General discussion


Q&A's in Discussions, I made my case

By Oz_Media ·
Well, I sent an email to R regarding the constant Q&A's in discussions and suggested that they use a checkbox or flag of some sort to indicate incorrectly posted questions.
I also mentioned that people closing questions without allocating points should have to fill in a form field explaining why the points were not allocated based on the responses gathered or offer a blacklist so that users who are found to misuse the R site can be flagged so members can use thier own discretion before offering solutions in the future.
Feels kinda like pissing in the wind but you got to start somewhere I guess.

Any support of my ideas or new ideas that could be offered (by you) to TR would be appreciated but not expected.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

27 total posts (Page 1 of 3)   01 | 02 | 03   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Well *I* expect it

by Cactus Pete In reply to Q&A's in Discussions, I m ...

In the grand scheme of things, it IS a rather trivial matter, but I would really rather like to have this given some consideration, as well.

Since the last discussion about Q&A in the wrong place, things seem to have gotten even worse. I wouldn't be surprised if a *vast* majority of the threads started in the last month here are actually topics better suited for the Q&A section of TR. It begs the question of why there is a separation at all...

So, consider yourself supported, though I haven't anything new to contribute. I would very much like to see this concern addressed.

Collapse -

Thanks for the backing

by Oz_Media In reply to Well *I* expect it

You're right, the Q&A's in the discussion forums aqree getting really bad now.
Max had some great suggestions based on the old TR layout that would be great.

It only takes a voice to get action, I appreciate your suuport.

Collapse -

Blacklist or rating system?

by maxwell edison In reply to Q&A's in Discussions, I m ...

TR used to show the statistics on how people treated their questions, but they removed it some time ago. (I wish they'd bring it back.) For example, it might indicate that a particular person asked 10 questions, received 50 (total) answers, and none were accepted - for a 0% acceptance rating. (Or 45 were accepted - 90%, and so on). It was similar to the chart showing the statistics of how many questions a person answered, how many were accepted, etc. With this in place, a person could determine the likelyhood of having his/her answer accepted before taking the time to post one. There were times, for example, when I saw that a person rejected 90%, 95%, or more of all answers, and as a result, I would take a pass on trying to post one. (Unless I had a different reason to post.)

I'd like a system that's similar to the one they have rating - or scoring - the top question answerers. Let's see the people who are tops at accepting answers given.

I'm of the opinion that most all answers are worthy of being accepted - especially if it's an "opinion" type question. After all, even the elimination of "wrong" solutions can be helpful in determining the "right" one, so even if the answer is off the mark, if a person is willing to giveme a few minutes of his/her time in an attempt to help, then passing on a few points - along with a show of grattitude - is the least I can do. Out of all the questions I've posted, I've probably accepted 95% (or more) of the answers, passing along close to 200,000 points, and usually leaving a personalized comment to each and every one. Some people treat their questions just about the opposite. I must admit, that I just don't get it - not saying thank you, and not passing along a few lousy andworthless points.

Collapse -

Thank you, well said Max

by Oz_Media In reply to Blacklist or rating syste ...

Your response is accurate and eloquesnt as usual.
I have noticed that you offer comments on almost all suggeations in the Q&A forum, which in my case is helpful when I get to see your thoughts behind my resolutions, it gets me to look at things from a different perspective sometimes.

I don't knwo how much time you feel like putting into this subject but I'm sure an email to TR would help. NOTE: I posted to the contact listed for Discussions.

Thanks for your input.

Collapse -

Questions posted in discussions

by maxwell edison In reply to Q&A's in Discussions, I m ...

It seems that this has happened more and more since the issue was brought up a while back. I must admit, however, that I sometimes have answered such questions, even it's posted in the discussion area. (Maybe I shouldn't do that.) I must also admit,that I've been tempted to post technical questions in the discussion area myself, just for the purpose of gaining more exposure. However, that would be in addition to posting the same thing in the Q&A section, not instead of. I've noticed that many people (but not all) tend to migrate to one or the other areas, but not both. (But some do indeed visit both areas.) I currently have a question posted in the Q&A, and I must admit that I almost posted it in the discussion area as well - just for theincreased exposure. How many more replies could I get if I posted in both areas?

Collapse -

Good point

by Oz_Media In reply to Questions posted in discu ...

Perhapse a discussion relating and then pointing to your question in the Q&A forum. I think I know the question you are referring to in this case.
Although relatively new here, I don't think you make a practice out of 'abusing' the site at all.
If you were to post here and explain that you didn't recieve the answer in the Q&A should be considered apropriate. Or just state your case and point to the URL so people could answer there and recieve the goodies if accepted. People know you here and don't think that you are just sucking resources out without some valuable input for others. There's a little personal discression needed, perhapse a good reason to FLAG an incorrectly posted question and let your peers decide for themselves whether to help or not. Obviously, if you were constantly sucking info without any input for others, you would become known for it and when flagged, people would NOT offer as much help in future.

Collapse -

An odd thing...

by Cactus Pete In reply to Questions posted in discu ...

You may recall that I posted my question about KVS last week in the Q&A section. I closed it with little input [granted, the three top answerers contributed]. I was rather hoping for someone with hands on experience giving me some advice.

This week, TR themselves [re]created my post into the Discussion arena, and backdated it enough to get it off of the recent posts. They did not ask me if I needed the help, or inform me that they would do this, other than my noticing my alias in a techmail.

Honestly, I was considering posing the question here in the discussions, as I was looking for opinions, but thought that the 50,000 points would get me some attention. Oh well.

Collapse -

Why would they do that?

by maxwell edison In reply to An odd thing...

After you said TR recreated your question and put it in the discussions, I searched for it (out of curiosity).

Why would they do that, I wonder? And why change the date? And why change the wording and context of the question?

This link shows that it was created on 7-15

However, this link shows that it was created on 6-23

What's up with that?

(I noticed similar discrepancies with others as well.)

You really didn't start thatdiscussion?

Interesting indeed.

(But it did get an answer - on 7-15. I wonder........)

So this means that I can claim that all those "bad" (lack of tact) messages that only "appeared" to be from me were really posted by others (at TR) with some other motive. Yea, that's the ticket.

Collapse -

TechRepublic Objectives

by Oldefar In reply to Why would they do that?

I think we forget that for TR, the site is all about advertisement revenue. That revenue is based on usage, and anything that increases usage is therefore "good". The sale of their own products is a secondary source of revenue.

Now with that in mind, they have to look at the usage of the Q&A area and the usage of the Discussion area as revenue enhancing. If they can get a particular question to generate additional hits by repeating it in the discussions, so much the better.

This also explains why some tangents are allowed to go along for weeks, and some posts that seem to be focused on creating controversy are not dealt with by TR. After all, what is important is the count, and a flame fest counts as much as a thoughtful discussion.
Or so it seems to me.

Collapse -

Good Point.

by admin In reply to TechRepublic Objectives

As usual, you are right on there Oldefar. One question I have though... are we TR members ultimately more a product or more a service to the paying customers they are selling our presence to?


Back to IT Employment Forum
27 total posts (Page 1 of 3)   01 | 02 | 03   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums