moderators for Q&A forum
 

One thing about the Q&A forum I keep thinking about is the way we get moderators for that forum.

For now, the list consist of people me and a few others suggested to Brandon. We suggested those people because we've seen them on CD being really helpful to others when they ask questions. And that's it, nothing more was said about this.

The reasons for having "invite only" moderators are these:

To make sure no random person would go into the forum and give false answer
Have a reputation that you will get "expert" answers in the forum
To make sure the answerers understand it’s for Q&A only and not another forum


I can't think of anymore reasons for having invited only moderators... Like Andy Baker said, there are lots and lots of students out there in FIRST capable of giving great answers. I can already think of 20 more people who could be great answerers... Only I didn't suggest those because I want to see how the forum goes when things get started.

I have to admit this seems selective and unfair to many people out there. Some think that having invite only means others don't get a chance to help out even if they want to. Some other wonders why they aren't good enough. A lot of people told me they want to help out with the Q&A forum, and I didn't really know what to say. I answered "its CD's forum, not mine", and "we will see how things goes.", but I should've said "we haven't figure out a process yet."

A few things that many might have missed:

We really do need a list to keep out trouble makers.
The list of moderators ARE NOT limited to the list right now.
We hope to get as many good answerers out there as possible, as long as all of them understand that the threads must be kept as short as possible.
If you have answers for questions and not on the list of moderators, you should PM or e-mail one of the moderators so your answer will be posted.

My original idea about this is like past situations when others ask me questions and I refer them to people I know who can answer their questions better. Instinctively I would suggest the people I know the best from past experience in the forum who had great answers. And every moderator can and should suggest people they know to become moderators and help with the effort to make life easier for all teams in FIRST. It was never meant to play favorites. All rules are made so the forum will function smoothly and efficiently.

But I think we still need some sort of process for people to become answerers. Few criteria like these:

Interested in helping out
Posted in the forum before
Minimum 1 or maybe 2 or 3 (not sure yet) experience in FIRST
Minimum numbers of answers quoted by PMing moderators(to show they really can give good answers)


These are just some ideas of mine. The forum still belongs to CD, so they are the ones making the decision. Mean while, any comments/suggestions are most welcomed.

Please tell us what you think, and suggestions for the process of inviting moderators. (especially if you are a moderator already)

I think that what you've suggested so far sounds excellent. There should be a large, diverse list of people to answer questions, but it does definitely need to be by invitation. Criteria like what you suggested sounds like the way to go. I think potential moderators (who meet the criteria) should be "nominated" by another moderator, then approved by Brandon and/or a small committee (3-5 people) of other moderators.

I think what you have said is good. The group needs to be limited for the reasons you said. If anyone else wants to throw in their $.02, they can click on the link.

A personal note: While it may seem cool to have that 'extra' power, it really isn't. The 'shine' of being a forum admin goes away after about two days. :cool: - I'm sure Brandon will back me up on this one. :)

And here, all it really means is that you will have to do a lot of extra work. Instead of giving an 'I think the answer is...' you will have to look up the answer and then post. :) - Personally, being lazy me, I'd rather click on a link and then throw in my $.02. :]

The forum is a great idea & will help rookie teams a lot.

No, they can't.

First, before I start ranting (you know it's inevitable, right?), I want to thank Ken for taking the time away from his vacation to mention this. As I suspect that my signature and a bit I'd written to him had something to do with this, I think I should note that none of this was really necessary.

Now, I think the impetus behind the Q&A forum as a method of asking direct questions and getting direct answers is a great idea for the forum. In fact, I'd be surprised if these forums weren't created with precisely that idea in mind.

The reason I dislike the forums so is because of, really, personal frustration. Jack mentioned that we can start additional discussion and give our input there. Well, yes, while that is true, we cannot do that until one of the designated moderators answers the question. Beyond that, given the nature of the forum, there's probably very little that is left to be mentioned.

On numerous, varied occasions, I've tried to reply to questions without first seeing what forum they were posted in - and each time, I'm greeted with a friendly message that says I'm not allowed to post in that forum. So, where someone could have gotten an answer to their question even faster than they do as things are, they didn't because of the limiting nature of the forum.

I can sympathize with the need to have the forum moderated, especially given some of the nonsense that goes on around the forum. But, also, it's been my experience that the technical forums are usually fairly straightforward and, while not immune to immaturity, are far less prone to receiving undue attention.

When I post in those forums, I may receive replies from people that are not qualified to answer my question. I ignore them. They're not volumes of text, usually, but a few short lines. When people who, with time, I've grown to know and respect reply, I read what they say very carefully. There are people who frequent CD who have earned my respect. There are people who have lost it. But, in every case, I was given free reign with regard to how I determined the value or worth of a post.

