Top Participants and Jive

[Guest]

Sometime in the last 2 weeks the Top Participants List has undergone major changes in both the Bridge and Photoshop Forums.  People that were not even on the list 2 weeks ago are now Top Contributors even though they have not visited the site in years.

Has Jive changed the rules on who is listed?  If so what are the new rules?  I know when the Forums consoladated everyone went back to zero rank and had to work there way up from there.

[adobe-admin]

Not aware of any changes at Jive. But what goes into there is a black box that we don't have control over. Jive has internal algorithms for that.

[Claudio González]

I don't understand. Are these the Adobe or the Jive forums? Who sets the rules? Or did Adobe just bought the cheapest Jiove package and now has to accept whatever Jive is willing or capable of doing?

[Guest]

From Adobe - Admin's response the answer is that these Forum are Jive forums, Adobe just pays them to run as they wish.

I see too many comments "we can't do XXX because we have limited options allowed by Jive".

[Dave Merchant]

SBS is a hosted platform - Adobe can customise the layout and ask for small-scale patches, but the core of the software is an off-the-shelf product which is maintained by Jive staff. They have more than one customer using the package, so naturally any development takes into account the needs of the majority - just as Adobe does with its own products.

[Guest]

Dave Merchant wrote:

SBS is a hosted platform - Adobe can customise the layout and ask for small-scale patches, but the core of the software is an off-the-shelf product which is maintained by Jive staff. They have more than one customer using the package, so naturally any development takes into account the needs of the majority - just as Adobe does with its own products.

Is Jive allowed to change the rules as they wish?  I know there are many detractors for the point system so this may fall on deaf ears.  But if John and Jane public see the Top Contributors, and they are people that have been dead, banned, or have not posted in years, what is the credibility of Top Contributors?  Why even use it if that is the case?

Kind of like having an entry in Trending Topics  that has not been commented on in 4 years. 

[Phillip M Jones]

I would think If Adobe entered into a Contract with Jive; that has the final authority as to what Jive provides and how, or else they can walk away.  There are tons of Other Bulletin Board (what this is) providers out there. And Adobe should have the authority to say if you don't fix the problems your out.

[Noel Carboni]

Dave Merchant wrote:

They have more than one customer using the package, so naturally any development takes into account the needs of the majority - just as Adobe does with its own products.

How is it none of those other customers have such a sucky forums implementation?  I'm just checking back here to see if Adobe/Jive have fixed the various problems of integration with Internet Explorer, and they clearly have not.  I still can't open a blank line without pushing a space or something in front of the cursor.  As I have ceased participating in general I don't know if the fairly frequent failures to be able to post have gone away.  I suppose this response will tell the tale.

Speaking of what large groups of customers need...

Based on my own web site stats:  In April 2013 Microsoft Internet Explorer was being used by 26.4% of the users who visited my site, 24% using Firefox, 30.3% using Chrome, and 13.8% using Safari.  March numbers were just a few tenths of a percent different for each.

So how is it okay that this site does not work properly for the second most popular (by a small margin) browser?

It seems to me Adobe is giving Jive a bad name.

-Noel

[Guest]

Noel Carboni wrote:

How is it none of those other customers have such a sucky forums implementation?  I'm just checking back here to see if Adobe/Jive have fixed the various problems of integration with Internet Explorer, and they clearly have not.  I still can't open a blank line without pushing a space or something in front of the cursor.  As I have ceased participating in general I don't know if the fairly frequent failures to be able to post have gone away.  I suppose this response will tell the tale.

[ insults removed by admin ]

You guys think that MVP title is something big.  Let me tell you it is not.  It is something given to posters here to make them solve problems which Adobe staff can't and all this is is done free of charge.  They are not paid servants of Adobe.  [ slightly insulting speculation removed ]

[pwillener]

professional.pirate wrote:

I wouldn't take everything written by certain Dave Merchant seriously ...

Dave is one of the most knowledgeable regulars in these forums.  It's not something that needs to be pointed out; most of us know that.

You, however, seem to see a red flag whenever you encounter a user with the MVP badge; why is this?

[Guest]

Pat Willener wrote:

Dave is one of the most knowledgeable regulars in these forums. 

