Coaching section?

[ReverseLunge]

Originally Posted by Gav

I envisage 2 forums:

We've got a coaching section on the UK forum. It works ok and it's mostly coaches who post in it. It's normal to see discussion of particular camps, articles from here, the labyrinthine politics of the BAF (note: not the BFA!) and so on. I think an actual forum for coaches with approved membership could be set up (like NY fencing and HPfencing). We would need to set up groups and agree rules of conduct and membership up front.
I would think a forum like this would be useful as a 'private area' for coaches to hang and swap ideas without the interference of "the usual suspects". Could be useful for your coaches college to pass information to their membership.
In summary:
1 public section for coaching advice and public questions.
1 private section for the serious coaching discussion Craig mentions that may, or may not, be of interest to the wider membership.

I can't see any reason why a coach might not post an article in both sections and see the difference in the discussions.

Are blacks and jews or other minorities allowed to participate in your section?

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by Gav

II can't see any reason why a coach might not post an article in both sections and see the difference in the discussions.

Because it's time consuming, extra effort, and after you've done it a couple times - it's boring.

Take this for what it's worth, but I've posted a few professional articles here... and for the most part the thread hit crickets, except for a couple people who posted things like "very interesting".

I think I have some idea of what Craig may be wanting... and I don't see it happening outside a highly moderated, "real name" only type of forum...

for a good example of that type of board, take a look at www.swordforum.com . They are a much larger board, with many many many different branches, and I doubt there is anyone that participates in all of them.

If a board like that existed for fencing, I might (I really don't know) be interested in participating, but it is a significant departure from the current culture of F.Net - which is much more fun loving/social... than an academic forum for professional discussion....

[reawl]

I like the idea of a section where coaches/owners can post, but all can read. In my case I am both head coach and owner, so one section would be fine, but I can see where others would rather two separate sections and I have no qualms reading 2 sections instead of just one.

Regarding business plans and financial issues: To me if it is a private matter, then it should be discussed privately, either by PM, phone, or email. If you're looking for advice perhaps you could post the question publicly but ask that people respond privately. I don't think this concern should prevent the addition of a new section.

[oso97]

What about one forum, but with some threads open to certified members, and others, not?

[ReverseLunge]

Mr. Epee you need to settle down. Just who the hell do you think you are? You are a senior member here not a fencing expert.

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by reawl

Regarding business plans and financial issues: To me if it is a private matter, then it should be discussed privately, either by PM, phone, or email.

Yep, there's a reason that business/marketing plans aren't usually posted on folks primary corporate websites. It's not good business. And quite frankly, they take time to develop, and can be copied/stolen very easily... and it's not a big deal, but sometimes a pat on the back, and a little recognition doesn't feel worth the effort of sharing something that took so much time/energy to compile.

[Gav]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

Because it's time consuming, extra effort, and after you've done it a couple times - it's boring.

I'm just chucking ideas about.

Take this for what it's worth, but I've posted a few professional articles here... and for the most part the thread hit crickets, except for a couple people who posted things like "very interesting".

I, for one, read - and appreciate - them. I particularly like Gladius's articles - although they are not necessarily about coaching. I sometimes link to the articles on the UK forum. I certainly did with your journal article; which I thought was at least interesting, but was greeted with a "big deal" from some quarters - so I certainly understand the frustration.

I think I have some idea of what Craig may be wanting... and I don't see it happening outside a highly moderated, "real name" only type of forum...

Shrug ... could work, might not - takes a lot of work for that moderator.

for a good example of that type of board, take a look at www.swordforum.com . They are a much larger board, with many many many different branches, and I doubt there is anyone that participates in all of them.

If a board like that existed for fencing, I might (I really don't know) be interested in participating, but it is a significant departure from the current culture of F.Net - which is much more fun loving/social... than an academic forum for professional discussion....

Shudder ....

I didn't much like the look of that.

I might be wrong (not having spent a lot of time trawling the site) but it looks decidedly classical and was not what I meant at all. I'd rather read some of the academic journals that I have access to.

[Schiavona]

Originally Posted by Allen Evans

I agree with Mr. Epee on this. I think the goal, Craig, is to find a way for members to find coaching advice and discussions. Currently that's not easy to do. Perhaps the idea of having a seperate section (like the "Armory", as Holly suggested) is a good one.

And I agree with Allen on this. An open forum section devoted to coaching and/or club management would be the bee's knees, or da bomb, whichever you prefer.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by Schiavona

And I agree with Allen on this. An open forum section devoted to coaching and/or club management would be the bee's knees, or da bomb, whichever you prefer.:)

Wikkid pissa? :)

-B

[Schiavona]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

Wikkid pissa?

-B

Only in Boston!

[Mr Epee]

Originally Posted by Gav

I might be wrong (not having spent a lot of time trawling the site) but it looks decidedly classical and was not what I meant at all. I'd rather read some of the academic journals that I have access to.

