Are these forums a waste of time?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hoseman
  • Start date Start date
H

Hoseman

Looking at the views that threads get hardly anybody looks at th
threads that get posted.

Who is actually behind these forums and are they going to appoin
anyone - or look at some sort of solution - to help any of the peopl
here? Otherwise what is the point of setting this place up in the firs
place?

Great idea but not much use if there is no feedback
 
Well I can't personally vouch for this forum since it is the first time I
have been here but since you used the word forums I can personally tell you
that over the years I have found them the single most useful source of
information particularly when searching using google groups.
You must remember that in the main they are effectively run by everyone who
uses them though there will always be a small 'hardcore' of people with more
knowledge and experience who freely give their time to help others.
A problem with outlook may be that there are a number of different forums so
there might be a degree of dilution. Nevertheless if some threads are not
being viewed it is likely that current users don't know the answer!

Chris Curtis
 
most peoples (who come on these news group ) help themselves it is not part
of microsoft like you seem to think .
If some one know an ansser or a possible solution to the posted question he
will answer it ...
thesr are web site similar to a news group where points are given to the
correct answer. it gives people a bit more chalange, and you get more answer
....

try :
http://www.experts-exchange.com/
 
Hmm, from where I sit, over 90% of the questions here get answered and the
10% that don't are usually off-topic, incomplete, or just not answerable (my
outlook is not working, please help!)

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. Due to
the SWEN virus, all mail sent to my personal account will be deleted
without reading.

After searching google.groups.com and finding no answer, Hoseman asked:

| Looking at the views that threads get hardly anybody looks at the
| threads that get posted.
|
| Who is actually behind these forums and are they going to appoint
| anyone - or look at some sort of solution - to help any of the people
| here? Otherwise what is the point of setting this place up in the
| first place?
|
| Great idea but not much use if there is no feedback.
|
|
| ------------------------------------------------
|
| ~~View and post usenet messages directly from
| http://www.ExcelForum.com/
 
You're kidding, right? This has to be a troll post....

But I'll bite.

The *.outlook.* heirarchy groups are some of the busiest serious
groups on USENET (*.excel.misc is real close). Behind these forums
are anyone who cares to help, and many of them are recognized MVPs
and/or authors of some very fine books. All of 'em are volunteers.
Sally and Sue and Jocelyn and Lanwrench and Neo and Roady and Russ
and....) contribute thousands - of posts each week. And that does
not count some of the email on the side.

When someone posts a lucid question with enough information to be
understood, they always get an answer or a referral. Even when the
posts are off-topic or not even about OUTLOOK, the poster is usually
given a recommendation where to get help.

My guess is that you originally posted your question on
www.outlookforum.com and it showed up on USENET, where I am reading
it. That "forum" represents a moderated (i.e. filtered) view of the
OUTLOOK help available on USENET. I also noticed that you signed up
for that service on 2/3/04, have contributed a whopping three posts
(including the present "Are these forums a waste of time?")

Well, you can't say your posts don't get answered....

/Cal/
 
I have to completely disagree with this statement: "When someone posts a
lucid question with enough information to be understood, they always get an
answer or a referral." It appears to me that many times when there is no
answer, or when Microsoft has not yet acknowledged the problem, none of the
MVPs even respond to say so.

The questions that receive answers here are procedural or "how to" questions
more than anything else. For the most part the MVPs wouldn't actually need
to spend their time answering "how to" questions, as other Outlook users
could usually answer them. It would help a lot more if the MVPs could be
used as laisions between users and Microsoft regarding actual problems with
the software.

Yes, I am aware of and am currently using Microsoft email support, and if
necessary after this process is exhausted will use telephone support. But
it is frustrating that this forum seems only to be for "how to" and not to
bring to light and perhaps acknowledge actual issues with the software.


No Spam said:
You're kidding, right? This has to be a troll post....

But I'll bite.

The *.outlook.* heirarchy groups are some of the busiest serious
groups on USENET (*.excel.misc is real close). Behind these forums
are anyone who cares to help, and many of them are recognized MVPs
and/or authors of some very fine books. All of 'em are volunteers.
Sally and Sue and Jocelyn and Lanwrench and Neo and Roady and Russ
and....) contribute thousands - of posts each week. And that does
not count some of the email on the side.

When someone posts a lucid question with enough information to be
understood, they always get an answer or a referral. Even when the
posts are off-topic or not even about OUTLOOK, the poster is usually
given a recommendation where to get help.

My guess is that you originally posted your question on
www.outlookforum.com and it showed up on USENET, where I am reading
it. That "forum" represents a moderated (i.e. filtered) view of the
OUTLOOK help available on USENET. I also noticed that you signed up
for that service on 2/3/04, have contributed a whopping three posts
(including the present "Are these forums a waste of time?")

Well, you can't say your posts don't get answered....

/Cal/
Click to expand...
 
Understandably, you do not know what goes on behind the scenes in these
groups. Clearly, the questions that get answered are those with known,
tested, verified and supported solutions. Of course other experienced
Outlook users could answer these questions as well as we can. We wish you
would.

But do you really expect an MVP to state categorically that no known
solution to a poster's problem exists and that Microsoft simply won't
acknowledge or solve the problem? How can any of us ever know that with
certainty? All we can know is that the problem is not one we've seen before
or to which we know a solution. Are we to assume that because we don't know
the solution that none exists? No way. Instead we leave such questions
unanswered in the hopes that someone else has seen or knows of a solution.

