Too Much Information

[Rallymatt]

It’s difficult to balance this, but….

When a member poses a fairly basic problem they are having, that requires a pretty basic solution to get them going, there can be a tendency for some responses to become a battle of the wits and technical prowess of others. I’m not doubting anyone’s ability or knowledge, it’s just it can be very intimidating to less experienced members and can create a false impression that railway modelling is difficult. I’m sure that is never the intention, we do by and large all, try and help in our own way. Sometimes the easy minimalist answer is the most effective

[RB51]

Thank you, with others, for bringing this up. We have noticed. All overly technical responses which go beyond the requirement of the query, from all sources, will be removed. This is developing into a bit of a common trend which will be closely monitored. R-

[Rog RJ]

It has always been my policy to keep my responses short and to the point. If more explanation is needed the enquirer only has to ask.

[Moccasin]

Thanks for raising this RM & for moderators for recognising the issue.

There are other places for discussing technical minutiae but this forum works best as a first port of call for the less technically minded without fear of ridicule or overly technical answers.

Some recent threads have demonstrated that instructions considered clear by many regulars on this forum can still be somewhat difficult for some newcomers and I know how I felt when I first started using this forum almost a year ago.

TT120 in particular has brought totally new modellers to the hobby, many with no experience of (or interest in) electronics.

[gilbo2]

I have to agree, some posts tend to be overwhelming if not careful. I suggest a more detailed response only when the OP comes back and asks further questions.

[96RAF]

There are several problems the forum faces in answering a question.

1. What is the actual question - it may take several iterations of posts to determine the actual problem. If the enquirer doesn't know what is wrong, then asking the right question may not be easy.
2. What is the skill level of the enquirer. Sometimes it is stated in post and other times it is blindingly obvious, but at others we have to probe for information much like for the question.
3. Answering just the question without wandering off track is preferred, unless there is an associated answer, like track power bus problems may need a ref to the soldering guide, or talking to CV29 may need further explanation and ref to a calculator - and so it goes.
4. Does the enquirer have special needs, physical or mental that could affect things. Such things may be told in post, but may not be otherwise evident. Difficult to handle sympathetically at times.

So if responders could please take those points into consideration before launching War and Peace upon a tyro it would really help.

[Moccasin]

All very good points Rob.

There’s a risk too that something intended to be lighthearted isn’t always interpreted that way, especially if the reader is less adept at picking up intended cues or is at the end of their tether due to frustration at something not working. Such is the minefield of social media.

[Rallymatt]

There is nothing to prevent people discussing very detailed topics in a separate thread, just don’t overwhelm people with overly technical answers when not required 😁

[Brew Man]

Who could you be talking about RM 🤔

[LTSR_NSE]

Since (at times) I am definitely a culprit…

If OP (or a responder) makes an incorrect assumption & posts inaccurate/unhelpful/potentially damaging information or advice:

• is it legitimate to challenge & correct the inaccuracies with corrections? (so that future readers can be better informed.)

• or would it be preferred to simply report the post to mods as inaccurate/unhelpful? (& hope they remove/correct it a.s.a.p.)

I have always done the former as I believe in sharing information & greatly appreciate posts that provide technical explanation (especially if an error I have unwittingly posted is corrected!)

However I would willingly change & do latter if that would be preferable.

[96RAF]

Basic backside covering from the rules . . .

All advice given is followed at your own risk. Posts are made in good faith, Hornby Forum users cannot be held personally accountable and Hornby Hobbies Limited cannot be held liable, for the results of following any instructions given.

[Yelrow]

DCC, and 7000, with Bluetooth, have not made explanations, simple. When it’s 00, or 3 Rail, it’s very easy to answer. Certainly, tis in my case. Those who have gone down the 7000, route, have a steep learning curve, and hence both their questions and answers, will be more technical. Our late lamented Chrissaf, had a gift of explaining the most technical problems simply, although, he was well known for the length of his replies. We have some very knowledgeable people on here, who do tend ,by the very nature of their Ability to give detailed replies. I think it’s a price worth paying.

