What happened in the other neighborhood

[strantor]

If you want to lose a client, that is the exact phrase to use.

I guess it follows that someone in an unpaid position for a profitable enterprise could potentially (perhaps justifiably) not consider clients, clients.

Actually, are we the members, the clients? Or are the clients the people who don't sign up/sign in, and view the adverts? I guess I must admit to volunteering my own time and donating my own resources (knowledge, sometimes) to the for-profit gig. So then me & the mods are on the same team, further diluting the "client" role.

</devil's advocate>

 

[gophert]

In posts 5 through 15 (approximately) I was asking Wendy to stop posting to my thread if she was not going to address the question in post 1. Then she started mocking me (what are you going to do about it" and "ooh, are you going to delete a moderators posts" type of comments. I deleted as much of that thread as I could (first post cannot be deleted) and decided I was done with AAC. I see that someone (wendy?) went back and deleted her posts.

I just checked, the question in post 1 was never addressed by a mod or mgmt.

My question:
Under what circumstances would a post to an old thread not get locked?

I never intended for it to get out of hand, I just showed an example and asked a question. Wendy came in with a chip on the shoulder and that was enough for me.

 

[gophert]

I guess it follows that someone in an unpaid position for a profitable enterprise could potentially (perhaps justifiably) not consider clients, clients.

Actually, are we the members, the clients? Or are the clients the people who don't sign up/sign in, and view the adverts? I guess I must admit to volunteering my own time and donating my own resources (knowledge, sometimes) to the for-profit gig. So then me & the mods are on the same team, further diluting the "client" role.

</devil's advocate>

I asked the question originally because I was writing an answer to a thread that was apparently revived and, when I clicked "post reply" I got an error message because it was locked by a mod while I was writing. My question in that thread was intended to help, reduce mod work load and keep the site cleaned up. Apparently, Wendy does not feel useful in her daily life and wants to clean up some noob mess on a daily or hourly basis.

 

[jpanhalt]

I don't think Wendy and one or two of the other moderators understand the basic business model of who the "clients" are.

John

 

[OBW0549]

Actually, are we the members, the clients?

Not IMO. The clients are the people who drop in looking for help or advice. On the other hand, the established, long-term members with extensive hobby or professional experience-- i.e., those who provide that help and advice-- are best looked on as business assets because without them, the board has little value. The moderators are just there to keep the whole thing running smoothly.

And smart moderators will refrain from pissing off the assets, because if the assets get P.O.'d they'll go elsewhere. This simple, commonsense fact seems to escape them over there...

 

[jpanhalt]

It is all a question of semantics. A business relies on its clients for survival and profit. Always has and always will be that way. Those who provide pro bono advice, some of which is sometimes good, fit the function of clients. The questioners are the commodity. They come, go, are somewhat expendable, and can be bought. Without the clients, the business would cease to exist. That is, a forum without good answers will cease to exist.

Of course, the words get a bit abstract when you try to fit them to that model, but show me a single successful forum where the contributing members don't contribute? There are far more lazy people in the world willing to ask a question than willing to look up the answer. The number of individuals willing to help and show how smart they are is far less. That is why I consider the question askers as the raw material (as in a manufacturer) or employees (as in a service organization).

John

 

[gophert]

It is all a question of semantics. A business relies on its clients for survival and profit. Always has and always will be that way. Those who provide pro bono advice, some of which is sometimes good, fit the function of clients. The questioners are the commodity. They come, go, are somewhat expendable, and can be bought. Without the clients, the business would cease to exist. That is, a forum without good answers will cease to exist.

Of course, the words get a bit abstract when you try to fit them to that model, but show me a single successful forum where the contributing members don't contribute? There are far more lazy people in the world willing to ask a question than willing to look up the answer. The number of individuals willing to help and show how smart they are is far less. That is why I consider the question askers as the raw material (as in a manufacturer) or employees (as in a service organization).

John

I wouldn't mind seeing a few more clients (noobs asking questions) here. Kind of dull outside of the off-topic / members lounge. How can we drum up some business?

 

[Reloadron]

I wouldn't mind seeing a few more clients (noobs asking questions) here. Kind of dull outside of the off-topic / members lounge. How can we drum up some business?

Several years ago this place was busy, real busy. During my last years at work my work demands exceeded my time for the forums, all forums. I guess there may have been some internal strife and when I got back with more time things were real quiet. Not sure what transpired? Agree, more clients would be nice.

