diff options
| author | Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mageia.org> | 2013-04-14 13:46:12 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Nicolas Vigier <boklm@mageia.org> | 2013-04-14 13:46:12 +0000 |
| commit | 1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0 (patch) | |
| tree | b175f9d5fcb107576dabc768e7bd04d4a3e491a0 /zarb-ml/mageia-webteam/2011-July/001276.html | |
| parent | fa5098cf210b23ab4f419913e28af7b1b07dafb2 (diff) | |
| download | archives-1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0.tar archives-1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0.tar.gz archives-1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0.tar.bz2 archives-1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0.tar.xz archives-1be510f9529cb082f802408b472a77d074b394c0.zip | |
Diffstat (limited to 'zarb-ml/mageia-webteam/2011-July/001276.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | zarb-ml/mageia-webteam/2011-July/001276.html | 332 |
1 files changed, 332 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/zarb-ml/mageia-webteam/2011-July/001276.html b/zarb-ml/mageia-webteam/2011-July/001276.html new file mode 100644 index 000000000..57a74c1c1 --- /dev/null +++ b/zarb-ml/mageia-webteam/2011-July/001276.html @@ -0,0 +1,332 @@ +<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> +<HTML> + <HEAD> + <TITLE> [Mageia-webteam] [Bug 1956] Can not edit posts in forum (after timeout) + </TITLE> + <LINK REL="Index" HREF="index.html" > + <LINK REL="made" HREF="mailto:mageia-webteam%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-webteam%5D%20%5BBug%201956%5D%20Can%20not%20edit%20posts%20in%20forum%20%28after%0A%09timeout%29&In-Reply-To=%3C20110705230758.9C9BB432C4%40alamut.mageia.org%3E"> + <META NAME="robots" CONTENT="index,nofollow"> + <META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> + <LINK REL="Previous" HREF="001275.html"> + <LINK REL="Next" HREF="001277.html"> + </HEAD> + <BODY BGCOLOR="#ffffff"> + <H1>[Mageia-webteam] [Bug 1956] Can not edit posts in forum (after timeout)</H1> + <B>Barry Jackson</B> + <A HREF="mailto:mageia-webteam%40mageia.org?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BMageia-webteam%5D%20%5BBug%201956%5D%20Can%20not%20edit%20posts%20in%20forum%20%28after%0A%09timeout%29&In-Reply-To=%3C20110705230758.9C9BB432C4%40alamut.mageia.org%3E" + TITLE="[Mageia-webteam] [Bug 1956] Can not edit posts in forum (after timeout)">bugzilla-daemon at mageia.org + </A><BR> + <I>Wed Jul 6 01:07:58 CEST 2011</I> + <P><UL> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="001275.html">[Mageia-webteam] [Bug 1932] Your Bugzilla bug list needs attention. +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="001277.html">[Mageia-webteam] [Bug 1956] Can not edit posts in forum (after timeout) +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#1276">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#1276">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#1276">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#1276">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + <HR> +<!--beginarticle--> +<PRE><A HREF="https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1956">https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1956</A> + +--- Comment #14 from Barry Jackson <<A HREF="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-webteam">zen25000 at zen.co.uk</A>> 2011-07-06 01:07:58 CEST --- +(In reply to comment #13) + +><i> +</I>><i> Then let's see if we can do better here with objective arguments. +</I>><i> +</I>That would be good - but if nothing will be done after then it's a waste of +time. +><i> +</I>><i> > > > and little or no consideration of the utility of the Forum as a research resource +</I>><i> > > > for users and of the fact that this limit can make life difficult for those people +</I>><i> > > > who spend time providing assistance to other users. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > Exactly +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> +</I>><i> On the contrary : BIG consideration was given to this point. But these special +</I>><i> users that are helping others on a regular basis are not common users. +</I> +Yes, in most cases they are. + +><i> As packagers or translators, or sysadmin are not common users either. All +</I>><i> follow +</I>><i> mentoring process and are given the proper privileges once they have been +</I>><i> considered ready to do their jobs without help or control... +</I> +You misunderstand forums - regular users helping each other. + +><i> +</I>><i> Users that write tutorials or that helps others on a regular basis can be +</I>><i> granted the proper privileges to edit own posts or other posts without +</I>><i> limitation. +</I> +Oh boy - this just gets worse. + +><i> (Well for this point of posts needing permanent edition like +</I>><i> tutorials... see later doc-tool part which is a discussion) +</I>><i> +</I>><i> But on a default basis no-one with common sense would give root password on the +</I>><i> servers or allow Mr Unknown to push whatever package he wants to the official +</I>><i> repositories... well on a less critical context users privileges on official +</I>><i> forums need obviously to follow similar scheme as other teams. +</I> +Well, anyone can edit the wiki + +><i> +</I>><i> Roughy : +</I>><i> +</I>><i> => Read only of topics for everybody (opensource way) +</I>><i> => Comment / Create topics for common subscribers +</I>><i> => More privileges for active forums contributors (like people helping others +</I>><i> on a regular basis or writing tutorials, or packagers that make the effort to +</I>><i> come to help users...) privileges that can vary depending of contributors +</I>><i> needs/activities. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> +</I>><i> > > You have to distinguish the forum-as-a-discussion-place (where keeping posts in +</I>><i> > > their original form is crucial) and the forum-as-a-support/doc-tool-place +</I>><i> > > (where obsoleting/updating posts, with update timestamps is crucial as well). +</I>><i> > > +</I>><i> > > Both have their own contingencies and may be best served by distinct platform +</I>><i> > > (the former is more in phpBB's original purpose, the latter more in an +</I>><i> > > equivalent to <A HREF="http://stackoverflow.com/">http://stackoverflow.com/</A> platform). +</I>><i> > > +</I>><i> > > If those are to be served by the same platform, that makes several use cases to +</I>><i> > > satisfy. And here obviously, the forum was first thought as a discussion +</I>><i> > > platform. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > Well no actually :- +</I>><i> > <A HREF="http://www.mageia.org/en/support/">http://www.mageia.org/en/support/</A> +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > This shows the forum as primarily a "support forum" not as a discussion place. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> +</I>><i> There is njon contradiction there : Many projects use bugtrackers like Buzilla +</I>><i> as a support system (others use mailing lists or Sourceforge/Savannah embedded +</I>><i> miniforums). All those don't allow late edition. And very few consider that +</I>><i> abnormal :) +</I> +I'm not concerned with those. This is about the Mageia users forum. + +><i> +</I>><i> Support IS discussion and nothing more :) +</I>><i> but at the moment the forum is (i confirm) more thought +</I>><i> as a discussion/support platform thant a doc/tool/publication one. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> (We can also consider to change this during discussions) +</I>><i> +</I>><i> > > +</I>><i> > > So you may of course argue of the contrary, but arguing won't lead as far as +</I>><i> > > really giving a hand, joining the team and helping to better configure the +</I>><i> > > team, the platform, and if needed, a distinct platform. +</I>><i> > > +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > By reporting this bug the intention was to give a hand at improving the forum +</I>><i> > by making the job of those prepared to help and offer support easier. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Well, at the moment if you have a true need to edit your posts because they +</I>><i> look like +</I>><i> tiny tutos/guides/howtos and because you prefer to work on the forum for these +</I>><i> publication +</I>><i> we can start an experimentation with you (specific user role like tutorial +</I>><i> writer and/or specific +</I>><i> forum area with a name to be defined) and see if the result is positive / users +</I>><i> feedback... +</I> +No thanks - I would just like this bug fixed. +><i> +</I>><i> > Likewise with <A HREF="https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1188">https://bugs.mageia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1188</A> which has also +</I>><i> > fallen on stony ground. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> +</I>><i> It did not... +</I> +Yes it did - no action has been taken. + +><i> but i'm not sure doing the reqested change bring more good than +</I>><i> harm. +</I> +Again - just your decision. + +><i> (It can be reverted though if we have many users complainig and it will not put +</I>><i> topic +</I>><i> flow at risk on the contrary of edition privileges) +</I>><i> +</I> +Many users already spoke in that bug. +And how on earth could a reply notification spoil topic flow - lack of one just +ruins it as the people in the topic don't know that there has been an answer. + +><i> +</I>><i> In my opinion it IS expected behavior : if you push words to the world (IRL +</I>><i> speaking, or in mail or ir instant messaging) noone could expect to be able to +</I>><i> get back in the future to erase the said words. +</I> +I give up... sigh + +><i> +</I>><i> In a forum if you say something and that people refer to it later in the topic +</I>><i> (or elsewhere in personal blogs or bugtrackers or whatever) They expect the +</I>><i> targeted post not to change because if it changes drastically their answers +</I>><i> would loose sense. And that is not what one should expect. +</I>><i> +</I> +Well I do expect it - and if I change something I make it obvious and also +consider the impact on following posts. + +><i> +</I>><i> > This bug report is not about politics but simply about the time limit on the +</I>><i> > editing of posts. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > Can we put the politics to one side and discuss just the bug please? +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Then you have technical and objective arguments on the matter itself here :) +</I>><i> +</I>><i> And for the "valid" reasons you gave : +</I>><i> +</I>><i> (In reply to comment #0) +</I>><i> > There are many valid reasons why it may be necessary to edit a post. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> > 1. It imparts incorrect information. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> It could also allow to break valid information (think for example of spammers +</I>><i> that could post unharmful links like screenshots with basic user question then +</I>><i> change them 3 weeks later to push viagra or whatever) +</I>><i> +</I> +Now that's what mods are for. + +><i> > 2. The information is out of date. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> For this a later post is a better way because a big change on out of date +</I>><i> information would result in many posts making no sense (like "hey the link is +</I>><i> broken : here is the good one"). +</I>><i> +</I> +That depends on the person making the change having some sense - something +which you seem to feel that no one else has. + +><i> Further, sometimes the date can be still valid for some users or some versions +</I>><i> of software (think that people don't always follow the update rythm... changing +</I>><i> the data to match new versions would deprivate them from the original post +</I>><i> which is what they need) +</I>><i> +</I> +Not always. + +><i> For that editors discipline is the only solution (choosing between new post +</I>><i> and/or update with a proper changelog so that users can know that the post was +</I>><i> edited when and why...) +</I>><i> +</I> +Exactly - so where is the problem? + +><i> And we would not expect such discipline from every user... +</I> +Here we go again - users are idiots - we must protect the world from them - +attitude. + +><i> so we come back to +</I>><i> mentoring process and dedicated privileges for users that will play by the +</I>><i> rules... +</I> +So now I need mentoring to use a forum in the way that I have used it in +Mandriva for the last 2-3 years? + +><i> +</I>><i> > 3. A minor edit would improve comprehension. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> +</I>><i> For tutorials and things like that yes... but do we want forums to host such +</I>><i> pieces of valuable information ? (See wiki vs forums discussion here above) +</I> +Again - anyone can edit a wiki without mentoring + +><i> +</I>><i> For discussions : better explain later so that posts of users asking for +</I>><i> precision do not loose sense. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> > In all these cases it is not appropriate to add another post to offer a +</I>><i> > correction as it may be several pages from the original post, also the +</I>><i> > incorrect post would still be available to be read. +</I>><i> > +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Well as said above, it is often better to have access to the original post +</I>><i> (wich is not necessarily "incorrect") so that the logic flow of the following +</I>><i> post is not broken. (Again: except for reference posts like tutos). +</I>><i> +</I> +Again, users are quite capable of deciding what is appropriate. + +><i> +</I>><i> > Forum posts are searched and used to solve problems in a similar way to the +</I>><i> > wiki. +</I>><i> > Imagine the author not being able to edit a wiki entry. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> Yes but we DO HAVE a wiki and the forum is not necessarily supposed to compete +</I>><i> with it... if you try to push the idea of having long life piece of information +</I>><i> on the forum you'll have to pass over the dead bodies of wikis advocates :o) +</I>><i> +</I> +Users are always pushed to search the forum for the answer to a problem before +posting - what are they looking for if it's not information? + +><i> +</I>><i> > BTW I tried to get a post modified by reporting it to the mods with clear +</I>><i> > instructions about what needed changing and it's now at 3 days and counting +</I>><i> > with no response. +</I>><i> +</I>><i> You have had your post modified... there is still a mod we to finish (because +</I>><i> nothin fit our needs for that) to accelerate processing of reports. Once done +</I>><i> you'll wait far less. +</I> +Thank you, yes and it did not cause any of the supposedly negative issues that +you raised earlier, and neither would it if I had done it myself. + +><i> +</I>><i> And for making a topic as Sloved a mod is also on it's way : so no need for +</I>><i> edition on this aspect :) +</I> +And will you be able to un-solve it as well if the problem re-appears, as can +often be the case? + +-- +Configure bugmail: <A HREF="https://bugs.mageia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email">https://bugs.mageia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email</A> +------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- +You are the assignee for the bug. +</PRE> + + + + + + + + +<!--endarticle--> + <HR> + <P><UL> + <!--threads--> + <LI>Previous message: <A HREF="001275.html">[Mageia-webteam] [Bug 1932] Your Bugzilla bug list needs attention. +</A></li> + <LI>Next message: <A HREF="001277.html">[Mageia-webteam] [Bug 1956] Can not edit posts in forum (after timeout) +</A></li> + <LI> <B>Messages sorted by:</B> + <a href="date.html#1276">[ date ]</a> + <a href="thread.html#1276">[ thread ]</a> + <a href="subject.html#1276">[ subject ]</a> + <a href="author.html#1276">[ author ]</a> + </LI> + </UL> + +<hr> +<a href="https://www.mageia.org/mailman/listinfo/mageia-webteam">More information about the Mageia-webteam +mailing list</a><br> +</body></html> |