I know it's classical, and honestly, I haven't spent much time there.

It was simply an example of a heavily moderated, real name forum that covers a wide variety of areas. They do manage a reasonably consistent standard of discussion.

And how they control the crazies that study 15 types of Ninja training, 4 Martial arts, and also do Historical Fencing, I will never know... but somehow they manage.

I wasn't saying it should be copied - only that it's another format.

[Craig]

Originally Posted by Poulet

That would be less coaching and more club management. I can see a club management forum being member-only...

Gotcha. This will be coaching then.

[jBirch]

I've seen really good discussions come from what at first blush would be considered really stupid comments/questions.

What need would a coach's section satisfy that isn't already addressed? It would seem to me that you're trying to increase the quality of the comments on the board and help non-members to find useful, quality information. If that is the case, then are you planning to just moderate anything related to coaching off to the coaches' section (like is done with water cooler type stuff)?

Finally, if you have a coach's section, what about a ref's section? Lot's of rules questions here too...

James.

[gladius]

Originally Posted by Gav

I'm just chucking ideas about.

I, for one, read - and appreciate - them. I particularly like Gladius's articles - although they are not necessarily about coaching. I sometimes link to the articles on the UK forum. I certainly did with your journal article; which I thought was at least interesting, but was greeted with a "big deal" from some quarters - so I certainly understand the frustration.

Thank you for the compliment, but if you have a coaching section or referees section or any other specialized section you won't be reading any of my postings there since I am none of the above. What I do is to spread around what I find interesting and think may benefit others, showing what other cultures do or think, crossing language barriers, not building new ones for the fencing glitterati, and occasionally putting in my 2 cents.

The good part of the open forum is that it attracts everybody with something interesting to say and also with dumb comments. But nobody, neither Olympic champions, nor Olympians (true or fake) nor coaches (certified or not and by whom? and what about those who think are fencing coaches just because they've hanged around fencing clubs for few years?) holds the ultimate truth and wisdom. So why set up any barriers to the discourse?

If some want to have a private discussion use PM.

In my opinion, a bad idea, but what do I know?

[rcmatthews]

Based on the number of threads that are posted that would go into the coaches forum, its worth asking, whats the point? Just to have more subdivisions?

One of the things that bothers me about escrime-info.com is the massive number of forum divisions they have. Many of these are seldom used, like our own NYC fencing forum.

[hpfencing]

A coaching area would be great, but would it be set-up so only coaches could access it?

I see a problem trying to have mulitple forums that are closed off to the mass numbers and only opened to those in the group because it would be hard to determine who should be in what group.

Just about anyone in the US can walk up and claim to be a coach, does that mean that they should have access.

If everyone has access then new students will get on and ask a lot of basic questions....

Also will to many "sub forums" the entire place gets harder to manage and it's hards to look at and view all the post.

I'm curious as to what the organization might be if something were to be added.

[CvilleFencer]

I would also like to see a coaches section of the forum and I would be very interested in a club management subsection as well. Maybe as a requirement for access it would be open, with the caveat that you mush include your real name and club(s) and your position there and it's location in the Public Profile section. Of course it would be a bit of a pain for the moderator to fact check that, expecially for members outside the US, but maybe if the applicant has a referral/confirmation from existing members that would surfice and cut down on the administration time?

Still, the UK section has an all open coaching section that seems to self govern fairly well and while I would be more interested in fairly involved discussions, I think it should be available as a resource for those thinking of becoming coaches or starting a club in there area. As such I am for keeping it as easy to access as possible. Another option touched on is that it may be good to allow anyone to read/access it but only allow verified coaching members or "fencing experts" to post to it. Just some thoughts, but a good idea overall I think and something that could be very useful.

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

If I were taking coaching/management advice, I would want to know exactly who was giving it and based on what qualifications/experience.

It might be a good idea, but it would take a great deal of thought and probably heavy moderation.

I don't see this working, if you just open the area and say "Hey, feel like a coach? This is your area".

I like this idea. The main fencing discussion is (obviously) open to anyone, which has advantages and disadvantages.

Having an experts only sort of forum (where anyone can post questions, but not answers) would allow for consistency in the quality of replies, and would create more of an information database than a bunch of people randomly shouting their opinions, which may or may not be correct. If this is done, then the coach's forum would have fewer replies, but higher quality of replies.

[jjefferies]

Originally Posted by Mr Epee

I think I have some idea of what Craig may be wanting... and I don't see it happening outside a highly moderated, "real name" only type of forum...

I will quite agree with Mr Epee that I would prefer that such a forum be real name. While the anonymity of the net can be fun and occasionally useful it's desirable in evaluating information to know who is providing it. Saves having to sort through the chaff to find the nuggets.