SkyscraperCity banner

Add a new megatall section


  • Total voters
    371
Status
Not open for further replies.
121 - 140 of 189 Posts

·
LIBERTINED
Joined
·
46,539 Posts
500m aren't and will never be considered Megatalls so NO IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE to make them fit just because we will see more threads in a new section! How old are we? 12?
Jeez. You should be able to read, shouldn't you. I said we could give the section another name like "500+" and add a specific megatall section. Reread my proposal, obviously you didn't get it. And don't be all too emotional about this please, some of your posts seem almost foam-mouthed. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,800 Posts
...and don't be all too emotional about this please, some of your posts seem almost foam-mouthed. :D
Lol:lol: that shows the passion and deep feelings about tall buildings! Better this way with a big portion of lifeblood than cold and mellow.
600+

Also maybe stop using feet as a unit of mesurment ?
Why? I think this question is absolutely wrong for this thread to discuss.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,768 Posts
First of all, please stop suggesting to combine the Highrise and Skyscraper Section to one subforum. They're already full of threads, especially the Highrise section. Combining them would be hell of a mess :coffee:

Anyway, I'd suggest to create a 600m+ section. It's silly to create a 500m+ height limit, just to have more activity and threads in that section, imo. The Megatall height minimum is 600m and it should stay like this.

However, I see the problem with the lack of threads in the Megatall section, but I would like to propose an idea. Since Megatalls are the most exciting and significant projects in this forum, it would be great to add discussion threads to the new section.(Actually similar to the ''Skyscrapers'' section in the World Forums).
We could create threads like ''The future of Megatalls'' where we would discuss about the next possible tallest skyscraper, ''Visionary projects from everywhere, in every time period'' where we could talk about projects like X-Seed 4000, The Illinois, etc. or ''What is your favourite Megatall?'' where we could compare different U/C, proposed or completed projects. :)

All these aspects that I mentioned above are missing anyway in my opinion. There are no threads for skyscraper visions or general Megatall discussions.

Megatalls are the most significant buildings in this forum and I think that the discussions should be extended beyond the normal, plain threads about the construction of an individual project.

So what do you think? :hmm:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,800 Posts
This sounds like a good idea for me:) in every case we need the 600m megatall section.
And adding those (and other perhaps) discussion threads would be filling the new section with more life. I was never satisfied we had no thread for visionary projects, so we could kill two birds with one stone:)
 

·
Let's Revive our Cities
Joined
·
2,491 Posts
600 Meters for megatalls, close to the 2000 feet usually used to define them.
 

·
The AlphaWolf of the Pack
Joined
·
1,748 Posts
600+

Also maybe stop using feet as a unit of mesurment ?
But there are so many Americans we may as well keep the feet measurement
 

·
LIBERTINED
Joined
·
46,539 Posts
Megatall section open for discussion sounds a bit better, but still not convincing.

Jan told me there will probably be a decision on the matter this weekend. :)

But there are so many Americans we may as well keep the feet measurement
Feet is usually used for American projects and a few other countries that use it more frequently, so I don't see a problem really. Leave it like that with the dual system.
 

·
LIBERTINED
Joined
·
46,539 Posts
Facts before acts.

But seriously, let's look at some facts:

How many "megatalls" 600m+ are there currently in the world?
3. Burj Khalifa, Shanghai Tower, Abraj Al-Bait.

How many megatalls are U/C?
4. Jeddah Tower, Suzhou Zhongnan Center, Merdeka KL118, Wuhan Greenland Center.

How many are proposed (more serious proposals)?
7.
Obviously we don't even have a proper list for proposals at SSC (not even here).

The CTBUH lists barely 7 projects as proposed megatalls here. Some of these are dead already and they might have missed a handful, but still.


That makes effectively 11 threads that could currently enter the forum. Even when that number doubles or triples in 5 years with all visions included, that's really just a few.

A section for a handful of threads doesn't make a lot of sense. Even if we add some general discussion topics and overviews there.

I say add a 500+ section and make U/C Megatalls sticky. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,800 Posts
For me this makes no sense:eek:hno:
You're right about the amount of supertalls BUT i'm very sure this will increase in the next years. To make a 500m+ section is arbitrary because there is already an excepted definition of megatalls used by CTBUH. Further this definition is consitent to the other definitions of highrise, skyscraper and supertall.
To create a new not official definition only to fill the new thread is a fix solution but it has no future. In a few years we would have the same discussion...
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,628 Posts
OMG Please stop this 500m+ nonsense! Adding to what Ch.W just said if we did take the 500ms towers to a new section this will totally kill the supertall one that is left with only 300m and 400m towers! :madwife: I myself very rarely do check progress of any of the towers below 500m
 

·
LIBERTINED
Joined
·
46,539 Posts
Again: No one said Megatalls should be re-defined as 500m+! What the heck are you even thinking? :lol:

It's just that a barely filled section isn't much fun, we're experienced in this regard on SSC. I used to moderate all sections of the global Development forums and gained a lot of insight here.

