Review database
I think that this would may be a good idea Jeff, but can you elaborate on what the differences would be?
I would also suggest taking it a step further.
In the old format of Coasterbuzz, there were individual forums for quite a few parks. I would venture to say that this concept should be brought back. I know that some of those forums did not see heavy traffic, but a the new concept could have parks broken up into regional forums (i.e., eastern, midwest, southern, western, international, etc.) This might clean up the General Buzz forum, leaving that only for general coaster discussions.
I also have been noticing that the "New for 2000" forum has significantly decreased in traffic. Information contained in this forum can merge into the above mentioned catagories, thus freeing up some of your bandwidth.
Also, I like the idea that folks can start a discussion directly from a news or rumor item. Sometimes though, interesting discussions about the news item go unnoticed, as most will assume that discussions for the most part are here in the forums. This can also reduce the amount of duplication of discussion topics if there was a link directly to the forum topic.
-------------
Neil
Pittsburgh, PA
I would also suggest taking it a step further.
In the old format of Coasterbuzz, there were individual forums for quite a few parks. I would venture to say that this concept should be brought back. I know that some of those forums did not see heavy traffic, but a the new concept could have parks broken up into regional forums (i.e., eastern, midwest, southern, western, international, etc.) This might clean up the General Buzz forum, leaving that only for general coaster discussions.
I also have been noticing that the "New for 2000" forum has significantly decreased in traffic. Information contained in this forum can merge into the above mentioned catagories, thus freeing up some of your bandwidth.
Also, I like the idea that folks can start a discussion directly from a news or rumor item. Sometimes though, interesting discussions about the news item go unnoticed, as most will assume that discussions for the most part are here in the forums. This can also reduce the amount of duplication of discussion topics if there was a link directly to the forum topic.
-------------
Neil
Pittsburgh, PA
This is a great idea, for lots of reasons. I don't know how appropriate it is to bring up other sites, but Worlds of Coasters has a large database of reviews which I have found to be incredibly helpful in planning trips - even to the point of going hundreds of miles out of our way just to check out some obscure coaster I never would have heard of that's now one of my favorites (i.e. Screechin' Eagle). However, that site - not to criticize - is not maintained anywhere near the level this is, and new info is rare. A review database for CoasterBuzz could cement its position as the pre-eminent coaster site on the Web. And I would love to contribute.
-------------
Age and treachery will always overcome youth and skill.
Functionally, the database would work like anything else that needs "approval" on the site. You enter a review, and it appears for me to approve before going live, therefore I can filter out the "that park sucks" reviews. Once live, the review would appear linked to the individual park page (like the news items, coasters, etc.).
Regarding individual forums, the problem with that before is that the discussion became too fragmented, and people would go forum to forum looking for something that interested them (according to the log analysis). The SFO forum has worked well because Chip drives people there from his SFO/Refreshing Look site. In short, I don't really want to do that again, because the only forums that got significant traffic were CP, PKI and Kennywood.
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
Regarding individual forums, the problem with that before is that the discussion became too fragmented, and people would go forum to forum looking for something that interested them (according to the log analysis). The SFO forum has worked well because Chip drives people there from his SFO/Refreshing Look site. In short, I don't really want to do that again, because the only forums that got significant traffic were CP, PKI and Kennywood.
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com
Sounds good, it would be nice to read what other people think of various parks and their experiences there, as long as their written in an intelligent way and are not afraid of being a little critical when it's deserved.
While I certainly don't want to see the "this park sucks" stuff either, at the same time I don't need to read ramapant homerism about "this park rules" and reading about every coaster being "the best ever" without any semi-intelligent analysis.
While I certainly don't want to see the "this park sucks" stuff either, at the same time I don't need to read ramapant homerism about "this park rules" and reading about every coaster being "the best ever" without any semi-intelligent analysis.
I think a review database is a GREAT idea, but I also think the "trip reports" forum is useful -- would you consider keeping both?
The review database is the "official" place to file "reviews" (obviously); the "trip reports" forum is a place to DISCUSS impressions -- "I didn't like THIS at Park X" can be discussed among members ("Well, when I went, it wasn't like that, but that was because....")
Just a thought...
-------------
--Greg
http://www.pobox.com/~gregleg/
The review database is the "official" place to file "reviews" (obviously); the "trip reports" forum is a place to DISCUSS impressions -- "I didn't like THIS at Park X" can be discussed among members ("Well, when I went, it wasn't like that, but that was because....")
Just a thought...
-------------
--Greg
http://www.pobox.com/~gregleg/
I need to agree with Jeff on the idea of not having individual park forums.
I think that we you may want to do seperate forums then just General, Trip Reports, and RCT. Things can be too hard to find in General also. I agree that the Refreshing Look forum works and it seems to recieve a lot of traffic. And with CP on GTTP, maybe just regional forums would do better.
