Discussion of ignore feature

[eleman]

Wut?

[anandcoral]

Hi ital2,

Your message is like Windows Error Message. Lots of text but ...
Can you edit your message and make if useful for us, members.

Regards,

Anand

[ConstanceJill]

So huh… basically this is a teaser for some thread that will actually start tomorrow? ^^'
Well, also with an invitation to download said software for free, so it's not completely pointless for today, I suppose… thanks for the notification then

[Curt]

How NOT to compose a thread.

[Ath]

(first post after massive edit of 13-05-17 from ~10 lines to ~300 lines)
tl;dr

Wut?
@ital2: please start your own blog, imo preferably elsewhere

[eleman]

Is this a new trick to get better pagerank on google or something?

If yes, I submit the proposal for the deletion of the whole thread.

[IainB]

Weeell, having only just now read it, I'd not be in such a hurry as to discount the value of that OP (Opening Post) by @ital2 as the comments that follow it would seem to do.
I say this because:

• (a) Starting from the basis of 3 specific references to threads elsewhere in the DC forum, the OP makes some valid and pertinent points and arguments about some perceived deficiencies of software trial periods. Those trials would thus arguably seem to have been ill-conceived trials. I could understand this approach only too well, as the sorts of deficiencies described have often been perceived by me as being just that (i.e., "deficiencies", and mostly annoying) - this is from the experience of some years of developing, selling, Beta-testing and trialling software of various types, including CRIMPing(*1).
  
• (b) The post then makes some valid and constructive suggestions, with some new ideas, about how those trials could be better-conceived and targeted for optimum user take-up, increased user/vendor benefit and improved overall marketing of the software products.
  ________________________________

Thus, given that the title of the OP is "How NOT to Conceive Trials (and some new ideas about them).", the post itself would seem to be pretty much exactly on-point.

It takes some effort on the reader's part to read and digest (or maybe even internalise?) some written material where the writer is attempting to communicate several different, but interrelated/interwoven threads in a complex argument. Whilst one's mind might be able to grasp such a thing "in the round" - maybe even seeing it as "simple" - attempting to articulate it as a cohesive whole in such a manner as that others might then be able to comprehend it is not necessarily always going to be an easy thing to do - and I would suggest that that could be the case with the OP above. The classic model for communications theory - if not the initial responses (above) to the OP - would seem to confirm this.

Unless the OP was written by a clever AI program, it would seem to be a tad discourteous not to make the effort to at least try to understand and recognise the sense of what the writer of the OP was trying to say to us. Having made the effort, I consider that the OP seems to be spot-on with its subject and I think the ideas suggested are new (to me at any rate). (I say this without wishing to comment on the style or use of English in the OP.)

The conclusion/summary is sufficiently concise about that (the ideas):

So, it's about giving the user the chance to really (!), effectively trial your application, and even when they missed that the first turn around for personal reasons, there should be second chances (and those users should know about them*), and if you do a free version, there should be repeated chances to get another, quick, but complete look, another 10 days with limitations, or another 5 days without any limitations (but then only once a years, not for minor updates).

In addition, I find the reference points and the expansion of points following the conclusion to be rather interesting and worth discussing. Generally, anything that could be done to improve the usefulness, value and marketability of software trials would probably be welcome.

I wouldn't necessarily say that it was all an overly easy read, but I hope that I was at least up to the challenge of trying to read and understand it and I also got some value from it - in the shape of some new/innovative (to me) ideas and some alternative ways to articulate/perceive some of the relatively familiar (to me) deficiencies in software trialling.

