Whan has a question been answered

I think this has been a thorn in the dev-archive forums for years. I think it is one of the major reasons people get frustrated and stop helping. It is the type of thing that prior managements have not attempted to solve. If this forum (the Feedback forum) is the same forum that has ben around for a while then you will find prior comments like this.

I suppose it would not work to suggest to search for previous answers.

Originally posted by billwilson3
I suppose its a difficult problem. Even if we had a convenient method of indicating our question was answered, many people would not bother to use it (or even notice it).Yes it is a problem. I think the only reasonable solution is that emphasis be placed on providing feedback when a good answer is provided. In the past this forum's philosophy (indirectly) has been that it is not the responsibility of the management/moderators to do that and (therefore) it is something the volunteers would have to do. I think that is why there was a greater emphasis on points developed a year or two ago. However some members that were very knowledgeable and helpful did not like the emphasis on points and stopped participating. The members that did remain were more interested in racking up points.

I think the refresh idea would:
not affect the discussions in which a good answer was provided
only affect the discussions in which a good answer has not been provided
not be sufficient indication that a good answer has been provided when it has not been used for a question
easily be abused

The reason I say that a refresh capability is likely to be abused is because there are so many vague questions that the person never clarifies. If they were to have a specific method to bring the same vague question up to to the top again then we would end up with an abundance of bad questions and the good questions would get highly diluted.

I suppose we need to clarify this discussion also. You seem to be concerned about questions that need an answer and I am concerned about getting feedback about questions that I have provided. Those are two separate problems but of course it is better to solve them both with a single elegant solution. I want to know when I have helped and you want to know where you can help. So can you see that for what I want the refresh capability would not help? Or I should ask how would it help?

Originally posted by Sam Hobbs
The reason I say that a refresh capability is likely to be abused is because there are so many vague questions that the person never clarifies. If they were to have a specific method to bring the same vague question up to to the top again then we would end up with an abundance of bad questions and the good questions would get highly diluted.

This could be slightly reduced by a timer that do not allow to refresh to often and with a limit that do not allow more than a certain number of refresh.

There's already a limit on the frequency you can send new post. It seems to be new, but in the past two days (Just back from holidays) I have been told several times that I can only send one post every 30 seconds.

If you cannot refresh, say, more than once every 4 hours, and with a limit of 4 or 5 times, it should not be to bad.

BTW, some people are already doing it by adding new posts to there own thread with comments like "Still no answer". It is not better than a refresh as it can be done as often as one want, and pollute the thread with uneeded comments.

Do most members of that other forum do the follow-up to indicate they have resolution when they do? I think that regardlous of the details the problem is how to get people to do it. Changing the subject is one possible solution but I do not know why it would make it more likely that the follow-up would be done. I think that the existance of the standard indicates that the management has emphasized the importance of it and it is the management that has been the solution. The technical details are probably not important; it is the management that is important.

What about this one?

-- I posted a question. Later, someone answered --> good, the question has been resolved.

-- 2 days later, someone give an excellent reply.

Frankly, I like the idea put forward in this thread. But, aren't we discouraging better replies (if any) that may come later if we have ndicators that the question has been resolved?

Mike is correct. In that forum, you still can reply in that [resolved] thread if you have a better solution which people do do.

In fact, I read [resolved] threads as much as other threads, as I personally want to know the solutions too.

That's why I feel that resolved threads are more useful to me.

As for the management part, I think everyone has to co-operate to make it work.

Originally posted by Sam Hobbs
That sounds good. How is cooperation acheived?
Check the meaning of cooperation in your dictionary.

Originally posted by Sam Hobbs It sounds nice to say it is simply a matter of cooperation but we currently do not have cooperation.
That's because we are not set out to do anything yet.

Originally posted by Sam Hobbs
There are basicly two methods of acheiving cooperation. That is for either members or management to make it happen.

How would it be possible for just either sides to act, to achieve co-operation? Please tell me how. Please do see that there is no perfect 100% cooperation; Cooperation is on everyone.

Originally posted by Sam Hobbs That is what I asked you. You say it is simply a matter of cooperation so you are the one that should know how that is possible.

It's not even my idea. I merely brought it out for discussion.

What worked in one place, doesn't mean it will work here.

You see, dev-archive has 80,000+ members. How many are actually active? <5%?

That is to say, most of them only come here once a while (or worse, once in the blue moon) to post questions.

Even after 1 year of implementing it, I'm sure 90% of them still don't know they need to change the title after their problems are resolved.

The problem here is how to effectively deliver this message to them.

After that, whether they would care to co-operate, is another problem.

Originally posted by CBasicNet
Even after 1 year of implementing it, I'm sure 90% of them still don't know they need to change the title after their problems are resolved.I am not sure which forum you are refering to here. If you are saying that that is supposed to be done in this forum then I am sure not aware of it.

Originally posted by CBasicNet
Even after 1 year of implementing it, I'm sure 90% of them still don't know they need to change the title after their problems are resolved.

That's just a scenario I am describing.

Originally posted by Sam Hobbs
I am not sure which forum you are refering to here. If you are saying that that is supposed to be done in this forum then I am sure not aware of it.

Originally posted by Mick_2002
Not to police the resolved, unresolved threads.Yes, that is the problem with members solving the problem themselves. Often an attempt by a member to solve problems is interpreted as "policing" and people do not consider members to have the authority to be the police. It does not take much for a member's attempts to improve something to be misinterpreted. Yet if there is a statement from management on the issue and if a member references that then the impression is very different.

Originally posted by Mick_2002
When it becomes easy to just click a button to indicate your issue has been resolved you will see a increase in threads being closed out.That is not the ideal solution. Yes, the convenience would make it more likely to be used but the problem is that there are often multiple solutions. Simply indicating that the problem has been solved leaves the solution ambiguous; there would be no indication of what the solution was. What if the person finds a solution elsewhere? The question should be marked as resolved so that people know that the person asking the question does not need an answer but there might be no good answers in the thread. In those situations a comment would be much more useful.

If your suggestion were implemented in an Experts Exchange type of way then that would be better. Each post could have an associated checkbox or whatever that indicates that it is a solution or part of a solution. Then a comment would be less important unless a solution was found elsewhere.

I looked at the linux forum, Sam mentioned. It will be intersting to monitor their experience with it.