Ron

 

[JoeJester]

jpanhalt

Very nice analogy. To illustrate to the "for profit" organizations, that the "assets" are the long term members they would have to look at the membership. I seriously doubt anyone notices the membership numbers except the overall total.

Most forums can tout "look at me, I have a half a million members. They never look inside. The vast majority of those numbers are one post and done, or done the moment their quest for an answer is met.

 

[JoeJester]

How can we drum up some business?

visit the forum dr at http://www.forumdr.com/ for ideas on running a forum.

One of the more active forums that I have seen is diy audio I never used them to compare forums as they are focused and the ones in the comparison were general electronic topics and a homework help section. DIY and AAC have similar membership growth per day (80) but DIY has three times the posts with about 1061 posts per day. The threads per day has DIY winning with a per day average of 46 against 30.

ETO, I am saddened to report, isn't close to either of them. I suspect that ETOs numbers were influenced by culling the threads which can lower the posts per day and threads per day figures.

 

[JimB]

ETO, I am saddened to report, isn't close to either of them. I suspect that ETOs numbers were influenced by culling the threads which can lower the posts per day and threads per day figures.

OK, please tell, what are all these threads which are being culled here?

JimB

 

[jpanhalt]

First off, I don't think volume measures tell anywhere near the whole story. If you want a commodity forum with lots of posts, go to FoxNews for an example: https://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/02/...down-in-alabama-mississippi.html?intcmp=hpbt1
Hundreds of comments, none of which are on topic or useful. That is a mild example and was chosen as it is non-political. Click on any political or crime story with comments and you will witness Americans at their worst.

Second, none of us, with the possible exception of our moderators, is aware of how the money flows. That is, how does WTWH's profit (?) from ETO relate to the number and quality of posts? That being the case, that measure of success is not my worry.

My preference is a forum that allows reasonable dialog, where the jokesters are not constantly vying for the most likes, and where my questions get reasonable answers. I am personally put off by active forums with lots of silly questions (e.g, what's a hardhat?) and even more silly and duplicative answers. It is rare that long threads stay anywhere near being on topic. Unfortunately, the silly questions often result in the longest threads. I was not being entirely facetious when I suggested buying questioners. If that is what a forum wants, I know of some individuals who would seem happy to troll the forum for free.

As an example of the type of forum I prefer, compare EDABoard with the Microchip forums. EDABoard is by far the more active and has more contributors. Dare ask a question and post something in Assembly, and one of the moderators on EDABoard will flame you. Microchip is not that way. It is my preferred forum for reviewing subjects about which I have a question. Its search function is not great by any means, but the ratio of relevant results to chaff is pretty good. And, if it actually comes down to asking a question about MCU's, I typically post it here. Of course, the Microchip forums are limited in breadth. ETO offers that great advantage. Post volume has nothing to do with that preference.

No one asked, so I will. What do I consider ETO's greatest "challenges?"
1) It has gone through a lull in analog questions and support. That situation is improving, but there is still a ways to go.
2) I think the rep system needs to be revisited. Is it counterproductive? Does it encourage silliness as opposed to content? Maybe, it should just be trashed. At a minimum, ETO's leadership needs to review what it is supposed to accomplish and decide whether it is doing that.

Regards, John

 

[tcmtech]

Not sure what transpired? Agree, more clients would be nice.

Back around the middle to end of 2012 going into 2013 (just look through the Site feedback and Members lounge for complaints and good bye threads in that time frame for reference) what is happening over at AAC is basically what went down here.

I and a few others were getting tossed out and banned on a weekly basis largely over nothing by one power mad moderator and then given a run around over the reasons why while certain other members had free run to do and post whatever wherever without repercussions.
A lot of bigger posters left in and around that time as well which is easily confirmed by the number of goodbye threads posted in the members lounge from 2012 into 2013.

After that a rewrite of the rules came about and the one moderator got tossed for a while then things quieted down but traffic was slower ever since.

That's the simplified explanation of what happened and when. It only took one over the top moderator and the unwillingness of the site ownership to accept that there was a problem to bring the whole site down to a crawl that it has yet to recover from even as years have gone by.

 

[JimB]

none of us, with the possible exception of our moderators, is aware of how the money flows.

Well, this moderator at least has no connection whatsoever with the "money flow".
Contrary to what was postulated in another post, I am most definitely not part of the "Management".
I am just an ordinary user, who was asked by the previous owner of ETO to be a moderator here. The new owners were happy that I carry on moderating, and so that is what I do.

