Merging Discussions and Tech Q&A

The idea of access thru a single interface page would go a long way to making it easier to particpate (at least for me and anyone else who only has time to 'skim' the topics instead of taking the time to go here-there-and-everywhere looking for something that i may want to contribute to.) [nice run-on sentence!] The mockup gets your point across, I'm trying to picture how it scales, though...

I vote to give it a try. Although, I would like a listing for folks that have opened tons of questions without closing them or providing feedback...

Don't know if it will pan out since it is a radical change, but definitely worth trying. Am seeing quite a few TQ&A type questions in discussion groups anyway.

Who determines whether it is a discussion item or a question?

Dalton

Although I am getting tired of everyone using the same XP style glass buttons nowdays, I kinda like TR's simple classic buttons, they seem a little more refined, maybe a 1 pixel (green/red)backlight for rollover effect would be nicer than the current 'charcoal' raised effect.

As for the concept, I dunno, personally it scares the hell out of me but it seems others want to see them combined. I would rather see them clearly identified/renamed, organized and separated.

I know you are going ot flag them but it's just not the same to me. Yeah I know I am a grumbly bugger about this issue but perhaps I just have a completely different view of how the site should work and how I would want it laid out.

I think the sample is nice but I feel like I've been there and done that, it seems too common and most tech sites just don't look good to me.

I like the idea and it should make life easier for some particularly the new Peers. Of course being the "Old Fart" that I am I'll have to get used to the change but eventually I'll manage to begin to understand it.

Lets see how things develop.

Col

I'm aware of Lycoris as the "other XP". I guess it serves a purpose, providing an easy transition to those who are [b]really[/b] uncomfortable with any OS other than Windows. It still gives me the creeps, though. Why anyone would want to emulate that look is beyond me.

I have installed MANY copiesof SUSE Linux for Novell servers.

SUSE gives you a downloadable, CD BOOTABLE copy os SUSE GO LIVE. YOu boot from CD straight into SUSE linux, OPen Office and all. Once you have finished playing with it, just reboot without the CD and your original install runs exactly the same.

The full SUSE (less than $100) somes packed with software and allows you a download link in your tool bars to get just about anthing you can imagine for free or next to nothing.

And has a lot of stuff that is more than useful particuarly for demo purposes or even a a tool box on a CD I tend to use it a lot when a system becomes corrupted and have yet not been unable to recover the original data.

If you are fairly well grounded in Linux it is a snap to use but has the ability to really screw up a system in the wrong hands like any good tool.

Col

I know enough to watch my step. I've had a lot of fun with Linux. I know enough to get by in the GUI world, but as far as core structure and shell utilities go, that is one weakness that I am interested in correcting.

Because the Linux flavours have already been in development over the course of many years, I have a hell of a lot of catching up to do. Microsoft products are easy to understand because of my personal experience since the MS-Dos days.

Chris :)

A Never Ending Learning experience and at the very least we are all assured of a long time job even after passing retirement.

I find it fun returning to my roots so to speak but in all honestly because now that I'm old and lazy I only work with small business no Government or Medical work so I'm mostly stuck in the Windows environment.

Perhaps you could suggest a way to explain to my wife just why I need 17 computers at home all running different OS?

While she constantly complains she has now accepted the fact that her kitchen table has disappeared under a pile of computer parts the network leads running along the floor will never be removed but only added to and I will never get the time to run network cables through the house and install them properly with a single outlet in a wall and a hub nearby. The last time she complained about all the computers here I offered to enlarge my Lab by knocking out the wall into the master bedroom and taking that over for some unexpected reason she declined the offer and now just accepts the situation.

But a few weeks ago I bought myself a Color Laser Printer which the wholesalers offered to me at a cut rate price because the camera that was suspose to come with it had gone missing and my sales rep thought I might be interested now I'm trying to explain just why I need 3 laser printers 4 Ink jet printers and 3 impact printers and to make matters worse another ink-jet printer is arriving today as trash from a customer who has brought a new one so I'll probably humor her and flog it off on E-Bay.

But I can not wait to see the look on her face when yet another printer arrives here to stay.

