, the parliament, the PR and the sub-forum and The Forgotten City gets nowt.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_cities_by_population
 
#30 ·
I posted this in April in the forum issues section:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=465723

(Some of it I still stand by and some of it don't)


"I just think that doing it by cities is susceptible to bias, and means that huge swathes of the country are missed out.

By simply covering the areas with the most concentrated populations (which BTW, the current format doesn't achieve that satisfactorily) it means that we often don't get to hear about landmark schemes in places that dont 'belong' to the bigger conurbations. For example, how often do you come accross something related to fairly big cities such as Plymouth, Aberdeen, Hull, Belfast, Norwich, Southampton etc etc? It's not that nothing is happening in these places, it's just that their news is often relegated to the dark depths of one of the lesser travelled forums.

As an example..at the moment, if there was a huge regeneration development in somewhere like Plymouth, it would be have a thread on City Talk that would vanish in no time. If however, it was in a main South West forum with Bristol, Bath (perhaps covering Portsmouth and Southampton, and - MP - even Torquay!) it would have much more prominence on SSC as a whole.

I think the fairest and most user friendly way of doing it would be to have each main forum as a region ie: South East, South West, East Midlands, West Midlands, Yorkshire and Humber, North East, North West, Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland.

That way there are no excuses, the main UK forums are distributed equally and nobody misses out."
 
#31 ·
Legolamb you know what? I would totally agree with you... if this website was called regenerationcity.com.... but this is skycrapertcity?? Its about skyscrapers....

Saying all that though... It still agree with you and believe thats the correct way to go about this...

but then again? South East, south west? I don't know about anything thats going on down there...and I take it the cities down there don't really have that much traffic going through their small threads because I never see them at the totp of the list?
 
#32 ·
Legolamb you know what? I would totally agree with you... if this website was called regenerationcity.com.... but this is skycrapertcity?? Its about skyscrapers....
THERE ARE NO SKYSCRAPERS ANYWHERE IN THIS COUNTRY OTHER THAN LONDON!!!!! THERE AREN'T EVEN ANY PROPOSALS FOR THEM!!

If you go on the Asian, North American, or Australian forums and tell them your idea of a skyscraper, you will be laughed out of town.

So what is everybody going to talk about??
 
#33 ·
Legolamb you know what? I would totally agree with you... if this website was called regenerationcity.com.... but this is skycrapertcity?? Its about skyscrapers....

Saying all that though... It still agree with you and believe thats the correct way to go about this...

but then again? South East, south west? I don't know about anything thats going on down there...and I take it the cities down there don't really have that much traffic going through their small threads because I never see them at the totp of the list?
If it's about skyscrapers how come Hull's had 36,000 views from SSC people and we don't have 1 skyscraper. We don't force them to view. You're being a bit unnecessary by using your large city status to suffocate medium city growth. What's the harm in having both? You still get your way.
 
#34 ·
THERE ARE NO SKYSCRAPERS ANYWHERE IN THIS COUNTRY OTHER THAN LONDON!!!!!
Have you noticed that these are actually the 'UK & Ireland Architecture Forums' now, this reflects the fact that discussion is about much more than skysrapers. Besides in UK context the word skyscraper is used much more generally to mean high rise building so why quibble over meanings of words like that?
 
#35 ·
Common misconception. Yorkshire has 4 cities which are larger than Cardiff. Cardiff is a similar city to Hull in many ways, so I'm stunned how it still gets the stadium, the parliament, the PR and the sub-forum and The Forgotten City gets nowt.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_Kingdom_cities_by_population
Maybe because it's the capital city of Wales?

The list is one of the most ridiculous I've ever seen, in it Hull has a population which includes the whole urban area, but Cardiff's figure doesn't, in fact none of the cities except Hull has a figure for it's entire urban area, Brighton's figure doesn't even include the population within the city boundary let alone the whole urban area!

Come back with figures that actually mean something.
 
#36 ·
Have you noticed that these are actually the 'UK & Ireland Architecture Forums' now, this reflects the fact that discussion is about much more than skysrapers. Besides in UK context the word skyscraper is used much more generally to mean high rise building so why quibble over meanings of words like that?
well...Exactly!

But according to some forumers their cities should get priority because they have taller buildings proposed? It's bullshit. It's a ridiculous criteria to judge architecture, planning or regeneration.
 
#37 ·
Maybe because it's the capital city of Wales?

