Programming forums [modified]
-
I'm hoping to have something out in the next few days that will surface the good stuff a little easier. In terms of member's behaving badly I'm tempted by the idea of allow community banishing of those members who abuse the site. Thoughts?
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Define abuse. Sometimes it's a matter of perception...and, I should warn you, once you open that can of worms, your and your staff's work load will easily triple. I've hung around here for a long time Chris and I don't see any major problems. This online community, for the most part, is one of the best I've ever encountered. Jerry Former AOL moderator(Guide) Former Forums Moderator for Taldren
“If we are all in agreement on the decision - then I propose we postpone further discussion of this matter until our next meeting to give ourselves time to develop disagreement and perhaps gain some understanding of what the decision is all about.”-Alfred P. Sloan
-
I don't really think that's the answer. The time tested answer to most of these problems is the same as always: don't reply to anything you don't want to encourage. I.E. if it's a very easily searched question, simply don't respond. They will get tired of waiting and go search for it or post it elsewhere. Unfortunately this never seems to work here, even the most seasoned and experienced users seem to have no ability to ignore those messages that nearly everyone knows *should* be ignored. I don't know why this is, but it's the heart of your problem. The site is really at a crossroads, marketing and business people always say if you aren't growing constantly you're falling behind, I think that's utter crap personally but I'm sure that's the sort of advice or demands you are getting from whoever the powers that be are in this case. One symptom of the problem that is potentially quite damaging is that a lot of the "old timers" here have expressed a point of view that they don't frequent the programming boards any more because of the high number of "bad" posts in them. This is a serious problem for Codeproject if it's a real trend and continues; unless you are hoping to just turn over users as they get more experienced and move on then new ones take their place to help out there. At the very least I think you need to have *someone* patrol the boards and when a poster is being disrespectful or rude for no good reason give them one warning then terminate their account immediately if it happens again or they don't remove or re-word their message. And remove those messages. You have to think of the image of the site overall and be pretty ruthless about it, even more so as you get an ever higher volume of users. CodeProject is big enough that it's well overdue for constant professional "pruning" and grooming, having users do some of that work may help but it might also open a big can of worms as well, particularly when you start talking about banishing etc. I know the idea of a self policing site sounds all groovy and feel goody but in practice it can turn ugly as you hand over more and more power to the users. Sometimes you need a sherrif to keep the peace, not a bunch of deputies.
"The pursuit of excellence is less profitable than the pursuit of bigness, but it can be more satisfying." - David Ogilvy
The voice of reason! ...but one that will be ignored. Why will it be ignored? "'Cause it's human nature to bitch, whine, and generally complain that someone else is not doing enough to make the complaintant's life easier and moderate things to fit more in line with their own world view. A call for moderatorship is people being people.
“If we are all in agreement on the decision - then I propose we postpone further discussion of this matter until our next meeting to give ourselves time to develop disagreement and perhaps gain some understanding of what the decision is all about.”-Alfred P. Sloan
-
"Abusing the site" comes with many definitions and gray areas. Given the nature of the way many people vote here, I would vote against this idea unless: 1) Those allowed to banish abusers was a very select group (maybe just platinum members), and/or... 2) It would be impossible to banish platinum members or anyone that is or ever has been an MVP or other CP awardee. 3) The final decision to ban someone isn't based on some obscure site algorithm, but instead is that of the site admin or someone equally highly placed in the CodeProject hierarchy. Why, you ask? Yes, you're correct - I'm more concerned about MY status here. If the "community" is allowed to ban people, I have enough knuckleheads following me around here that it is not inconceivable that I would be voted out in short order (I mean, seriously - the ratio of Indians to programmers here heavily favors the Indians). (See? I can't help myself. This was a joke, but I'm sure a number of clueless retards are going to see this as an affront to their national pride, and if allowed, would happily mark this message as "abusing the site".)
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001I would never ban you John. I have too much fun tormenting you to throw away my greatest off time entertainment. ;)
“If we are all in agreement on the decision - then I propose we postpone further discussion of this matter until our next meeting to give ourselves time to develop disagreement and perhaps gain some understanding of what the decision is all about.”-Alfred P. Sloan
-
I have to disagree. I remember when active on the ASP.NET forum that there were indeed stupid questions, but their number was not that high. I remember occasionally being amazed at the incompetence of some users, but quickly moved on the the serious posters. This happend, but there were far more valuable questions than abuses. Nowadays there are valuable questions as well, but it's difficult to find them. You have to search through the bunch of crap and go several pages deep. And this is only one part of the problem. I also get annoyed because of the stupid questions and the behavior of people so I get out of there.
Cheers, Mircea "Pay people peanuts and you get monkeys" - David Ogilvy
When where you active in the ASP.NET forums? The cretaceous era? (Evolution seems to be favoring the idiots.) There was a good quote about the universe being able to produce better idiots over time. I wonder where that went…
So the creationist says: Everything must have a designer. God designed everything. I say: Why is God the only exception? Why not make the "designs" (like man) exceptions and make God a creation of man?
