Designated "Expert" Forum Users?

[EEVblog]

A forum user brought this up and I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea.

Essentially, people could nominate and/or vote on who are known "Experts" in a particular field and give them an "Expert" designator tag. e.g. Analog Expert, Acoustics Expert etc.
This could potentially help newbies or generally just anyone asking a question to perhaps be more confident in a technical answer if it comes from a designated "Expert" in that field. Help weed out the weat from the chaff so to speak.

I think it's an interesting idea in principle.
It's possible in the SMF forum software to have additional categories that where members can be allocated into groups which shows up under their username, just like we currently have for Frequent Contributor, Supporter etc.

Of course the posible problems are obvious:

1) It could be seen as an "appeal to authority" which is not how science/engineering is supposed to work. The best technical argument is supposed to "win".

2) Being an expert in one area does not make you an expert in another area, and that's certainly the case when it comes down to something that it's just personal opinion. So maybe some avenue for possible abuse here? Although if it's just a label and the Expert was given no extra moderator power in the forum then maybe that's moot. But I could imagine some getting the label and then it going to their head somehow.

3) It could lead to infighting about who gets the tag, "they aren't worthy of it any more, see this post" etc.

You probably couldn't have just "Expert" on it's own of course, that's kind meaningless, it would have to specific like "Analog Expert" etc.

Anyway, thoughts please...

[ataradov]

I can see a lot of fighting on what constitutes "an expert". Many things have multiple fundamental approaches (scientific rigor vs engineering winging it). Both are valid in some cases, and an a theoretical expert's opinion may override a more practical approach for a given situation.

I see it going better the other way - marking people that just rant and don't contribute anything of substance or conspiracy nuts. It is a less positive "badge", so exposing it publicly may be controversial too.

[amyk]

Where's the "I like it, but only if I can be one" choice?

More seriously, I usually pay less attention to who posted something, than what they posted. From that perspective, emphasising the former wouldn't be a good idea.

(I think you're missing a "not" in your second problem.)

[Cerebus]

Hmm. Generally I don't feel very easy about it.

Some random thoughts. Note that this is not a thought-out analysis, but just some things that immediately come to mind.

Who decides who is 'expert' or not? If the expertise is narrow enough there may not even be anyone else around who has sufficient relevant expertise to act as a confirmatory "Yup, he's an expert" or a "Nope, he's a fool".

There's a little too much possibility for self-promotion here too. An observation I've made is that anyone who chooses a user name that includes words like "export", "wizard", "master", academic titles, and other such like terms is usually (but not infallibly always) a walking talking example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. i.e. Knows enough to be dangerous and over-confident in their own abilities, but actually has at best half a clue. So self nomination is right out in my book.

But if people are nominated by others then there's a risk that they may not want that nomination. That would need handling carefully to avoid all round embarrassment.

Also it could push a lot of work in the direction of nominated 'experts'. I don't think I particularly stand out from the crowd as one of the 'go to' guys but I already get the odd PM out of the blue from other forum users along the lines of "I saw you'd written several times about X and I've got a related problem Y, can you help". Generally if I can I do, but the requests are few and far between. Now if, god forbid, I got the tag of "Go to man for turbo-encabulator expertise" I can imagine that the PMs might flow thick and fast. It needs some thought about how to handle this to prevent people ending up with a part-time unpaid consultancy gig. It's one thing to chirp up in a topic if you're in the mood and have useful expertise to impart, and if you're not in the mood you can just pass. It's not quite so easy if you've got a personal appeal for help sitting in your PMs.

[ataradov]

An another issue would be karma farming that a lot of people can't resist for some reason. It risks to turn into stack overflow situation.

I personally don't want to be in any special groups like this.

[fourfathom]

I hang out on a non-technical forum where members can give other members up-votes or down-votes.  I think I have only up-votes there (because that's the kind of person I am!) but I still don't like it.  When politics or other opinions run hot the votes end up showing who is "in the club" and who is out.  Perhaps on this engineering forum this wouldn't be as much of a problem, but in any case I don't think the "expert" status is needed.  This is a public-access forum, anybody asking questions here should know that, and from what I've seen any "wrong" information gets corrected (or at least well-discussed) pretty quickly.

[Ed.Kloonk]

Whoo. Gee. Can of worms.

In the old days it was thought, on early forums, that those with ridiculously high post counts were the experts. Of course we know better now.

I don't understand what is wrong with the existing Thanked User system here. The first one to answer with the nearest solution is marked by consensus.

What I've seen in the past with novices who do search before posting is sometimes they wanted to hear answers from others and not a loudmouth who might be dominating every thread with their BS.

I think it comes back to learning the art of asking the question in a certain way and then being able to self moderate the thread a bit.

[Monkeh]

Can we give treez a special title instead?

[MrMobodies]

Maybe I misunderstand but I thought that was what the moderators were for nominated to a board/subject of their expertise.

[Ed.Kloonk]

Maybe I misunderstand but I thought that was what the moderators were for nominated to a board/subject of their expertise.

This is a side-effect of the problem posed. How do you assign people to topics without giving them the super mod powers?

[EEVblog]

Where's the "I like it, but only if I can be one" choice?
More seriously, I usually pay less attention to who posted something, than what they posted. From that perspective, emphasising the former wouldn't be a good idea.

That's what I do in most cases too. I guess it's more for newbies who get a whole bunch of responses and don't have the technical ability to judge each post on its technical merits.
Although we do have the Thanks system for posts.

