Choice of support forums

A few thoughts:

Usenet gives more freedom and with that come advantages and disadvantages. There is a need for self-discipline, for respect of others based on their merits, for the search of the truth by debate and not that of victory by all means.

Usenet was born in another time when only a limited number of people could participate. There was selection based on education. All that has changed now, the Internet is everywhere for everybody. We could say that it has moved from the universities to the street.

Corporate forums are a response, moderation prevents chaos but your freedom is restricted. You become dependant on an organisation that you don't control, you lose your independance. You lose for instance the right to criticize that organisation.

Corporate forums are specialized. Here, you can ask general questions, like about architectures, circuits, parts, equipment, techniques, history.

There are several "web forums" that are directly ripped from SED, with ads. You can post something silly here, and then google it and see where it winds up. Teal elephant sidesaddle.

--

John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   laser drivers and controllers 

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com 
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

The good thing about fora is that there are so many of them. This is also the bad thing about them. I mainly use fora through Google searches; even then, it's hit or miss.

Usenet is a vast improvement over everything that tried to replace it.

--
Les Cargill

Yes. So, folks intent on the venue to exchange information are left with a crappier S/N.

Yes, as well. The moderation tends to get a bit more heavy-handed; BOfH-ish.

OTOH, you can get "moderation" without corporate sponsorship. But, the big (potential) win of corporate involvement is the presence of "experts", hopefully (unless the firm assigns the newbies to the task of "support")

I see support "venues" (trying to avoid conflicting with "forum") as having several different characteristics that drive their overall utility. In no particular order (some of these rely on others -- but, IMO, merit being addressed explicitly):

- Technology How is the venue implemented (mailing lists, web pages, SMS services, etc.)? This has direct impact on many of the other issues (that follow)

- Accessibility How readily can the content can be accessed (devices, media, etc.)? And, how well can it be *searched* for applicable content?

- Push vs Pull Does the content come to you or do you go to it? Mailing lists being an example of the former; USENET the latter.

- Privacy How much privacy does the venue present its participants? Do you have any idea/control as to who is "seeing" your posted content? Can you limit your exposure?

- "Richness" of content What sorts of media are supported? E.g., USENET is effectively text only while most "portal forums" support at least limited types of multimedia.

- Focus Is there an "effective" charter governing the venue's usage? Or, does the content (topic and quality) wander aimlessly?

- Control How is access controlled? Content? Is any form of moderation in force and, if so, how (specific moderators, distributed moderation, etc.)?

- Exploitability How susceptible is the venue to abuse (spam, etc.)? How vulnerable are the participants to that (unwanted) abuse?

- Cost Is there a cost associated with posting/reading content? To maintaining the service?

- "Value" (Bad choice of terms) Are the right people drawn to the venue to address the subject matter covered in the charter? (note that this applies to encouraging the participation of "experts" as well as NOT discouraging the participation of neophytes)

I can go on, but I think this gives an indication of how multifaceted the decision is.

What obsolescence? Usenet is alive and kicking. Nother ever came close to its efficiency, certainly nothing "modern" from the script kiddies. I am also quite certain that nothing ever will come close.

--
Regards, Joerg 

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

NNTP is vastly superior to the rest for this.

So use NNTP over port 80.

Pull is good.

Ha! Privacy is an absolute illusion.

Very bad. Text is good. Multimedia is a threat vector medium at the very least.

NNTP coupled with webpages should be enough.

Doesn't matter. Focus is also overrated.

There should be total anarchy. Control is an illusion ( unless all the poles are on the unit circle ).

Who cares? Become adept at filtering.

Pay for your NNTP link, then stop worrying. I feel for people trying to monetize fora, but not too much.

The best thing a neophyte can do is learn to ask good questions.

Gated communities are no way to live.

--
Les Cargill

So are unix-like operation systems.

Some places like here, I enjoy lurking, but I use the killfile not so much for people, but for topics that do not interest me.

I've had Usenet access since the Fidonet daze ;^) '90s dialup.

Grant.

Sure, but the younger ones seek to solve problems by searching youtube for howto videos, their text comprehension is limited. From what I see on a local forum I frequent.

Grant.

