The say of the natives

[Jacob Bugge]

Quite a few times it has been claimed in these threads that the posters are few, do not represent the average, and so on.

Seemingly this leads the claimers to the conclusion that the strong support of the present forum appearance and the consequent strong objections to the complete change anticipated, and at least partially confirmed, does not represent a general opinion among forum members.

However, I am convinced that the objections to the anticipated change are widespread among the product forum members, especially among frequent posters, and especially among those contributing answers.

As far as I can see in the product forums that I contribue to or follow, at least 3/4 of the questions are answered by forum regulars such as myself that never, or very rarely, ask questions themselves. This means that we may be few in number, but not in terms of contributing to the forums.

Actually, only few regulars in the product forums post in the general forums at all, except perhaps on very rare occasions, but all the reactions I saw after the nightmare of the aborted forum merge were clear: Everyone resented not only the serious issues, but also the very format, which was not that far from what we are anticipating here, based upon the feedback so far.

All other product forum members post (questions) much less frequently, but stil, all the reactions I saw after aborted forum merge were the same.

Consequently, as far as I can see, what is posted here in these threads is the say of the natives.

[Jacob Bugge]

In the OP I stated three things:

1) There are some regulars that post more often than anyone else, and they provide most of the answers. I have not said that the regulars should have a special treatment or be the only one with a say.

2) The only reaction I have seen after the aborted merge, from both regulars and other forum members, has included a strong opposition to the format of it. Both groups together constitute the natives that I refer to.

Therefore, what is posted here in these threads is the say of the natives.

And:

3) According to the feedback (actual statements and reference to existing comparable forums), the merged forum format was not that far from what we may expect.

Therefore, the say is not groundless, although I hope things will have developed when we get to the preview.

[Ann_Shelbourne1]

>So... Ann... where is the web site you've created to help users?

I try to help in THESE Forums (and I do read all of the Posts regularly, if not daily, and respond whenever I can help) in the Photoshop, Photography, ACR, Bridge and Forum C&A forums.

I also regularly read, but admit that I post a lot less frequently, in the inDesign and Illustrator Forums.

As a contributor, I am only concerned with how the Adobe User to User Forums work and up until now the ADOBE FORUMS (unlike the MM ones!) have been the epitome of efficient and clean design and usability except for the slowness that we sometimes experience.

Speed of access was, and is, the ONLY aspect that needed to be changed or "improved".

[Sorry, but all other web site creation that I do is done only for people who will PAY for it!]

[Cindy-]

> If you don't have one, I would say you do not have an equal voice with Curt

Sorry, Curts outside activities have nothing to do with these forums.

[Guest]

Kath, much, or most, of the stuff I do online relates to how people talk to one another. I have been dismayed all these years that some of the old ways of interacting have continued to live on even now, tho to a far lesser degree then once was. I hope that the days of beating on newbies is gone, but you do still see it now and again. So, yes, I talk about how people relate to one another online. I tend to use business models and suggest that they write as tho they are in f2f meeting with the folks they are interacting with, which tends to temper some of the extremes that otherwise show up. I also encourage folks to remain aware of the perspectives of other people around them and to take those into consideration in their interactions. I also ask people to be realistic in both their suppositions and expectations. If all that constitutes a sermon, all I can say is that I'm sorry it's needed.

[Curt Wrigley]

Amen

[Kath-H]

Just so you know - I do not regard you as qualified to sermonise at me.

[Guest]

You're funny, Curt. :)

Kath, if you want to be queen bee, I don't care. The only question I'd have for you is what color crown you prefer, silver or gold. The only aspirations I have around here is to be helpful. If you want to assume more, you're well within your rights to do so.

[Chris Cox]

Ann - Calm down.

Please stop attacking people.

And be careful with the accusations.

There is always more to the story than can be publicly shared.

[Cindy-]

> The only aspirations I have around here is to be helpful.

That may be true but I have never liked how you come across. Could be that sermonizing thing. Perhaps you think you can talk down to people. Whatever. Just reading some of the things you say to other people annoys me. But I tend to stay back until I have something to say... like now. There is no argument but rather just my take on you.

I would not consider you a peace maker since I would stake money on there are others who feel just like I do. Who have never really had any cause to be involved in conversation with you and would like to keep it that way. You know, the yuk factor.

So have at it dear.

[Guest]

good thing we don't have to actually like one another, just treat one another half-way decently.

[Cindy-]

> just treat one another half-way decently.

Now I feel motivated.

[Guest]

> I wonder if Adobe appreciates just HOW much software is sold as a direct result of advice and help that is given in these Forums?

Or not sold. There was a long and vitriolic thread in one of the product forums recently where something like twenty different people complained about a bug in the product. It was then revealed that this bug was only evident in pirated versions of the software. Sudden silence by the complaining members.

There's every reason to think that some of the 'natives' haven't paid for the product and often don't have a manual, and thus greatly value the support generously given by the regulars here.

