The Big Picture

[Guest]

I think what is not being understood by some participants in these discussion is the scale of change which will follow the transition to the new forums.

Have a look at http://www.jivesoftware.com/products/clearspace-community and you'll see that the purpose of the Clearspace Community software goes way beyond the objectives that might be deduced of the current forums and their underlying software.

My personal take on things is that Adobe have decided that the whole style of the user interactions and community here is no longer appropriate to their corporate needs. There was a time when provision of a support forum was not seen as much related to the main thrust of company objectives, but those days have gone. Online communities are now one of the chief means of interaction between a corporation and its customers - and it's a two way channel. Interaction between those customers is also facilitated by within the online community but that's not necessarily deemed to be the key objective.

The forthcoming change represents, sadly, the end of this community and the creation of a new and very different one. The functional elements and the look and feel of their presentation in the Jive software are carefully designed to foster a particular style of interaction between users of Adobe software, and beween the users and the company. The functions and form are designed for an over-riding purpose and to support an overarching communications philosophy, not thrown in upon a whim.

It seems very clear to me that Adobe expects that the new community will have a significantly different flavour to the old, and that they will have anticipated that not all of the present members of this (and the Macromedia) communities will feel at home in the new one. There's no need to warn Adobe that some people will be unhappy enough not to return - they will have accepted that risk at the outset.

While there will be an inevitable loss of expertise, and it will be sad to see the last of some regular participants here, it seems clear to me that Adobe are hoping that the new style of community (moulded by the software they have chosen to create it) will bring in new members who may well have considerable expertise in the products, but who have not felt encouraged to participate in the style of community we have here now. The company will also be hoping that those newly requiring support will find the new site to be more effective and simpler to use than the old, and that the site will enable the company image and the strengths and usage of the product lines to be put across more clearly.

That, as I see it, is the big picture. There's not much point in discussing the points of detail unless in the context of the overall company objectives in making these changes - and if you disagree with the whole underlying premise of the changes, then there's little chance that you'll like much of the detail either.

[Guest]

Im not inclined to disparage the expertise of those that Adobe has anointed with the Community Expert label; I suspect that they really do know their product well however, that doesnt give any of them any special standing in this debate.

I guess my problem is that the example of the new forum layout that was posted by John for review includes the opportunity/encouragement of awarding points for correct answers. I couldnt be against this more! (along with many other things regarding the proposed layout). This starts us on what I believe is a very bad path that encourages the establishment of various tiers of forum participants. Adding to that already regrettable direction, you then add the idea of adding yet another even higher tier of forum user the community expert and you have the easy makings for the hall monitors, the cool kids, and the others which does not serve the forum community well in my estimation.

I always told my son when he was growing up that he should not brag about being good at something but instead go out and do the skill really well and then let others recognize and boast about his talents. Having an expert tag in your profile or attached to your postings seems pretty self-conflating and without a doubt off putting for me better to just give consistently good advice and be known to the forum community for that.

The over the top defending of the expert title that Ive seen here makes me believe that many of these experts need that ego stroking - sorry folks - that's how I see it.

[Ramón G Castañeda]

Fully second that last paragraph's in Gary's excellent post, with which I agree in its entirety.

[Guest]

> Im not inclined to disparage the expertise of those that Adobe has anointed with the Community Expert label; I suspect that they really do know their product well

Thank you for that at least :-)

> however, that doesnt give any of them any special standing in this debate.

I don't believe anyone asked for any special standing, we were invited here to find out exactly what was happening with the new forums, but I'll let the posts speak as to the welcome we received here.

> The over the top defending of the expert title that Ive seen here makes me believe that many of these experts need that ego stroking - sorry folks - that's how I see it.

It's the Community Expert Program that is being defended here, not the title per se. Not one person has suggested that the title need be used in the new forums - not one. I for one, don't need my ego stroked :-)

>I guess my problem is that the example of the new forum layout that was posted by John for review includes the opportunity/encouragement of awarding points for correct answers.

Couldn't agree more, but for another reason in addition to the ones you mention. I can only go by what may happen in the DW forum - but suppose a poster asks a question, is given an answer that is not the most solution for his needs, gives a thumbs up that the answer was correct, but in essence, it was not really the correct solution. Someone comes along later - does a search, finds this answer and then wonders why the solution didn't work for them.

This type of system was used on another forum I frequent, but got so out of hand that it was pulled within a short space of time.

[Kath-H]

I agree, I've seen it go badly wrong as well. Similarly a thread can be closed, because 'answered' when there is more to it. I've also seen people merrily handing out plus and minus points to people they do/don't like - it gets very silly very quickly.

[Guest]

>I've also seen people merrily handing out plus and minus points to people they do/don't like - it gets very silly very quickly.

there is that as well, which I forgot to mention, so thanks Kath :-)

[Guest]

> Fully second that last paragraph's

Now why did I know you'd be one of the first to say that :-)

>in Gary's excellent post, with which I agree in its entirety.

I agree with the majority of his post as well, except of course, where I replied to separately.

I don't see why this 'title' has been made to be such a big issue. It's not important to the overall scheme of things. No one is complaining whether it is used or not.

