| General > General Technical Chat |
| Designated "Expert" Forum Users? |
| << < (46/98) > >> |
| rstofer:
--- Quote from: jpanhalt on February 17, 2022, 07:37:58 pm ---We need a facetious emoji. I thought that might be the case, but I didn't want to say that, if you weren't. --- End quote --- I don't do 'social media'. I have no idea how to use emojis even if I were so inclined. 'Luddite' applies here... |
| MK14:
--- Quote from: emece67 on February 17, 2022, 07:51:24 pm --- --- End quote --- You're getting me worried, about the changes which are happening here. I'm absolutely NOT a facebook fan kind of person. It happened to another forum. I won't mention its name here. But they went from a nice/neat open plan, forum, to a horrible messy, point scoring, expert only sectioned, massive eye hurting, mess-up. I almost have to squint my eyes, when ever I see it, and I just ignore the silly/crazy points schemes, multi-faceted likes (many types selectable on there), and one or more sections is for EXPERT replies only. They also added up/down voting things. But I don't mind, there are still many places available, around the internet, to find out about things. I think they had a change of management, which was probably why things changed. They were probably more concerned about maximizing views, advertising and hence profitability. If I understand things correctly, the users in general, hated the new schemes, and said so. But the admin teams, seemed to ignore all the complaints, and just did whatever they wanted to. On the one hand it is their forum, they can do what they like. But on the other, the best users probably disappeared, and the less useful members remained. But maybe the forum was getting less and less popular anyway, as I suppose times change. I think I'd read things on that forum less and less, anyway, a long while, before the changes. But I was amazed at how bad a forum can be messed up, with a change of management and various changes they make. As I see it. It is like the modern freemium games. With paid micro-transactions. Whereby once good games, with sensible one-off game purchase pricing, became expensive horrible freemium ones. tl;dr Not all changes are good. It's not my forum, but a thread asking what we think, seems to have been created. So I'll leave my opinions. On reflection, I think I'm being significantly too pessimistic, in my outlook. I.e. Making a mountain out of a molehill. :palm: |
| Halcyon:
I can see arguments on both sides of the fence, but I'm swaying more towards the "don't like it" option for these reasons: * Some experts (not all) will simply use the tag to stroke their own egos or perhaps attempt to use it as a subtle tool to make themselves appear more knowledgeable in other fields, even when they aren't (kind of like not correcting someone when they mistakenly assume you have a certain position/authority/credentials etc...). * Some experts are introverts or don't like to be labelled, so to those who don't know them, they might appear less "authoritative". * It creates classes of people which will inevitably lead to bullying. * Some people might take offence if they don't "make the grade. * Determining who is an expert shouldn't be up to the admins/moderators. * Likewise if you let users class themselves as experts, it de-values the meaning as non-experts will simply use the tag to feed their own egos or misrepresent themselves. * We don't wear a badge to social events that says "expert", why do it here? * What problem/deficiency are we attempting to solve by implementing this? I'd much prefer a system where others can up or down-vote user comments to produce some kind of aggregate "score", but even that is not without its problems and needs careful consideration. For example, on the Australian internet forum Whirlpool, every user has an "aura" which is basically a popularity vote. Regardless if your content is true or factual, if you piss the wrong people off, they will do everything in their power to down-vote users in order to artificially impact their aura. I saw this all the time as a moderator there before I left. It just became a poisonous forum to be part of. |
| rstofer:
Yes, questions posed in the "Go Ask The Expert" sections on that other board could only be answered by the appointed expert on the topic. That left all of the burden on one person and the various forums could be stagnant for years. Truly a waste of pixels. I started thinking about divisiveness (again) and how one possible result of this topic just adds another example of 'them versus us' and all of its side effects. There's enough divisiveness going around without adding it to a laid-back family oriented forum. There are some very talented people hanging out here and most seem quite generous with their time. Who should be the most comfortable here? The folks that have been here a while and are just kickin' back or the person who showed up on Tuesday and didn't like the replies? |
| rstofer:
--- Quote from: Halcyon on February 18, 2022, 02:00:53 am ---I can see arguments on both sides of the fence, but I'm swaying more towards the "don't like it" option for these reasons: * Some experts (not all) will simply use the tag to stroke their own egos or perhaps attempt to use it as a subtle tool to make themsevles appear more knowledgeable in other fields, even when they aren't (kind of like not correcting someone when they mistakenly assume you have a certain position/authority/credentials etc...). * Some experts are introverts or don't like to be labelled, so to those who don't know them, they might appear less "authoritative". * It creates classes of people which will inevitably lead to bullying. * Some people might take offence if they don't "make the grade. * Determining who is an expert shouldn't be up to the admins/moderators. * Likewise if you let users class themselves as experts, it de-values the meaning as non-experts will simply use the tag to feed their own egos or misrepresent themselves. * We don't wear a badge to social events that says "expert", why do it here? * What problem/deficiency are we attempting to solve by implementing this? I'd much prefer a system where others can up or down-vote user comment to produce some kind of aggregate "score", but even that is not without its problems. For example, on the Australian internet forum Whirlpool, every user has an "aura" which is basically a popularity vote. Regardless if your content is true or factual, if you piss the wrong people off, they will do everything in their power to down-vote users in order to artificially impact their aura. I saw this all the time as a moderator there before I left. It just became a poisonous forum to be part of. --- End quote --- That about sums it up! But I'm also against the up/down-voting. How do you judge the quality of the person voting. Maybe they don't like the reply because it doesn't fit their preconceived idea of how a problem should be solved. Their solution won't work, they get told it won't work and then they down-vote the reply. You last point is the most important (in my view). What problem is being solved and, more important, why is it being solved at all? |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |