this place is dead

[computeruler]

*cricket*

[BC_Programmer]

[Broni]

Yes, it is 

[computeruler]

Or maybe I'm just used to bigger forums. 

[patio]

Or maybe I'm just used to bigger forums. 

Then spend your time there...
Whatever floats your boat...

[Dead Reckon]

Welcome to ComputerHope, the Biggest Little Forum this side of the interweb!

[Computer Hope Admin]

I'd be open to suggestions from Computeruler or anyone else on making the Biggest Little Forum more active. I do plan on merging the site more with the forums, but it's down the road a little. Want to make sure everything with 2.0 is working properly.

[Dead Reckon]

I didn't mean that as an insult, I meant it as a complement, most forums are hostile environments which you enter very carefully. As carefully as you would carry yourself through a minefield, not CH though.

[Allan]

I'm sure it wasn't taken as an insult. I haven't known Nathan that long, but it's been my experience that he is rarely, if ever, sarcastic (though patio and I are working on correcting that ).

[Computer Hope Admin]

Allan was right, didn't take it as an insult and very rarely sarcastic.

[BC_Programmer]

Actually this is the most active forum I'm a member of.

[Broni]

This is totally IMHO, so please don't kill me, if you have different point of view.
Because, of my nature, if I have something to say, I'll say it without wrapping it in a candy paper....

First, the facts.
If you look at board's statistics, basically all numbers have been falling for a while.
It must be some reason for it.

As probably some of you noticed, I've been much less active on this board for a while.
One of the main reasons....I'm sick and tired of many, many topics, which started as computer problem question and by a second page, it already became a discussion about grandma's underwear.
It's totally unprofessional and I don't even see anyone trying to curb those trends.
I've also seen some rude replies and some others, where just because someone is a computer newbie, he/she becomes a target for jokes, or rudeness.

Secondly, since evilfantasy practically left, the malware forum looks like a joke.
There are couple of guys there, who try to do what they can and a whole bunch of other people, who keep posting replies there, but they have no single clue, what they're talking about.
Replying in malware forum is not a reading from a crystal ball, but a professional activity.
I've never seen any other forum, I'm familiar with, where anyone, aside from malware staff is allowed to post replies.
It's very irresponsible and often dangerous to allow people, who know nothing about malware, to reply there.

Just some thoughts....

[jason2074]

Just some thoughts....

Well observed thoughts Mastermind Broni

[Computer Hope Admin]

Definitely respect your opinion and some very good points were brought up. The going off topic has always seemed to be an issue on Computer Hope that we continue to struggle with in all places of the forum, I've tried my best in getting rid of trouble makers, but probably boils down to me simply having to spend even more time reading each post. As I hope you've noticed I've been spending more time in the forums, although it has recently been for updating the forum, I'm going to make a real effort in contributing more to the posts myself especially if I can complete my system for having all the mail Computer Hope gets directed to the forum, so I only have one place to focus on instead of being bounced around from mail to forum to chat.

Each of the moderators and good contributors have been a fantastic help to the forum and to me, since one person can really only do so much. I'm extremely grateful for that, unfortunately there is going to be an endless supply though of those members who don't contribute well or just want to cause havoc. I'm hoping with the new 2.0 update and the warning system the moderators and I can clean up the forum some more.

[Allan]

If I may add my 2 cents.... I happen to agree with Broni to a great extent. Especially about topics going off point (my default setting is generally "bottom line"). The problem, however, is that forums such as this are not only support forums but also communities, as is evidenced by the longevity of many of the members. We learned the hard way at Tweaks that if you start to inhibit "off topic" chatter you run the risk of alienating otherwise reliable, desirable, and valuable members. There's a fine line. I'm as guilty as anyone of trying to inject some humor into support threads. I think Nathan has the right idea - identify the trouble makers - those who are here ONLY to troll, spam, or be smart alecs - versus those longtime contributing members who are here primarily to provide support but who also enjoy a little side chatter, jesting, and community spirit.

I'd be very interested in hearing your thoughts on that Broni (and Nathan AND other respected CH contributors).

[Broni]

I'm as guilty as anyone of trying to inject some humor into support threads.

Well, I'm definitely not a dull person and I like humor too.
There is nothing wrong with cracking a joke here and there, even in strictly computer related topic.
What I'm talking about are topics, where the original subject get totally lost and all of sudden we have a discussion about something else.
Something else is often a discussion, who is right, who is wrong, "I'm smarter than you" and so on.
Try to read a reply #9, or #12 in some topics and you won't have any idea what the topic subject is.

I'm hoping with the new 2.0 update and the warning system

I lost some info somewhere, so....how does that warning system work?
Is some warning level bar going to be shown under member's avatar?
That's how it works on many boards.
In any case, it's probably a great idea.

Which brings me to another possible issue....too many "dead" moderators.
I assume, moderator title is given for some reason...to moderate?

I see people like patio, or Allan being here every day for at least couple of hours and that's moderating to me.
On moderators list, I can see some people, who haven't show up for days, or months, or they visit for a few minutes once in a while.
If some title is so important to some people, maybe they should be named "Honorary moderator", or something similar and instead have couple more moderators, who actually do some work around here.
I don't think, Nathan can do it single handed, even if he's here 24/7, which surely is impossible.

Still, I'd like to see some comment regarding malware forum.

[computeruler]

Like infractions?  That would be a great idea.

[Broni]

Exactly.

I think, I'd like to see number of posts under member's avatar instead of in a fly-out.
When replying, it's easier to select language, depending on, if I'm dealing with a newbie, or someone with 200 posts.

[Quantos]

I think this would be an excellent idea, is it something we can talk Nathan into

[Allan]

Exactly.

I think, I'd like to see number of posts under member's avatar instead of in a fly-out.
When replying, it's easier to select language, depending on, if I'm dealing with a newbie, or someone with 200 posts.

I agree completely and have already suggested this, but I think Nathan is waiting to see how many others agree.

[BC_Programmer]

I find it ironic that this discussion about off-topic/infractions and so forth is in and of itself off-topic for this thread.

Often there would be multiple "conversations" occurring in a single thread, often about entirely unrelated subjects. I used to make sure that if I posted I would at least attempt to address the original problem; but I've found that that really doesn't help either, since eventually one "conversation" wins and it goes entirely off-topic.

Lately when I've seen threads I've been involved in go off-topic I try to either stop posting in that thread or return to the original topic. I usually go for the former since I seem to have a habit of making things worse rather then better.

I think that a single case could be made for OT conversations- those that are started by the original poster. Of course it depends entirely on context, but sometimes the OP will return with a similar or related problem, or a few satellite queries stuff like "what hard drive brands would you recommend" when told they need a new HD, and so forth- which may spark further conversation between other members about various HD brands and their experiences with them, etc. In those cases, It's usually productive to continue it in that topic rather then say "start a new thread", but only for the Original Poster, of course.


For the other stuff (Infractions/warnings, etc) Certainly something worth looking into.

[Broni]

I don't see how this topic is off topic since it started with: "this place is dead" and we've been discussing why it is.

[harry 48]

Well, I'm definitely not a dull person and I like humor too.
There is nothing wrong with cracking a joke here and there, even in strictly computer related topic.
What I'm talking about are topics, where the original subject get totally lost and all of sudden we have a discussion about something else.
Something else is often a discussion, who is right, who is wrong, "I'm smarter than you" and so on.
Try to read a reply #9, or #12 in some topics and you won't have any idea what the topic subject is.

i agree broni and brought this up months ago about going of topic in a post , but within 9 to 12 posts ( as you said ) you would not have known what the op posted about and so the whole subject is lost

[kpac]

Where did all the other posts here go?

[BC_Programmer]

Where did all the other posts here go?

the first page? 

[kpac]

The were two pages in this topic.