JimB

 

[jpanhalt]

Back around the middle to end of 2012 going into 2013 (just look through the Site feedback and Members lounge for complaints and good bye threads in that time frame for reference) what is happening over at AAC is basically what went down here.

I and a few others were getting tossed out and banned on a weekly basis largely over nothing by one power mad moderator and then given a run around over the reasons why while certain other members had free run to do and post whatever wherever without repercussions.
A lot of bigger posters left in and around that time as well which is easily confirmed by the number of goodbye threads posted in the members lounge from 2012 into 2013.

After that a rewrite of the rules came about and the one moderator got tossed for a while then things quieted down but traffic was slower ever since.

That's the simplified explanation of what happened and when. It only took one over the top moderator and the unwillingness of the site ownership to accept that there was a problem to bring the whole site down to a crawl that it has yet to recover from even as years have gone by.

I don't like bullies or gangs. That moderator was doing a fantastic job. He was not power hungry and to the outside world was not targeting people. Every one of his comments was on-topic and constructive. True, some people's egos may have gotten bruised, but those same individuals had/have the same complaints at AAC. His loss left a hole at ETO that those who complained the most have failed utterly to fill in the least.

John

 

[tcmtech]

Ah exactly my point! When two solidly opposing camps get set up in a forum where they each see the same actions in two completely different ways that's where problems start.

Back then a few said that there were no problems in ETO yet a mass migration of members occurred followed by a highly noticeable drop in the sites overall traffic set in that has been ongoing for around two years now.

Sure some can say that there was no problem and that nothing needed to change yet the overall change in direction of the site traffic numbers as others have posted strongly suggests otherwise.

Of course those who complained the most never filled in afterwards. They had already left by the time those who were in charge realized the need for a change was necessary!

A few of us stuck around and worked on the rewrite of the forum rules but for the most part after that they backed way off in their work here. I know I did.

 

[strantor]

Well, this moderator at least has no connection whatsoever with the "money flow".
Contrary to what was postulated in another post, I am most definitely not part of the "Management".
I am just an ordinary user, who was asked by the previous owner of ETO to be a moderator here. The new owners were happy that I carry on moderating, and so that is what I do.

JimB

I hope there wasn't any perceived negative connotation with my postulation. It was simply a theory to explain why you're the only moderator shown on the "staff" page.

 

[ericgibbs]

I don't like bullies or gangs. That moderator was doing a fantastic job. He was not power hungry and to the outside world was not targeting people. Every one of his comments was on-topic and constructive. True, some people's egos may have gotten bruised, but those same individuals had/have the same complaints at AAC. His loss left a hole at ETO that those who complained the most have failed utterly to fill in the least.

hi John,
Unfortunately most of the Moderation in ETO during that sad period, was going on in the back ground, the Mods had lengthy discussions with the Admin of that time.
I was frequently assured by Admin that I was going a good job in accordance with the ETO Rule/Guidelines.
Both Admin and myself had been exchanging PM's with the complainants, pointing out their behaviour was not acceptable.

I was sacked as Mod in order to satisfy the unrest caused by a few members, Admin then realised that this was unfair and reinstated me as a Mod.
You can imagine this left a feeling of mistrust of the then Admin, that I could be easily tossed overboard in the future, so I quit.

Its interesting to note that the same small group who caused the unrest at ETO are prominent in the unrest at AAC .

Eric

 

[jpanhalt]

Its interesting to note that the same small group who caused the unrest at ETO are prominent in the unrest at AAC .

I couldn't agree more. It should be mentioned that several of the high-profile "leavers" (e.g., Mr. RB, Ghostman11) quickly left AAC too. Maybe it was a virus?

One thing that stunned me at AAC recently was the reception given this thread: https://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/threads/wife-is-out-the-door.119761/ It now has over 100 posts, mostly supportive, but no one has any inkling of the other side to the story. While there are very few rules about what goes on in the off-topic areas, there are just some tings I can't see bragging about. Seems almost to form a pattern with that individual regardless of the forum.

John

 

[JimB]

I hope there wasn't any perceived negative connotation with my postulation. It was simply a theory to explain why you're the only moderator shown on the "staff" page.

I have no idea why I appear on the staff page.
In fact I did not even know that I appeared on the staff page until you pointed it out.

No negative connotations taken!

JimB