What bugs me is you can't read (as text) any news on the web anymore, you have to watch some fricking video. I guess the kiddies can't read text anymore :-( ...Jim Thompson

--
| James E.Thompson                                 |    mens     | 
| Analog Innovations                               |     et      | 
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    | 
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142     Skype: skypeanalog  |             | 
| Voice:(480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  | 
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com |    1962     | 
              
I love to cook with wine.     Sometimes I even put it in the food.

Not the smarter ones. They search the web the same way we do.

It's ok to use new media like video and I have done it myself. For example to learn how to do a certain repair on a bicycle. Sometimes a picture is just better. But typically not for high-tech stuff.

Sometimes I wonder where the next generation of real hardware engineers is going to come from. In some areas it's not a problem, I was in the US mid-west recently at a client and was very impressed by the engineers they had including young ones. But in other areas of the country they simply can't find any.

--
Regards, Joerg 

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Wrong. The distinction is that Usenet is essentially a text based system, which really means that content is what's important. What you get with the web based forums is advertising, advertising, and more advertising. You also get avatars, navigation aids, user identification, prematurely terminated threads, and the ability to imbed images. Oh yeah, you get plenty of useless one-line replies.

Corporate sponsored means that it deals primarily with the company's products. If you have an interesting topic, but not necessarily related to the company's product line, you may find yourself admonished or censored. Independent really means advertising funded instead of corporate funded. I have no clue which type has fewer distractions, less junk on the page, and less advertising.

Corporate forums also tend to be devoid of comments that are critical to the company, its products, and its management. If you want a realistic comparison of devices that include competitors products, you will rarely find them on a corporate support forum.

Oddly, you may also find a lack of decent answers. I do quite a bit of Googling, looking for answers to specific issues and problems. I often find the same question on a corporate forum, where the only answer is "Sorry that you're having this problem. Please call your support team at XXX-XXX-XXXX for assistance". If you like useless answers, you won't have any problem finding them in corporate forums.

Corporate forums also like to "expire" old history and evidence of common problems. At one point, Linksys was removing anything that was more than about 2 weeks old. It was impossible to determine if a problem had been known and reported, or if it was something unique. While this is a rather extreme example, the retention of old postings on corporate forums is nothing when compared to Google Groups and various Usenet news services.

Don't forget about mailing lists many of which have the beneficial characteristics of Usenet, without the ugly mess on forums. For example, for time and GPS related issues, there's the Time Nuts mailing list: Looks like over 700 to 1000 messages per month. By comparison, sci.electronics.design gets about 100-200 per day.

Yeah, something like that. It's really the players of the moment. I read and post to about 8 Usenet forums literally since the beginning of Usenet. I've run mailing lists, moderated local newsgroups, and run Bnews, Cnews, and INN news servers since about 1985(?).

It's not the players so much as the polluters found in many newsgroups. I've noticed a significant drop of knowledgeable contributors immediately after the arrival of those who are not looking for help, but instead are looking for entertainment value, ego inflation, or targets for their personality problems. Only those with substantial dedication, a willingness to help, and a cast iron stomach stick around. Usenet groups that were previously thriving with intelligent questions and comments, are now dead thanks to a few individuals.

So, what problem are you trying to solve? Is there something wrong with Usenet (other than the rumor of its demise) that would inspire you seek an alternative?

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com 
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com 
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com 
Skype: JeffLiebermann     AE6KS    831-336-2558

That isn't a direct consequence of the format. Just because it's better suited to animated dancing popsicles, doesn't mean it has to be *used* for that! I've seen "independent" portals that were devoid of advertising (despite the pressures on "owners" of such sites to give in to "rent us your viewers' eyes"). And, mailing lists with ads tacked onto every message! :-/

Again, what you *choose* to present as the UX is up to the designer of the interface. If you want to clutter it up with eye-candy... . What I find most crippling in web forums is the lack of a threaded interface as the *norm* -- instead, it's just a flattened accretion of all posts in a form that's easy for the software to implement (time-ordered) instead of thinking about the viewer.

That's exactly the point! It's a SUPPORT venue, not a "chat room". However, dealing with a particular product(s) doesn't require corporate sponsorship. Nor, corporate *control*.

