Why don't the people answering my questions read the information I put in with the question?
I recently put in several questions. NOT one of them was answered in a helpful manner. It was clear that they had not even bothered to read what I wrote. What good is this community help system? The people responding only tell me how to do what I already did that I clearly stated did NOT work!!!!!!
malich
Answers
-
People want to be helpful. I assume they do read the post but everything does not register in their brain. It's an easy mistake to make. We appreciate your patience as people learn how to better use Community.
1 -
I'm afraid that does not comply with any definition of Spam that I can find.
I would only flag as Spam if I felt someone was pushing a product on this website. I just read it described as, "unsolicited usually commercial messages", in line with my thinking. Teresa is correct. I, and many other users sincerely try to be helpful, but often misunderstand the issue, especially when there is any degree of ambiguity included.
@malich should just politely advise the person who responded that, "No, this did not answer my question", then perhaps paraphrase it so the meaning is absolutely clear.
0 -
Thank you for your private messages.
I have read many of your posts / responses and am sure most are very helpful to other members of Community. It was just this one that worried me. I had looked at profiles of other users and been baffled as to why their posts should have been marked as "Spam". Seeing your comments, I felt that other members are probably of the same mind as you and have used the "Spam" option to flag comments, for reasons related to what you suggest (i.e., non-satisfactory answer of a question).
All I was saying was that I would be totally confused if anyone marked any post of mine as "Spam", because I would be looking to see how I had suggested the use particular product (or promoting something commercial) when I knew that is against the Code of Conduct.
I would have responded to you privately, but the messages indicated you had "left the conversation", so assumed you would not be reading anything posted against them.
Sorry if you (and others) might think I am over-reacting to comments I know you intended to be helpful.
0 -
As a friend of mine is fond of saying, there are three reasons for miscommunication: people don't read, people don't read, and people don't read.
1 -
Yes sometimes my 'passionate' genthusiasm gets the better of me...
0 -
I completely agree with Paul W 's comments in respect of the meaning of Spam. I have belonged to many Forums over the years and I have never come across any instance where Spam has been used to indicate the person concerned considered the reply non satisfactory. I see genthusiast 1 has now deleted his/her comment.
An employee of FamilySearch should indicate what Spam refers to.
Returning to malich's original comment, I think it is sad that SOME people who are classified by FamilySearch as moderators clearly do not know much and provide replies that seem to be some sort of "standard routine reply" without considering the exact circumstances, or worse something that is incorrect. In some cases the moderators do not even know they are incorrect. Do moderators have to reach a standard of competency before are given this title? Are they monitored in any way on an ongoing basis? I have had moderator correspondence where a disturbance of brain function was the impression.
I think it devalues the standing of this FS Community when moderators give inappropriate or incorrect replies. What is the point of having such persons in roles which in all other Forums I have had contact with would indicate competency?
1 -
@MaureenE123 Moments of brain function not notwithstanding - for a moderator to state such is not too 'professional' - and assumes what the other person was thinking. Just get along with helping the 'guest' don't point out what may have been difference in communication style - people are trying to help... I like giving people the chance to learn and grow - moderators wrong responses are learning experiences - don't forget/prevent that - they are trying their best to be helpful too. What I don't find helpful is complaints when understanding is not there - I will go back and try to help the understanding 'catch up'.
This 'guest' has a system specific issue - I pointed that out to her (edit post a couple of times) and then she came over here and vented that responses weren't helpful. Responders are people not a computer - we have to ask questions to find out what the issue is and then respond appropriately. Fortunately (in most cases) I am not a computer - but being a human will get things wrong - and will have to communicate to understand an issue better to even be able to try to help.
The problem lies in a method to 'interface' with the 'guest' computer in these circumstances. Without such a 'tool' at the disposal of responders (not sure what tools moderators have access to) they can:
1. ask questions to try to understand further
2. share screenshot differences (which take way to much time to load/be approved)
3. use the 'best practice' or knowledgebase documents (which sometimes 'guests' view as not 'responding' to their issue effectively)
Also - they can return and edit their posts for clarity/completeness. I don't find it too helpful when responder starts a conversation going down one route and moderator 'well meaning' states opposite and takes it down another - but I'm not going to complain about it (too much). The system has that open-edit stance (like the Tree) anyone can say anything (that isn't abusive) and the 'guest' can decide what they accept/like.
It's a process of improving/educating both sides of the product base - internal and external - and that's where the focus should be - not on complaints - sorry that's just the way it is...
@Paul W I don't know FS Community definition of Spam - If Spam should be marked by moderators then it should not be available to anyone other than them. If there is not an option to mark a comment as unhelpful and it cannot be marked as Spam - then I guess not explicitly clicking Like it is marking it Not Like/Not Helpful?
0