In another company's forum I've heard about, it's a requirement that you provide your software serial number when you sign up. If it doesn't match with a valid number, you don't get in. If you're evaluating the product you can indicate that instead, and after a month, you have to provide the serial number if you've purchased the product, or you're out.

It would be interesting to see the reduction in the number of natives here if that mechanism were possible in the new software. Doubtless it's not.

[Cindy-]

> There's every reason to think that some of the 'natives' haven't paid for the product and often don't have a manual, and thus greatly value the support generously given by the regulars here.

You won't find that in the Mac Photoshop forum. The "regulars" around there can tell pretty quick whether or not someone is using their software legitimately.

> It would be interesting to see the reduction in the number of natives here if that mechanism were possible in the new software. Doubtless it's not.

I for one wouldn't care if you did that. I pay good money for Design Premium and don't like people pirating software. But by the same token I don't like too much policing or "hall monitors". I like an open atmosphere. I think it gets handled pretty well in the forums I go to.

[Jacob Bugge]

In the forums I know, regulars, and indeed all members deserving the term natives, take piracy very seriously.

Anything else would be a great surprise. But then again, Len once commented that I was such an innocent, when I asked him how he recognized a pirate poster; I did not know the meaning of the word keygen.

[John T Smith]

Chris Cox - 2:13pm Mar 13, 09 PST (#32 of 38) <br />Adobe Photoshop Engineer <br /><snip><br />>There is always more to the story than can be publicly shared.<br /><br />Chris... if you have any contact with John at Operations, the very best thing that would take people's focus away from attacking each other would be to post the link to the preview forum<br /><br />All we are doing now is chasing the rabbit down the race track... instead of being able to hunt real game, which would be pounding away on real software to see how well it works<br /><br />This place is full of rumors and supposition<br /><br />Tell John to give us something real... soon!

[Cindy-]

> Tell John to give us something real... soon!

They are probably worried all hell would break loose.

[Chris Cox]

John is working on the preview, it'll get here when it is ready.

[Guest]

Just to amplify Jacob's remark, I'm sure he used the term "natives" to mean regular contributors, not casually visiting ranters or pirates.

Having said that I don't think we can contribute any more meaningful input to this discussion it's getting repetitive and acrimonious and will achieve nothing.

[Andrew Yoole]

Well, I think I qualify as a native. I've been a posting member here for 7 years, and a Forum Host for 4 or so. I'm an "answerer", not an "asker". I'm also an award-winning motion graphics designer who has used Adobe software since Photoshop 2.

I post on numerous other Forums, of all shapes and sizes, and I have no problem with any of them particularly. I post because I enjoy contributing and communicating with my peers, and with those who are still learning. I must say that the formatting and attachment limitations of our current system are very noticeable.

I'm really looking forward to the Forum update. There is certainly feedback from users at the After Effects forum in the negative at times - the text-only look of the current forums, and inability to easily attach photo's or embed code properly, and the tendency of WebX to improperly display code fragments by posters discussing Java-based Scripts and Expressions, are serious problems for users there.

I, for one, like avatars. I think they give Forums a bit of personality, and help you to easily identify and remember less-frequent contributors. Any bandwidth they might chew up is really not a concern to me, and I doubt it would be to the majority of users whose business is creating and manipulating digital media. I think people working in this biz with dial-up are probably few-and-far between these days.

The new search capabilities sound fantastic, and I'm eager to try them out.

My primary concerns are purely speed/reliability, for obvious reasons, and the ability to know which posts I've already viewed. So long as those parameters are met, I'm one "native" who welcomes the changes.

[Guest]

NO AVATARS! All these forums need are self important people filling up valuable space with irrelevant visual testimonials to their importance. I can only imagine the length of this cat fight if each self centered participant included an avatar. Rant over. And no, I don't offer many solutions, but I do read and appreciate constructive user solutions to questions asked in these forums. Oh, maybe that's what they mean by User-to-User forums. Recriminations begin.

[PJonesCET]

What part of an AVATAR denote any self importance?

The only thing an AVATAR does puts a human face to the comment made.

Make the forum more personalized and intimate. No cold and Sterile like a Robat or a Dr's Office.

and if done right like p on phpBB newsgroups take up very little extra space.

Chance are a one line comment would based on system used take up as much room by itself or whether a properly sized avatar included.

[John T Smith]

I read a forum that has avatars... either actual pictures or just wimsy

http://www.realitytvtalk.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18096

I don't see any problem with that format... of course, I have no idea if that software would be robust enough for 600k members

Top of that section, to see how subjects show, is

http://www.realitytvtalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=9

I don't care if the new forum has avatars or not, as long as it is fast loading and the search function works

[Ann_Shelbourne1]

>What part of an AVATAR denote any self importance?

The fact that the person posting their portrait thinks that anyone else has any interest in seeing their face is the clearest possible indication of "Self Importance"!

>The only thing an AVATAR does [is to] put a human face to the comment made.

From most of the examples that I have seen posted, it would be merciful to be spared that experience!

[Claudio_González1]

(sorry, double posting)

[Claudio_González1]

In one forum I frequent in spite of the avatars, very few participants, if any, use them for their photos.