The list is one of the most ridiculous I've ever seen, in it Hull has a population which includes the whole urban area, but Cardiff's figure doesn't, in fact none of the cities except Hull has a figure for it's entire urban area, Brighton's figure doesn't even include the population within the city boundary let alone the whole urban area!

Come back with figures that actually mean something.
No. Get a life and stop constantly banging on about the population of Hull.

It is a decent sized city by UK standards. Nobody would argue with that on here. What's the matter with you?
 
#38 ·
well...Exactly!

But according to some forumers their cities should get priority because they have taller buildings proposed? It's bullshit. It's a ridiculous criteria to judge architecture, planning or regeneration.
As I said before though this is a site primarily for fans of skyscrapers, this is why cities which are planning and building high rises at the moment will get more of a voice on here.

Surely that's not hard to understand?
 
#39 ·
No. Get a life and stop constantly banging on about the population of Hull.

It is a decent sized city by UK standards. Nobody would argue with that on here. What's the matter with you?
I didn't say it wasn't a decent sized city, here you go again legs ...

Chris said Hull was BIGGER than Cardiff, and produced a list of silly population figures which mean nothing, why can't you see that ..... oh yes because Hull's figure looked quite respectable in that list didn't it!
 
#40 ·
As I said before though this is a site primarily for fans of skyscrapers, this is why cities which are planning and building high rises at the moment will get more of a voice on here.

Surely that's not hard to understand?
Sorry. I was just under the impression that this was the UK & Ireland Architecture Forum.

I too am a fan of skyscrapers, but like i say, there arent any here. I'm not gonna pretend that there are, or that there are going to be.

At the end of the day, it's a bit like having a UK Hurricane forum, discussing hurricanes. We may have had heavy gusts in this country (usually of hot air emanating from the sussex coast) But we aint never had no REAL hurricane.
 
#41 ·
Legolamb...I know this contradicts what I said earlier... but I do agree with your overall point....

The reason I went on with the skyscraper stuff is because Gothic's response to leciesters attempt to get a sub forum was simply no.... because there's no skyscrapers there.... The East Mid sub forum is more or less waiting for Leicesters towers to begin....

But I do agree with your theory and your overall point that we should look at this more on the principal of regeneration than skyscrapers.
 
#44 ·
i agree about the regeneration thing which is why we're not looking strictly at skyscrapers, eg 150m+ buildings. in my book 100m is a skyscraper for any british city as it scrapes the sky. i know the definitions people like myself come up with say its not but to all intents and purposes for this forum it is.
and please stop bickering. im currently trying to work out just how to order these damn forums. we already have city ones you see which clashes with the concept of regional ones.
if anyone has a suggestion on how to organise things into regions with perhaps construction/development forums for major cities in those regions PLEASE let me know. as with the renaming we have changed focus, the only place on ssc, but this is a gradual change. if you look at skyscrapernews too you see lots of tiny gradual changes which over the course of a year are actually pretty substantial. it's a tried and tested way.
we're already successful so i am pragmatic and a believer that gradual change works best. anyway.... welshies, i havent forgotten that forum, just been crazy busy today. the main reason i like the idea of an east midlands forum is this - imagine if we had a separate forum for every single uk city how many forums we'd have! there'd be dozens in the end and it would end up totally unweildy and also very separated with loads of different cliques.
at least in taking the regional route we can combine things better, its a lot more communal and i like forums for that reason.
 
#48 ·
What about ordering it by the BBC regions like in the map below, with Scotland, Wales and Ireland each given a subforum?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/england/tvindex.shtml

These regions seem pretty well populated and all include at least one big city. They also all seem to have plenty of SSC members already.

It would make 15 subforums to go under a 'region' heading on the UK front page. The current 'Social places and Forum issues' could just have one link to go to a subforum for the skybar etc. This way, all the regions would be on the front page, easier for navigation, and it wouldn't look too cluttered.
 
#49 ·
I think thats a starting point legolamb but I think some need to be combined. For example South and South East.

I suggest you combine North West and West Midlands. Not for ease but rather for us other forumers to sit back and laugh at the Liverpool-Manchester-Birmingham arguments.
 
#50 ·
But then you end up with forums like 'E. Yorks and Lincs' which would only have Hull in it, 'East' which would pretty much just be Norwich, and 'North East & Cumbria' which is just Newcastle. None of these have that many posters and wouldn't be very active, whereas the active forums would be sharing 'Yorkshire' and 'North West' (and of course London and West Midlands).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top