Posts: 1,311
Threads: 193
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
4
07-15-2021, 11:58 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-15-2021, 08:15 PM by Eleatic Guest.)
I am probably not alone in noticing that, despite the best efforts of those who run and moderate it, the forum has much declined in recent years. The quality is still there, but not the quantity of posts to make regular visits worthwhile. The end result is a downward spiral where users post less because less users visit and the other way round. At the time of writing this, I am the only member online. This is a pity since the forum still has potential. But it needs mass to.
What I suggest is to abandon the focus on the Roman army and to open up the forum to a new time horizon. Increase the range of topics and subforums both in time and space. Expand the timeline to all military history before gunpowder weapons became dominant, that is from Bronze Age through the Middle Ages. Include other civilizations, add more non-military subjects. By this, I believe, we could escape the specialisation trap and attract new users, while preserving the focus on pre-modern warfare and society.
What do you think?
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
Posts: 6,734
Threads: 489
Joined: Mar 2001
Reputation:
27
I think you're right that we might have to consider something. RAT suffers from the same issue most forums have/had: the competition from Facebook and other Social Media.
Posts: 341
Threads: 8
Joined: Jan 2007
Reputation:
2
I keep hoping the FB'ers will wake up and refuse to be harvested. I am not comfortable with chaos and that is what FB is to me. I hope RAT can keep a "forum" format. I can go back and find anything here (or be pointed to a helpful thread). Yay for us???!!!???
Cheryl Boeckmann
Posts: 1,599
Threads: 83
Joined: Mar 2007
Reputation:
57
To revitalise RAT hmm what to do ? The format to post on here is great ? being able to put up how too do something and help others I cannot fault, to be able to show research again great. I only joined FB last year because of the pandemic with all our events cancelled. I needed to keep talking to those I could not be with. I suppose this is maybe what is missing that element of it, and the ease that FB offers, but it is no good at what this site can offer for the access to information or help. I also have found that posts you put up now have very little discussion with only a few regulars talking which is a shame considering that people are still joining the forum ? I hope reenactors ect would still use the site and return.
Regards Brennivs ?
Woe Ye The Vanquished
Brennvs 390 BC
When you have all this why do you envy our mud huts
Caratacvs
Centvrio Princeps Brennivs COH I Dacorivm (Roma Antiqvia)
Posts: 67
Threads: 8
Joined: Aug 2020
Reputation:
17
I am a very new member of the forum and I do not post very often. So I cannot comment on the decline or otherwise of the forum. That said, I have found the helpful attitude of members, quality of information and the amazing breadth of topics covered invaluable. I do not, and will not, use Facebook et al so a forum like this is far more to my taste.
As one whose main interest in the Roman Army is constructing and then fielding a miniature representation of a Roman Legion with 28mm sized models for wargames I have found the members here most helpful with answers to some odd questions and I will, no doubt, have a few more as I wish to add supporting services - a field forge, butchery, hospital etc.
I would add that I am a member of another forum that had a similar discussion that became a self fulfilling prophesy. The discussions became quite divisive as camps formed around "forum traditionalists" and "Facebook progressives". The forum effectively died.
Alan
Lives in Caledonia not far from the Antonine Wall.
Posts: 341
Threads: 8
Joined: Jan 2007
Reputation:
2
Can we add another voting option? I did not vote yet and would like an "abstain" option. I know things must change, but I have no thoughts to offer on that (yet). Some serious thinking must be done!
Cheryl Boeckmann
Posts: 15,116
Threads: 415
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation:
77
"Expand the timeline to all military history before gunpowder weapons became dominant, that is from Bronze Age through the Middle Ages"
I am NOT in favour of that, it would mean letting go of this forum altogether, without any chance of success of 'revitalization'. I know for sure that it would drive those away who are here for the main topic - the Roman army.
Stefan, you say 'abandon the focus on the Roman army' but are you forgetting that we already include the complete Greek Classical period as well? And that we even include the Roman Empire (not JUST the Roman army) up to 1453?
And even that does not give us the desidered impact - why would including every persiod and every region do that?
Plus the fact that more history boards still exist (and apparently suffer from our problems), why would you ruin this one?
