NNTP users being treated like second cousins

English Forums Feedback
#1

I’ve been a reasonably happy participant in Suse newsgroups since at least
9.3. I found them useful, the participants were usually helpful, the
newsreaders were fast and snappy, and and most of the time we weren’t over
moderated.

Since we’ve moved to newsgroups that are really web forums with nntp feeds I
feel things are being handled in a way that clearly treats nntp users as
second class users.

The first problem is the incessant closing and moving of threads, despite
the fact this breaks nntp threading. It certainly doesn’t seem like it
concerns people moving threads that this is highly annoying, or that it
makes responding to people’s posts more difficult and time consuming.

Please please please moderate your thread closing activity. People post in
what looks like the appropriate newsgroup according to the name of the
group, and by and large are not much off topic. If they are, a gentle
reminder that discussion of network interface cards is best done in, for
example,opensuse.org.help.network-internet may be more effective should
suffice.

We certainly don’t need to constantly move and close threads, breaking nntp
threading. And keep in mind that if we want to give people more guidance
about which newsgroup to post to, perhaps short, periodic posts that
announce which newsgroup is most appropriate would be helpful.

Your activity (however well intentioned) in closing/moving threads is much
more annoying than the occasional post in the wrong newsgroup.

Merging newsgroups with web forums can only work if attention is also paid
to the user experience of the half of us that use nntp newsreaders. I hear
occasional references to “stickies” that I understand are some kind of
standing post in the web forums. None of us with nntp readers will ever see
them, unless they never expire old messages. If some attention was paid to
nntp readers, perhaps this material could be periodically posted, so we
could see them too.

And no, I’m not going to take my marbles and go away, but the present
situation makes MY experience much LESS rewarding, and reduces my
participation.

–
bob@rsmits.ca (Robert Smits, Ladysmith BC)

“I’m not one of those who think Bill Gates is the devil. I simply suspect
that if Microsoft ever met up with the devil, it wouldn’t need an
interpreter.” - Nicholas Petreley

#2

Patience, Robert - they’re working on it.

Continuing to harp on what you see as problems isn’t going to make things
change any faster. All that does is increase the frustration level for
those who are trying to make it work.

Jim

#3

Jim Henderson wrote:

> Patience, Robert - they’re working on it.
>
> Continuing to harp on what you see as problems isn’t going to make things
> change any faster. All that does is increase the frustration level for
> those who are trying to make it work.

If they are trying to make it work, they should tell us that. One of the
best ways to reduce the frustration level is to cutback on closing and
moving threads.

bob@rsmits.ca (Robert Smits, Ladysmith BC)

“I’m not one of those who think Bill Gates is the devil. I simply suspect
that if Microsoft ever met up with the devil, it wouldn’t need an
interpreter.” - Nicholas Petreley

#4

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:37:34 +0000, Robert Smits wrote:

> If they are trying to make it work, they should tell us that.

They have told us that, many times. At the same time, they have
standards they are applying from their experiences in moderating the web
forums, and it makes sense to me for them to continue to do that. People
do things differently in different situations, and it takes time to adapt
and change.

I don’t think I’ve seen a single member of staff declare that everything
is perfect and “this is just the way it is going to be from here on out”.

They’re aware that there is frustration on the part of some NNTP users.
Personally, I don’t have a problem with how they’re doing things, and
you’ll note that I’m an NNTP user exclusively.

When merging several different communities together, there are going to
be bumps. Again, patience is called for while they work the bumps out.

Jim

#5

Staff moderation decisions are not up for public debate or commentary. Feel free to dialog with staff privately about your concerns.

As for NNTP issues, this is a web based forum providing NNTP access as a courtesy. We are not a newsgroups provider. We run the forums from a web interface, with web based tools. There are serious limitations with our current software tools in trying to integrate protocols designed for different ways of handing topics, replies, and organization. This puts a burden on both NNTP and HTTP users, and requires cooperation from members using either to make this work for the benefit of the community. We’re constantly pursuing both administrative and software solutions that improve the NNTP/HTTP content interaction, but that takes time and resources. We are hosted by Novell, but other than that, we’re on our own, and subject to the constraints imposed by volunteer time and resources.

If you’re unwilling to cooperate with us on this endeavor, or can’t wait for better solutions to present themselves, then please accept our best wishes in finding a community that better serves your needs.

#6

Jim Henderson wrote:

> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:37:34 +0000, Robert Smits wrote:
>
>> If they are trying to make it work, they should tell us that.
>
> They have told us that, many times. At the same time, they have
> standards they are applying from their experiences in moderating the web
> forums, and it makes sense to me for them to continue to do that. People
> do things differently in different situations, and it takes time to adapt
> and change.