Dave may be knowledgeable, but most of his comments reflect that he is out of touch with the real world on major issues that affect the main responders and public participation.  He is all too eager to support the direction that Adobe thinks is the "correct" route, and turns a blind eye to our suggestions.  This rankles some of us.

[Guest]

Curt Y wrote:

He is all too eager to support the direction that Adobe thinks is the "correct" route, and turns a blind eye to our suggestions.  This rankles some of us.

Curt, aren't you forgetting that one of the conditions to be an MVP is to be faithful to Adobe customs and practices otherwise the right to be an UNPAID helper is taken away.

[Guest]

We are all UNPAID Adobe helpers, but just because we are unpaid does not mean we have to be without comment sense as to how real world works.

[Phillip M Jones]

If that is the case the Adobe's version of MVP not right. In that case MVP status is only conferred to people that curry favor with Adobe That taints the value of the MVP Program.

Microsoft also has a MVP (Microsoft Valuable Persons) program

To be confered MVP Status you first must be asked and recommended by another MVP. Then you Must fill out what qualifications you  have. At no point are you required to Tow the company line. Only have the technical abilities to give correct answers. You are provided links to special Links provided to MVP to research answers. And up to last year anyway were allowed test new versions but are sworn to and sign NDA's and are not allowed to hint a new version is out.

Your not allowed to defame or disparage the Officers, employees in such a way that would/could  cause legal action.

But they are freely allowed to express their disappointment with the products they are answering questions on (Missing features, Buggy operation.

We people MVP, and User alike have a Link to go to to report Forum software Problems, and They are usually fixed with at best 24 hrs or less at worst 7 days.

I know about this because I was asked to join the MVP program and respectfully declined, because I didn't feel I was qualified enough.  I have been given Community Star designation.

[pwillener]

Phillip Jones wrote:

Microsoft also has a MVP (Microsoft Valuable Persons) program

Most Valuable Professional.

[Phillip M Jones]

That's Adobe's version. Orginally in Microsoft it was/is known as Most Valuable Persons Be that as it may - I was comparing between the two systems.

[Dave Merchant]

Wrong. As you well know from reading these forums, MVPs are completely free to express their own views whether they agree with Adobe policy or not.

Adobe employees have contractual restrictions on what they can say, nobody else does.

professional.pirate wrote:

Curt, aren't you forgetting that one of the conditions to be an MVP is to be faithful to Adobe customs and practices otherwise the right to be an UNPAID helper is taken away.

[the_wine_snob]

I disagree with your comment:

... that one of the conditions to be an MVP is to be faithful to Adobe customs and practices otherwise the right to be an UNPAID helper is taken away.

Over the years, I have been critical of several of the Adobe choices, from implementation of certain "features," deletation of others, GUI changes to "streamline," while making them less intuitive, and the list goes on. I have also been critical of many of the Forum changes, where I see a negative effect.

Still, I use many Adobe programs, so in very general terms, am supportive of them - with some major exceptions.

I also utilize the Bug Report/Feature Request form often, where I feel that there is an issue, a Bug, or something could be done better.

I have also been critical of Adobe's desire to restructure its Premiere Pro program, to solely accommodate the new users, who just came over from Final Cut Pro, while rather throwing loyal PrPro users "under the bus." I do agree that features of other NLE (Non Linear Editor) programs can be a good thing, but some of what I have seen has gone far, far beyond that, and I find some of it to be blatant pandering to a new market segment. To date, I have not been cautioned, censored, banned, or had anything stripped from my status. There has been no attempt to "rein me in," or get me to toe any party line. Maybe that is coming?

I believe that, at least in some cases, the above assertion is incorrect.

Hunt

[Noel Carboni]

This very kind of debate is exactly why I specifically asked not to be given a holy white background, though there have been those kind enough to offer.

Nothing wrong with recognition, and lord knows the MVPs I know are never "fanboys" or "yes men" (though they tend toward balanced opinions, which may be misinterpreted by those with hotter heads).  I just never want even the slightest implication of bias.