While I would applaud changes that would bring more traffic, these would have to be within the frame of our current scope, which is military plus civilian from the Bronze Age up to 1453 - yes focused on the Roman army but that is not limited by the forum in any way.
Posts: 1,973
Threads: 40
Joined: Mar 2011
Reputation:
101
I seem to recall that, some time ago, I suggested that we might have a sub-forum on the Byzantine army. I know that, in theory, we go up to 1453 but there is no great emphasis on this and something specifically on the Byzantine period might attract some more members.
Michael King Macdona
And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
Posts: 127
Threads: 17
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation:
8
I tend to agree that some sort of re-brand along the lines of "Ancient and Medieval Warfare" would probably get the user figures and activity levels back up. If folk are concerned that goes too late, just call it "Ancient and Early Medieval Warfare" - the Bachrach "up to the first crusade" model might be a good timeslot, and start at the iron age if there are worries about bronze age creeping into the forum?!
A bit of new content might also help, e.g. add a page for links to museums and sites (by country).
John
Posts: 1,068
Threads: 51
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
82
I dont know if your aware but there is another Dead "Roman Army Talk" actually a snap shot of the Forum as it was in 2004 or so : https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/romanarmytalk/
I mention this because this tapatalk version and RAT facebook are the one's that come up when I search for Roman Army Talk in my Browser normally... not this site...
Ivor
"And the four bare walls stand on the seashore. a wreck a skeleton a monument of that instability and vicissitude to which all things human are subject. Not a dwelling within sight, and the farm labourer, and curious traveller, are the only persons that ever visit the scene where once so many thousands were congregated." T.Lewin 1867
Posts: 1,550
Threads: 81
Joined: Oct 2006
Reputation:
49
07-18-2021, 04:21 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-18-2021, 05:17 AM by Sean Manning.)
(07-15-2021, 12:09 PM)Praefectusclassis Wrote: I think you're right that we might have to consider something. RAT suffers from the same issue most forums have/had: the competition from Facebook and other Social Media. The really nasty period on RAT around 2012 drove a lot of us away.
As I wrote in my 2020 year end essay, my goal for the 2020s is to turn the good things from the open web into printed books and articles which will be findable in 2121. I served my time in the previous decade trying to keep communities on the open web alive, and now its someone else's problem.
Nullis in verba
I have not checked this forum frequently since 2013, but I hope that these old posts have some value. I now have a blog on books, swords, and the curious things humans do with them.
Posts: 15,116
Threads: 415
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation:
77
(07-17-2021, 09:23 PM)Crispianus Wrote: I dont know if your aware but there is another Dead "Roman Army Talk" actually a snap shot of the Forum as it was in 2004 or so : https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/romanarmytalk/
I mention this because this tapatalk version and RAT facebook are the one's that come up when I search for Roman Army Talk in my Browser normally... not this site...
It's a copy of this forum - I recognise topic and most members. I think they just took one of the previous forms of this very forum and cloned it into a 'new' one?
(07-17-2021, 08:19 PM)John W Davison Wrote: just call it "Ancient and Early Medieval Warfare"
Why? RAT is a bit of a brand name, I think we would confuse (and lose) the core members that we still have. If you ask me, if we want to get more traffic here there may be ways but they should be Roman (from 1000BC to 1000AD or whatever). I am NOT in favour of creating a totally different forum on the shoulders of this one, 'just' to get more traffic numbers. It sounds too much like a bad decision from Hollywood about a good script into a 'popular movie', just to get the ratings up. 
Posts: 330
Threads: 21
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation:
10
I too would like to see this forum revitalized and continue, but I have to say IT IS still very relevant to anyone interested in military matters from the start of the Hoplite period all the way to the later Roman period. It is a depository of relatively easy to access "peer reviewed" information, most still relevant, and I check in almost daily still. Some of the information here was digested by youngsters who went on to get undergraduate and then graduate degrees and are now moving into academia or are junior working archaeologists. I know this as I met many of them at the University of Pennsylvania (Ivy League) Museum as a long term volunteer in the Classical Galleries and the influence of this forum is profound on that generation. In fact many are or were "reenactors" or just collected the gear and wore it for their personal pleasure. Almost every young man who studied anything about ancient Rome owned a Deepeeka "Gallic G." If this forum went away it would a great loss to the "lurkers" who make up the majority of every forum, they don't post but they do read.