Why can't a venue be corporate *funded* (to eliminate the need for adverts) yet "controlled" independently?

Exactly. But, that doesn't also have to be a *consequence* of their sponsorship/involvement.

I *think* (IANAL) that a corporate sponsored venue probably has to take some steps to prevent its use in illegal activities (e.g., allowing participants to post copyrighted materials, etc.). But, that doesn't also have to include prohibiting criticism of the "sponsor" or the sponsor's products -- you can't prevent folks from making those criticisms in *other* places so why bother, "here"? At least you can attempt to address them and, possibly, make the complainant look unreasonable, etc. (e.g., "Yes, you *did* submit your device for warranty repair. But, it was 3 months PAST the warranty date -- here's a copy of the paperwork that you submitted with it, note the date. At that time, we indicated that we had determined the reason for the failure was because the device had been hit with a baseball bat and informed you that the cost of the repair would be $X. Additionally, we offerred to sell you a reconditioned unit at a reduced price, as indicated in this correspondence (attached)...")

Any participants acting as representatives for the corporation would obviously be constrained in what they could do/say ON BEHALF OF THE CORPORATION.

And, "membership" can be conditioned based on *ownership* of the product(s) in question. Want a say? Buy the item!

The liberties that a corporation (as sponsor) is willing to permit speak to its commitment to its customers.

Yeah, and useless answers are SOLELY within that domain, eh? ;)

Again, that's just policy and how comfortable sponsors are about hearing bad things. Given that most such venues are visited by FOLKS HAVING PROBLEMS, anyone reading them that is NOT at least subconciously aware of this does themselves a disservice ("Gee, EVERY vendors' products suck!!")

Yes, I've already implemented some mailing list software. Personally, I prefer pushing content to the user (assuming there is no associated

*cost*) to ensure it's *there* when he/she opts to view it. But, this can tax most mail readers unprepared for big messages, high volumes, etc.

It also requires a bit more discipline among the participants (e.g., folks who know how to quote properly -- and don't just report all of the original post FOLLOWED by a few comments).

And, "push" approaches tend to lend themselves to simpler content filtering solutions (e.g., you can't "spam filter" USENET unless you download every post)

I've seen the same thing happen in web forums -- newbies hijacking threads, responding to threads that died off years earlier, etc. "Oh, is this where everyone is actively talking? Great, let me inject MY question, here!!!"

The issue with USENET is that (unless moderated), groups can quickly degrade/lose value. And, the cost of moderating can be high (time wise). This was the issue I tried to address with my mailing list implementation: encourage moderation by "anyone who wants to do so" -- yet prevent overzealous moderation (i.e., be able to moderate the moderators). AFAICT, this is only possible with a closed membership list (piss enough people off, and you lose access!)

I notice there are very few "alt.liebermann.products" USENET groups! :>

Wound up in Indian gold-trading backroom--^

I was about to post something of that sort but you had already done it :-).

Typically I do not post at all to places where someone is allowed to delete/move/edit my posts in the way they can do at fora etc. I have done it - and once I actively participated for a few years in a forum (until they tampered with one of my posts)- but I avoid doing it. Generally if I allow someone to mess with my output I'd rather not do it for free, if that.

What facebook and twitter got right is exactly the feeling of not being censored too much for the users I suppose, hence the success. Not getting me on board though - I barely use my accounts. I do use flickr though, hunting with the camera being my main recreational activity....

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff, TGI

------------------------------------------------------

Amen to all of that.

I pay all of $13 (10 Euros) per year for the news server. For that I do not need to run any kind of filtering because they already take care of hosing off spam. When I still had AT&T I filtered out google mail and that took care of most spam. It's easy.

--
Regards, Joerg 

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Hi Don, I sometimes "hang out" at the electronics stack exchange forum. It has a lot more low level questions than here... but it lacks all the polit ical (and other) "noise". The high end is about the same at both places. (IMO) I've asked question on both sites and gotten useful answers at both. The one problem with the stack exchange is the format is not conducive to long discussions, which I find the most enjoyable part of SED.

George H.