I think you’ve hit exactly on the nub of the problem, Jim. They’re applying
experiences moderating web forums to something that ought to include nntp
users. At this point, I don’t feel like that is what is happening.

> I don’t think I’ve seen a single member of staff declare that everything
> is perfect and “this is just the way it is going to be from here on out”.

Nor did I, nor did I suggest that they should stop trying to improve the
situation.

> They’re aware that there is frustration on the part of some NNTP users.
> Personally, I don’t have a problem with how they’re doing things, and
> you’ll note that I’m an NNTP user exclusively.

Then why not reduce the number of threads closed/moved until that happens?
Why doesn’t someone explain why, in their view it’s necessary to close/move
threads even though it’s disruptive?

> When merging several different communities together, there are going to
> be bumps. Again, patience is called for while they work the bumps out.

I think, if you look, I made the very first post in any of these new
forum/newsgroups. I think I’ve been patient, but the continual moving and
closing of threads is really annoying, and largely unnecessary. Comments
explaining the consequences appear to have been largely ignored because it
is still going on.

I think I’ve made constructive suggestions that could lead to a reduction of
aggravation for both administrators and readers alike, such as periodically
posting forum/newsgroup posting guidelines so that you know the most
appropriate group in which to post, for example.

Perhaps, instead of unilaterally deciding to move/close threads, we could
have first had a discussion about the best way to deal with inappropriately
posted threads, and what we should do about them. People could have
described what problems, if any, they caused, and what solutions would have
least impact on both forum and nntp readers. If this is intended to be a
community effort, members of the community need to be included in the
decision making process.

bob@rsmits.ca (Robert Smits, Ladysmith BC)

“I’m not one of those who think Bill Gates is the devil. I simply suspect
that if Microsoft ever met up with the devil, it wouldn’t need an
interpreter.” - Nicholas Petreley

#7

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:50:37 +0000, Robert Smits wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 16:37:34 +0000, Robert Smits wrote:
>>
>>> If they are trying to make it work, they should tell us that.
>>
>> They have told us that, many times. At the same time, they have
>> standards they are applying from their experiences in moderating the
>> web forums, and it makes sense to me for them to continue to do that.
>> People do things differently in different situations, and it takes time
>> to adapt and change.
>
> I think you’ve hit exactly on the nub of the problem, Jim. They’re
> applying experiences moderating web forums to something that ought to
> include nntp users. At this point, I don’t feel like that is what is
> happening.

Given that the vast majority of users of these forums access through the
web interface, it makes sense to me that those management principles
would be applied at this time.

>> They’re aware that there is frustration on the part of some NNTP users.
>> Personally, I don’t have a problem with how they’re doing things, and
>> you’ll note that I’m an NNTP user exclusively.
>
> Then why not reduce the number of threads closed/moved until that
> happens? Why doesn’t someone explain why, in their view it’s necessary
> to close/move threads even though it’s disruptive?

Because from the web side it’s not disruptive. It’s the way things are
done. I don’t know who comprises the entirety of the staff, but it seems
that most are more comfortable with web forums and how they’re managed as
opposed to NNTP. They’re stretching to accommodate us while maintaining
their standards. As community leaders, they get to set the standards -
including standards of conduct. When they tell us that something’s not
up for discussion, it’s not up for discussion.

They’ve done a lot of heavy lifting to get the communities merged
together. They deserve our respect for that and if we have problems,
they need to be brought up in a way that shows that respect.

>> When merging several different communities together, there are going to
>> be bumps. Again, patience is called for while they work the bumps out.
>
> I think, if you look, I made the very first post in any of these new
> forum/newsgroups. I think I’ve been patient, but the continual moving
> and closing of threads is really annoying, and largely unnecessary.
> Comments explaining the consequences appear to have been largely ignored
> because it is still going on.

I wouldn’t assume that they’re being ignored. I would assume that the
discussions are ongoing and until such time as the management of the
forums makes a decision about how to move forward, they’ve opted to
continue with what they know. I personally don’t see a problem with that.

I’m glad that they’ve committed to having the NNTP interface, and I’ll
continue to use it exclusively. I expect there to be rough edges for a
bit, and I’m willing to deal with those.

What I fear is that the constant complaining from the NNTP users about
these things will drive the staff to decide that NNTP isn’t worth it.
Continually identifying and re-identifying the same problems just makes
us look like a bunch of whiners. We’re better than that.

> Perhaps, instead of unilaterally deciding to move/close threads, we
> could have first had a discussion about the best way to deal with
> inappropriately posted threads, and what we should do about them. People
> could have described what problems, if any, they caused, and what
> solutions would have least impact on both forum and nntp readers. If
> this is intended to be a community effort, members of the community need
> to be included in the decision making process.