I don't believe everyone is going to like every feature of whatever is rolled out eventually, but we'll have to live with it, whether we are from the old MM forums or the current ones. Should a feature not be working out as well as they had thought/hoped, I'm sure they'll work to fix it at that time.

[Guest]

> (And for the record, mine either I suppose, in getting tangled up with replying to your posts)

I've fallen into the trap of trying to counter every argument I see here. I think things will move along more briskly if there's a bit more of a brainstorming atmosphere - let people have their say, or their rant, without others having to have their countersay followed by a further riposte, etc etc, and let the good people at Adobe reach their own conclusions.

[Kath-H]

And lock the bad ones in a cupboard ;)

[Ramón G Castañeda]

>I don't see why this 'title' has been made to be such a big issue

You have Murray to thank for that, as explained in the other thread, it goes back a long time.

[David_Powers]

> Forum Host has always been all that you needed: your knowledge not only of the Adobe products but, even more important, the ancillary trades of the printing industry, makes your expertise more than obvious.

Hang on a moment. Are you saying that you don't object to Neil being known as Forum Host? If that's the case, all the ranting and railing against Adobe Community Experts has been a total waste of time.

Let's be absolutely clear about this. I am an Adobe Community Expert for Dreamweaver - not for anything else. My skills in Photoshop, InDesign, Fireworks, and Flex are competent at best. I lay no claim to expertise in them, and have stated repeatedly that it would be an embarrassment to me to be identified as an "expert" in a forum dealing with a product or subject where I clearly have no claim to such a title.

Although Community Experts play a wider role, their role in the former Macromedia forums is very similar to that of an Adobe Forum Host. It can't be exactly the same, because we don't have the same powers of benevolent dictator as a Forum Host. We can't edit other people's posts, but we do act as a conduit between the forum and Adobe, reporting abuse and spamming, and escalating urgent problems directly to a member of the product development team. Like Forum Hosts, we're acknowledged by our peers to be experts, not just in the product, but in the wider perspective of web development. I probably spend more time in the forums helping people with PHP scripts than dealing with questions directly related to Dreamweaver.

I would be perfectly happy to be identified in the new Dreamweaver forums as Forum Host, as that is the role Community Experts are being asked to undertake. I play a similar role in Dreamweaver Community Help, the commenting system for the online help files and Adobe Developer Center articles. I'm identified there simply as "David Powers (Moderator)". There is no mention of me being an Adobe Community Expert, but the Moderator title is automatically appended to my posts by Adobe. In the five months I've been fulfilling that role, no one has ever objected to the title being used.

My defence of the title Adobe Community Expert is simply a response to the vitriolic attacks on our integrity as a whole. You cannot claim on the one hand that Neil Keller is OK because you know him, but that the rest of us are "masquerading under insignificant titles". When selecting Community Experts, Adobe will have applied the same criteria of professional excellence to everyone as it applied to Neil. We work in completely different fields and don't know each other, but that's no reason to doubt another person's skills or character.

> And the more that they defend the practice, the more I realise just how insignificant they are.

And the more you rant, the hollower your arguments sound.

[David_Powers]

> I guess my problem is that the example of the new forum layout that was posted by John for review includes the opportunity/encouragement of awarding points for correct answers. I couldnt be against this more!

This very point was raised by many Community Experts in a Connect session that we had with John Cornicello. Our concern was not to protect our own "status", but the fact that a beginner could award "helpful" points to a suboptimal solution that "works", but leads to other problems further down the line.

[Ramón G Castañeda]

> you don't object to Neil being known as Forum Host?

Neil never flaunted even the Forum Host title, doesn't use it. He only identified himself as such when he was about to ban someone from the forum, as a final warning.

[David_Powers]

Some people might regard that as underhand - a plain clothes policeman who reveals his identity only at the time of arrest. No disrespect is intended to Neil or any other forum host; but my feeling is that, if somebody has moderator powers in a forum, it is preferable to be open about it.

[PJonesCET]

I see no reason why it would be a problem to identify forum moderators. Many Forums I go to openly show who all the moderators are by the username or nickname and have a mechanism to highlight the one that are actually on the air at the time you sign in.

[Guest]

>That didn't stop me from doing what I've been doing for the last 4 years... going out into the community and helping newbies.

nadia, i think the point is, that's what ALL of us regulars do. i recon on a BAD day i help 2 or 3 people in PS win a day. there are good days where i get to a dozen or more. i've been doing it for at least 6 or 7 years now. i don't have a "badge". i don't get "free software"... so yea, maybe there is a little jealousy involved. a little "thanks" might be nice every now and then instead of the constant "watch it, you'll get banned." or "i'll delete that post if you don't get back on topic" slap in the head we get occasionally.

>I always told my son when he was growing up that he should not brag about being good at something but instead go out and do the skill really well and then let others recognize and boast about his talents. Having an expert tag in your profile or attached to your postings seems pretty self-conflating and without a doubt off putting for me better to just give consistently good advice and be known to the forum community for that.

bingo!