Col

Reminds me of my fourth year in Automotive school.

I had a car I was doing a frame off resto on and we was modding a Thermoquad carb. It was MY BABY and I spent all day and all night working on the thing for nearly 2 years. Needless to say, ONE relationsship ended shortly after my girfriend coming home, walking in the bedroom and covering her face as she ran to open the window. I was happily sitting there with Q-tips and a can of very caustic carb cleaner while cleaning the carb on a trunk at the foot of the bed.

I didnt have a clue until I started to look around just how FOGGED with carb cleaner the bedroom was! LOL.

We actually couldn't sleep in the master bedroom for about four days, while I washed all the walls, ceiling, shampood carpets and drycleaned all the bedding etc.

I actually think carb cleaner is a somewhat pleasant odour, I also don't mind the smell or taste of gas (unleaded) and oil though. :) (FREAK!)

I don't mean that Tech Q&A is harder to find [b]than[/b] the discussion center. It's just not terribly easy, currently, to find [b]from[/b] the discussion center. Most visitors to the site that are likely to hang around spend a lot of time in the Discussion center. They'd typically only go to TQ&A if they have a problem they want resolved, and if they're already in the Discussion center they probably won't think of looking for a TQ&A.

I guess what's really important to "fix" is the fact that people tend to overlook TQ&A when they're posting. People that are likely to answer questions there are going to find it if they want to, and will spend time there for the sake of finding interesting technical information and questions to answer. People that are likely to ask questions, on the other hand, often won't spend any time there at all unless they have a question to ask, and if TQ&A isn't something they visit often they may not think of it at all.

That's my knee-jerk reaction, anyhow.

There's about a million and one (slight bit of exaggeration, there) LiveCDs available. The main LiveCD version of Slackware is called SLAX. The LiveCD version of FreeBSD is called FreeSBIE. The list goes on and on. There's at least two or three dozen versions of Knoppix alone, and I think the third official version of MEPIS is about to be released (MEPIS, SimplyMEPIS, and no ProMEPIS is being finished). There's a LiveCD version of SuSE, and a LiveCD version of Mandrake.

Generally speaking, LiveCD distros aren't quite as suitable to long-term use on a workstation (or especially a server) as the non-LiveCD distros. LiveCDs are often quite usable as permanent-install distros (better than Windows, generally, at any rate), but just better suited to being run from the CD.

Anyhow, have fun.

I was simply ofering a Live CD distro (which I think was GoLive but I could have Adobe on the brain) that you could easily test out if you are comparing versions. clients I have done full installs for loved it, just tossing out an idea.

The Linux pissing contest is a little over the top don't you think?!? :)

Yeah, maybe it is a bit over the top. I think that TR web-dev is actually looking for a little bit of site feedback. Instead, they've given us a private little room to argue, curse, and talk amongst each other. Thanks Jay.

We sound like a bunch of Indie music geeks dropping names and quoting bands that nobody has ever heard of, just to prove our knowledge of the topic.

PS - linux linux linux linux linux linux linux.... linux......... linux............ li........ l.. linux linux linux linux.... linux

err . . .

I don't know about you, but I'm not trying to get into a pissing contest. That was meant to be informative.

I guess I'll just shut up, then.

Keep talking. Don't pay any attention to us. Since we aren't in the open forums, we're starting to go mad - Lord of the Flies style. What else is there to talk about when we are all on the same page?

Personally, I like the conversation. I can't speak for Oz, but I like the info. I was aware of the Mandrake and Knoppix bootable cd operating systems, but the others were unknown to me. :)

linux linux linux linux linux

Chris

There is only one thing I absolutely refuse to have anything at all to do with and that is gear oil of the Hypoid variety. It's messy stinks and is unclean-able off anything.

I suspose having to dismantle a racing gearbox and do a ratio change while the thing was hot made it even worse but ever since that time I just do not go near Hypoid. I have a couple of torn CV boots on one of the Mercedes and instead of pulling the diff apart to replace them I just change the entire diff and drive shafts over as it avoids getting anywhere near the gear oil.