References:
______________________________
(*1) CRIMPing:

OneNote note: 2014-01-25 1625hrs: Definition of CRIMP (Compulsive-Reactive Information Management Purchasing):
CRIMP, crimp
CRIMP defined
Posted by Stephen Zeoli
May 10, 2006 at 01:05 PM

CRIMP stands for a make-believe malady called compulsive-reactive information management purchasing. Symptoms include:
• never being satisfied with your current system of information management
• continuously being on the look-out for something newer and better
• purchasing every new PIM program you learn about
• and secretly hoping you won’t find the perfect PIM, because then you’d have to stop looking for a better one

So, when someone speaks of succumbing to his or her CRIMP, it means acknowledging that they’ve purchased another PIM program even though they really don’t think they need it.
There must be a 12-step program for over-coming CRIMP, but who really wants to? It’s too much fun.
  Steve Z.

From <http://www.outlinersoftware.com/topics/viewt/17/0/crimp-defined>;
________________________________

[Giampy]

This is a triple spin-off from ... etc...

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/conciseness

[wraith808]

This is a triple spin-off from ... etc...

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/conciseness

Is that really how we behave on DC?

[Curt]

My previous post now seems to have a different meaning than intended. My problem with the initial post is the announcement "tomorrow there will (still) be a post here, but then with a different text". When I modify my various posts, I do it for clarity or for correcting errors. But ital2 did it quite differently; he wrote an entirely different post! We are not telling him to use fewer words (PLEASE, USE FEWER WORDS, ital2!!), but we're saying that he should not change the entire content the way he did.

^That is what I was trying to communicate:

How NOT to compose a thread.

[eleman]

Is there a way to not be notified about some specific user's posts?

[wraith808]

Is there a way to not be notified about some specific user's posts?

I'd think that you should ask a generic question in Site/Forum Features, rather than singling someone out in this way.  Not very much in the spirit of DC, I don't think.

You can ignore users, and threads.

Threads

Code: (text)

http://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?action=topicmarks;mt=ignoredthread;u=

Put your user number on the end.

Users

Code: (text)

http://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;area=lists;sa=ignore;u=

Put your user number on the end.

[eleman]

I'd think that you should ask a generic question in Site/Forum Features, rather than singling someone out in this way.  Not very much in the spirit of DC, I don't think.

You're right. It wasn't my best behavior. I am sorry.

[anandcoral]

You can ignore users, and threads.

Thanks for the tip @wraith808. I remember another on mouser gave for display of all mesgs in one long page, I forgot.
Is there a thread/page which displays all these tips of DC  forum ? If not, I think it will be of great help if one is made and published.

I read "A Practical Guide to DonationCoder.com Forum Search" thread https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=9434.0 but it says it is very old and I did not find the required tips there.

Regards,

Anand

[tomos]

Could some moderator maybe split this topic from post #12 down?

[wraith808]

Thanks for the tip @wraith808. I remember another on mouser gave for display of all mesgs in one long page, I forgot.

Well, one tip - I've noticed you using the @ syntax in several thread.  It doesn't do anything.

[anandcoral]

Thanks for the tip @wraith808. I remember another on mouser gave for display of all mesgs in one long page, I forgot.

Well, one tip - I've noticed you using the @ syntax in several thread.  It doesn't do anything.

Ahh....actually I saw members addressing each other with @<nick_name> in another forum and thought that was way, so started doing it. May be it had some meaning / auto link etc. on that forum. Anyway will not use '@' now. Thanks for pointing the mistake.

Regards,

Anand

[IainB]

@anandcoral:
Re: Use of the "commercial at" symbol "@" as a prefixed Tag: You are not "making a mistake". For the purposes of improved communication, it is taught as being quite useful (depending on one's objectives in making the communication). This is typically useful within the context of circumstances where the classic communications model applies.