-
"Abusing the site" comes with many definitions and gray areas. Given the nature of the way many people vote here, I would vote against this idea unless: 1) Those allowed to banish abusers was a very select group (maybe just platinum members), and/or... 2) It would be impossible to banish platinum members or anyone that is or ever has been an MVP or other CP awardee. 3) The final decision to ban someone isn't based on some obscure site algorithm, but instead is that of the site admin or someone equally highly placed in the CodeProject hierarchy. Why, you ask? Yes, you're correct - I'm more concerned about MY status here. If the "community" is allowed to ban people, I have enough knuckleheads following me around here that it is not inconceivable that I would be voted out in short order (I mean, seriously - the ratio of Indians to programmers here heavily favors the Indians). (See? I can't help myself. This was a joke, but I'm sure a number of clueless retards are going to see this as an affront to their national pride, and if allowed, would happily mark this message as "abusing the site".)
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Yes, you're correct - I'm more concerned about MY status here. If the "community" is allowed to ban people, I have enough knuckleheads following me around here that it is not inconceivable that I would be voted out in short order
If you have pissed off that many Platinum-level members, maybe you should reconsider your posting style?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Yes, you're correct - I'm more concerned about MY status here. If the "community" is allowed to ban people, I have enough knuckleheads following me around here that it is not inconceivable that I would be voted out in short order
If you have pissed off that many Platinum-level members, maybe you should reconsider your posting style?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
First, there's only 27 platinum members (or maybe 28). Second, it's not the platinum members I'm worried about. Third, there's no way I'm going to change my "posting style".
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
First, there's only 27 platinum members (or maybe 28). Second, it's not the platinum members I'm worried about. Third, there's no way I'm going to change my "posting style".
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
First, there's only 27 platinum members (or maybe 28). Second, it's not the platinum members I'm worried about.
Since your first demand was that only Platinum members have the power (something I'm not opposed to, by the way) it followed that the other demands you made were predicated upon that one. If that's not the case, then you night have used an "and/or" construction rather than a descending list, just for me and any other easily confused souls.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
Third, there's no way I'm going to change my "posting style".
One of the things I have noted as being true for me is that I seldom get the chance to legislate out of existence, the consequences of my actions. Of course, your mileage may vary. I wish you all the luck in the world getting the mountain to come to Mahomet, since I think you enliven CP's forums quite a bit and often you dare to say in the lounge what I only feel free to express in the soapbox.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
There is education, but when someone asks you a very basic question, why should I take my time to explain something they could fine hundreds of examples of if they used Google? Plus these are the ones who seem to be most defensive when you call them out. They are nothing but slackers. You either enable them or teach them their behavior will not be tolerated. I prefer the latter.
Current Rant: "What happened to REAL programmers?" http://craptasticnation.blogspot.com/[^]
-
leckey wrote:
why should I take my time to explain something they could fine hundreds of examples of if they used Google?
Why not ignore those questions?
-
Because it seems like there is someone who ends up answering their simple question, thus enabling the person.
Current Rant: "What happened to REAL programmers?" http://craptasticnation.blogspot.com/[^]
leckey wrote:
there is someone who ends up answering their simple question
What is the real problem, then? Codeproject must not answer any questions that is already in a book? I mean, if someone asks a question, and someone else is willing to answer it, why not leave it at that? I know I have asked many simple questions on many forums including this one a few years back, and have got great prompt answers from well-meaning people. I find that there is a shift to flaming every poor soul who posts in the wrong forum for the first time (for god's sake, have not any of us missed any signs in our lives?), flaming/making fun of for using text messaging language, and flaming for asking simple questions. I am sure that no one answers any of the homework questions with anything meaningful. I think that abusing someone for his/her ignorance or lack of etiquette without giving a benefit of doubt about their intentions is despicable. I think we all have to be more tolerant to genuine mistakes. But, then, that is just me.
-
I'm hoping to have something out in the next few days that will surface the good stuff a little easier. In terms of member's behaving badly I'm tempted by the idea of allow community banishing of those members who abuse the site. Thoughts?
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
tempted by the idea of allow community banishing of those members who abuse the site. Thoughts?
Sure, but you'd need some kind of safeguard so it would not be abused. There is always the old fashion ignoring of them, but that seems to be difficult to accomplish around here. If someone posts a programming question in the Lounge, why not just simply vote it as abuse and not reply. Seems like the easier route to go.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
leckey wrote:
there is someone who ends up answering their simple question
What is the real problem, then? Codeproject must not answer any questions that is already in a book? I mean, if someone asks a question, and someone else is willing to answer it, why not leave it at that? I know I have asked many simple questions on many forums including this one a few years back, and have got great prompt answers from well-meaning people. I find that there is a shift to flaming every poor soul who posts in the wrong forum for the first time (for god's sake, have not any of us missed any signs in our lives?), flaming/making fun of for using text messaging language, and flaming for asking simple questions. I am sure that no one answers any of the homework questions with anything meaningful. I think that abusing someone for his/her ignorance or lack of etiquette without giving a benefit of doubt about their intentions is despicable. I think we all have to be more tolerant to genuine mistakes. But, then, that is just me.
