New Bike Chat -->1998 on section

[Kona Paul]

The '98 split although a little arbitary was far more than '10 years ago'. The goalposts as it were will never be rolling although whose to say the forum won't develop further over time.

can someone explain to me what should be put where now?
i.e ive just had a searpost thread moved to chat 1998 from general and off topic
im far from complaining, just wondering what content base goes where?

Think I set if out pretty clearly in the first post. 'What my dogs having for tea' posts in general and off topic. Bike stuff in here.b

Well actually the 10 year mark was the only reason given, or more accurately the boundary that was used, because one was needed and it seemed as good as any at the time.

It felt a little like segregation once the readers bikes from 98 on dropped way down to the bottom of the page after BMX, general chat, ebay listings and the such. That pretty much killed my love for the site (along with all the "modern" haters snarky remarks.) The sites users are not devided between retro riders and modern bike owners (who are constantly reminded of the other sites on the net), bur retro riders and retro riders who ALSO have and appreciate modern bikes and the evolution of both trails and equipment. So I'm pretty sure almost all the users here either have or have an appreciation for older/retro bikes. Shame the appreciation and respect doesn't go both ways. Now that my oldest bikes are from 2000, despite their classic lineage, with the exception of my 95 Humu cruiser, I don't feel so much at home here anymore. I do still love and appreciate old bikes, the history of mountain biking, steel and ti frames and the feel of rigid forks. As long as it's the right tool for the job...

 

[clockworkgazz]

Don't go kona Paul we love you man, but remember this is "retro" bike and I for one think the move has been an inclusive move not exclusive, and as I've said, I would put the cut off at 1993 so be glad I don't run the site

Anyway go away and make that "modern" thread the most visited/posted part of the site that will prove a point.

 

[Easy_Rider]

Retro Retrobike.
Almost 3 years ago to the day. I think it's evolved quite well with the growing popularity.

 

[Kona Paul]

The '98 split although a little arbitary was far more than '10 years ago'. The goalposts as it were will never be rolling although whose to say the forum won't develop further over time.

can someone explain to me what should be put where now?
i.e ive just had a searpost thread moved to chat 1998 from general and off topic
im far from complaining, just wondering what content base goes where?

Think I set if out pretty clearly in the first post. 'What my dogs having for tea' posts in general and off topic. Bike stuff in here.b

Well actually the 10 year mark was the only reason given, or more accurately the boundary that was used, because one was needed and it seemed as good as any at the time.

It felt a little like segregation once the readers bikes from 98 on dropped way down to the bottom of the page after BMX, general chat, ebay listings and the such. That pretty much killed my love for the site (along with all the "modern" haters snarky remarks.) The sites users are not devided between retro riders and modern bike owners (who are constantly reminded of the other sites on the net), bur retro riders and retro riders who ALSO have and appreciate modern bikes and the evolution of both trails and equipment. So I'm pretty sure almost all the users here either have or have an appreciation for older/retro bikes. Shame the appreciation and respect doesn't go both ways. Now that my oldest bikes are from 2000, despite their classic lineage, with the exception of my 95 Humu cruiser, I don't feel so much at home here anymore. I do still love and appreciate old bikes, the history of mountain biking, steel and ti frames and the feel of rigid forks. As long as it's the right tool for the job...

Right, and I forgot to mention (thanks to clockwork for the reminder) that I understand, appreciate and have always supported that it's a retro site...it is in the name...and that should absolutely take priority. We shouldn't be overrun by the kiddies who only ride DH and only ride 8" travel full sus rigs (why would they be here anyway?), but we also shouldn't knock them, as a lot of the young riders are pretty damn talented. And I mean just normal everday kids, not pros. But before I digress too much, the point is there should be room for retro dudes that don't mind a 100mm fork or disc brakes on at least one bike in the shed. ;-) I know it's for practical purposes, have no problem there, think John does a lurvley job with the site, but to me the original split felt like a message being sent out due to the puritans complaints over the rise in membership of folks with both kinds of bikes polluting the forum.

 

[IDB1]

to me the original split felt like a message being sent out due to the puritans complaints over the rise in membership of folks with both kinds of bikes polluting the forum.

But now those people don't have to have their retina irritated by forum pollution..
And the broader minded can pollute without fear of ridicule or retribution. . . that's gotta be a good thing?

 

[Kona Paul]

to me the original split felt like a message being sent out due to the puritans complaints over the rise in membership of folks with both kinds of bikes polluting the forum.

But now those people don't have to have their retina irritated by forum pollution..
And the broader minded can pollute without fear of ridicule or retribution. . . that's gotta be a good thing?

Probably. But I'm not trying to start a debate, honest. I was only trying to help with the "why 10 years?" question to the best of my ability. I probably should have kept my feelings and opinions to myself.

 

[IDB1]

I probably should have kept my feelings and opinions to myself.

Not at all. .

And I'm only trying to help.. epic fail normally but one has to try

 

[gump]

I probably should have kept my feelings and opinions to myself.

Nope, all good to hear.

Think there may have been some confusion over the 10 year thing though. This was discussed, but historically the era this site started discussing was before 95-ish bikes and parts. Hence 97 being the end of this 'era' such like. Sure there will be more points in time as we go forward, the site can evolve as best suits.
There are a lot of people who are still mainly into the early years, one forum for all years will for sure get diluted, and we were missing some good newer posts in the OT forum.

Cant please all the people all the time, but there is an essence of where the site started, and now getting a feel for where it should be going.

End of the day, will be what suits the people

 

[We_are_Stevo]

Wouldn't it have been easier to just divide everything up into 'Cantis,' 'Vs,' and 'Disks' rather than years? Or am I just being simplistic, or simply flippant? :?

 

[clockworkgazz]

See where you're going with that but disks were kicking about before v's so could get confusing.