>My defence of the title Adobe Community Expert is simply a response to the vitriolic attacks on our integrity as a whole. You cannot claim on the one hand that Neil Keller is OK because you know him, but that the rest of us are "masquerading under insignificant titles". When selecting Community Experts, Adobe will have applied the same criteria of professional excellence to everyone as it applied to Neil. We work in completely different fields and don't know each other, but that's no reason to doubt another person's skills or character.

well put david.

>Some people might regard that as underhand - a plain clothes policeman who reveals his identity only at the time of arrest.

I agree there too. i believe the hosts should have that appellate attached to their forum names, the way adobe personnel do.

[Guest]

another thing about the "correct" answer option...

there's a long held tradition that "there are always at least three ways to do ANYthing in photoshop". so much so that it's become like a cult thing to try to get to the "other" ways at times.

someone marking "correct" next to an answer will generally leave a LOT of ground uncovered in the photoshop forums.

and my vote is to keep windows and mac separate. those maccies will get mud all over our carpets! the hooligans! :P

[PJonesCET]

I see the That the PC vs Mac war is still alive and well 10 years or more after platform wars was declared over.

Although I prefer Mac's that my opinion, I don't have to constantly worry (yet) about all types of Malware out to destroy my data. It not nearly as complicated to install and setup an Application. Its not nearly as complicated to remove an application. It's not nearly as complicated to set up internet connection. The list could go on an on. But that's all my opinion, and experience.

If you like and enjoy and using a windows PC that's fine as well.

I too believe That there should be a group for each Platform that uses Adobe products. Be it PC. Mac. UNIX. Linux. BEOS, NextStep or whatever.

That way people that have experience using a products on a given platform, can help other on that platform. Most folks from the windows side of things if they were allowed on all groups would only take the opportunity to make fun of and deride people and their computers. Many (not all) have this silly notion just because they use the system with the largest base, means its better. When all it means is its just different.

[Guest]

>Although I prefer Mac's that my opinion, I don't have to constantly worry (yet) about all types of Malware out to destroy my data

sure you do. you're just blissfully unaware! :)

(yes, i'm kidding. after all, macs are just over-priced intel machines now-a-days anyway. too bad steve won't open up and sell the os to everyone!)

[Günter_Schenk]

-------
i recon on a BAD day i help 2 or 3 people in PS win a day. there are good days where i get to a dozen or more. i've been doing it for at least 6 or 7 years now. i don't have a "badge". i don't get "free software"... so yea, maybe there is a little jealousy involved
-------

From my experience: once you have that badge attached to your name, it´s in particular the new forum participants who may have a tendency to call you to account for matters you aren´t responsible for at all respectively which you can´t solve because they are out of your reach -- and as the Community Expert label (I reckon this could be *any* lable) appears to induce the huge misinterpretation that your posts reflect Adobe´s view, it usually does take a while until new forum participants realize that you´re an independantly acting/speaking fellow who does his work for the benefit of the user community.

I tell ya, wearing this badge can become a burden at times ;-)

[Stan Jones]

I follow the arguments, but I can only understand the INTENSITY of the concerns about how users are identified as emotional. It is true that these forums are unusual today in the very small amount of identification that is done in posts. But that data is available in a profile if the user chooses. And what is the difference in whether a very brief tag (as signature line or left column) appears in the post or by rollover or by click-to-profile. That is really not a bandwidth issue; and I do believe the left column should have a preference for being turned off.

Official Adobe status (employee, forum moderator/host, community expert) are logical bits of information. The arguments against them simply because some users believe that people's advice should speak for itself, is not going to convince many of us. I don't find it pretentious any more than someone who states how many years they've been posting. The new user has very little data; why not provide them something.

Many other tags are also appropriate, including the actual ACE (Adobe Certified Expert).

[Guest]

>From my experience: once you have that badge attached to your name, it´s in particular the new forum participants who may have a tendency to call you to account for matters you aren´t responsible for at all respectively which you can´t solve because they are out of your reach -- and as the Community Expert label (I reckon this could be *any* lable) appears to induce the huge misinterpretation that your posts reflect Adobe´s view

right. thanks. that's a pretty good argument for NOT allowing the "badges"... :)

[Guest]

>and I do believe the left column should have a preference for being turned off.

Keep in mind that such options can only be available if the ability is offered as a feature within the software. While such items can be added as a feature request for the software itself, John is avoiding any kind of code customization that would prohibit appropriate software upgrades in the future.

I'm also not certain whether there is a limit on the number of icons (or whatever the term might be) that indicates status. There may well only be one allowed... so how then would people choose? It's also probably not possible to pick and choose which areas to display which icons. In all likelihood it's an all or nothing thing.

All this is still yet to be seen... and so far we are working with near zero information. I'm gonna wait a bit before I try to figure that one out.

[Günter_Schenk]

-------
right. thanks. that's a pretty good argument for NOT allowing the "badges"...
-------

sorry, but the presumed strong predisposition for swaggering does not allow me to agree with this :-)

[Kath-H]

So you really don't know and have nothing to add?

[Guest]

>sorry, but the presumed strong predisposition for swaggering does not allow me to agree with this

XD