The last time my wife complained about the unnecessary cost I told her to do it herself and I would supervise and tell her what to do. After she drained the oil she understood and now doesn't say a single word we still have a full set of CV boots and the grease to go in them sitting here in their plastic bags just as they came from Mercedes as new parts and I never under any circumstances intend to use them!

But while totally off the subject over here we have Aerostart and a generic brand which I personally prefer called "Start You Bastard!" the name sought of sums everything up don't you think?

Col

There is always Morphis to have a try of. Its nice as well and you are asked to take either the red or blue pill at the beginning "Like Niel was in the Matrix" maybe it's just my warped sense of humor but that little bit at the beginning of the load just brought me down you could not proceed until you had chosen on of the pills.

Col :D

It pains you to agree with me?

Lol... just reinforcing my comment. :)

This could actually work though if, like I've mentioned, they limit the messages on a post.

PS - I was finally able to repair my broke title on this post.

Chris

They also need to work on something for the problems that we see when someone forgets to put a title on their post.

If there is a space or a line break, that should be the default.

I am only prompted for a title when I edit the post. That mess above this one cannot be fixed though. I get a page not found message when I try to fix the title.

I was able to correct the title... finally.

I'm not sure that everyone who posts a question in the discussion area is doing it because they don't know about Technical Q&A. I think some are doing it because it is just a lot easier. There is none of the administrative stuff (determining point values, closing questions, awarding points, etc.) that slows them down in TechQ&A.

There have been some really good points made concerning the whole merge issue. However, everyone here has a "history" with these features. You're used to using them a certain way.

What if you were a first-time user with a pressing IT issue? Would you want to have to go 2 places to see if a question or topic had been covered?

Even if a user reads the explanations about what each feature is (which they most likely won't), there is still the chance that the answer you are looking for was posted in the "other" place.

And the fact that every other site does it a different way is an important point to consider. That means that most first-time users are expecting there to be a single forum where they can discuss things or ask questions.

For the veteran members, doesn't having the ability to sort the contents of each topic by type (Discussions only, Open questions only, Closed questions only) allow everyone to get the view they want? So veteran users who just want discussions can just see discussions and new users who are looking for advice on "security" can go to a single "security" forum and see what discussions and questions currently exist. And users who just want to keep up with the latest posts on "network administration" can see everything in one view.

Thanks again for all of the feedback so far. It has really helped us understand how you all use these features.

sm

I don't think the separation really has a whole lot to do with the fact that TQ&A doesn't tend to lead to debates. I think what prevents that is the structured setup for TQ&A. With the "post an answer, get accepted or rejected" format, people are less likely to simply post argumentative messages.

claimed that they didn't know it existed.

I think OZ has a valid point make the TQ & A stand out a lot more and be in front of the Discussion side of things.

TR is a World Wide resource center and using the discussion forum is not the fastest or best way of getting an answer. Of course if you believe everyone is American there are only a few hours time difference involved but that is simply not the case. I know when I have a real problem I want help now not in 20 hours time when the other side of the world wakes up.

Col

I know I have spoken against that idea before, but perhaps ditching the points and just tweaking the algorhythm or adding a separate Q&A meter would be better after all?

When you enter discussions you choose from a list of topics. When entering Tech Q&A you have another list of topics to select from.

Have a SINGLE list of TOPICS OF INTEREST and after each the user can select DISCUSSIONS or TECHNICAL SUPPORT QUESTIONS. Enter Tech Support would open up the standard Post a Question window and you're off to the races. oooooh raaaaaaceeeessss!!!! Droool :p

On that first TOPIC OF INTEREST page, you can have a Short paragraph welcoming users and explaining that if they wish to Discuss the latest news on a topic listed, just click DISCUSS beside the topic. If they need help solving a problem, just click TECHNICAL SUPPORT QUESTIONS after the topic.

Then it would be easy to ditch points and insert a second meter for all users, one for DICSUSS and one for TECHNICAL SUPPORT activity.

This would provide ONE gateway page, with the separation AND the separate meters to show who is more active where.