The Q&A Forum, by limiting participation to select few individuals, strips away some of that ability to see someone's worth. Instead, I fear, it will become the exclusive place to look for answers and discussion and - as someone told me - the "garbage" will be filtered out.

I respect many of the people who have been chosen to moderate the forum, as they've shown themselves to be informed, intelligent, gracious, and prompt. However, there are equally many others, if not more, who I've come to respect precisely because of their varied experiences, desire to learn new things, and, sometimes, esoteric expertise. Where are these people being represented?

As discussion shifts from the regular forums to the Q&A Forum, many of these people are being stripped of their ability to contribute. While it may be true that these people can, in time, also become moderators of the Q&A forum, it seems that that can only happen if they're visible - and they can only be visible if they're given a fair chance to participate.

Already, I've found my desire to participate here is not as strong as it once was.

(/me pauses for the collective sigh of relief :p)

I enjoy learning new things, and sharing what I've learned, and seeing varied perspectives of the same situation. However, if my contribution, however small or esoteric or imperfect it may be, is going to be viewed as less valuable, or as "garbage", than that of other people, I don't know that I want to continue to be a part of such a community.

So, again, that's my reasons for disliking the forum. It has nothing to do with the forum, really, or the moderators, or the way the moderators are chosen. Rather, it has everything to do with the notion that we need to stratify and quantify the participation of certain members of the forum. But, again, as I mentioned to Ken, I know I'm in the minority on this, and my hurt feelings don't really compare to the good the forum will probably do for many, many people.

Carry on.

I believe that M's previous post conveyed my thoughts and feelings on this topic as well.

The advent of this Q&A form has really diminished my already weak drive to participate on the ChiefDelphi Forums. Yes, it is true that there are a good deal of off-topic or uninformative posts being made, but please look at the attitude of the forum in general. This is what I was referring to when I said my CD-Posting drive was already weak.

Aside from the six-weeks, J. Random CD-Poster spends his or her time on these forums playing games such as "Word Association" and "FIRST Classifieds (Part N)." Social interaction is wonderful. However, there is comparatively a minute amount of "real" discussion going on here. It seems as if people only care about technical topics when they are scrambling to figure out how to make their robots work.

But I keep hoping that some real discussion will spark up, and that is why I read these forums on a regular basis. I did my best to answer whatever questions I came across that I felt qualified to speak about. I enjoy very much the opportunity to share my knowledge with others, and to have others share their knowledge with me. It is in this manner alone that we can better our understanding of these technical topics in an intelligent fashion!

I agree entirely with M's post, except for the last line. I see no good to come out of this new forum. I only see frustration and discontent from those of us who are already weary of this community.

So that makes four cents in total, so far. I am hoping M is wrong in saying we are in the minority on this topic. Who else is bothered by this?

M, Jon, I couldnt say it better myself.

I agree with points from all these posts. I think the Q&A forum is kind of inefficient. As a recent example, someone asked a question and Gadget470 had an answer before any moderator (I dont think any have replied yet). I also think that only questions with one clearly defined answer whould be posted in the Q&A forum. Also if you look at the percentages about 1.5% of the CD users can answer a question in the Q&A forum, where as >50% could answer it anywhere else, asssuming that at least half of the users know what they are talking about. If this is all about getting a fast answer, its not working, because it could be posted anywhere else and 5 people would have already responded. I think that maybe if a user met certain requirements they could become a moderator, such as length of time using CD, value of posts, behavior (By this I mean whether or not an indvividual is always stirring up trouble, bashing on people/teams, etc.), and respect of the community this may work a little better. I also agree with M and Jon in that it doesnt allow people to carry on an intelligent "conversation" when all of the meaningful material is locked away in a forum where only an elite few can post.

Anyways, thats just my 2 cents


Cory

My feelings somewhat echo the fears of M. Krass and Jon Lawton. I think that this forum, in its current state, is flawed in a sense that there are so many unique and qualified thinkers on this board who won’t get a chance to answer a given question. If you think that having an “additional discussion” on a topic is sufficient compensation to those who aren’t on the list of moderators, you’re gravely mistaken (I fear). I don’t think that having a separate thread in which people can give their legitimate spin on a rule, or a different suggestion for a question in the Q/A Forum would be sufficiently advertised (for lack of a better word) to either the person asking the original question or by other viewers. Although, I must admit that there’s a high possibility that the same question asking in the Q/A Forum will be asked 10-15 times in either the General or a Technical Forum (which is one of my pet peeves). I think that the idea of having a forum where questions are asked and legitimate answers are given quickly is great. I just think that more people ought to be allowed to voice their suggestions in these threads. Maybe we could allow everyone to answer the questions and then we (by we I mean Brandon ;)) police these threads more vigilantly and started preventing certain people from answering if they proved themselves incapable of that responsibility. Posting in that forum ought to be a privilege, not a right, but not necessarily limited to the people who currently have that responsibility. In the end I’ll yield to CD. After all, it’s not like it’s my website.