-------------
Matt Bleiweiss
http://www.sfo.f2s.com
I think that we you may want to do seperate forums then just General, Trip Reports, and RCT. Things can be too hard to find in General also. I agree that the Refreshing Look forum works and it seems to recieve a lot of traffic. And with CP on GTTP, maybe just regional forums would do better.
-------------
Matt Bleiweiss
http://www.sfo.f2s.com
I feel that this is a great idea. You could have a professional review as well as shorter reviews from members. This would be excellent in trip planning as well as for just having the knowledge available. Also in these forums you could have coaster reviews of the parks coasters. This would help when visiting the parks to know which ones are really worth waiting a lot of time for. The rating system that is in place now helps a little bit, but if a ride gets high ratings or low ratings, I would really like to know why. This way people can make their decisions based on the details in these reviews and then decide if they should wait for it if there is a long wait.
I agree with Greg... I would like to see both.
I like the Trip Reports because they provide an interesting summary of the members' experiences at the various parks and allows subsequent dialog as a result.
Personally, I would prefer to see Park Reviews by a smaller group of seasoned veterans. These standalone commentaries could be linked from the Park's page and include:
- a general description of the park and its unique and historical features.
- a detailed description of each coaster, the riding experience, and a rating on the Griswold scale of -3 to +5.
- any other noteworthy rides or attractions.
- an overall impression/rating of the park.
You could form a Review Team and open the selection process to the membership by asking all interested members to submit a Park Review by a certain date. Determine how many charter members there will be on the Review Team and make the selections based on a combination of:
- quality of the Park Review
- number of parks visited
- number of coasters in the track record
- CoasterBuzz membership date
Periodically, repeat the process to add a new Review Team member. Also, you can always promote a Trip Report to a Park Review (by a Guest Reviewer).
Trip Reports and Park Reviews altered my vacation plans for the better: PKD, BGW, KW, CP, PKI beginning 6/16. I dropped PCWonderland and added KW and CP.
Many thanks!
Dan
I like the Trip Reports because they provide an interesting summary of the members' experiences at the various parks and allows subsequent dialog as a result.
Personally, I would prefer to see Park Reviews by a smaller group of seasoned veterans. These standalone commentaries could be linked from the Park's page and include:
- a general description of the park and its unique and historical features.
- a detailed description of each coaster, the riding experience, and a rating on the Griswold scale of -3 to +5.
- any other noteworthy rides or attractions.
- an overall impression/rating of the park.
You could form a Review Team and open the selection process to the membership by asking all interested members to submit a Park Review by a certain date. Determine how many charter members there will be on the Review Team and make the selections based on a combination of:
- quality of the Park Review
- number of parks visited
- number of coasters in the track record
- CoasterBuzz membership date
Periodically, repeat the process to add a new Review Team member. Also, you can always promote a Trip Report to a Park Review (by a Guest Reviewer).
Trip Reports and Park Reviews altered my vacation plans for the better: PKD, BGW, KW, CP, PKI beginning 6/16. I dropped PCWonderland and added KW and CP.
Many thanks!
Dan
I didn't read all of dan's so I may say some of what he says. I would like to see both a trip report and park review. A park review to me would be boring as only good things about that park would be allowed. That is not bad by no means. I like it alot. However I also like the separate trip reports where one can be free to state his own experience without having the bad stuff taken out (unless cussing is in there). If there are certain things bad about a park for example; ops, theming, rides, environment, etc.. let them be posted in a separate trip report. Don't take that away. I will be at SFDL this year and am wondering how it is. Only SF park I have been to is SFO. A park review would greatly help on this matter. If it is not up before I go I will probably start a topic about how good is SFDL. I vote for both trip reports and park reviews.
-------------
Closing Time: 5:30
CP Arrival Time: 5:50
Whose Line is it Anyway?
-------------
Closing Time: 5:30
CP Arrival Time: 5:50
Whose Line is it Anyway?
Ditto Seven-of-9! I share your sentiments exactly. When there were individual park forums I enjoyed visiting Coasterbuzz daily. I rarely visit anymore because I have too much trouble finding things. Perhaps I am becoming an anachronism (in more ways than one), but I prefer the BBS type format that Coasterbuzz used to have. I think having a review database will make the site even more disjointed and harder to use.
-------------
G&K Roller Coaster and Amusement Park Gateway
http://www.msi.ms/gk
-------------
G&K Roller Coaster and Amusement Park Gateway
http://www.msi.ms/gk
How about individual state forums? You could click on the state that you are interested in for reviews and trip reports of a park in that state. Also include international countries for reviews and trip reports. I feel this will give the smaller scale parks some recognition of where they are at and what they have to offer.
You must be logged in to post