Registered users can enter, post, ask questions etc. NO points, just meters. The ONLY issue is that people who post Technical Support Questions must close them and rate the answers by checking simple radio buttons beside the peer's answer (Somewhat helpful, worked perfectly etc.) within a specified time frame or an email is sent out as a reminder of the open question.

You can also provide an OPTIONAL comment window if they wish to say thanks but they should be forced to at least check a radio button or two and rate/close it.

You could also have a searchable database. When someone clicks Get Technical Support, the posting window page also has an option of being able to search existing responses based on a standard keyword search box. Small server load and it would only take simple indexing to maintain, much like any website search.

I agree with Oz and Colin. There are many reasons why somebody would post a question in the discussion forum. This is what I would like to see done regarding the Q&A predicament...

1) When a new peer signs on, have a brief explaination of the two key features without the user having to dig up the dirt themselves.

2) When submitting a post for discussion, after chosing to start a new thread, ask them whether or not it is a technical question or a general discussion topic.

3) Either [b]allow peers to leave positive or neutral feedback underneath somebody's response without closing the question[/b], or change the layout to a discussion style, independent of the discussion forums - it is also important to set the max message level accordingly to reduce the amount of garbage. I'm starting to think that altering the current layout, and not necessarily revamping it to the thread layout, is the best idea.

4) I don't care much about the points rating. Any of the techs here who offer positive contributions are quickly recognized by other peers anyways.

5) We could also try switching the order of the discussions and Q&A as previously mentioned.

6) I repeat - please do not merge the two.

There are many different reasons why someone would post a tech issue in the discussions; Oz has pointed them out. We can never get rid of this problem completely, but it is important that new users are directed somehow to the apropriate location. Perhaps a big dumb animation that waves and says "over here, moron". Joke.

Chris

I like the idea too. We've already beaten this one up last month, but I think that it is worthy of being brought out again. Perhaps it is also worthy of a completely new thread. http://tinyurl.com/42pek I mean no offense, but the current search engine requires a bit of work. I am hard-pressed to enter key words and find what I am looking for.

The "enforced" search idea was something that tweaked my interest.

That's what we've been nagging about the whole time. Do you mean to tell me that you've had this concept in mind for the past couple of months? heh. :)

This is an ideal layout for the submission of a new thread/question. This is the kind of attempt at redirection that I was talking about. I think that this feature would minimize the questions in the discussion forums.

It is important to note though, if a user does not know about the Q&A, they need to know where their question is being posted. Of course, if they subscribe, then they will see a link of some sort in their email, but if they are simply browsing the site, they will not be able to find their post.

After submission, you should say.... "Your thread has been posted in the TQ&A area of TR" - or the opposite.

Finally a concrete concept that looks rather good.

I assume that the choice between Discussion and Question will be forced; i.e. one must be selected for submittal.

Dalton

If you don't channel anyone into an answered questions database first, you get a lot of very stupid questions, and end up answering the same questions over and over. Eventually, then, you get people "answering" the questions by saying "RTFM". There needs to be a "manual" for people to read, I think, and some kind of impetus to go read it. If it has already been said nine hundred times, I'm not sure it needs to be said again.

It definitely has potential, and I assume that you guys are willing to make small changes as it goes on and tweak it up a bit.

I like it but I am wondering how this will work right through.

SO someone chooses Windows server 2003 dministration. Opens a page of what? Answers from past users, discussions, all of the above lumped together?

THEN if they don't find the answer they can post and choose whether it is a question or a discussion topic?

If so, I think the first step of browsing through replies will be the kicker that makes people leave.

People wont search a knowledgebase, unless it is REALLY fast and accurate. People won't wade through 3, 3000 posts to see if there is an answer. People just want to ask a question or talk about something. Answers from returned hits don't help MOST people, they will need to sort through returned hits, perhaps even resumbitting a more accurate search, if they haven't seen an answer that plainly states "Here is an exact answer for your question" they will be gone before posting. You don't have time, it MUST be now, people don't browse and read, they surf the net.

There are other site I have that I search for technical help BEFORE posting questions on TR.

TR is my end all for tech questions, if I can't find answers, I will post here as a last resort.

If TR had a bunch of stuff that they THINK may be related to my issue, I am not going to read it and will just want to post by that time.

