The Lemon Fool

I'm just looking through the list of boards we currently have and I am struggling to find ones that aren't, either by design or by their nature, UK centric, which, of course, is hardly surprising for a UK focussed, .co.uk, site. Even when discussing international investment it's always mostly about which ITs/OEICs/ETFs and the like you can access in the UK to get international exposure, and very rarely about Berkshire or Nestle or Vale, etc.

Maybe <Macro and Global Topics> of the core investment boards can be "international", and then some of the non-core boards, like Food, Drink, Science, <Games, Puzzles and Riddles>, etc, but as for the rest....

New boards for our US friends could be set up within the current structure, but if more than a few migrate here then there's a fair chance that New posts, Unread posts, Active topics, etc will have a lot of stuff that just isn't relevant to the UK denizens. And, of course, that's also true for the US denizens who will see a lot of UK stuff that's not relevant to them.

So, if TLF intends to attract disgruntled US TMF denizens, perhaps it would be better to segregate the US boards from the current structure, while allowing either set of denizens to opt in to see the other. Not sure if that can be done with groups or would require a different entry point (http://www.lemonfool.co.uk/US?) with a different "Home" structure, but I do think it would be best if the board sets were split, while (hopefully) allowing users to opt in to seeing one or both, (hopefully) under the same login....

mc2fool wrote:
but I do think it would be best if the board sets were split, while (hopefully) allowing users to opt in to seeing one or both, (hopefully) under the same login....

On that particular subject, I'd go one step further and suggest that *if* a workable solution were to be found for that issue, then let's not just consider two areas that might warrant segregation - let's consider four -

1. UK investment
2. UK Politics
3. US Investment
4. US Politics

Your suggestion is a good one that might hopefully give board users choices as to what might visibly infringe on their particular area of interest, but I think any solution might also be a benefit for existing infringement issues as well as potentially news ones...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Itsallaguess wrote:

mc2fool wrote:
but I do think it would be best if the board sets were split, while (hopefully) allowing users to opt in to seeing one or both, (hopefully) under the same login....

On that particular subject, I'd go one step further and suggest that *if* a workable solution were to be found for that issue, then let's not just consider two areas that might warrant segregation - let's consider four -

1. UK investment
2. UK Politics
3. US Investment
4. US Politics

Your suggestion is a good one that might hopefully give board users choices as to what might visibly infringe on their particular area of interest, but I think any solution might also be a benefit for existing infringement issues as well as potentially news ones...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Well I was going to say, isn't (UK) investment vs (UK) Politics already dealt with by users being members or not of the Polite Discussion Group? But I've just tried resigning my membership of that group and I can't see any difference ... I can still read and post in Current Affairs & News so whereas I thought I understood the point of that group, I now don't....

I agree. I'm not sure why a UK investing forum would really want to be providing a home for investors who are in the USA (or any other entirely separate country). If the current main forum for investors in the USA has ceased to serve that purpose, then arguably that's something for that community of investors in the USA to find a solution for by themselves. They have a population 5 times that of the UK for starters, and, in addition to that, probably a disproportionately larger number of members of that forum than we do here, as investing, and discussing investing, is perhaps a rather more widespread activity in the USA than it is in the UK. I'm pretty sure that among their membership they will have enough people with the necessary skills to set up and host a new forum site for themselves.

If there were to be an influx of investors from the USA to The Lemon Fool, it probably would end up with many posts, and in particular the new/unread posts lists (which many members skim through to find new/updated threads of interest), being swamped with US topics of little or no relevance or interest to UK members (cue lots of threads about "401(k)" and suchlike US-specific topics spewed everywhere), and so would make the forum rather less useful and usable to existing members associated with the UK, where we need to bear in mind (and are primarily interested in) the laws, investing schemes (eg, ISAs) and brokers (etc) applicable to the UK. Weight of numbers of US posters could all too easily result in UK posts becoming a minority of the whole and therefore harder to find and access.

