Are you tired of asking what SMF Version someone is using?

[C4G-TK]

I meant to post this like over a year ago when I first signed up at Simple Portal's website.

I thought it QUITE clever that they make people answer what version of SMF the member is using before they can start posting.  I would have thought that since repetitive questions seem to aggravate the heck out of people, someone would have made this same type of feature here on simplemachines.org.  (Especially if it was attached to a user's posting profile.)

I mean, we know what gender the members are here which doesn't necessarily do any type of good when trying to help someone, so it makes more sense that the current SMF Version and or Theme someone was using was there instead.  I remember starting to put my current SMF version and theme in my signature after I joined over there because I figured it would help if I accidentally forgot to say it in my post.  (At the time, I had one forum, so it worked well like that.)

Having the ability to update this at will when you upgrade or switch your theme would be great.

[Arantor]

Well, this is a 2.0 forum, so it could just be made a custom profile field, which is what SP did.

There are several problems with that approach though.

1. It's been done here before. People didn't bother to fill it in, or they'd pick the first one on the page to make it go away, or the one they thought was the right one but it turned out to be wrong.

2. People sometimes run multiple versions of SMF, particularly if they run multiple sites, I know some users who have both 1.1.x and 2.0 RCx sites (I'm still admin on... 2x 1.1.x, 1x 2.0 RC1.2 and 1x 2.0 RC3 sites)

3. People probably won't update it when they update their SMF version. Too many people put it in their sigs and fail to update it.


It's a good idea on the face of it, but unfortunately it doesn't actually work so well in practice.

We tried a new idea, to add a form in the ACP in SimpleDesk, which reposted back to the SD forum, complete with version numbers. Sadly it hasn't worked so well in practice because the majority of users are just posting directly on the forum when they have support (which is, oddly, quite infrequently)

[Mick.]

Heck even the prefix mod can be used here.   Force input of smf version when creating a topic.


[rc3]:  blah blah blah

[1.1.x]: blah blah blah

[Arantor]

Some people will pick the right one. Many won't, but will just pick the version at the top of the list to make it go away.

[C4G-TK]

Heck even the prefix mod can be used here.   Force input of smf version when creating a topic.


[rc3]:  blah blah blah

[1.1.x]: blah blah blah

That would be good especially if you turned it on/off in specific boards.

[Arantor]

You're still assuming then that people will post in the right boards, and will pick the right version; they won't.

I regularly see people posting SMF support issues in SMF Feedback and Discussion, Site Comments, Mod Requests, SMF Coding Discussion (not for actual coding but general support), Bug Reports...

[C4G-TK]

Let me ask you a question, Arantor.

When you are working on SimpleDesk and you come across a potential problem or inefficiency do you...

A) Think of an idea that may or may not work completely and attempt to see if it helps at all.

OR

B) Decide that only 75% of the people will understand your solution and then forget about it because if you can't make it 100% then it isn't worth it.


I get the impression that you do A for SimpleDesk, so why is it it always sounds like you give B as your reply on here most of the time?

[Arantor]

I do A for SimpleDesk. The thing you don't see is the process of having B thrown against it repeatedly before A gets implemented.

The point I cite is why it was removed from here last time it was tried.

Another thing I'd note on a tangent, did you know mods used to have a rating system? Until you got "Not for my version 0/5" or "Doesn't install 0/5".

My point is as I've repeatedly maintained, people take the path of least resistance.

[C4G-TK]

So, are you saying it is another delegation issue or inefficiency of management that nothing is attempted?

Cause I've not noticed anything in the past two years where anything of the sort has been attempted to drive down these types of questions that would in turn assist in less frustration on the part of those giving support.

[Allusion]

people take the path of least resistance.

I couldn't say it better.

[Arantor]

I'm saying that the ideas that have been suggested here have been suggested before, tried before and found not to work.

I think you'll find it was more than 2 years ago it was attempted, but there's no reason it would be any more successful now than it was then.