That said this type of forum has limitations, as does Facebook Reddit. I stay off Reddit as some folks there just like using using foul language and that does nothing to further knowledge. Facebook is awful for presenting ideas coherently as it's so easy for discussions to go off in a dozen directions at once, some relevant and some not. Because it reaches so many folks around the world I now post mostly on the International Hoplite Discussion Group which complements this forum I'd say. For example, I took an old discussion here on sauroters and continued it over there. I added dozens of new pictures of artifacts, references to published works going back a century and old quotes from distinguished members here, and in the end we as a group contracted 20 very high accuracy reproductions of a well published bronze/lead sauroter at Harvard Univ. with a well respected professor/bronze artist in Norway. Via Facebook we contacted over a dozen bronze artists around the world and collected numerous bids before we settled as a group on the most accurate version, it will have lead added to the alloy as the maker wants to be accurate. These pieces will be as exact a copy as exists in the world today down to the surprising hollowness almost down to the tip. It was this forum that brought such details to the reenactment community, but the manufacturers of modern sauroters, a must have item for Hoplites, as exist in the marketplace today did not produce anything close to accurate and the one person who did, was not interested in making them anymore. If I had used this forum only I'm not sure we would would have had more than an academic discussion on the subject, and it is very very easy to post pictures on Facebook. Not all 20 sauroters are committed so if anyone is interested drop me a line at [email protected]. I am simply the facilitator of the group and make no money for my efforts.
So I hope this forum stays alive and not dilutes its core focus on Classical Civilization Warfare and all the subjects like textiles, trade and politics that are as relevant as swords and helmets.
Joe Balmos
Posts: 1,550
Threads: 81
Joined: Oct 2006
Reputation:
49
If the folks who are still on RAT want to promote it, they could try some of the big ancient podcasts and vlogs.
(07-15-2021, 03:38 PM)Athena Areias Wrote: I keep hoping the FB'ers will wake up and refuse to be harvested. I am not comfortable with chaos and that is what FB is to me. I hope RAT can keep a "forum" format. I can go back and find anything here (or be pointed to a helpful thread). Yay for us???!!!??? I think chaos is a great name for social media with 'timelines'! In meatspace, everyone learns to behave one way with their partner at the breakfast table, another way in a meeting with their boss, and a third way with their friends at a cafe, but the 'timelines' smush all those different social contexts together. But it is also that the hosts of those sites track everything you do and everywhere you visit, but make it hard for you to find something you saw last week.
As I said, my hobby work since 2018 is mining the remaining forums for data which I am turning into books and scholarly articles which will still exist in 2121. The thoughtful people were on the open web, but they are not on social media or not their thoughtful selves there.
Nullis in verba
I have not checked this forum frequently since 2013, but I hope that these old posts have some value. I now have a blog on books, swords, and the curious things humans do with them.
Posts: 1,311
Threads: 193
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
4
(07-17-2021, 01:56 PM)Robert Vermaat Wrote: "Expand the timeline to all military history before gunpowder weapons became dominant, that is from Bronze Age through the Middle Ages"
I am NOT in favour of that, it would mean letting go of this forum altogether, without any chance of success of 'revitalization'. I know for sure that it would drive those away who are here for the main topic - the Roman army.
Why is that? Why can't we keep the reenactors and bring new history buffs onboard at the same time? We could create new subforums, while keeping those that exist intact. What you say amounts we want the forum as it is or we are leaving it. Well, very many have already left and I don't see a turnaround.
I don't know about the great Facebook exodus that has been referred to, but Facebook should not be a competitor due to its technical limitations that have been pointed out. Also, Facebook is more a thing for the older, first online generation. How many teenagers still register there? They are all now on Tiktok, Instagram and whatever. So, I feel we should be in principle able to outcompete Facebook, as long as we do our homework and broaden our scope.
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
|