Most people that I have seen in Tech Q&A are people who say they have looked everywhere, can't find answers ec.

Sure many are just newbies with simple issues but many are not.

I equate database returns it to calling a company and getting into Auto Attendant hell, "if you are...press 1, 2, 3, etc. Next tier, "if you are...press 1, 2, 3, etc.
You want to press ZERO and quickly get a live person, but SOME people don't let you, you MUST sit there until they have finished blabbing before you can hold for a live person.

I love it. I particularly love the fact that it has a nice, wide text area for entering the text of a post, that the interface is clean and uncluttered, and that it simply and prominently presents the options for where to post it and whether or not to subscribe to it between the text area and the submission button.

I also like the fact that there's only one "optional" item between the text area and the submit button. Often, I like to use the Tab key to move through the text entry items and selectable options when posting something, and the spacebar or enter keys to select options and buttons, and having too much optional crap in there would get in the way of using the keyboard for the interface.

In short, this is good. I like it. I also like the fact that the category title is visible at the top of the page (where it says "Network Administration"), though I think it might make sense to add a drop-down SELECT menu (probably above the title text field) so that the poster can, if so inclined, change which category it is to which the post will be sent.

[b]Oz:[/b]
Much of that could be solved just by putting a button at the top of the results list that says "Post Question". Then, the results come up, but it's an easy thing to ignore them and just proceed. When the results page loads, the focus could even be set to that button, so that the poster would just have to hit the spacebar or enter key to post it, if (like me) he or she is more inclined to use the keyboard than the pointing device for such things.

I know that I for one would NEVER stick around to see "Do one of these answers help?" Then you have to pick a title, click the topic, read it and find out it doesn't apply to you.

YOu realize you have less than 30 seconds to get people active before they go elsewhere?

I know there are many simple questions asked here ocer and over again, welcome to the help desk, but I have NEVER seen someone here say "RTFM".

That is so childish and something I have only seen from completely anal techs or kiddie gamer sites.

I believe they should have a FATQ's or Frequently Asked Technical Questions and you can even have a line on the posting window that says, check our most commonly asked questions here, but to force people to wade through other people's issues to see if they are similar will have people clicking somewhere else, I know I would in a heartbeat.

People that end up here are NOT going to accept they have the same issue as others, everyone has a unique problem at this point, or at least they think they do. Let them ask away, let the patient reap rewards ofconstantly answering the same questions and have thier patience rewarded by the increase in their Q&A meter. YOU as a regular user will haveno problem deciding what to answer and what bores you, you will also not have an issue with clicking away to another site if you are forced to search through questions for one you wish to answer.

This forced database idea scares the hell out of me, what a nightmare it will prove to be, especially on the visitor retention side of TR.

My favorite coffee is tea. Maybe that's why I don't like Java so much (or even Javascript).

I can see how that sort of off-topic tendency might arise with a "reformed" TQ&A, depending on how exactly it's reformed. I think some of that might be eliminated if people posting "answers" are limited to only be able to respond directly to the person that originally posted the question, and cannot respond to each other. In that sense, people would likely feel they could refer to the answers given by others, but not respond directly to them, which would probably help immensely to keep things on-topic since it would discourage actual debate between different answer contributors.

Or not. Just a thought. This isn't a particular approach I've tried in any of the sites I've designed over the years.

I just saw this:
http://tinyurl.com/5w46z

What this says to me is that there needs to be a reformation of the way TQ&A works. Granted, there's probably no way to be sure of encouraging good spelling and grammar, but there are other problems here. Specifically, both house (you) and I have responded here with fairly useful information, I think, that doesn't simply provide a retread of the same information. When you responded (house), you actually added to what I had to say rather than just rephrasing my answer. That's good.

alokchauhan1@yahoo.com, on the other hand, didn't. I think the points-system currently in place encourages this kind of thing, sometimes: if the answer is "right", it might get points. Yes? So, mine previous responses for what looks like a "right answer" and post it in your own words. Voila! Easy! You might get points for it.

I know TH's is the heartbeat of Canada, though Starbucks is FAR more trendy for special coffees.