EDIT:: drat, I was playing around with settings and changed the number of posts per page to 25. Silly me.

[Dead Reckon]

Oh, irony, how I loath thou.

[truenorth]

Because it was mentioned earlier in the thread of this post i hope i shall be staying within the "topic'. "Secondly, since evilfantasy practically left, the malware forum looks like a joke". I was NOT aware of "evilfantasy's" departure from the forums. From my limited involvement with that forum and him in particular i had developed a practice. Whenever a member (usually a new one) expressed a problem that either was or potentially could be related to that forum i would always direct them there. Usually including a reference to the exclusivity of the expertise that existed there for those type of problems. So it discourages me and removes my credibility as an advisor to learn that i am sending people there and what i promised would be the result is not assured. I would recommend, if it is possible , that someone be designated to be in charge of that forum and that that person assign those who can exclusively provide advice there. The names of those individuals could be posted as a preliminary post at the beginning of the forum. A statement such as "Only these people should be considered qualified to assist on this forum". I shall govern myself accordingly until i become aware that sending problems there will be better dealt with. truenorth

[BC_Programmer]

I would recommend, if it is possible , that someone be designated to be in charge of that forum and that that person assign those who can exclusively provide advice there.

Um... you just described CBMatt.

A statement such as "Only these people should be considered qualified to assist on this forum". I shall govern myself accordingly until i become aware that sending problems there will be better dealt with. truenorth

Or, we could do something really crazy, like a custom title, like, say- just thinking- "malware specialist" maybe... oh what? that's already what it is? 

[truenorth]

Yes,except that as on all the other forums ANYONE can contribute their advise (good/bad /or indifferent) and the poster is then left to decide whether to listen/follow that advise. Given this comment (again credit to Broni) " the malware forum looks like a joke." It is hardly appropriate to suggest that the current situation is anything close to ideal. Therefore an approach of "if it ain't broke don't fix it" IMHO is not in the best interests of the CH forums in general and that one in particular regardless of what is currently in place. If Broni's observation is accurate then fixing is needed (if possible). I believe it can be improved. truenorth

[harry 48]

i agree somewhat with truenorth  , there seems to be only one person now helping out there and that is dave sometimes you would get jay and chris , i to have noticed people having to wait a long time and then dave would come in and answer a lot of new and old posts

all i do now is send people to the " do this first topic " in the hope that they get the help

i could do a little more very basic fixing as i have done and have learnt from that , but i/we are not allowed and i understand that and its to stop new posters giving bad advice

[Broni]

So it discourages me and removes my credibility as an advisor to learn that i am sending people there and what i promised would be the result is not assured.

Very same here. I still direct people there, but I keep thinking, if I even should (no offense to couple of guys there, who really do what they can).

that as on all the other forums ANYONE can contribute their advise (good/bad /or indifferent)

Which is point blank wrong and dangerous.

Um... you just described CBMatt.

Again, nothing personal and no offense, but when was the last time, when he actually did something in malware forum. He's been practically absent, as well. Again, talking about "honorary" staff members.

Or, we could do something really crazy, like a custom title, like, say- just thinking- "malware specialist" maybe... oh what? that's already what it is

It's not. It's about people, who shouldn't be posting there.
As I said before, I'm not aware of any other forum, when non-malware people are allowed to post. It's like giving a baby a grenade to play with.

At the end, these are just my thoughts. I don't make rules around here.

[Allan]

As I said before, I'm not aware of any other forum, when non-malware people are allowed to post. It's like giving a baby a grenade to play with.

+1

[Fed]

To my knowledge there's no restriction on posting in the Malware Forum and just like every other CH forum posters should expect dangerous advice to be edited or removed.

[Broni]

By whom exactly?
Is anyone monitoring that forum 24/7?

[Fed]

If any CH Member sees a potentially dangerous post they should click on the
"Report to Moderator" link, this will send an email to every Moderator and I can tell you, I respond to every email as do many others.
Often when I respond the problem has already been fixed by someone else.

