User to User?

Here is the original background thread:

http://forums.adobe.com/message/4399019#4399019

Even if they are staff, there is no guarantee their response is any more correct than one of the users,with the noted exception.  If they are directly involved in the development of that particular tool/procedure/interface that the question is based on their comments are a treasure as they are then the "bible".   But each program is so complex, and developed in different buildings and countires, and every computer has a different hardware/software mix, that any given staff person can not know the "correct answer" every time. 

In my own experience I see answers by staff that are given with good intentions that miss the mark.  It will probably always be this way as what solution works on User #1's machine will not work on Users #5 machine even with the same problem.

So readers should give a little more attenion to a Staff's response than a user's response.  And even with users response I would think they are biased by a user that had 9 posts vs someone with 9,000 posts.  And I personally think this is the way it goes.  I see all to many responses to a Staff's comments which says "you don't know - - - - "

Claudio, others,

The background issue was up in this thread:

http://forums.adobe.com/message/4592761#4592761

As it appears, it turned out that it was (probably a remnant of the fortunately discontinued general use of contrasting background for special posters, still) only applying to specific staff members.

And as it appears, John would report the issue so it would go away.

I have seen no special backgrounds since then, so I believe it is a matter of a few overlooked cases.

As I understand the MVP designation, it covers a number of groups including former Community Professionals, moderators, maybe some other groups, and a lot of quite innocent and equally ordinary natives that know no more about the whole thing than anyone else.

As I understand the increased staff presence, it is an attempt to support the forums in different ways, including their actual participating in answering questions as equals rather than superiors, their helping to bring issues to the attention of the relevant other people at Adobe, and their taking care of things and thereby taking part in the running of the forums.

As I see it, the increased staff presence is one of the best changes since the days of the fair forums.

I am very happy to consider the Adobe forums to be user-to-user discussion boards.

Claudio González wrote: My reason for raising this matter again is that I have noticed, at least in the Reader forum, a marked increase in the number of participants who have a notorious staff badge. Which I would find perfectly all right if they were participating officially as Adobe staff. However, there are several cases where it is quite evident that they are only posting their own personal opinions. Which, unfortunately, at times are wrong, or show that they do not understand the problem being discussed, perhaps because of language problems.

I don't understand or sympathize with your use of the work "notorious" in this context.  There is nothing "notorious" about working for Adobe or posting in the forums as a staff member.  I look on voluntary staff participation as something very positive.  These staff members show the human face of Adobe when they express their personal opinions, and I wouldn't want to miss it. I find it especially refreshing when a staff member agrees with community criticism.

I don't really understand what you to expect them to post at all under the official "Staff" badge (or highlighted as representing the company).  If they had to represent the official company position in every instance, most of the time they wouldn't be able to post at all (because no "official company position" has been issued) or they would have to use boilerplate text. 

If you are having trouble differentiating personal opinions from the official Adobe position (I don't frequent the Reader forums, so I don't know what goes on there), you can always ask. 

The fact that sometimes the answers are wrong wouldn't, in my opinion, change if there was a differentiation between when a staff member posts as a private person or as an official Adobe representative.

<opinion>

The derived answer is this:

They are what they are, no more and no less.

That's really all that can be said.  It may be futile to look for a master plan.

</opinion>

-Noel

I would suggest removing the different background, or at least to restrict its use to the cases in which the person is officialy posting as a member of the Adobe staff.

Ideally, the staff posting here, in any capacity, should be familiar with the product rather than simply expressing his/her opinion.  I guess the same principle applies to an MVP.  What is the point of an MVP interfering in a discussion in which he/she has no expertise at all.  All they do is disrupt the discussion and whoever was trying to help just stops to avoid unnecessary public row about nothing!!