|
JaneyCanuck
"What it actually was, was a clear indication that people who knew what they were talking about had a whole host of excellent reasons for thinking this Help Clinic, with its starred "advisors",was a bad idea. I summarized them in my post on the FB site."
Not at all, and I don't think the summarizing started until after the help Clinic was launched. However, there were certainly a few threads on Genes condemning the Help Clinic to failure before it started.
"And what we now have is a clear indication that we were right -- not just the fact that it has been eliminated, but the obvious fact that it wasn't working during its brief life.
I don't think there is any clear indication that you were right. I think a minority of members who objected before and after its launch were listened to in favour of the majority who just accepted it and carried on as usual.
As to it not working during its brief life. There were members who used it and got benefit from it. Especially those seeking info from Scotlands People without having to shell out money on credits. Alas, that is no more.
There were also those that chose to abuse it by placing unrelated posts that the Advisors were not in a position to answer - acknowleged by Genes as they stepped in and referred those posters to the proper area. In reallity it was doomed to failure because some had pre-judged it before it got of the ground.
If there are now upfront guidelines/rules before posting then that's definately an improvement but reading through the boards I can't say they are being read and serving the purpose they were intended for.
The one thing this site lacks compared to others are Moderators who would stop the duplicate posts, move inappropriate posts to the correct board, etc.
This is unlikely to happen unless Genes ask for volunteers. Heaven forbid what would happen if they did that. Especially if they gave them a gold star.
Tony
|
|
Oh blah blah, Tony. A majority of members can do what they like. The minority of members (i.e. the 30 or 40 out of the millions and billions) who actually provide the input that makes this site what it is, for all the others who come to the boards for help, are the ones whose opinions count when it comes to the help boards. They're the ones who both know what they're talking about and are needed by the site itself.
I sought info from ScotlandsPeople and didn't get any. I did get some from someone else who decided to help, whose input caused me to take a second look at something I'd looked at and filed away once before.
The Clinic board was full of posts duplicating threads on the other help boards, and for good reason -- it was there to break down brick walls, and when no answers were found on the regular boards, what else would someone do but turn to the Help Clinic? ... where there were fewer people, with less time, nothing like the breadth of experience and knowledge of the combined active "helpers" , and limits on the sources they could cite. Yes, that sounds like a recipe for success.
It was doomed to failure not because anyone "pre-judged" it -- how could that have affected it in the slightest?? -- but for the very reasons that anyone knowledgeable of this site and experienced at this site could have given had anyone asked ahead of time. Simply because they are based on knowledge and experience.
Kind of like I could tell you that your bread isn't going to rise if you don't put leavening in it, without having to wait until you've baked it.
As for moderators, I couldn't agree more. I agree ten thousand per cent.
It wouldn't work now, on a volunteer basis. What's needed now is active moderation by staff -- moving threads to appropriate places, for instance, actively watching for duplicates, etc. After a time doing that, they would be in a better position to take proactive measures to bring more order and civility to the proceedings.
Kind of like how you don't rely on speed limit signs to stop people driving at breakneck speeds through school zones, you put in speed humps and wide boulevards and traffic diverters. Those kinds of measures are what's needed here: better organization to reduce the risk of inavertent disruptive posting, after which regular moderation, possibly even by volunteers, should be maintained.
|
|
"The one thing this site lacks compared to others are Moderators who would stop the duplicate posts, move inappropriate posts to the correct board, etc."
- I agree completely. It is ridiculous that the success board is the only one that is supposed to be moderated. All other sites that I visit are moderated.
|
|
Tony
Also re "There were also those that chose to abuse it by placing unrelated posts that the Advisors were not in a position to answer - acknowleged by Genes as they stepped in and referred those posters to the proper area."
I plead guilty to posting one of those unrelated posts yesterday .................. why?
Because GR was actually responding to those posts, and I was unable to get through to them. My emails were coming back as Blocked, messages sent through Contact Us were not being allowed through ..... possibly because I was including their own email address in c&p'ing the Message undeliverable notice.
I could go on and on .............. but won't for the sake fo the sanity of everyone else on this thread!
sylvia
|
|
Yes Joy......i so agree with you are the Moderators. I have been on a few site where they have them & they seem to work out quite well
|
|
Julie
I wasn't in the least 'put out' by SatNav....I've seen enough examples of her sarcasm on the boards to know exactly where she's coming from!
If it gives her some sort of twisted satisfaction to try to belittle people...........good luck to her.
|
|
Flick......I should have known you wouldn't have been :o))
& it is nice to see that someone else had noticed too
|
