| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 32700 | 2003-04-25 13:22:00 | Helping make this forum kick a$$ | Captive (3159) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 138916 | 2003-04-25 13:22:00 | I am fairly new to this forum. I have previously state, and will state again something which I believe would add value to both this site and to leading a more productive computing experience for this service as a whole. Recommendation: The forum have added the facility to mark when subjects do not have answers. Reason: To establish for those who provide support where they can help best. My personal view: I dont want to come here to look through, what is currently estimated at 2180 pages to try and help people. i want to help but i don't have the inclination to journey through so many pages to offer support. My assumption is the occurance of this would not be uncommon. Why oh why? There is those of here who want to help. Are we to be condemned to a system which clearly presents advancement in the pursuit of knowledge acquisition? assumably we all face limitations. I do feel this one could be rectified with a small uncursion of labour/redesign/redevelopment cost at a samll fee in proportion to the benefit it will have to the users of this service. Thus aiding both PC worlds reputation to innovate as well as advance this area in part of whole. Implementation: I believe a field to determine if the problem has been solved, which is filterable will allow this advancemet. Secondaly a filter for the individual subject message saying which was the solution which was found to be best in relation to the question to allow quick asbtraction for those browsing longer lists or perhaps other advantages. Point to note: some sites already offer this and my assumption is for tech support sites it will expand for the reasons of practicality. Should progress be made or should we look a knowledge-horse in the mouth? Please consider this for the merit it posses, perhaps not the presentation as i am by far a speech writer. |
Captive (3159) | ||
| 138917 | 2003-04-25 14:27:00 | same old same old... read so many msgs that didnt need help i decided its time to back to mp3s. | Captive (3159) | ||
| 138918 | 2003-04-25 15:18:00 | err, there is no way you can tell me there are 2160 pages of posts that there you need to go though. Just visit daily or on some frequent basis and answer the relevant threads in the recent threads posted. No need to drag up threads from 1999. |
-=JM=- (16) | ||
| 138919 | 2003-04-25 19:41:00 | So don't wade through 2180 (have no idea where you got that number from) pages to try to help people. Help the people that are wanting help now, not 3 or 4 years ago. Generally only the first (perhaps the second) page of the index of threads will contain recent requests for help, and the ones that still need answers are easy to spot as usually they have a "0" in the "Replies" column. Threads are ordered by date of last post, so old posts are further back through the pages. Quite often people like you who just want to answer somebody's post go back three years in the posts to answer one that supposedly hasn't been answered. However the post is out-of-date and quite often the poster has either solved it (I'd hope so after 3 or 4 years!) or isn't sitting around the forum waiting for an answer. Just answer the threads from the last few weeks or so. A suggestion though - when posting don't add extra line breaks; it makes it really hard to read your post. |
Mike (15) | ||
| 138920 | 2003-04-25 21:38:00 | Sounds like me cant quite comprhend the languge,which doesnt help. If you want a difficult site go to annoyance.org. |
Thomas (1820) | ||
| 138921 | 2003-04-25 21:38:00 | Yeah, the 'Replies : 0' is a good indication matey, and threads from the last week are really only relevant, and in that due time, id say at least 95% have had a reply of some sort anyway. Come back more frequently, and you'll find you can answer more questions because other people havent beaten you to the gun. As for me, I think the forum is great, as it stands now. Im also pretty positive that the programmers/web dev team/webmasters etc. from IDG dont have time to implement such an addition to the forum at this stage, as its not as simple as installing an EXE or RPM file on your HDD and you're away with it. This has been brought up before, and Im sorry to say, always gets the thumbs down. Cheers Chilling_Silence |
Chilling_Silently (228) | ||
| 138922 | 2003-04-25 22:03:00 | Question: Why is it when we make a post, it gets you to choose what "Categories" it goes in to? |
somebody (208) | ||
| 138923 | 2003-04-25 22:12:00 | This came up some time ago as well and the answer was "for statistical purposes" "What statisrical purposes?" You may be wondering. I dunno, like they say on talkback radio. "Go figure." |
mark c (247) | ||
| 138924 | 2003-04-25 22:28:00 | > Question: > Why is it when we make a post, it gets you to choose > what "Categories" it goes in to? On the old forum (eg pre June 2002) they had the same categories, and when you searched for posts you could search under one of those categories to narrow down your search range. I guess when they upgraded the forum the idea was there to put in something similar at a later date. To be honest though, I don't think it'll work as well as you might think, as a lot of people wouldn't know what to categorise the original post as, so previous posts with the right answers may be missed in a search because they've been put into the wrong category. Mike. |
Mike (15) | ||
| 138925 | 2003-04-25 23:28:00 | > Sounds like me cant quite comprhend the languge,which > doesnt help. > If you want a difficult site go to annoyance.org. Hey a new forum to ferment |
Baldy (26) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||