Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Naming and Shaming Bad Forums with Bad Ethics
Stoic Joker:
It's often been wisely said that what you say isn't nearly as important as how you say it. Therein lying the rub. In a form of communication that is exclusively text based, the inflection applied to the words in the posters head doesn't necessarily (ever) translate well to the reader. This can cause frustration (which is quite rare in IT...) to be perceived as rudeness even tho it was not actually the intent.
So as Gwen7 mentioned a bit of understanding goes a long way... (Well said G)
I add this as a continuation of my earlier post in the defense of the "stupid" question. As most of us aren't really all that bright when we hit topics that are outside of our respective skill-sets. I myself have asked a few questions here at DC that were for-all-intent-and-purpose dumber than hell. But I did so in the hopes that someone would give me a gentile kick in the right direction...and that it may just help some other poor sap who couldn't quite muster the stones to put on the dunce cap for a bit.
cranioscopical:
Why anybody would want to waste the effort of 100+ words just to say "no" to a complete stranger is beyond my ability to comprehend.
-40hz (December 28, 2010, 05:49 AM)
--- End quote ---
Well, it's like this — and you may or may not agree and, frankly, whether or not you do is of little consequence to me because I, personally, have never contributed any post that is other than fatuous — but having nothing useful to offer results in people trying to seem as if they might have something worth saying, notwithstanding their inability to contribute meaningfully, and thus they are prompted — often without a great deal of forethought (possibly because that is something of which they are incapable) — to enter somewhat empty and often unpleasant material that some might say would be best left aside and which is always negative.
barney:
I, personally, have never contributed any post that is other than fatuous
-cranioscopical (December 28, 2010, 12:48 PM)
--- End quote ---
Except this one <g,d,&r /> :P?
40hz:
Why anybody would want to waste the effort of 100+ words just to say "no" to a complete stranger is beyond my ability to comprehend.
-40hz (December 28, 2010, 05:49 AM)
--- End quote ---
Well, it's like this — and you may or may not agree and, frankly, whether or not you do is of little consequence to me because I, personally, have never contributed any post that is other than fatuous — but having nothing useful to offer results in people trying to seem as if they might have something worth saying, notwithstanding their inability to contribute meaningfully, and thus they are prompted — often without a great deal of forethought (possibly because that is something of which they are incapable) — to enter somewhat empty and often unpleasant material that some might say would be best left aside and which is always negative.
-cranioscopical (December 28, 2010, 12:48 PM)
--- End quote ---
111 words Chris?
Exactly 111?
Bow your heads, all Ye Devoted. For we are in the presence of a Master... ;D 8) :Thmbsup:
IainB:
In a separate topic, @superboyac posed what he later reckoned was a deliberately provocative question: "Why do we go out of our way to be unhelpful in forums?".
You could look at his Q as being relevant to this topic (i.e., "Naming and Shaming Bad Forums with Bad Ethics").
As well as suggesting that his Q was a loaded Q, full of assumptions, and thus likely to generate a random/irrational response, I also suggested - in a response to @mrainey that:
At the risk of being repetitious, I thought it had been conclusively established a while back elsewhere in this forum -
e.g., Re: Discussion: How can we Improve DonationCoder?
- that the most effective method for improving the DC forum's feel-good factor and avoiding things sucking was to plaster animated pictures of Angelina Jolie in scant or zero attire all over the place.
--- End quote ---
So, in this case, the answer could be equally simple (with some modification):
* Instigate an auto-parsing of the grammar of every single initial/new topic post.
* If the parsing detects that a question is being asked, then this triggers an auto-response post/comment from the Moderator.
* The first part of the Moderator's post displays a largish (say) 4cm high animated icon of a naked Angelina Jolie - or maybe any babe - blowing you a kiss or doing something nastier.
* The second part of the post could say something like, "97.63% of people who asked this or a similar question managed to obtain a satisfactory answer by "googling" it (i.e., by searching for it on http:\google.com), or by RTM (Reading The Manual). Have you already tried these? If you have, then please reply to this comment with "I already tried that, thanks." and members of our forum will no doubt be falling over themselves to help you! Meanwhile, enjoy the image above and have a nice day!
--- End quote ---
Results?
* This would be guaranteed to blast the user experience up by a factor of 150% (at least)! Do the math! :Thmbsup:
* The take-away would an enormous feel-good factor for 99.97% of your target audience, who will tell 87.3% of their friends about it, 99% of whom will rush off to try it out and tell their friends about it, thus increasing the number of users of the DC forum asking inane questions at an exponential rate! :Thmbsup:
* A 100% reduction in "forum fatigue" from responding to the same old questions or variations of the same, time and time again.
Editor's note: 93.75% of statistics are made up.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version