Since the status quo hasn't changed, neither will the result. So think of something not tried before and it can be given a chance to work. We did that with SimpleDesk - we've actively tried something new and different, and reducing resistance to get those details, and results are currently inconclusive.

[C4G-TK]

people take the path of least resistance.

I couldn't say it better.

Well, I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt.  I think people want to contribute as best they can to helping themselves and not let the minority that takes the easy way out tarnish my belief.

(And, I'm not even religious.  )



So, you think that the amount of people who come to SMF to seek help are completely THAT lazy.  I think that there's a greater amount that come here, don't sign in or don't post, who find their answer and go without asking for help, but the minority of people are who you are referring.  Also, I think that the more help that people receive from their posts, they tend to start building their own confidence and do start doing things more themselves.

[Arantor]

Interesting argument.

You know as well as I do that we can't quantify how many people do that. We hope and have to make a reasonable assumption that it does happen a goodly amount. But since they don't post, we never know if it's the case or not, so to all practical purposes, it's actually irrelevant because it's a mass we can't quantify or identify.

All we can see is the number of people who do post, of which a perceived large percentage don't read what's in front of them. It's actually not quite so bad in the 1.x/2.x Support boards because there is a reasonable inference.

But take a look through virtually every thread in Coding Discussion. Page after page, people come in with what they want to achieve, and definitely haven't read the read first thread I wrote, of which one of the key points requested is SMF version, because there is virtually never a way to infer from the thread itself.

Or Mod Requests. We experimented with making that topic-approval a bit back and 90% of threads got deleted after a week for not meeting the rules, despite trying to ask to get the information requested/required.

[C4G-TK]

Interesting argument.

You know as well as I do that we can't quantify how many people do that. We hope and have to make a reasonable assumption that it does happen a goodly amount. But since they don't post, we never know if it's the case or not, so to all practical purposes, it's actually irrelevant because it's a mass we can't quantify or identify.

All we can see is the number of people who do post, of which a perceived large percentage don't read what's in front of them. It's actually not quite so bad in the 1.x/2.x Support boards because there is a reasonable inference.

Actually, I'm sure someone is aware of the amount of unique hits this site gets in a day compared to members signed in as a start to the answer...

I just like the fact that it ends up being the age old question of is the glass half full or half empty between us...

Too bad we can't do a shot.   

[SleePy]

If people won't bother to search for answers to their questions, why would they fill out accjurately their smf version?

The plain and simple fact is that most people will not bother to search, will not bother to give any helpful information and they will rarely use proper gammar.

Which when you think of me typing on a phone and having good grammar.

[Arantor]

Any such answer is likely to be wildly inaccurate. It's an interesting idea, but I doubt it'll be that enlightening, even if you filter out the search engines, and the traffic of those who aren't asking questions generally, plus the known bots, the likely bots...

How do you classify when someone has read the site and actually not found the answer to their problems and goes to do their own thing? The very first mod I wrote, which I never did publish outside the site it was for, I spent a while reading on here, downloaded a couple of mods, then started to write my own - unaided by the forum. I can't help but think that's also an unmeasurable, and would distort any figures.

I try not to be unreasonably pessimistic, and would love to try new ideas in going places, but each time I think maybe people are moving forwards, I see something that dashes that hope.


@SleePy: Your grammar -- I understand you just fine.

[C4G-TK]

If people won't bother to search for answers to their questions, why would they fill out accjurately their smf version?

The plain and simple fact is that most people will not bother to search, will not bother to give any helpful information and they will rarely use proper gammar.

Which when you think of me typing on a phone and having good grammar.

Don't even get started on proper spelling, huh? 

[Allusion]

Which when you think of me typing on a phone and having good grammar.

I hope it was deliberate... haha.

[Arantor]

@Allusion: Yup, it's SleePy's self-deprecating attitude.

@C4G-TK: Typing on a phone is tricky

[SleePy]

* SleePy laughs

I didn't know if anyone would catch that

It is hard to type on the phone, especially when you are walking to your table and trying not to run people over