Weight of numbers from the USA could also significantly increase the hosting burden for the site, and therefore possibly also increase the hosting costs.

By all means offer help to the US investor community about how to set up a new forum, but if the Lemon Fool admins actually wish to host such a forum, I think it would be better for both communities if it were a separate site.

mc2fool wrote:

Itsallaguess wrote:

mc2fool wrote:
but I do think it would be best if the board sets were split, while (hopefully) allowing users to opt in to seeing one or both, (hopefully) under the same login....

On that particular subject, I'd go one step further and suggest that *if* a workable solution were to be found for that issue, then let's not just consider two areas that might warrant segregation - let's consider four -

1. UK investment
2. UK Politics
3. US Investment
4. US Politics

Your suggestion is a good one that might hopefully give board users choices as to what might visibly infringe on their particular area of interest, but I think any solution might also be a benefit for existing infringement issues as well as potentially news ones...

Well I was going to say, isn't (UK) investment vs (UK) Politics already dealt with by users being members or not of the Polite Discussion Group? But I've just tried resigning my membership of that group and I can't see any difference ... I can still read and post in Current Affairs & News so whereas I thought I understood the point of that group, I now don't....

The user-definable segregation aspect of the Current Affairs & News area was sadly removed some time ago...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

dave559 wrote:
If there were to be an influx of investors from the USA to The Lemon Fool, it probably would end up with many posts, and in particular the new/unread posts lists (which many members skim through to find new/updated threads of interest), being swamped with US topics of little or no relevance or interest to UK members (cue lots of threads about "401(k)" and suchlike US-specific topics spewed everywhere), and so would make the forum rather less useful and usable to existing members associated with the UK, where we need to bear in mind (and are primarily interested in) the laws, investing schemes (eg, ISAs) and brokers (etc) applicable to the UK.

Weight of numbers of US posters could all too easily result in UK posts becoming a minority of the whole and therefore harder to find and access.

I agree with all that you've said, but that's also exactly what many of us that are primarily interested in discussing UK-centric investment matters have been saying for years now, with regards to the current complete flooding of the site with discussions and arguments around UK politics...

Those of us that complained about the removal of the political-area user-defined segregation facility that helped enormously with the enjoyment of the site for those of us primarily interested in investment matters have been persistently told that we should manage our expectations and use of the site better, to cope with the removal of that segregation facility, where all discussion-types are now completely visible, so I'd have to ask why that approach might then be different with any potential addition of US-centric discussions...

'Deal with it' has been the mantra up to now - why might that change?

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Itsallaguess wrote:The user-definable segregation aspect of the Current Affairs & News area was sadly removed some time ago...

That must have passed me by ... so I take it that membership of the Polite Discussion Group has no meaning now? But what was the effect before? It's been so long since I joined it I don't remember how the site appeared to me without it. Will Groups provide the kind of segregation you, I and dave559 want?

dave559 wrote:They have a population 5 times that of the UK for starters, and, in addition to that, probably a disproportionately larger number of members of that forum than we do here, as investing, and discussing investing, is perhaps a rather more widespread activity in the USA than it is in the UK.

The TMF USA discussion boards currently have a membership of 50897. https://discussion.fool.com/u

mc2fool wrote:

Itsallaguess wrote:
The user-definable segregation aspect of the Current Affairs & News area was sadly removed some time ago...

That must have passed me by ... so I take it that membership of the Polite Discussion Group has no meaning now? But what was the effect before?

If you weren't a user-defined member of the political-discussion-and-arguments-area Group, then visiting the site had the bizarre but very welcome effect of actually allowing you to think that this place was, indeed, a 'Shares, investment and Personal Finance Discussion Forum'...

mc2fool wrote:
Will Groups provide the kind of segregation you, I and dave559 want?