I think there are certain things that the staff here is responsible for,
and ultimately the decision lays in their hands. I’m not staff, just a
very interested user here, but IMNSHO we NNTP users have identified the
major issues and now it’s up to the staff to determine the best way to
resolve them. I’m happy to help out if I can, but this community is
under their control.

Jim

#8

<posted & mailed>

Robert Smits,

I’ve read your concerns and as a site admin for this forum, I can appreciate
your views and frustrations. At this time, as Jim said, the issue is being
worked on. You have to understand that these forums are a marriage of
three different forum sets with different cultures. NNTP and web
functionality is hard to reconcile as different people think different
things are important. Thanks for posting your suggestions/opinions as it
helps us know what users out there think which is important to creating and
maintaining a community such as this. As we go along, we compromise to see
if we can get a middle ground between different, valid opinions. Enough
drivel…I just wanted to let you know we’re listening.

#9

It is not my intention to play down the problems the NNTP users have with the Forum. I never used an NNTP product so it far from me to say anything useful about it.

But as a web users that wants to follow some of the (sub)forums because I hope I can help people with the knowledge I have about the subjects that those forums are for, I value it very much that threads are placed where they belong. Else I would never see them.

I also think that the web interface is a very important one as most newcomers will search the web with keywords of their problem and so hopefully come to openSUSE Forums.

#10

Jim Henderson wrote:

>> I think you’ve hit exactly on the nub of the problem, Jim. They’re
>> applying experiences moderating web forums to something that ought to
>> include nntp users. At this point, I don’t feel like that is what is
>> happening.
>
> Given that the vast majority of users of these forums access through the
> web interface, it makes sense to me that those management principles
> would be applied at this time.

Actually, I understand that before the merger, the users on web based forums
and nntp were roughly 50/50.

>> Then why not reduce the number of threads closed/moved until that
>> happens? Why doesn’t someone explain why, in their view it’s necessary
>> to close/move threads even though it’s disruptive?
>
> Because from the web side it’s not disruptive. It’s the way things are
> done. I don’t know who comprises the entirety of the staff, but it seems
> that most are more comfortable with web forums and how they’re managed as
> opposed to NNTP.

I think you’re absolutely correct, here Jim.

> As community leaders, they get to set the standards -
> including standards of conduct. When they tell us that something’s not
> up for discussion, it’s not up for discussion.

In my communities I get to help decide who the leaders are, and have a voice
in the process that leads to decision making.

> I’m glad that they’ve committed to having the NNTP interface, and I’ll
> continue to use it exclusively. I expect there to be rough edges for a
> bit, and I’m willing to deal with those.
>
> What I fear is that the constant complaining from the NNTP users about
> these things will drive the staff to decide that NNTP isn’t worth it.
> Continually identifying and re-identifying the same problems just makes
> us look like a bunch of whiners. We’re better than that.

The problems won’t go away, Jim until they’re fixed. You don’t fix problems
by sweeping them under the rug.

–
bob@rsmits.ca (Robert Smits, Ladysmith BC)

“I’m not one of those who think Bill Gates is the devil. I simply suspect
that if Microsoft ever met up with the devil, it wouldn’t need an
interpreter.” - Nicholas Petreley

#11

@hcw: Well said. Many members here (including myself) use the web interface and are not familiar with NNTP, but through these forums I now realise what a difficult job it is to support them concurrently. Credit to the admins that it even works as well as it does. Time will tell if it can work acceptably.

@Robert: Thanks for illuminating the issues of NNTP users. Without posts similar to yours, I for one would have to admit to being ignorant of the implications of editing and thread shifting.

#12

kgroneman wrote:

> <posted & mailed>
>
> Robert Smits,
>
> I’ve read your concerns and as a site admin for this forum, I can
> appreciate
> your views and frustrations. At this time, as Jim said, the issue is
> being
> worked on. You have to understand that these forums are a marriage of
> three different forum sets with different cultures. NNTP and web
> functionality is hard to reconcile as different people think different
> things are important. Thanks for posting your suggestions/opinions as it
> helps us know what users out there think which is important to creating
> and maintaining a community such as this. As we go along, we compromise to
> see
> if we can get a middle ground between different, valid opinions. Enough
> drivel…I just wanted to let you know we’re listening.

Thanks. The OpenSuse community is great, and I know we’ll overcome the
problems eventually.