Isn't TH the Canadian branch of America's Dunkin Donuts though? I know they were originally Canadian but I am prety sure the franchises were taken over when it became popular in the US.

I seem to remember the ownership thing being reseached here before and it linked back to a US owned donut franchise now.

I dislike max message levels. They're cumbersome in the extreme, as we're seeing in this very discussion.

Rather than using a low "max message level" to discourage off-topic discussion, I think it would be more helpful to simply limit new posts so that people posting "answers" can only respond to the top-level question post, or within subthreads they have created themselves. The question poster, of course, would be able to respond to anything. That way, people are limited to carrying on discussions directly with the person that posted the question, and won't get into browser wars, distro wars, political flamewars, and other off-topic debates with other people.

Before everyone gets too excited, I guess I failed to mention that this "start a thread" page would be for the merged feature.

For example, the thread started from this page wouldn't be moved to some other area. It would be displayed in the topic that it was started in and would be displayed along with other questions or discussions in that topic.

The main thing that the selection of "question" or "discussion" would do is determine how that item is displayed in the list of other threads (i.e. questions get some sort of icon to signify a question and its status). It would also determine what features and UI need to be present. For example, questions would need some way to close them, mark them as solved, etc.

So, while I am thrilled that the response has been positive to the mock-up, I felt like I needed to mention that it (at least in my mind) was designed to be used in a merged discussion-tech Q&A feature.

You can now begin throwing rocks and bottoms at me :)

I agree with you about not interrupting the user's momentum while trying to complete the task. If we were to try something where we suggested previously-asked questions, then it would maybe be something that was presented off to the side of the "start a thread" page where it didn't interfere with the current task.

Now if they are separated at birth, why bother combining the forums? It doesn't make any logical sense at all really. Separate the two as always, it has worked well and everyone likes it this way. The ONLY issue is people posting incorrectly in the wrong forums. Combining the entry page simplifies it (Your advantage)separates them (OUR advantage) and eases the users job (user advantage).

Simple, separated and has a user advantage (like any good bra).

All this is done without combining the two which will become a distraught mess of crap to wade through, no matter how they are tagged. It's bad enough just sortng through Q&A posts and Discussion posts now, yet you want to double that pain in the mouse, please....for the love of God, DON'T DO IT!!!

It will work fine as separate entities that are conbined at the entry page, why take it further?

We don't need hens to be able to identify and peck the right forum for the bird seed to come out. If people can't figure it out from that point, they shouldn't have a computer.

When someone asks a question they want help NOW! they need to get help and not spend the next 3 days wadding through already asked questions that just may have some bearing on their present problem.

I think that would put almost every new person off right away without even mentioning what they would tell their friends.

They all think that they have a unique question and by their standards they do as it is something that they have not run across previously hence the need for a quick solution. Like in the Windows Users Group or a Linux User Group they just ask the question and it gets answered ASAP no matter just how many times it has been asked previously.

Having the ability to group all the questions into categories that may be similar would be a great research tool for others but not a solution for those needing a response ASAP.

If things where forced that way I think that a lot of people would drop out very quickly and TR would die a unnatural death which would be counter productive to us all.

Col

Get it? Recombined?

Heh.

Anyhow: I got the impression you guys were thinking about a semi-combined layout, where on the discussions page the topic hierarchy would look something like this:

Topic
Question and Answer
Discussion

Topic
Question and Answer
Discussion

Topic
Question and Answer
Discussion

. . . thus combining the stuff in one area, but still keeping it separate. If that's not the case, then I've been looking at this incorrectly. Of course, if that's not the case, I'd like to recommend that as a possible way to handle it. I think that might have the best chance of making everyone happy.

It is very similar to a new discussion group this side of the pond which is run by one of the bigger Second Hand Computer Parts Sellers.

They are only just starting so what they have is very basic but I love the clean lines without the clutter.

That would work very nicely.

Col

I'm kinda confused as to how you think someone is likely to get faster responses when he has to wait for someone to give an answer, rather than having an easier option of checking through saved responses to similar questions with a cursory glance as part of the process of posting. If something's already posted, there's no waiting involved. Otherwise, you have to wait for someone to respond.