But that's not a *SUPPORT* forum. Rather, it's a place where folks gather to discuss a particular subject matter (electronics, metalurgy, religion, etc.). There are scant few newsgroups that could marginally be considered "support groups": notable exceptions being the adobe.* groups and the various alt.*.os.* groups. There are a smattering of "autos" groups, and game consoles, etc.

But, you don't see an alt.tgi.netmce group :>

I.e., do *you* sponsor/endorse any "venues" (mailing lists, newsgroups, portals, etc.) for your customers to discuss problems/features with your products? If *not*, is this because there is no demand for it (i.e., perhaps customers don't want to disclose publicly to others how they are using your kit -- competition; or, perhaps, their needs are met with one-on-one email/phone exchanges?)

Said another way, what sorts of "support venues" would you consider appropriate for *your* products -- and *why* (esp why *not*!).

AFAICT, social media "venues" are advertising and griping opportunities. I'd not place much stock in a "recommendation" (nor a *warning*) posted on the like: "Who is this guy and why should I take *his* comments as Truth?" (i.e., he may be an idiot and hence complaining about his own ineptitude with the product; or, he may be a shill effectively pushing a product for some other reason!)

Hi George,

Nice and cold, there?? :> (Unfortunately, I can't "gloat" as it's been a wee bit chilly, here, of late! No idea how the Valencias are far> Hi Don, I sometimes "hang out" at the electronics stack exchange forum. It

Again, I don't really consider those "support venues". Rather, a step above a "chat room" -- a place where people gather to talk about (ideally) a particular subject matter (which is often very broad/general).

E.g., you wouldn't expect folks who purchase Nest thermostats to come

*here* to discuss the problems/features/operation of their devices (though there is nothing *preventing* them from doing so, they would probably prefer to gather with OTHER OWNERS of Nest thermostats in the hopes of finding folks with more common experiences as theirs).

USENET allows for this -- create a newsgroup, give it a charter, decide whether it should be moderated (or not), find a moderator, etc. There are some newsgroups set up for this (see my other recent post for examples; or, peruse your newsgroup list).

But, USENET is not "private" -- you can't discuss problems with your XYZ Colostomy Bag and expect it to only be seen by other (sympathetic?) colostomy patients! You can censor posts *to* it (with a moderator). There is no (practical) cost to supporting it. It's a "pull" technology. Whether or not it allows advertisements and other off-topic content would be subject to the moderator's discretion. It can opt to support binaries (untyped objects), or not (ick! the idea of media other than text for a subject like that is... disconcerting!).

Similarly, you (manufacturer) can enroll all of your customers in a mailing list (anonymized or not) and therefore know that only *they* are privy to see the comments of other customers, no "spam" opportunities (assuming the list is actively moderated), etc.

Or, set up a web portal and get the worst of both worlds :-/

Separate from all of this is the extent of corporate involvement: in terms of funding the venue, participating in it (employees), controlling it (censorship/policing), etc.

I.e.,, even if the corporation doesn't *endorse* a venue (and may, in fact, resent its creation), there is nothing to stop someone from independently creating such a venue without the consent/sponsorship/control/participation of the corporation whose product is being "supported"!

E.g., alt.microsoft.*.sucks

No, of course it is not.

Our customers are not that many, I wish they were in the thousands so I had to organize something like that. Then our devices are typically used by end users, not developers - where the user manual tends to do a good enough job. For the few cases when people have some issue usually it can be resolved one on one over the net, being able to see the *same* screen at both sides (the netMCA working over RFB/VNC) makes things quite easy.

I did actually make a "TGI official twitter account" which is active but remains unused. From time to time twitter email me with what I might find interesting :D . I have a new tiny auxilary HV source to announce, may be I'll use it for that - once its webpage is ready.

If I have to do a serious developer support group it would be via a mailing list. Just let the people who actually have something to do with it join, then leave the thing alone. Archive the messages in a way convenient enough to access - what more does one need. By controlling the population on the list one can afford to allow all sorts of attachments etc. etc.

Well that's what they are generally used for but isn't that with all mass media. Nothing should stop you from using a facebook or twitter profile as a mailing list - if you have to not use a real mailing list, that is.

Dimiter

------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff, TGI

------------------------------------------------------