Reviving Roman Army Talk

[Athena Areias]

OK, OK, I voted.

I'd be considered an elder here and elsewhere. I like how RAT is now, but know it needs to be revived somehow. Loss of members in a physical way struck a chord with me. Some of the best posters are forever offline.

[Praefectusclassis]

Obviously if we want to grow, attracting more attention is one way to do it. We could, probably, tweet / post to FB when there's a new thread, or use the Ancient Warfare social media channels to attract more attention. (it's the magazine that pays for this, after all).

[JRSCline]

All points well taken!

What then, are our most practical ways to drive traffic from the more visible Facebook RAT page to this (its purported parent site), RomanArmyTalk.com?

I would like to explore if the 'RAT Facebook' page can be divorced from the present 'Ancient Warfare' magazine banner and instead feature the banner for RAT.com.  Ancient Warfare is an allied publication -- always has been -- but the linkage between the two entities is merely the fact that Jasper is both AW's editor and an admin (Second Founder, even) of Roman Army Talk.  There is no formal relationship (to my knowledge) between AW and RAT.

So I would gently wonder why is AW featured on our FB RAT banners, and not RomanArmyTalk.com?  AW doesn't need the publicity anyway -- it's well established by now (and kudos on that!) -- but clearly our ancestral forum needs some sunlight shining in from the hobby's more youthful areas.

Are these actionable items?

[Praefectusclassis]

AW pays for RAT ;-) But otherwise, the link is an internal FB link. If you wanted to attract attention on Fb RAT for this version, a pinned post with a picture and link probably works better.

[Robert Vermaat]

We have that pinned post: the link refers to the OldRAT rules page (and hence to the forum).

[Praefectusclassis]

That's an implicit reference. If we really wanted to push people here, we could stand to make it a bit more overt. I do understand that would feel strange, having built a community on Fb.

[Robert Vermaat]

True but we get only one pinned post, and ground rules are more important than pushing OldRAT

[Praefectusclassis]

It's a choice

[Corvus]

I think its a problem with forums in general.
Many forums are declining and younger generations are less interested in long discussions (TikTok is the most popular medium nowadays, which is the total opposite of a forum).
You can see it in the Facebook group of RAT as well. Mist posts are pictures, rather than discussions.

In my oppinion, it would be a mistake to introduce other historical periods to the forum.How different would it be to Historum?
 The strength of RAT is in the depth and focus on Antiquity.


What I would suggest though, is better adaptation of the RAT Forum for smart phones.
90% of the time I access the forum over Smartphone and I think that's the overall trend nowadays.

[Praefectusclassis]

That'd mean a more responsive template, I suppose. I think a plugin via Tapatalk is possible, but that's introducing a commercial party whose only interest is making money off the visitors.

[Crispianus]

That'd mean a more responsive template, I suppose. I think a plugin via Tapatalk is possible, but that's introducing a commercial party whose only interest is making money off the visitors.

I think anything that brings more interested parties to the forum is a good thing, though of course you can have too much of a good thing as well...

I voted for reform, but have no real idea on what that may mean, but if a plugin with Tapatalk etc is possible then maybe its worth experimenting with...

Personally I dont use social media like facebook etc, but a number of non historical forums I visit have been bought up by tapatalk so I do have an account there, and it is as you say very much all about the money...

Its not ideal for sure.

[Praefectusclassis]

Tapatalk is a decent experience if you pay. Trouble is that most won't and then the forum looks like an advertiser's paradise and we don't earn any on that.

[Corvus]

Yes, I agree with Jasper.
No sense in doing it, if you need to "sell your soul" to Tapatalk.

But I think, I did saw forums which were not on Tapatalk, but had a good format for mobile phones.

[Crispianus]

Tapatalk is a decent experience if you pay. Trouble is that most won't and then the forum looks like an advertiser's paradise and we don't earn any on that.

Not in my experience but then I use an adblocker on my laptop, I dont pay either and I dont get the popups and adds...
However I freely admit I know nothing about smartphones so this may not be possible?.

As far as I can see though you dont earn anything from the forum via adds in anycase... so I dont really see that as a negative reason, unless looking for ways to support the site financially from external sources.

If there are other ways of doing the same and adding in smartphone support without resorting to "selling your soul" then I think that would be a good idea though...

[Praefectusclassis]

Exactly, we've kept ads off the forum, apart from Ancient Warfare, obviously. So I wouldn't want someone else to plaster them all over ànd earn from them. I will look into easier templates for mobile phones. It's true it all gets a bit small.