When a new problem arises that seems to be reproducible and consistent, we
check with one another to see if anyone has seen a solution and if none
exists, these problems are identified and reported to Microsoft. In fact we
do function as liaisons, but that is not a role that will be apparent to you
just by reading newsgroup posts.
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]
Barbara Graham said:
I have to completely disagree with this statement: "When someone posts a
lucid question with enough information to be understood, they always get an
answer or a referral." It appears to me that many times when there is no
answer, or when Microsoft has not yet acknowledged the problem, none of the
MVPs even respond to say so.

The questions that receive answers here are procedural or "how to" questions
more than anything else. For the most part the MVPs wouldn't actually need
to spend their time answering "how to" questions, as other Outlook users
could usually answer them. It would help a lot more if the MVPs could be
used as laisions between users and Microsoft regarding actual problems with
the software.

Yes, I am aware of and am currently using Microsoft email support, and if
necessary after this process is exhausted will use telephone support. But
it is frustrating that this forum seems only to be for "how to" and not to
bring to light and perhaps acknowledge actual issues with the software.
Click to expand...
 
Well I disagree with your analysis of the newsgroup totally.
Yes the statement "they always get an answer or a referral" is not correct.
There are some questions that people do not have an answer for, or perhaps
that exact same question was asked by the same person on another group or
another person in the group, the people (MVP's and general users) also just
plan miss some of them.

However, if you care to go back a few days, I think the percentage of
answered questions is rather high, for a totally free service, I do not see
how one can complain. Also alot of the people get the answer direct in a
email as they when they ask the question, also email the question to people
they have seen answer questions in here.

If these forums are such a waste of time, then why are they known worldwide,
quoted time after time in google forums and many other forums that pick up
these forums ? That is a tremendous amount of people "wasting time for no
reason", for some reason, if the groups were useless, I do not think you
would see to many posts in here. If you look at the read records, there have
been 10816 posts since about Dec 15th. I do not think all those people feel
its a waste. Perhaps for you it is and AOL answers all your questions ?

Tedd Riggs
PDA Square Content Developer
www.pdasquare.com

 
To Tedd: Actually, regarding your not-so-oblique AOL reference, I have been
a systems administrator for about 20 years, which is probably why the
questions I post here are things that don't have easy answers. You really
have no way of knowing why anyone in particular uses AOL for their personal
email.

To Russ: Thank you for your reply. It makes a lot of sense.
 
No I never said I knew nor cared why people used AOL. The statement was made
as we get alot of people in here from AOL asking questions. You jumped to a
very incorrect conclusion. Matters not how long you have been a systems
admin. I have used the web before it was the web and was ARPA and DARPA net
and I am glad that these forums are around, they are much cheaper then
technical support calls and also the old days of calling BBS's. You still
cannot argue with over 10,000 people using this service in a short time.
However you are of course entitled to your opinion, if they are a waste of
time to you, they don't bother going here, they are a lifesaver for many
others and you cannot solve all the peoples problems on here, but I would
say, a good effort it put forward by many of the people.
Tedd
 
I will capitulate and admit I regret the use of the word "always", as
that seems to be easily disproven. Should shave said "almost always"
- which I think is the case. Often questions are posted for which
there are no satisfactory answers other than "that's just the way
Outlook works" or are due to other factors which represent
limitations of the underlying OS or networking topology. (Example:
the numerous posts asking why a .PST stored on CD-R media cannot be
opened in Outlook.)

Perhaps I completely misunderstood the original post insinuating
"...hardly anyone looks at the threads that get posted." I still
stand by my belief they are read and when someone has a helpful idea
or answer, they share it promptly.

Thank you for the feedback - always nice to hear how my words are
interpreted, especially when I fall into the trap of using words like
"always" or "never". I'll always try to never repeat that mistake!

/Cal/


I have to completely disagree with this statement: "When someone posts a
lucid question with enough information to be understood, they always get an
answer or a referral." It appears to me that many times when there is no
answer, or when Microsoft has not yet acknowledged the problem, none of the
MVPs even respond to say so.

The questions that receive answers here are procedural or "how to" questions
more than anything else. For the most part the MVPs wouldn't actually need
to spend their time answering "how to" questions, as other Outlook users
could usually answer them. It would help a lot more if the MVPs could be
used as laisions between users and Microsoft regarding actual problems with
the software.

Yes, I am aware of and am currently using Microsoft email support, and if
necessary after this process is exhausted will use telephone support. But
it is frustrating that this forum seems only to be for "how to" and not to
bring to light and perhaps acknowledge actual issues with the software.
Click to expand...
 
Cal,
I wish I could change my speller and "always" change the word "always" to
"most of the time" or "almost always" as I get stuck in the same problem as
you it seems whenever I use the world always.
Oh well...that happens... "most of the time" :-)

--
Tedd Riggs
PDA Square Content Developer
www.pdasquare.com


No Spam said:
I will capitulate and admit I regret the use of the word "always", as
that seems to be easily disproven. Should shave said "almost always"
- which I think is the case. Often questions are posted for which
there are no satisfactory answers other than "that's just the way
Outlook works" or are due to other factors which represent
limitations of the underlying OS or networking topology. (Example:
the numerous posts asking why a .PST stored on CD-R media cannot be
opened in Outlook.)

Perhaps I completely misunderstood the original post insinuating
"...hardly anyone looks at the threads that get posted." I still
stand by my belief they are read and when someone has a helpful idea
or answer, they share it promptly.

Thank you for the feedback - always nice to hear how my words are
interpreted, especially when I fall into the trap of using words like
"always" or "never". I'll always try to never repeat that mistake!

/Cal/
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top