Ken:
I didn't mean to bash on your creation :)
Have a safe trip back to CA. See you Saturday bright and early.

Cory:
You’re a little more generous with your figures than I would be. I don’t think that 50% or more of the posters on these forums could give a concise and legitimate answer to any given question related to a game or robot design/construction. There are quite a few screw ups roaming these boards.

Well after seeing what people have had to say, i'm not sure if the Q&A forum is the best idea that i thought it was.

Instead of having a few people respond, what we really need are a bunch of 'good' people.

I aways hear about people posting a question and then people yelling at them because the question was allready asked and to use 'search'.

Now... on the biggest forum that i use (www.phpbb.com) They say to use the search function before posting. BUT... the moderators don't yell at people when the post a question twice, instead, they search and find the answer, and post a link to the answer.

So... The Q&A forum was designed to get people good answers fast w/o all the incorrect/spamming posts. Most anything that will appear in the Q&A forum will be right in the rules / allready posted. Therefore, what CD really needs are for the users that hate people when the post a question twice to find the old post and then give that person a link to the old thread.

Any other non-simple answer question shouldn't be in the Q&A forum, but in a forum where anyone can answer.

I hope you all get what i'm trying to say. :)

Jack

I read the message by M Krass and skimmed the rest of the following replies. I pretty much agree with all that was written. I also don't like how the forum has been working so far, and I can only see it getting worse as the season begins.

I will have a discussion with a few people to determine the fate of the Q&A forum. It sounded like a good idea, but after seeing it function for a bit, I'm not liking the results, as well as the number of people it has [concerned/angered/disturbed/etc].

Brandon,

I think what should happen is, leave the Q&A forum open for the first week or so after Kick off and see what happens, see if the rookie teams use it enough to keep it. If it does'nt work out then you can remove it and anyone who needs a question answered, can simply go to what ever other forum the question applies to.

P.S. Or just add a link to where someone can click to start a discission on the question even if a moderator has'nt answered yet.

First of all, thanks guys for replying. This is why I started the thread. I don't need to hear people agreeing with me.

My reason for starting a Q&A place is the same as what Bill said. A place for anyone to come in and ask quick questions and get answers. It certainly never meant to replace other forums.

As I said, I originally thought of it being invite only is to prevent trouble makers. Any rules made are made to make sure the Q&A forum go as smoothly as possible. Nothing more. People like M could tell if replies are good or not and ignor the bad answers, but rookie members cannot tell what's correct and what isn't. That's why there need to be some way to make sure answers are good.

Of course there are few ways to do it. We can either make sure only good people can reply, or make sure every answered is checked.

I think a better way to do this is to let everyone replying, while having a long list of moderators to help check answers and make sure they are good answers. When I said long, I think everyone underestimated my definition of long. From the tone in everyone's posts "long" seems to mean the current list + 20. What I really mean is 400+ ;). The more the better. It pretty much means "EVERYONE in FIRST - trouble makers & inexperienced people".

Do you think that would work out better? Just having the moderators act as checker of answers?

Also, one more thing. Would it be better if the Q&A forum is some where else and not in CD?

According to the above post, that makes it seem like it would be just the same as any other forum so I don't think that's a good idea. We want fast answers but it would be better to wait for an accurate answer. No use getting threads cluttered up with posts from people who don't know what they're doing.

As for it being on CD, most definitely. CD is the #1 resource for anything FIRST.

Except this forum is different that its for Question only, and the amount of moderators helping to check and make sure answers are good. All the moderators have the ability to close threads, and should when they see threads clutter up.

Thanks for reminding me another reason to have a seperate forum for this... It's to make sure questions by rookie aren't lost in the other big forums, and make sure the questions doesn't turn into needless discussions.


I also agree that CD is the #1 resource for anything in FIRST... Except I also would like to see some peoploe start something on their own and make it just as successful ;).

I would like to see that too but it will never happen unless a catastrophe happens to CD. It's a good name, a good site, and great friendly moderators and users. All the structure has been in place on CD for a while and the community just keeps growing. It will be a primary resource for many years of FIRST to come. However I'm not stoping others from trying. Like the FEDS have good stuff going. Keep up the great work all you FIRSTers!

PS Happy New Year.

Whee... :) - Thanks, but never worry, even though www.feds201.com will (notice the verb :)) become a 'site' (for something, don't really know what now though :D ), CD will always be my FIRST 'home'. :]