I don't think we'll ever see 24/7 dedicated monitoring but the CH Membership does a pretty good job IMO.

[Broni]

That rule may be good enough "safety valve" on any general forum, because there are plenty computer savvy people around here almost at any time of day, or night, but it's not in malware forum, because there are only very few people, who have any clue about malware issues, so how an average computer user can know, if some advice is good, or it'll make some computer not bootable very next minute.

There is a reason, why all malware forums on all other boards are strictly restricted.

[JJ 3000]

I'm confused. What exactly are you suggesting Broni? More malware removal experts?

[jason2074]

all i do now is send people to the " do this first topic " in the hope that they get the help

People come and go. Either for the people mention in the previous post or for the person or user who seeks for advice or help. I think its both the responsibility of the helper and the one being help in some or maybe most threads whether its in malware, software, hardware section. There should also be a preliminary thread for malware issues(usually HJT) to be look upon by old members/mods or people who are experienced,wants to learn or wants to step-up to this issue. Then only it will be submitted or referred to the malware specialist/s to avoid certain waiting as stated. And it should also be a limited steps, taken out from the guidelines of malware section.

[Allan]

There should also be a preliminary thread for malware issues(usually HJT) to be look upon by old members/mods or people who are experienced,wants to learn or wants to step-up to this issue. Then only it will be submitted or referred to the malware specialist/s to avoid certain waiting as stated. And it should also be a limited steps, taken out from the guidelines of malware section.

Are you suggesting that pretty much anyone could evaluate hjt logs and post suggestions? I've seen systems rendered inoperable because of inappropriate actions with hjt. As it stands now, anyone can post on our Malware forums but only designated Malware Experts can offer advice. Whether or not this is the most efficient method (for those waiting to be helped), it's certainly the safest. Receiving no advice is a whole lot better than receiving bad advice.

[truenorth]

To my mind Allan and Broni are expressing precisely the point i have been endeavoring to make. I strongly subscribe to this comment from Allan " Receiving no advice is a whole lot better than receiving bad advice." There was a reference earlier to the comparison of a "baby" and a "grenade" . I would suggest it is more aptly compared to the absence of a neurosurgeon in a hospital  and at best a heart specialist tries to do it  or in a completely unregulated environment the janitor does it.
 In my view if we do NOT have the expertise or the number of experts we need to govern our dispersement of the council we give to others with that as the dominate criteria we should curtail or cease offering the service until and if we can.
  Those that come to the malware forum (directed by other members or by their own initiative) are generally desperate and vulnerable to advice from anyone they feel can help them. They are also very often lacking in computer skills and knowledge and are hardly in a position to personally judge  the competency or lack thereof of the advisor (well intentioned or not). Ideally, if the technology were capable, once the problem were stated  by the O/P NO ONE other than an accredited malware specialist should be able to contribute to the thread .
 Of course there are some that will argue well shouldn't that be the case on ALL the forums of the CH. I say no. Because there are many factors that are different . Primarily a generally understanding that many members with widely varying levels of experience/knowledge/ability/fluency/and other factors will come forth with advise. Sufficient numbers of CH members exist that bad advise is usually quickly caught and negated. I for one would NOT be able to determine if the advice on the malware form was good or not. There are some forms i would NEVER consider myself  credible to give advice on and other than to occasionally go there to perhaps learn something i totally refrain from input. Certainly the malware forum is one of them. However my observation is that not all members apply such personal constraints. I think the malware forum CAN be improved and encourage efforts toward that end. truenorth

[patio]

How it's worded in the guidelines:

Under no circumstances should you attempt to fix things by following another log and doing it yourself.  This can only lead to more problems and possibly an un-bootable system.  Every machine and every infection is unique and this method will only cause more problems.

If this is a machine at your place of Business, we need to be informed beforehand.  This is also not negotiable and we will not be responsible should you fail to do so.