Yes, but I'd have to question why they'd possibly be brought back for concerns that have been completely dismissed in the past where similar segregation issues and requests have previously been raised...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Itsallaguess wrote:I agree with all that you've said, but that's also exactly what many of us that are primarily interested in discussing UK-centric investment matters have been saying for years now, with regards to the current complete flooding of the site with discussions and arguments around UK politics...

"flooding", what flooding? This is nonsense (as usual). It sounds to me just 'the usual suspects' having their all too regular whine.

1. The TLF site is already segregated into Investment/Politics/Other/Etc. by the very structure of the site. If you aren't interested in a particular subject, don't read that board. It's simple and works for me - and for most people I would have thought.

2. If there are too few posts on investment topics for a minority, then that minority should post more on investment topics. Simple.

Itsallaguess wrote:Those of us that complained about the removal of the political-area user-defined segregation facility that helped enormously with the enjoyment of the site for those of us primarily interested in investment matters...

Yeah. Why do I minority of TLF posters persistently seek to dictate to others how they ought to post on the site. What business is it of theirs?

mc2fool wrote:That must have passed me by ... so I take it that membership of the Polite Discussion Group has no meaning now? But what was the effect before? It's been so long since I joined it I don't remember how the site appeared to me without it. Will Groups provide the kind of segregation you, I and dave559 want?

At one time you had to be both logged on and also elect to be registered to see PD. Needless to say, this caused issues...
Now PD is simple one of a small number of boards that you can only see if you are logged on.

XFool wrote:1. The TLF site is already segregated into Investment/Politics/Other/Etc. by the very structure of the site. If you aren't interested in a particular subject, don't read that board. It's simple and works for me - and for most people I would have thought.

That may work for you but as has already been mentioned twice by two different posters in this thread, many users use the new & unread posts lists to access the site (I rather suspect, from previous discussions, that it's actually the majority, or at least a very large cohort) and any solution should try and satisfy most people, not just people that access the site the way you do. The suggestions offered so far wouldn't affect you at all, you'd be able to carry on accessing the site as you do, but would improve matters for others that don't.

dave559 wrote:If there were to be an influx of investors from the USA to The Lemon Fool, it probably would end up with many posts, and in particular the new/unread posts lists (which many members skim through to find new/updated threads of interest), being swamped with US topics of little or no relevance or interest to UK members (cue lots of threads about "401(k)" and suchlike US-specific topics spewed everywhere), and so would make the forum rather less useful and usable to existing members associated with the UK

(Dave's bold, my red)

Itsallaguess wrote:

mc2fool wrote:
but I do think it would be best if the board sets were split, while (hopefully) allowing users to opt in to seeing one or both, (hopefully) under the same login....

On that particular subject, I'd go one step further and suggest that *if* a workable solution were to be found for that issue, then let's not just consider two areas that might warrant segregation - let's consider four -

1. UK investment
2. UK Politics
3. US Investment
4. US Politics

Your suggestion is a good one that might hopefully give board users choices as to what might visibly infringe on their particular area of interest, but I think any solution might also be a benefit for existing infringement issues as well as potentially news ones...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

"in fringe areas of interest"?
try Macro Topics
certainly some fringe perspectives there

The only reasonable solution I see - may not be possible - is to simply "segregate" Quick links into "New Financial posts" and "New General posts", or further if you will. Or even have two separate Quick links.

XFool wrote:
2. If there are too few posts on investment topics for a minority, then that minority should post more on investment topics. Simple.

Those that chose to leave the site, and reduce the number of such posts further, won't reverse. Not so "simple".

XFool wrote:

Itsallaguess wrote:Those of us that complained about the removal of the political-area user-defined segregation facility that helped enormously with the enjoyment of the site for those of us primarily interested in investment matters...

Yeah. Why do I minority of TLF posters persistently seek to dictate to others how they ought to post on the site. What business is it of theirs?

You do realise your post is exactly a demonstration of that which you wish to stop?