-Noel "Gandalf the Grey"

[Phillip M Jones]

Noel Carboni wrote:

Nothing wrong with recognition, and lord knows the MVPs I know are never "fanboys" or "yes men" (though they tend toward balanced opinions, which may be misinterpreted by those with hotter heads).  I just never want even the slightest implication of bias.

-Noel "Gandalf the Grey"

some of your recent comments would belie your potestations of being unbiased.

[Noel Carboni]

What do you feel is unbiased, that I happen to feel the features in Photoshop CC are worth joining the cloud for?  You'll note that I've also advised people who don't think it's worth it not to buy into the cloud subscription model.  Where's the bias?

It might interest you to know that I have over $6K invested in my current image processing workstation hardware alone, and that I have kept up with every single Photoshop release since version 3.  Perhaps the scale of what I consider reasonable for expenditures for state of the art image processing gear doesn't match yours.  I don't believe that makes me biased.

And I'll also offer up this:  As a career software engineer I know better than most what goes into a product as complex as Photoshop.  You couldn't possibly fund the development of such a product for anything less than tens of millions of dollars over years of development time.  We should all thank our lucky stars that we can get personal use of such technology for a mere few hundred dollars a year.

-Noel

[Phillip M Jones]

And they Hundreds or thousands millions in return.

You've  been far more in favor of CC rather than against it. You know that people have no choice. There is nothing to get in place of the products (the reason why the size of companies should be regulated so the Market has more choices). Adobe has us over a Barrel and laughing all the way to the Bank.  They are trying to rather get all the customers thay can are trying cull their customers and freeze everyone else out.  They are going to kill off customers that work for non profits. even schools and universities may stop as well. they simply don't have the systems need to go to rent/lease  it is Going to be tough forr University or small college to come up with the money lease per month paying thosands or hundreds of thousands of dollars per month.

To be unbiased your not supposed to recommend it or not, period just explain how it works and leave it at that.

[Noel Carboni]

I'll take your opinions under advisement.  Thank you for offering them.

I'm all about the features and function of the software, ESPECIALLY about getting more out of what the camera delivers, and from where I sit Adobe are doing good things, technically.

I'm not deluded into thinking that I'm going to be able to change Adobe's commerce policy.  If I want the software I know what I have to pay.  I also quite likely know a lot more about how Photoshop CC works than you do at this point.  I like what I see.

-Noel

[Guest]

Phillip Jones wrote:

Adobe has us over a Barrel and laughing all the way to the Bank.  They are trying to rather get all the customers thay can are trying cull their customers and freeze everyone else out.  They are going to kill off customers that work for non profits. even schools and universities may stop as well. they simply don't have the systems need to go to rent/lease  it is Going to be tough forr University or small college to come up with the money lease per month paying thosands or hundreds of thousands of dollars per month.

Companies are in business to make money.  Very few have "lets market it as cheap as possible" in their business plan.  Was that the creed of Apple?  The users vote with money and participation whether they approve or not.  THis is the only voice they have.  The CEO may look at the suggestion box, but the cash register is the one that gets the most votes.  In a few years Adobe may have to change the business plan again as competition emerges to fill in the void.  Ask Mic Jagger if he cares that the college kid has to pay $500 for a ticket to see him perform.

[Phillip M Jones]

I am not adverse to companies making money.  It's when Companies think they can make more money by freezing a large group of their loyal customers out of the Market I have issue with.

Creative Cloud is and May be the greatest thing to come out since Sliced Bread for some people. If they have the disposable income to fritter away a set amount of money that may change (go up at a moments notice) every month; more power to them. (It sure as heck will never go down) The People in the Main Office and the BOD have got to realize that unlike themselves that have an unending, infinite source of income (if the income is getting low just sock it to the customers to replenish there coffers), their customers do not.

There are many of us that don't have that luxury.  That $49 or $69 or $89 a month may make the difference in Their business staying  afloat. Or putting Potatoes on the Table  for super.  The Local church or school or the state university can no longer use the products because they are unavailable, due to cost.

Plus the majority of the country (not in Urban Metropolises) but in typical Rural areas, have poor Internet service even in Cable Modem service because the Cable or what ever provider values making a buck over doing regular maintenance to their infrastructure. In My case cable wiring into the house is over 30 years old. And creative Cloud just won't work, or doesn't reliably.