–
bob@rsmits.ca (Robert Smits, Ladysmith BC)

“I’m not one of those who think Bill Gates is the devil. I simply suspect
that if Microsoft ever met up with the devil, it wouldn’t need an
interpreter.” - Nicholas Petreley

#13

On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:14:29 +0000, Robert Smits wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>
>
>>> I think you’ve hit exactly on the nub of the problem, Jim. They’re
>>> applying experiences moderating web forums to something that ought to
>>> include nntp users. At this point, I don’t feel like that is what is
>>> happening.
>>
>> Given that the vast majority of users of these forums access through
>> the web interface, it makes sense to me that those management
>> principles would be applied at this time.
>
> Actually, I understand that before the merger, the users on web based
> forums and nntp were roughly 50/50.

I don’t believe this is correct.

>> As community leaders, they get to set the standards - including
>> standards of conduct. When they tell us that something’s not up for
>> discussion, it’s not up for discussion.
>
> In my communities I get to help decide who the leaders are, and have a
> voice in the process that leads to decision making.

Online communities work differently. I participate in a couple of web-
based communities as well, like the Rockbox community; the lack of NNTP
there means I don’t participate much, but I sure didn’t select the
community leaders. The community leaders in online communities (in my
experience, going back to well before I was a Novell SysOp on CompuServe)
tend to volunteer for the position, or their recruited by the sponsoring
organization.

>> I’m glad that they’ve committed to having the NNTP interface, and I’ll
>> continue to use it exclusively. I expect there to be rough edges for a
>> bit, and I’m willing to deal with those.
>>
>> What I fear is that the constant complaining from the NNTP users about
>> these things will drive the staff to decide that NNTP isn’t worth it.
>> Continually identifying and re-identifying the same problems just makes
>> us look like a bunch of whiners. We’re better than that.
>
> The problems won’t go away, Jim until they’re fixed. You don’t fix
> problems by sweeping them under the rug.

You also don’t fix problems by continuing to say “you guys suck” (pardon
my language). I know you haven’t phrased it quite like that, but
starting a thread with the title this one has does come across that way,
at least to me. I know if I were one of the moderators, I’d probably be
at least slightly offended, especially if I were making an effort (as I
see the mods here are) to NOT do what you’re accusing them of.

So again, I implore ALL NNTP users, when reporting issues, to remove
emotion from what you’re reporting and state “just the facts”. Be
neutral in your presentation.

That will help us ALL have a better experience here.

Jim

#14

hcvv,

> But as a web users that wants to follow some of the (sub)forums because
> I hope I can help people with the knowledge I have about the subjects
> that those forums are for, I value it very much that threads are placed
> where they belong. Else I would never see them.

Very valid point and one that has to be reconciled with having two
interfaces. To address the needs of both sets of users, we (forum
administrators) should do our best to ensure we provide the best possible
intuitive forum layout so posts generally go where they are supposed to the
first time and don’t have to be moved. Again, that’s being discussed. We
look at all the suggestions that come in here and try to make sound
decisions based on input, practicality, usability, software functions, etc.
etc. Thanks for your perspective.

#15

<posted & mailed>

Robert Smits,

> Actually, I understand that before the merger, the users on web based
> forums and nntp were roughly 50/50.

Not exactly. Three forums came together originally to make this one set of
forums: suseforums.net, suselinuxsupport.de, and Novell openSUSE forums.
The first two were purely web based and the last one was web/nntp with an
approximate split of 50/50. SF and SLS had more members than the Novell
openSUSE forums. Currently the users here are overwhelmingly web users but
we hope to maintain the current NNTP users and appeal to more users by
providing the NNTP interface.

#16

On 07/21/2008 hcvv wrote:
> I never used an NNTP product so it far from me to say anything useful
> about it.

Try it. For some of you web forum folks it may look like an outdated protocol for old command line farts, but it isn’t. It’ll take you 15 minutes, and you’ll easily see why people stick to it (even if you don’t like it yourself), so we can understand each other much better.

Uwe

#17

May be I will (I am slightly curious already), but that is not the point of my post. The point is that a lot of people are happy with a web forum and that even people who do not know about us now are more likely to find us because we are a web forum. And hopefully they will not feel lost being there. We have to grow in an environment where new Linux users will not only give SUSE a try, but will stay SUSE users when they find out that help is readily available (maybe even on a much better level then when they pay a company for ‘support’, that in the end will show itself as a never listening helpdesk that only knows standard answers).

I myself are happy using the RSS threads of those forums I am interested in, backed up up by e-mails about the threads I subscribed to. Both then link easy to the web pages. I also think that this way of working is neither bleeding edge nor old fashioned and that it maybe is a way especialy newcomers will use at least partly. So this must be supported by the forum software/management in a logical way and putting threads where they belong is part of it.

#18

On 07/22/2008 hcvv wrote:
> May be I will (I am slightly curious already), but that is not the
> point of my post.

Sure, my message was just an addition. I noticed that many NNTP users checked the web interface and found it not as suitable for their needs, but apparently web interface users didn’t try NNTP :slight_smile:

Uwe