We also request patience.  The Experts here are Volunteers and are not here 24/7.  This is not a live session either.  If it takes a few hours or overnight for them to get back to you, trust me it is worth the wait.  See here why not to not bump your thread.  And once you have been given the all-clear, be sure to stick around until your Helper clearly concludes the issue, as they may have some additional steps and advice for you to follow.  Just because you have been cleaned of an infection, that doesn't always mean the work is over.

If you receive advice from someone other than the approved Malware Removal Specialists, you do so at your own risk. We are not responsible if you take potentially inaccurate/harmful advice from someone who is not a designated helper. Anyone interested in joining the crew must have a good amount of experience and submit references to CBMatt (Chris) or Evil Fantasy in a PM. References will be checked. Others posting advice without approval are subject to have their posts removed immediately as the wrong advice is too risky. We welcome new helpers so if you are interested see this post: Would you like to learn to fight malware?

[Broni]

If you receive advice from someone other than the approved Malware Removal Specialists, you do so at your own risk.

If so, then what is the point for allowing non-malware specialists to reply in malware forum?
Keep in mind, that the reality is, that 75% people don't read manuals, rules, etc., or they barely read them.
"Too bad" answer won't do, because it's not about a glass of water, we're dealing here with, but a serious people's property.

[JJ 3000]

If so, then what is the point for allowing non-malware specialists to reply in malware forum?

I still don't understand this. If the malware specialists are the only people allowed to post in the forum, then how will the people with the infected computers reply to them?

[Broni]

On all other boards only original topic starter (malware victim) AND malware specialists are able to post AND reply.

[JJ 3000]

Oh okay. I see. It sounds like an excellent idea.

[Broni]

[Computer Hope Admin]

Since it's been requested a few times I've restored the posts count to the left-hand side and removed it from the hover window. As I mentioned in the 2.0 update thread, I was doing this as an experiment since there have been posts in the past about too much emphasis being placed on post count. Maybe to help alleviate this I've put the thanked count above the post count. As always we can continue to experiment and change things since it's always going to be a work in progress.

As far as the warning system I mentioned Broni. There is a new system with SMF 2.0 that allows the moderators to warn users. With each warning sent they can assign a warning percentage, as that percentage increases they loose abilities such as being able to post without it being moderated or post at all. There is a setting that would allow this percentage to be visible to everyone, but at this time I have it set so only the moderators can see this.

Finally, I've read though all the posts since I've last made a reply and appreciate all the feedback. It appears that a lot of issues reside with the malware section. I'll see if there is anything I can change / setup that may help address each of these concerns.

Thanks everyone for the continued feedback. This post has ended up being a great post. 

[Allan]

Thanks for the change Nathan.

[harry 48]

quote by CHA ;  Thanks everyone for the continued feedback. This post has ended up being a great post.





and i'm sure it will go on for a long time yet

[Broni]

Thanks Nathan for the update.

One comment:

There is a setting that would allow this percentage to be visible to everyone, but at this time I have it set so only the moderators can see this.

Just in my opinion, it kills the purpose.
If the bar is visible, it serves two jobs:
- misbehaving member can see, where he/she stands
- other members may be more careful, when receiving any advice from some member, whose warning bar doesn't stay at ZERO.

[reddevilggg]

I've followed this topic with interest and one thing that stands out is that this place is far from dead.

[patio]

I've followed this topic with interest and one thing that stands out is that this place is far from dead.

Please stay on Topic.....

[mektek]

It's not dead it's just restin' 

[Computer Hope Admin]

Thanks Nathan for the update.

One comment:Just in my opinion, it kills the purpose.
If the bar is visible, it serves two jobs:
- misbehaving member can see, where he/she stands
- other members may be more careful, when receiving any advice from some member, whose warning bar doesn't stay at ZERO.

I agree with you in part, but at the same time I feel that users will feel as if they are marked by a 'Scarlet Letter' of sorts and the community may shun them, even if they are no longer breaking the rules. Also I would imagine that having this mark visible to the whole community would also increase my PM load, since I would imagine most people with this warning would be constantly asking to have it removed. Of course some type of system could be set in place, where it would remain in place for a set amount of time after initial warning.

