General Feedback and Suggestions
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Throw out the baby with the bath water

 
Hein van den Heuvel
Honored Contributor

Throw out the baby with the bath water

 

My informal, highly subjective, quit possibly biased, observations of new-topic rate and reply-rate in the Operating-Systems corner of the world suggests the HP managed to throw away the baby with the bathwater (1)

 

Maybe areas other than HPUX, OpenVMS, Linux,... do better ?!

 

Kindly prove me wrong ?!

 

Please show me the official numbers 4 weeks before, and 4 weeks after the change.

- new topic rate for a week

- reply rate for a week.

- number of distinct authors of new topics

- number of distinct authors of replies.

 

Best regards,

Hein

 

(1) "an avoidable error in which something good is eliminated when trying to get rid of something bad, or in other words, rejecting the essential along with the inessential."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Throw_out_the_baby_with_the_bath_water

 

22 REPLIES 22
Steven Schweda
Honored Contributor

Re: Throw out the baby with the bath water

 
Dennis Handly
Acclaimed Contributor

Re: Throw out the baby with the bath water

>observations of new-topic rate and reply-rate in the Operating-Systems 

 

This has gone way down even in the ITRC since the beginning of the year.

Pete Randall
Outstanding Contributor

Re: Throw out the baby with the bath water

Unfortunately the only such statistics ever published came from Merijn.  You can see some statistics for the old ITRC on his site (http://www.cmve.net/~merijn/#Statistics), but Merijn notes "ITRC forum statistics ended on 22 June 2011 as the forum moved to an inferior new passport controlled site."

 

Given HP's reluctance to be forthcoming with much of any information other than "shut up and like it" [sic], I highly doubt that we will be seeing any current stats either.

 

I do agree, however, that traffic seems to be way down.


Pete
James R. Ferguson
Acclaimed Contributor

Re: Throw out the baby with the bath water

Hi Hein:

 

I couldn't agree with you more.  Again, I applaud your directness and the professional manner in which you apply it.  Are you listening HP?

 

The structure of the old ITRC was simple and intuitive.  The structure of the old HP documentation was simple and intuitive.  Now we need vitural manuals to figure out how to use, let alone find, something.

 

Things like the HP GEMS and the pretty pictures on the are marketing (branding) banter and in my opinion do not belong on what is purported to be a community forum.  Move the stuff to one of your other (hidden) websites.

 

The internal search provided works better than the old ITRC internal search but is still a joke.  One can already see questions that have been answered tens or hundreds of times being asked again.  How can any of us say "Is your search ability broken?"

 

Sorry, HP, you solicited our opinions but I don't believe you listened to very much of the feedback that was offered (either directly or via consultants you hired).

 

Regards!

 

...JRF...

Dennis Handly
Acclaimed Contributor

Re: Throw out the baby with the bath water

>Now we need virtual manuals to figure out how to use, let alone find, something.

 

What, google hasn't started working after all this time?  :-)

 

>Things like the HP GEMS and the pretty pictures on the are marketing (branding) banter and in my opinion do not belong on what is purported to be a community forum.

 

(Hey, I have to work with several of those guys, be nice.  :-)

One of the guys there was even asking me about the new forums recently.

 

>Move the stuff to one of your other (hidden) websites.

 

The videos are there, only that picture and ad are on the forum.

 

>One can already see questions that have been answered tens or hundreds of times being asked again. 

 

I would first assume laziness by the user, rather than search issues.  I don't see many users say they bothered searching.

 

Or did you want to change the New Message button to say "Did you try searching first?"?