Prev: Register a file extension
Next: Frame not becomming invisible
From: Paul Clement on 9 Apr 2010 08:31
On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 11:57:54 -0700, Karl E. Peterson <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote:

� Paul Clement wrote:
� > Not sure where you have seen the marketing stuff.
�
� No corporate logos? This I gotta see!
�
� Hmmmm, nope... Marketing fail!
�
� http://i2.social.microsoft.com/Forums/GlobalResources/Images/bing.png
�
� http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/GlobalResources/images/Msdn/networklogo_Msdn.png

Yeah, the fact they use an MSDN logo (they are MSDN forums) and a Bing search box is shameful. How
dare they implement such subliminal marketing tactics. ;-)

� > They support it just as
� > they did the NNTP newsgroups,
�
� Not exactly a ringing endorsement, either.

Well I guess you'd actually have to be there. ;-)

� > Certainly don't mind the moderation. The pointless flame wars and
� > backbiting are minimal to non-existent.
�
� I imagine you'd prefer that, yeah. Another fail.

It shouldn't surprise me that you wouldn't. Fail for you.

�
� > Unusable? Why do some find web forums so challenging? ;-)
�
� One word: statefulness.

How does that apply?

�
� Btw, who's "Paul P Clement IV", your boy?

No, c'est moi.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
From: Mayayana on 9 Apr 2010 09:51

| �
| � > Unusable? Why do some find web forums so challenging? ;-)
| �
| � One word: statefulness.
|
| How does that apply?
|

I'm not sure what Karl means by that either,
unless he's just talking about the ease of
data download. Or maybe he's referring to new
posts being visibly distinguishable on Usenet?

In any case, I see plenty of problems:

* Awarding medals makes no sense for people out of
the first grade. It's childish. The reason here, however,
is insidious.

* Ditto for "voting". It just creates peer pressure and
juvenile behavior. It's used on opinion pages of
commercial sites to generate traffic. The people
at Microsoft apparently just didn't think it through
before copying that format.

* A commercially-hosted web forum is naturally problematic.
The marketing is "baked in". It's like a "beemer" club
(remember those? :) meeting at a BMW showroom
rather than at a parking lot. They're surrounded by
ads and the salesmen are moderating the discussion.

The moderating MVPs exert control with passive-
aggressive niceties: "Thank you so much for your
contribution, and welcome to the forums, but you're
wrong." They are *moderators*. They're in charge by
definition. Their filtering decisions and the hierarchical
authority structure are, in themselves, marketing. The
fact that their posts are festooned with more medals
than an Olympic swimming champion can't help but
affect the judgement of new people. And if Microsoft
phases out Usenet for new groups then there will be
no place for unmoderated discussions.

All of those problems are aside from the one, basic
problem: A webpage forum does not work well. In Usenet
I see all message titles for the past few weeks. I can
easily navigate sub-threads. I can easily see where new
messages are. On a webpage all posts to a thread appear
in posting order -- just a long, long line going down the
page. An 8-post sub-thread chat is indistinguishable from
the meatier posts. The thread can't be surveyed as a
whole. ....And all that's only if I find the thread in the first
place. The webpage layout takes up a lot of space and
makes it difficult to see what's been posted.

Then there's script. Microsoft's current layout uses a
minimum of script, which is nice, but some functionality
is missing with script disabled. Given that script is
required for nearly every malware attack online, I find
it idiotic that I should enable script for a forum when
there's no need to. (That's the elephant in the room
with the cloud fad. It can never be safe.)

I find an interesting pattern when I go looking for
information. Many people don't know about newsgroups.
But a lot of the information out there is coming from
newsgroups. Usenet is like a sort of secret royalty in
the information world, with the mainstream getting
Usenet posts via Usenet-repackaging sites they find
through Google.

Anyway, I know that you, Paul, will probably just
respond with a string of ;)-puncuated wisecracks. Your
blissfully impervious to reasoned discussion. I'm not
really addressing this to you. I'm posting it in the hope
that some of the people here using Google Groups,
because they don't know any better, might discover
Usenet.


From: Paul Clement on 9 Apr 2010 14:19
On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 09:51:04 -0400, "Mayayana" <mayayana(a)invalid.nospam> wrote:

�
� | �
� | � > Unusable? Why do some find web forums so challenging? ;-)
� | �
� | � One word: statefulness.
� |
� | How does that apply?
� |
�
<snip>

� Anyway, I know that you, Paul, will probably just
� respond with a string of ;)-puncuated wisecracks. Your
� blissfully impervious to reasoned discussion. I'm not
� really addressing this to you. I'm posting it in the hope
� that some of the people here using Google Groups,
� because they don't know any better, might discover
� Usenet.
�

Well, actually I agree with some of what you say but perhaps that's because I'm "blissfully
impervious to reasoned discussion". (Uh oh, a wisecrack). ;-)

I don't really care much about the marking of answers, points, medals etc. As a matter of fact I
bailed on Experts Exchange because of their silly points system. I'm certainly glad that Microsoft
didn't implement the same mechanism, but I could still live without the other stuff as well. I tend
to focus on quality and not quantity anyway. Always have.

Some things work better in NNTP and some things work better in web forums. I'm not picking a
favorite and I'm not refusing to use or dismissing one for the sake of the other. Quite obviously
I'm capable of using both (sound familiar?) I've used CompuServe as well as some of the old bulletin
board systems (w/Qmodem). There were advantages and disadvantages to using all of them.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
From: New2Access on 9 Apr 2010 15:09
Thanks, I'll post it there.

"Nobody" wrote:

> "New2Access" <New2Access(a)discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:0F0038D8-8EB6-4C2E-9217-BF2EBCB9FDFA(a)microsoft.com...
> > I'm new to using Visual Studio (2005)
>
> This group is for VB6 and earlier(VB Classic). VB.Net and all dotnet groups
> have either "dotnet" or "vsnet" in the group name. Please use the following
> group instead:
>
> news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb
>
>
>
> .
>
From: Karl E. Peterson on 12 Apr 2010 15:54
Mayayana wrote:
>> �
>> � > Unusable? Why do some find web forums so challenging? ;-)
>> �
>> � One word: statefulness.
>>
>> How does that apply?
>>
>
> I'm not sure what Karl means by that either,
> unless he's just talking about the ease of
> data download. Or maybe he's referring to new
> posts being visibly distinguishable on Usenet?

Yeah, anytime you want to see another message, you need to click and
wait. Uuuuuugggggly!

--
..NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Register a file extension
Next: Frame not becomming invisible