If the community overall feels that they'd like to see this warning on flagged members I can easily enable it. We may want to start a new topic for this discussion though.

[Quantos]

... Also I would imagine that having this mark visible to the whole community would also increase my PM load, since I would imagine most people with this warning would be constantly asking to have it removed. Of course some type of system could be set in place, where it would remain in place for a set amount of time after initial warning.

If the community overall feels that they'd like to see this warning on flagged members I can easily enable it. We may want to start a new topic for this discussion though.

I can imagine that there will be a few problems with it when it's first implemented, you could try looking at something in the nature of SlashDot as they use the karma system fairly well.  Chances are that most people who wind up flagged would deserve it and only hard work and integrity should remove the tag.

[BC_Programmer]

I'm pretty sure they had a "karma" system here before they switched over to thanks.

[Broni]

Just to voice my opinion....I don't like that "thanks" thingy at all.
I see no purpose whatsoever.

[patio]

I agree....

[Broni]

This is how I see the advantage of a "warning bar" (or whatever you call it) being public.
There are some members, who can't be simply banned over some one infraction, because that one infraction may be not serious enough.
However, if that very same member keeps posting irresponsible, or dangerous advice, he goes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, banned (or whatever number of warnings is necessary).
I can assure you, 9 out 10 such members will think twice before posting anything, if they see their warning level at "3", or "4".
At the same time, any regular member will be more cautious from accepting any advice form a such person.

[Salmon Trout]

Just to voice my opinion....I don't like that "thanks" thingy at all.
I see no purpose whatsoever.

I agree 100%.

[Allan]

Just to voice my opinion....I don't like that "thanks" thingy at all.
I see no purpose whatsoever.

I always thought that was a nice little touch that differentiates CH from other forums. Not as a tool for comparisons or a quantitative measurement of anything, just a nice way for a user to say thank you (which most don't do in a thread, but apparently many WILL click on the "thank you"). But I certainly see both sides of the issue.

[Salmon Trout]

I always thought that was a nice little touch that differentiates CH from other forums.

I agree, it's nice to be thanked, but now the novelty has worn off, I don't take note of my own thanks total very often, and you can't tell who has added to it.

Not as a tool for comparisons or a quantitative measurement of anything, just a nice way for a user to say thank you (which most don't do in a thread, but apparently many WILL click on the "thank you"). But I certainly see both sides of the issue.

I value it much more if people actually take the trouble to say "thank you" in a post. Thankfully (!) we don't get people boasting about their thanks total, although I have sometimes thought it might be instructive to have a posts:thanks ratio showing. It might deflate one or two of the self-appointed "experts".

[Edit] just to be mischievous...

Code: [Select]

Me                  14.85
Allan               15.04
JJ 3000             19.81
BC_Programmer       25.82
Computer Hope Admin 34.15
Broni               53.66
quaxo               55.40
ghostdog74          60.38

[BC_Programmer]

wait a minute... you aren't counting your posts as Dias or Contrex!

[Broni]

although I have sometimes thought it might be instructive to have a posts:thanks ratio showing

It doesn't really show much, since "thank you" was introduced only maybe a year ago (?) and post number accumulated over number of years.
For instance, I was probably over 25,000 posts, when "thank you" was introduced.

[soybean]

The Thanks feature is meaningless in this forum because it does not show who left the Thanks and in what topics.  I'd like to see it either discontinued or changed to show who left Thanks.

[Quantos]

The Thanks feature is meaningless in this forum because it does not show who left the Thanks and in what topics.  I'd like to see it either discontinued or changed to show who left Thanks.

Even though I'm only part way through my first cup of coffee, I find that I have to agree.

[Salmon Trout]

wait a minute... you aren't counting your posts as Dias or Contrex!

Who? 