If there's enough projects in the not-too distant future for an actual 600+ section, then fine, there will be no fuss to change this. Jeez, we're on the web! This isn't carved in stone! :D

The supertalls forum is too crowded as-is, and a bare 600m+ section wouldn't help a bit with that.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
25,190 Posts
It's not about making a megatall section, it is about splitting the overcrowded supertall forums in the most reasonable way. You guys are completely missing the point here. There's also a 200-299m thread and a 100-199m, both subofrums lack a proper term, so what? When you get too many active threads you should split the existing forum into halves, not into 5% vs 95% just because you want a nice title (megatalls) for the new subforum. Nowadays megatalls are mixed with supertalls, from now on they will be mixed just with 500m+ supertalls. Nobody is dishonouring the megatall concept.
 

·
Que paza!!!
Joined
·
2,731 Posts
It's not about making a megatall section, it is about splitting the overcrowded supertall forums in the most reasonable way. You guys are completely missing the point here. There's also a 200-299m thread and a 100-199m, both subofrums lack a proper term, so what? When you get too many active threads you should split the existing forum into halves, not into 5% vs 95% just because you want a nice title (megatalls) for the new subforum. Nowadays megatalls are mixed with supertalls, from now on they will be mixed just with 500m+ supertalls. Nobody is dishonouring the megatall concept.
For that purpose, making a subforum for every 100 metres would also make sense.
600+ (Megatalls)
500-599 (Supertalls 3)
400-499 (Supertalls 2)
300-399 (Supertalls 1)
200-299 (Skyscrapers)
100-199 (High-rises)
-100
 

·
LIBERTINED
Joined
·
46,539 Posts
^ Indeed. Maybe it'd all be more orderly and less crowded then. As this is the main skyscraper forum, it's perfectly justifiable to have such a refined structure for skyscraper projects.

And thanks for your post z0rg, exactly the point. Some people in here are jumping way over the fence.


Btw, the General Urban Developments would also profit from some kind of release.
The Archive is way too big. I suggested adding an Archive for every project forum (highrises, skyscrapers, supertalls). Cramping them all together ain't so cool.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,628 Posts
People are missing the fact that these 5% of megatalls create almost 50% of the activity in the Supertall section!! And puh-Lease Jan was crystal clear when he suggested to have a new MEGATALL section. I mean read the title of this thread! If it was about just dividing it 50 - 50 then he would have done it already! No need to make a big fuss about it then.

To refresh your memories guys ... here's Jan first post of this thread! So please don't rephrase the intent of this thread just for the sake of proving your point! I say what Jan suggested is best!

It's been suggested we add a megatall (over 600 meter / 2,000 feet) section. The reason not to is that the number of megatall projects is limited, so it's going to be a few extra clicks going back and forth for those interested in anything 300 meter plus.

Then again, we're a skyscraper site, so yeah. :)

I just ran through the supertall forums and tagged those over 600 as megatall. We could move these to one new section, although that we be under construction, proposed and visions all in one.

Let me know what you guys think of adding a megatall section. :)
 

·
LIBERTINED
Joined
·
46,539 Posts
People are missing the fact that these 5% of megatalls create almost 50% of the activity in the Supertall section!
That's a staggering exaggeration. It might have applied when the Burj Dubai/Khalifa was the super-hot and seemingly only topic on this forum, but times changed dramatically. When I look for the highest post counts here, it's not the megatalls that lead (except JT). Same for views. It rather depends on location and iconic design which ones lead, not all too much on height.

And frankly, the height race turned less appealing over the past few years. This can be measured by the decreasing public interest for new supertalls/megatalls. People care more about iconic and timeless quality designs nowadays (which is a good thing imho) and actual landmark towers, also location is very important. Height bragging by itself has a much lower attention span. It has worn off since it was so frequently done by so many players.


So you're super passionate about this obviously. But how about this suggestion?

For that purpose, making a subforum for every 100 metres would also make sense.
600+ (Megatalls)
500-599 (Supertalls 3)
400-499 (Supertalls 2)
300-399 (Supertalls 1)
200-299 (Skyscrapers)
100-199 (High-rises)
-100
That way all sections would be more evenly and similarily active, with finer distinctions.

<100 up to <600 all should have the sub-sections: Proposed/Visions and Archive.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
25,190 Posts
For that purpose, making a subforum for every 100 metres would also make sense.
600+ (Megatalls)
500-599 (Supertalls 3)
400-499 (Supertalls 2)
300-399 (Supertalls 1)
200-299 (Skyscrapers)
100-199 (High-rises)
-100
Yup, that would be perfect, logical and likely to satisfy both those of us who want to divert the existing overcrowded subforums and the megatall fanboys.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
10,628 Posts
So you're super passionate about this obviously. But how about this suggestion?

600+ (Megatalls)
500-599 (Supertalls 3)
400-499 (Supertalls 2)
300-399 (Supertalls 1)
200-299 (Skyscrapers)
100-199 (High-rises)
-100
It is indeed a very good one and I wasn't against it in the first place and since we are expecting a rise in the number of 300m+ towers in the coming years, this could be a very sustainable plan for this forum.

My only issue was with the 500m+ plan because it will only create chaos in the future if further subsections were needed to be made due to the fact that there is no logic in it in the first place to why this threshold was chosen.
 
121 - 140 of 189 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top