I'm also not too keen on the idea that the people answering the questions might get very, very tired of answering the same question over and over again. RTFM responses in a system that doesn't use the current point-reward system will probably be more prevalent if it's not as easy and automatic for question-posters to quickly check through already-posted answers to similar questions.

I like sMoRTy71's suggestion elsewhere in this discussion that it might be good to stick the results of such a search into a side-bar, though, rather than making it central and adding to the user's effort in posting a question. That addresses the matter of prompting people to think for themselves sometimes without discouraging them from posting questions.

Just how many people with a problem actually look through that for a solution?

At least when someone posts a question they have the idea that they have done something without requiring them to spend several minutes/hours looking through previous responses/Questions for a solution.

Remember here we are mostly thinking about end users not the IT Pro's.

TR has to grow and the only way this will happen is to get more people involved which means more end users who so far are not highly rated here. There are a limited number of IT Pro's and quite a lot are already Peers but without new members TR will start to fold and come crashing down in a heap.

I totally agree with what you are saying they do not get an immediate answer but then most people do not want to exert themselves to get an answer they want it handed to them on a "Silver Platter" so by leaving a question immediately they at the very least are satisfied that they have done something with a minimum effort on their part. They will then get auto generated responses to their question so they do not have to work {I know before you say it they are lazy bar stewards} but it is a fact of life and we are going to be seeing more end users here rather then more IT Pro's.

While they are not getting am immediate answer at the very least they get the impression that they have done something which in reality is all that matters. If they had to spend any time at all wadding through previously answered questions even though they might possible get their answer on the first question that they look at unfortunately they just will not do this.

I actually do not think that they are getting an immediate answer but they do get the impression that they have done something which hopefully will lead to an answer.

Col

Would be to have the option of scanning the Data Base after they post a question as that way it would be available if required but not a mandatory thing to go through before the question is asked.

The last thing that we need to do is make the posted work for an answer as many just will not consider this. They want to ask their question and then have a solution provided with minimum input on their behalf.

Basically we are all lazy sods!

Col

The max level message that is set at 6, I think, is set that way so that the staircase pattern doesn't run off the screen.

If the user doesn't post a longer explanation, then I have no idea as to his/her knowledge; "source" and "x86" might be alien english to them.

Moron didn't even respond, but I don't really care. I'm not hunting for points when I answer a question. I would like a little feedback though.

Chris

And i think that's been recognized but the issue is that the postings would be in a combined forum. BAAAAAAAAAAAAADDDD!!

I like the idea of two different forums, two different meters all from the home page of Topics exactly as you have shown.

As for people wading through BOTH ot find answers as Shawn suggested, It wouldn't be an issue in my mind. If the page clearly says use Questions and answers for finding solutions to problems and use DISCUSSIONS to simply talk about a topic or the latest IT news, it should be fairly easy to navigate.

Regular users should be able to choose where they want to participate, whether to help people or just talk to/bitch at people.

I find there are two very different groups of 'regulars' here, as I am sure you've noticed.

THose that ALWAYS seem to respond to Q&A and those that ALWAYS discuss then there are a few crossovers, such as you or I that flip back and forth. These two very different communities remain intact because they are independant and need to remain so.

One gateway, two communities, all problems solved.

Happy suns and pretty rainbows for all!

Or as mmy buddy Oz says, "Hookers and Cocaine for everyone!!!" :)

Although I usually abhor off topic discussions, couldn't resist horning in on this one.

You guys in the great northern nether lands probably have never experienced a real cup of coffee.

My brew of choice is Community New Orleans Blend made fresh daily in my own little coffee maker. Now if only I had some beignets from the Cafe Du Mond to go with it.

Us old Southerners would as soon drink dishwater as a cup of latte.

Dalton

I don't like to promote willful ignorance. I like to think that I'm helping people learn. I don't know if you've noticed, but when I answer people's questions here I often try to give concepts, principles, and directions of inquiry rather than step by step instructions for the lazy-minded. I also tend to get good responses to that (at least in discussion).