Hi all,.
Interesting discussion.
We are happy to welcome the US discussions, because we can handle the growth in multiple ways ;

We can have a US Section
We can have an unread posts option, UK or us/all
We can spread out and have a Lemonfool. Com separate website!

Was are not limited by the current structure.
We will judge it like we did when we set up and will build room to cater for everyone.

stooz wrote:Hi all,.
Interesting discussion.
We are happy to welcome the US discussions, because we can handle the growth in multiple ways ;

We can have a US Section
We can have an unread posts option, UK or us/all

And Your posts UK or US/All,
New posts UK or US/All,
Unanswered topics UK or US/All,
Active topics UK or US/All and
Search UK or US/All ?!?

Can you explain what the problem (if any) is with using Groups, please? (And why the Polite Discussion Group is no longer used?) 'Cos, IIUC, Groups sounds ideal; you just put boards into the relevant group, US/UK (and maybe UK Politics/US Politics) and users just opt in to whichever groups they're interested it.

stooz wrote:We can spread out and have a Lemonfool. Com separate website!

Too late, http://www.lemonfool.com,

mc2fool wrote:Can you explain what the problem (if any) is with using Groups, please? (And why the Polite Discussion Group is no longer used?)

I can for a start.

And surely we don't need locked up sub forums when the only real problem is some people have finding new posts on their favourite boards?

XFool wrote:And surely we don't need locked up sub forums when the only real problem is some people have finding new posts on their favourite boards?

They're not "sub forums" and please stop trying to demean the way other people use the site, which you obviously don't understand anyway as it's exactly the opposite to having "favourite" boards (if it weren't we'd just use subscriptions); just accept it.

mc2fool wrote:

XFool wrote:

mc2fool wrote:Can you explain what the problem (if any) is with using Groups, please? (And why the Polite Discussion Group is no longer used?)

I can for a start.

Dare I ask, go on then...

No harm in asking...

mc2fool wrote:

XFool wrote:And surely we don't need locked up sub forums when the only real problem is some people have finding new posts on their favourite boards?

They're not "sub forums" and please stop trying to demean the way other people use the site, which you obviously don't understand anyway as it's exactly the opposite to having "favourite" boards (if it weren't we'd just use subscriptions); just accept it.

I don't care how "other people use the site", that's their business. I resent, and will continue to resent, the way some people keep on trying to get the site re-engineered for their specific use and benefit - which I obviously do understand - where it would prove to be a nuisance to me and probably others. (As it has in the past) OK?

Do we know if it is technically possible to accommodate these users wishes, without inconveniencing others?

XFool wrote:

mc2fool wrote:

XFool wrote:

mc2fool wrote:Can you explain what the problem (if any) is with using Groups, please? (And why the Polite Discussion Group is no longer used?)

I can for a start.

Dare I ask, go on then...

No harm in asking...

mc2fool wrote:

XFool wrote:And surely we don't need locked up sub forums when the only real problem is some people have finding new posts on their favourite boards?

They're not "sub forums" and please stop trying to demean the way other people use the site, which you obviously don't understand anyway as it's exactly the opposite to having "favourite" boards (if it weren't we'd just use subscriptions); just accept it.

I don't care how "other people use the site", that's their business. I resent, and will continue to resent, the way some people keep on trying to get the site re-engineered for their specific use and benefit - which I obviously do understand - where it would prove to be a nuisance to me and probably others. (As it has in the past) OK?

Do we know if it is technically possible to accommodate these users wishes, without inconveniencing others?

Well (unlike your suggestions) I'm not trying to get the site "re-engineered", I'm trying to understand what the advantages and disadvantages of some choices available are. Oh, and sorry but you obviously started replying to my post before I edited it and removed my "ask"; I originally asked Stooz and it's just him I'd like a reply from.

In any case, I am now convinced; if TLF wants to take on US folks I will be pushing for a completely separate site. http://lemonfool.us is free.