[RB51]

The beauty of Chrisaff's responses was they were always entirely relevant to the query. Divergence, expansion and wandering off topic never occurred. R-

[SteveM6]

I, for one, am glad this subject has finally been raised.

John says “DCC and HM7K with BT have not made explanations simple.” Very true, and you can add to that - many of us on here now have the benefit of working with, say HM7K for the past year. But with a maturing system, we must remember that we are now entering the period where new users are joining the hobby and are at the start of the learning curve that we have all been on.

Think back to the early days of HM7K, when none of us knew anything and asked plenty of questions - the answers tended to be fairly simplistic. As more knowledge was gained, the answers and explanations came with extra levels of detail.

Recently, there has been a tendency, when a simple ‘early days’ type question is asked, for some responders to jump straight to the most technically obscure and complicated possible solution. Guaranteed to send the OP running to find another hobby.

We could all benefit from remembering K.I.S.S. - keep it simple #banned word#

When any kind of troubleshooting is needed there is a process to follow from the most basic of questions to determine the nature of the fault, expanding into areas of increasing complexity until the problem is resolved.

I seem to remember that a standard set of questions to determine the basic details of the fault was going to be drawn up to establish a baseline for each enquiry rather than the current scattergun approach to problem solving. Each contributor, however well meaning, will come to an issue with their own preferences and prejudices - mine is always to try switching it off and on again (K.I.S.S).

Maybe it is finally time for a more structured approach, from which we can all benefit, to be adopted?

[Yelrow]

wandering off topic, unfortunately, does tend to occur, with members, who dont realize that it is frowned on, these days. In the past, both this, and banter, was acceptable, and its intolerance has led to the departure of several valued members. In my view, it is a shame, as now, a lot of us use emails to exchange advice, that in the past would have been shared. i hope that the new platform, will recognise this loss, and contain an area, as all other forums have, where a tad of banter, is permitted.

[LTSR_NSE]

When I first saw this thread’s title I wondered if it was going to be a criticism of suddenly introducing previous life history & experiences, (in a manner not relevant to the original thread) but I digress…

[Moccasin]

I did wonder whether a banter area could be created for established forum users to chew the fat on a range of topics, but am conscious that in the past Hornby have wanted to keep the forum focused and it is likely to make more work for the moderators.

If direct messaging is allowed, then maybe that will allow a group of users to set up a private conversation. Maybe that will help keep threads on track to a greater extent, if off-topic banter can be taken offline.

I've certainly learnt a lot from coming here and having some light hearted banter makes it more enjoyable for me, but it might annoy others!

[96RAF]

The reason banter was discouraged was to try to keep topics on track else they could develop into a bun fight as happened just recently.

It may be sensible to provide an off-piste section where all such banter can be directed. Give us a few suggestions for the section title - Lamp Room, Off Track, Beyond the Tracks, etc. winning suggestion gets new platform brownie points which are worthless unless you are into such nonesense.

[LTSR_NSE]

Perhaps a term describing the section’s purpose e.g. ‘Blowing Smoke’ or ‘Letting off Steam’ ?

[Rallymatt]

I like the idea of a ‘Club Room’ where less focused things can be discussed.

I’m glad people understood the issue I was highlighting, seems a few others saw it too. There is always a place for the expertise and detail. Knowing how much information to give and when is as valuable as the information itself. As Steve M6 identified, we don’t want to be scaring people off the hobby 😁

[Yelrow]

The Mess room is the name of such a section on my favourite forum, the canteen, off piste , perhaps.

[Yelrow]

The Boiler Room, a place where you can let off Steam.

[Moccasin]

The Boiler Room, a place where you can let off Steam.

 

 

Yes I like that, although I’d personally prefer Boiler Shop as it links back to Stephenson’s original locomotive factory in Newcastle. Both the Boiler Shop & Pattern Shop still exist, though now seeing alternative uses

[Rallymatt]

Wheel Tappers and Shunters Club

[gilbo2]

“Smoking Room”, but I guess not PC these days!