Giving database search results AFTER the question has been posted seems to me to be kinda counterproductive. That's not going to cut down on the number of unnecessary question posts at all, since the questions will be posted before already-posted answers are found, and it will probably only increase the problem of people posting answers and never closing questions or otherwise responding meaningfully to people that provide answers.

Yeah, I understand the max post limit on discussion threads, though it still bothers me somewhat. I just think that even stricter max post limits to discourage off-topic discussion would more likely just discourage participation in general. The current highly restrictive system, allowing unlimited commenting to one's own answer subthread, seems like a better way to control that sort of thing than a straight-up max post limit.

And you are completely right.

I was thinking that when the person submitted his question, it was automatically keyword checked and som eresults were returned, if no go then the user can opt to continue and post the question.

Shawn's (smorty) idea was to show a searchable list in a 'pane down one side of the post screen, this could be handy and sounds a little mroe reasonable. Perhaps a TOP 10 questions list with a link to read more answers as if they wanted to or something similar would suffice.

Discussions are different to TQ & A in the discussion we tend to ramble on go off topic a lot or bring in what at first may not seem related but could have an influence on the discussion.

The Q & A section is a different kettle of fish however. In that area we do tend to at the very least try to provide solutions to what many at best provide poorly asked questions. I know I've at various times looked at what sounded like an interesting question only to see people like "The Chas" have already provided an answer which sounds quite correct and logical. While I could rephrase the answer or just rehash the same thing I do not partly because I'm basically a Lazy sod and other people do not need to have the same answer in 20 different word patterns.

I'm not talking about discussions here but the Q & A section. In the discussion threads like the one that is currently running about Windows XP SP 2 there are a lot of observations and general forms of help offered to problems encountered but it is a different forum where there are no truly correct answers only working solutions to new problems.

Many years ago a new dealer told me that when he first meet me he thought I was "A know all Bastard" but after a time when he did really get to know me he realized that I really was "A know all bastard" but I came off like this because in that area I did know it all instead of coming across as sounding well I say this is so therefore it is.

I've tried very hard since that time to change the way I sound as I still to this day believe that we are constantly learning and there is not a single person on the face of the planet who actually knows it all. I've been know to say that if I can ever know a third of what so & so's forgotten I'll think myself knowledgeable.

In the above I was only referring to the TQ & A side of TR not the general discussion side.

Col

But leaving the option open after the question is posted so that the person could then have a look around to see if anyone has asked something similar previously. If they found the answer they could always close the question.

But having the option prior to actually posting I think would be ignored/overlooked or just forgotten about.

If there was the possibility of posting the question and then having a look around I tend to believe that at the very least some would take the time to actually look. Granted a lot wouldn't but at least the option would still be there. I think we need to have as many options for searching the data base as possible just in case someone wants to have a look around. Granted it will never stop the point gathering questions that seem to get posted and the other rubbish but for the real user it would be of some advantage as they have the ability to have a poke around after posting a question.

I do not know if it would work but making people look through answered questions first I believe would kill the site stone dead in no time at all.

Col

Yeah, It was more of a suggestion on my part, and not necessarily what I would like to see in the Q&A. Personally, I like the current system, but we need to have a means of safe communication without hampering a technician's stats. I have suggested a third option for a response to an answer. I hope to see some sort of a neutral choice.

I agree with you that replies to answers should be reserved for the original poster - if they decide to go with that sort of layout.

Chris

...I weighed the pros against the cons. You guys have brought out some of my key arguments regarding the enforced search.

1) Nobody is going to type out a question and then not submit it.

2) Giving them the answer after submission will promote abandoned posts.

3) People who want their answers handed to them (seems to be the case here) will not take the time to go through all of the previously answered questions.

One of the essential skills of an IT professional is to be able to search the internet for a solution to a problem. People who post very simple questions, either do not want to browse for a solution, or the techno-terminology escapes them. Perhaps there is no solution for the Q&A problems that we are talking about.

I think that maybe the search engine itself should be the target, rather than the automated search option based on a submission.

I don't think any of us want to see the combination of the two. If you give them the option before they reach that page, you can redirect them to the Q&A submission.

Chris