I guess I would probably not be alone in using the prefixed Tag @NAME as a learned behaviour - to be used both as a courtesy and (more importantly) as a tool/protocol for identifying and getting someone's attention for communication, and providing for an acknowledgement and response path, as required - a sort of conventional "AT/ACK" equivalent protocol in human communication. This was simply as a result of my professional training, where I learned that it can be useful for communicating across large, diverse discussion groups/listservers/forums, where there may potentially be a lot of "noise" and where one may be in a hurry, or does not have the time to read everything and thus needs to sift through the noise in outgoing and incoming messages and thus filter and condense the relevant/important information:

• (a) Usage: It is useful shorthand for directing the comment being posted at a specific, named and unique ID/person on the forum being used - so (say) @anandcoral or @John is addressed to that named handle "of this parish" (of this forum), as it were, not just any "Anand" or "John", and not (say) "@Anand on MajorGeeks" or "@John on Twitter".
  
• (b) Reduce feedback noise: By being specific, it can thus avoid seeming to make a general comment to nobody in particular and so inadvertently inviting comments from all and sundry. However this is not necessarily always going to be successful, and some people might not get the hint, as, with the breadth of opinions out in the world and in relatively open forums, it may be almost impossible to ensure that one has not posted comments which may be perceived as having inadvertently trodden on someone's toes/paradigms/sensitivities or (say) a sacred cow or other religio-political belief or (depressingly) contradicted someone's perhaps unstated but nevertheless dogmatic and strongly-held-opinions-that-must-be-emphatically-stated-and-enforced-as-rule/truth for us all. There are ample instances where we can see how this can inadvertently start a flame-war or even cause the loss of a political election - e.g., and especially where some news media or other religio-political commentators/communicators amplify the message or add ambiguous "noise" that may be deliberately intended to amplify or even distort the perception of the original message out of context, all out of ulterior motives.
  
• (c) Filter out noise: It can provide an easy search key/filter for comments one has addressed to various people (with @NAME) and to help to sift through the noise - e.g., in searching through the zillions of posts in one's bazqux feed-reader logs. A potentially huge timesaver in this time where the exponentially growing volume of information is subject to mass and almost instant wide-band broadcast. Interestingly, the marketing strategies developed and advocated at EDS Corp. had presciently and accurately  predicted this potential before it arose and so built it in (as attacks and defences) to their excellent and far-sighted VBM (Value-Based Marketing) methodology  - especially in the Communications Planning section of VBM. Hats off to the brains at EDS who thought of that.   

Wikipedia has an interesting general post relevant to the use of the commercial "@" prefix:

The at sign, @, normally read aloud as "at", also commonly called the at symbol or commercial at, was originally an accounting and commercial invoice abbreviation meaning "at a rate of" (e.g. 7 widgets @ £2 = £14). In contemporary use, the at sign is most commonly used in email addresses and social media platform handles. It was not included on the keyboard of the earliest commercially successful typewriters, but was on at least one 1889 model[1] and the very successful Underwood models from the "Underwood No. 5" in 1900 onward. It is now universally included on computer keyboards.
The fact that there is no single word in English for the symbol has prompted some writers to use the French arobase[2] or Spanish and Portuguese arroba, or to coin new words such as asperand,[3] ampersat[4] and strudel,[5] but none of these has achieved wide usage.
The mark is encoded as U+0040 @ Commercial AT (HTML &#64;) ...(more at the link)
- Wikipedia <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_sign>;
___________________________________

[ital2]

Aside (topic add-ons continued above):

"to be used both as a courtesy"

Speaking of courtesy in this raided thread (any third-party non-meta content way-off off-topic) is a very, very good one: Thank you for the very good laugh!

[IainB]

^^ Ouch!   

[wraith808]

Could some moderator maybe split this topic from post #12 down?

Done.  I didn't have the power when asked.

[wraith808]

@anandcoral:
Re: Use of the "commercial at" symbol "@" as a prefixed Tag: You are not "making a mistake". For the purposes of improved communication, it is taught as being quite useful (depending on one's objectives in making the communication). This is typically useful within the context of circumstances where the classic communications model applies.

I only let him know as it doesn't do anything on this forum mechanically. Many have started to make use of it recently as some software alerts the named user of their mention.  As currently set up, DC does not.