Should Oakland-Fremont-Hayward area be a separate sub-forum? (San Jose, San Francisco: versus, title)

[sonarrat]

See, here's my problem with this. You already have most of the same people posting on the San Francisco and San Jose forums, because they're in the same economic orbit and there are desirable, destination locations halfway between the two. And most of those people also know about the Oakland/Fremont/Hayward/Pleasanton area.. none of these places are more than 40 miles away from either SF or SJ. Many of the same people also have knowledge of the North Bay as far up as Santa Rosa.

So what you're going to see, over and over, is a post in the San Francisco forum by someone who hasn't done their homework and doesn't know that you can't get a two-bedroom apartment for $1100 in San Francisco. They'll be told that they'll need to look on the other side of the water. So they'll repost the thread in the Oakland forum, and then the same people will answer their question the way they would have wanted in the first place. It's more of a hassle and more forums for us regulars to check.

[sav858]

Neither Bay Area forum seem that busy to me so I don't really see the point in making another one.

[rah]

Originally Posted by sonarrat

See, here's my problem with this. You already have most of the same people posting on the San Francisco and San Jose forums, because they're in the same economic orbit and there are desirable, destination locations halfway between the two. And most of those people also know about the Oakland/Fremont/Hayward/Pleasanton area.. none of these places are more than 40 miles away from either SF or SJ. Many of the same people also have knowledge of the North Bay as far up as Santa Rosa.

So what you're going to see, over and over, is a post in the San Francisco forum by someone who hasn't done their homework and doesn't know that you can't get a two-bedroom apartment for $1100 in San Francisco. They'll be told that they'll need to look on the other side of the water. So they'll repost the thread in the Oakland forum, and then the same people will answer their question the way they would have wanted in the first place. It's more of a hassle and more forums for us regulars to check.

Yeah this would be the result of yet another Bay Area forum. It just doesn't make sense to chop such a tight-knit/highly interconnected region up into so many different sub-forums. For all intents and purposes, it's probably similar to say, chopping New York City into a different forum for each borough (of course not exactly the same, but you get the idea).

Originally Posted by sav858

Neither Bay Area forum seem that busy to me so I don't really see the point in making another one.

this too.

[Administrator]

Originally Posted by rah

If Oakland gets it's own forum though, shouldn't places like Fresno and Long Beach get them too? Both those cities are larger than Oakland, and Long Beach is in the same boat in that it's also right next to a larger and much more well-known city (LA).

Fresno will get its sub-forum once there are some more threads about it. Long Beach is the same Metropolitan Division as Long Angeles according to the Census Bureau (while Oakland is in the same Metropolitan Statistical Area as San Francisco but in a different Metropolitan Division), so the situation is not exactly the same. However, I am not opposed to a vote in regards to Long Beach as well if there is interest.

[llowllevellowll]

Originally Posted by sonarrat

See, here's my problem with this. You already have most of the same people posting on the San Francisco and San Jose forums, because they're in the same economic orbit and there are desirable, destination locations halfway between the two. And most of those people also know about the Oakland/Fremont/Hayward/Pleasanton area.. none of these places are more than 40 miles away from either SF or SJ. Many of the same people also have knowledge of the North Bay as far up as Santa Rosa.

So what you're going to see, over and over, is a post in the San Francisco forum by someone who hasn't done their homework and doesn't know that you can't get a two-bedroom apartment for $1100 in San Francisco. They'll be told that they'll need to look on the other side of the water. So they'll repost the thread in the Oakland forum, and then the same people will answer their question the way they would have wanted in the first place. It's more of a hassle and more forums for us regulars to check.

You're absolutely right. I can admit when I was off and I was off. You really are right. I would vote for it to say "Bay Area forum" and have 1; or "San Francisco - Oakland" and let it encompass both the Peninsula and the East Bay with a better title. You really were dead on though and I hadn't thought about it. Good post.

[fizbin]

There really should be just one forum - the SF Bay Area - that includes all of the nine counties that comprise ABAG (the Association of Bay Area Governments). Those would be Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, SF, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma. There is far too much interdependence, commuting/work relationships and general knowledge for these to be broken up. As it is I never see the SJ forum, even though it could be useful for me and others (I lived there for about five years so do have some good knowledge).

[artemis78]

Agreed; I like using the ABAG counties as the model, as they really are too interconnected to tease out. (Oakland is a great example, since people commute to San Francisco from there regularly, so thus have knowledge about both places.)

I think it's more a question of naming it accurately so that people stop complaining about it. Just call it the San Francisco Bay Area instead of San Francisco, roll the San Jose forum in, and call it a day.

Originally Posted by fizbin

There really should be just one forum - the SF Bay Area - that includes all of the nine counties that comprise ABAG (the Association of Bay Area Governments). Those would be Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, SF, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma. There is far too much interdependence, commuting/work relationships and general knowledge for these to be broken up. As it is I never see the SJ forum, even though it could be useful for me and others (I lived there for about five years so do have some good knowledge).

[Administrator]

Looks like this poll will be very close. I'll add extra three days to the voting period.

[kettlepot]

Originally Posted by artemis78

I think it's more a question of naming it accurately so that people stop complaining about it. Just call it the San Francisco Bay Area instead of San Francisco, roll the San Jose forum in, and call it a day.

I agree completely, and disagree completely... you are thinking.

Either combine SJ-SF-OK into one SF Bay Area forum, or have 3 separate forums. Pick one solution or the other. The current 2 forum set-up is confusing, and leads to too many East Bay posts cluttering up the main CA forum. And the SJ forum has a pretty low activity rate for a California forum.

However, I do believe that a Fresno forum, and maybe a Bakersfield forum might be in order. Possibly a Stockton one too, though perhaps rolling it into a Sacto-Stockton forum might be the thing.

[artemis78]

Originally Posted by Administrator

Looks like this poll will be very close. I'll add extra three days to the voting period.

What about adding a separate poll with the "combine all three" option to see how it plays (both here and in the SJ forum, and maybe even in the CA forum)? Kettlepot has a good point about the all-or-nothing approach.

Thanks!