| ??? 12/24/04 19:05 Read: times |
#83807 - Poorly asked questions Responding to: ???'s previous message |
Craig said:
I agree with Prahlad's message that we should all agree to just not answer these questions. I don't think we should ask them for more information, we shouldn't try guessing what they're trying to do. We should just ignore them. In an earlier similar post, I had expressed the same opinion. http://www.8052.com/forum/read.phtml?id=71432 Although I faced some criticism, but I still have the same opinion. May be another soultion (though difficult to maintain) is not to accept new posts in real time from fresh members. Posts should be submitted, reviewed and then appear on the forum. This can be done for first five posts, for example and then a flag be set in the database to accept real time posts from them. We could simply delete such threads but that's subjective and sometimes there are some valuable responses before Steve or I even see the thread. If a non-speicific question is allowed to appear, there would certainly be someone who will respond (no matter what the response would be) and this can not be blocked in any way. I was thinking of forcing all users to read the forum rules once and force those with negative karma to read it before every post In the past I was a big supporter for this but now I think that it might help to reduce only some load of such posts since there are those people who can hardly describe their problem (in english)? They will simply press "I agree". Anyway, it is easy and can be tried out. We could have the system automatically close the thread if the first post in a thread gets, say, 3 votes for "Non-Specific/Vague question"--or maybe even automatically delete the thread? seems to work but don't delete the thread, just close it so that original poster knows why it has been closed and if some reply has valuable information then it does not get deleted. If nothing works then I think let's ignore or just point them to the current Forum rules Regarding the email (received and reported by some members), I also received the same email. Perheps the sender assumed that we (whom he sent email) visit forum very occasionally and thus assumed he might get more response and attention if he used email. |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Trend of poorly asked questions | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Amen | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| One solution | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Poorly asked questions | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Karma rating | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| No posting same day | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: No posting same day | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Delayed posting | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Delayed threads | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| delayed threads | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Any soft way? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ... it works. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Start a new thread | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| ? | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Soft way | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Another approach | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Nice feedback based logic | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Re: Another approach. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Another approach suggestion | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Exactly! | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Possible minor extensions: | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
Sounds reasonable | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| Assign mentor(s) to help re-write post. | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| asking information | 01/01/70 00:00 |