[Computer Hope Admin]

Broni, I'll look into getting the warning system shown in the posts and we'll see how it works. I guess we could at least test the system and adjust it like everything else.

As far as the Thanked (Karma), like the post count, it too seems to be something that never seems to satisfy the complete community. This can be easily removed or changed like anything else on the forum but I'd like the overall communities input on this.

...
I have sometimes thought it might be instructive to have a posts:thanks ratio showing. It might deflate one or two of the self-appointed "experts".
...

I thought about creating some type of system like this that combines the karma with the post count, but like Broni mentioned it wouldn't properly represent any user who has been posting years before it would be implemented. Also I would imagine that combining these values into a single value would still not appease everyone.

The Thanks feature is meaningless in this forum because it does not show who left the Thanks and in what topics.  I'd like to see it either discontinued or changed to show who left Thanks.

In the past when looking into solutions for the Karma system I do recall a more advanced karma mod that could be added to the forum. If I recall correctly this system allowed you to show who was thanking for what. However, I didn't add this mod because I felt there were a lot in the community that didn't really like karma to begin with and didn't feel it would be worth the time to implement this feature, just to remove it later.


I imagine most of the long time contributors feel the same way, which is that the post count and thanked count are really meaningless. However, there are some advantages to having a post count, such as post count groups that help me gauge things like forum participation. In addition, there are quite a few members who like seeing these values.

I have tried hiding the post count a couple of times, but I always end up re-enabling it because some users like it and I feel those that don't like it probably just disregard it. I would imagine if I simply disabled the 'thanked' the same thing would happen.

If we can come to a method of displaying or not displaying the thanked or post count that both sides like I'd be more than happy to change it. Until then we will have to rely off of a voting system that the overall community gets to put to vote on what they would like. I've gone ahead and created a poll for this on the below link.

http://www.computerhope.com/forum/index.php/topic,111382.0.html

[Broni]

Maybe, we should just create a poll and go with majority.

My vote...

Thanks - no

Post count - I really don't  care about my post count, or anyone with 5,000, or 10,000 posts. All I care, is to see, if I'm dealing in my reply with someone with 2 posts, or 500 posts (a person with 2 posts, not necessary has to be a computer newbie, but in most cases, he/she is)

[ThomasTheXPUser]

I think that the quality of posts is more meaningful than the quantity of posts. (Look who's talking, Mr. 200 posts)

When it comes to the thanks button, I think nothing of it either way. It's just a simple button. It's easy to ignore if you DESPISE it 

I think that the thumbs up/thumbs down youtube comments-esque feature suits a forum a little better, however

Just my 2 cents on the issue.

[Broni]

I think that the thumbs up/thumbs down youtube comments-esque feature suits a forum a little better

If "thanks" feature is to stay, I think, the above is a very good idea

[JJ 3000]

I concur.

[BC_Programmer]

If "thanks" feature is to stay, I think, the above is a very good idea

they tried that already; isn't that basically the same thing as the original "karma" system, just on an individual post basis? If they are "counted" or averaged then it ends up being exactly the same as the karma system, which was disabled because a lot of contributors were actually getting negative karma for no good reason.

The original karma system was tried. It works on paper, but it didn't work for the exact same reason that is being essentially suggested be changed now; the addition essentially of the "smite" option (thumbs-down). Indubitably the same will occur if that is essentially "re-enabled". The "thanks" system was basically a fix for that problem by disabling the ability to smite/thumbs-down/reduce a member or member's posts' karma/rating, which was the problem because for whatever reason people were spamming on the smites. It might be possible that  it could be set that each member can only "vote" once on a post (thumbs up or thumbs down) but in that case it would mean that the people who "voted" for a post would need to be tracked. This seems like an awful lot of effort to appease people who are essentially saying they don't much care about the thanks/karma system at all.




Older threads on Karma/thanks:

http://www.computerhope.com/forum/index.php?topic=34394.0


http://www.computerhope.com/forum/index.php/topic,78554.0.html