[EEVblog]

Maybe I misunderstand but I thought that was what the moderators were for nominated to a board/subject of their expertise.

We don't moderate technical content here.

[EEVblog]

I don't understand what is wrong with the existing Thanked User system here. The first one to answer with the nearest solution is marked by consensus.

It's used a bit but I guess not often enough to be really useful. No one looks every beginner thread and gives a rate unlike say StackExchange.
Maybe it's just not possible on a chat forum based system to solve this, it's just the wrong platform to even try? Horses for courses so to speak. Stack Exchange will always do it way better?

[Mr.B]

Like @Ed.Kloonk said, the Thanks system usually indicates a valid answer to a question or solution, or a more valuable contribution.
Anyway, I have been here long enough to know who here is an authority on a certain discipline and who the far less knowledgeable are.
I am pretty good at being able to see the wood for the treez…

[EEVblog]

I hang out on a non-technical forum where members can give other members up-votes or down-votes.  I think I have only up-votes there (because that's the kind of person I am!) but I still don't like it.  When politics or other opinions run hot the votes end up showing who is "in the club" and who is out.  Perhaps on this engineering forum this wouldn't be as much of a problem, but in any case I don't think the "expert" status is needed.  This is a public-access forum, anybody asking questions here should know that, and from what I've seen any "wrong" information gets corrected (or at least well-discussed) pretty quickly.

Way back we trialed a rating system of some sort here (thumbs up/down was it?), but IIRC it was abused with people just voting down people they didn't like. I think we did a poll and the majorty voted to remove it in favour of a simple Thanks system.

[EEVblog]

An another issue would be karma farming that a lot of people can't resist for some reason. It risks to turn into stack overflow situation.
I personally don't want to be in any special groups like this.

What's the "stack overflow situation"?

[Ed.Kloonk]

I don't understand what is wrong with the existing Thanked User system here. The first one to answer with the nearest solution is marked by consensus.

It's used a bit but I guess not often enough to be really useful. No one looks every beginner thread and gives a rate unlike say StackExchange.
Maybe it's just not possible on a chat forum based system to solve this, it's just the wrong platform to even try? Horses for courses so to speak. Stack Exchange will always do it way better?

I wanted to suggest stack exchange. But here's the rub. I have started to ask here instead SE because of the rabbit hole effect. Over on unix.SE, once the question is technically answered, any further dialogue is nixxed.

WRT thanking users, I wish more people would try and thank the one good answer in a sort of drive-by thanking without feeling the need to contribute further. Takes a second to hit the button.

[EEVblog]

WRT thanking users, I wish more people would try and thank the one good answer in a sort of drive-by thanking without feeling the need to contribute further. Takes a second to hit the button.

Maybe it could be renamed to something else? like Valuable?
e.g. "The following users thought this post was Valuable"

[ataradov]

What's the "stack overflow situation"?

People are fighting for upvotes and begging OPs to accept their solution as correct. And all for fake internet points.  It is pathetic.

[MrMobodies]

I see, so it is based on a level of trust between the members that have voted for someone.

I think I have seen other boards do that before and one I recall even had an "enthusiasts" title.

[Ed.Kloonk]

WRT thanking users, I wish more people would try and thank the one good answer in a sort of drive-by thanking without feeling the need to contribute further. Takes a second to hit the button.

Maybe it could be renamed to something else? like Valuable?
e.g. "The following users thought this post was Valuable"

 

It's all getting too close to "Ed.Kloonk likes this". Makes some peeps run for the hills.

[bdunham7]

That's what I do in most cases too. I guess it's more for newbies who get a whole bunch of responses and don't have the technical ability to judge each post on its technical merits.
Although we do have the Thanks system for posts.

I don't see too much of newbies getting bad or conflicting advice as I think most people are a bit careful about that sort of thing.  Of course there are vigorous, um, 'debates' about some topics, but I don't think the quality of help provided for real-world problems would be improved beyond what self-regulation has done so far.  As for who is a qualified expert, that's not easy to sort out--I might know the exact answer to a repair question because I just solved it on my bench yesterday, but then I've no clue on a very similar issue that I haven't seen before--but someone else has.

[ataradov]

It's all getting too close to "Ed.Kloonk likes this". Makes some peeps run for the hills.

It already is "likes". For that exact reason I have thanks buttons here adblocked.

[Ed.Kloonk]

I see, so it is based on a level of trust between the members that have voted for someone.

I think I have seen other boards do that before and one I recall even had an "enthusiasts" title.

The titles such as that are bestowed often automaticity once you reach a certain number of posts.

Big forums like Ubuntu used to (still do?) dabble it it. It is a symptom of the sheer volume of users asking questions and the need to address so many users.

[Cerebus]

What's the "stack overflow situation"?

People are fighting for upvotes and begging OPs to accept their solution as correct. And all for fake internet points.  It is pathetic.

The way some people go about it, obvious neophytes, it looks like they want a "I got seven zillion points on Stackexchange" badge to put on their CV/Resume.

Every forum that sets up some kind of rewards system, even if just points or upvotes, seems to acquire people who rush around answering everything, whether it's actually helpful or not. There's one Eevblog forum participant who rarely comments here, yet on one of the 'other' EE forums they seem to make every third post and have a gazillion 'points'. The drive for engagement produces really, really poor quality posts.