Too Many Cooks (Spoil the Broth or Confuse the Poster)

I have just read a thread which extends over 2 pages, the reason...it's because the poor poster has had 5 members replying to her queerie, each telling her different things. Being a Newbie and already expressing his/her lack of knowlege I feel it is UNWISE for so many members to respond to the thread when, in my opinion another member is doing a fine job of solving it.
For quite some time I have been posting here and if I see another member has the thread covered I WILL NOT enter that thread unless I feel there is something IMPORTANT to add.

NOTHING irks me more than to see someone doing this. I know the mods have a lot on their plate, but this is one aspect I would like to see addressed.

I read this thread. as I said and even I was confused. In this particular thread the poster states she has problems with a particular program, several members reply offering 7 different programs...NONE OF WHICH SHE HAS....a very senior member replies with a COMPREHENSIVE and well constructed post only to have other members come back with their "solution" still NOT covering her problem with the program she wishes to use!!

 

http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/480846

 

Well said Gwen.

Everyone has their own tried and tested methods which they prefer over the next person's. People are always going to want to help and offer their solution(s), so it leads to the situation of the person asking for help getting confused.

Like you said, Maybe it would be a good idea if people (unless they have knowledge of the areas being covered by said member) then they should leave it be.

Problem being this is only going to work if members agree (on a sitewide level - kind of eticate thing) to stay off a thread if it is already being covered by a member (and by covered I mean that the newbie getting help is actually being helped) then they stay off it.

Hmmm >.<

 

Good illustration gwendolin, if Granny wasn't confused before, she most certainly will be after reading through that one.

 

I agree.. I saw a thread yesterday with no less than 9 people all chipping in and giving conflicting information.

I must admit I do sometimes post something either asking for more info, or to mention if something doesn't seem right. You will remember back last week Gwen when there was some confusion over a set of dvd files.. I couldn't see a .bup file amongst the lists and asked about it.

The problem seems to still relate back to the autopromote mechanism.. people can gain benefit from posting unhelpful, confusing or downright wrong stuff.

While I'm here.. I have a ripit4me package available on my profile page (seeing as it was removed and all the sites closed yesterday)
I'm not making anything from it, and I don't actually use it myself.. but it's nice to have it available for those who want it.

 

@gwen...I confess that I am guilty of that myself but I like to think I do so with good reason; I make it a point not to interfere (sp?)otherwise. When I do, it usually for the same two reasons: 1) In the HD Displays forum, someone will buy a new HD television but the display isn't right for one reason or another. They try and try with the TVs display menus but to no avail. For some reason, many of those who respond seem to forget that the HD cable box also has a display setup menu which determins how the signal is sent to the TV...they will try until the cows come home if someone doesn't intervene.

So too in the receivers/amps forum. "5.1 surround" is misunderstood by so many, perhaps even most. When a DVD players audio menu has 5.1 surround as a selection, it is talking about the six analog outputs each with a seperately recorded track. I can't tell you how often I've heard responders to posts tell the poster that the digital coax or optical outputs are a better and more hi tech "replacement" for the six analog 5.1 outputs and that simply isn't true. On your more hi budget movies, those six signals coming from the analog outs are painstakingly made for the maximum experience with effects ... six planned and seperate signals which obviously needn't be decoded. On your better DVDs, the sound from these six analog outs (true 5.1) is infinitely better than the signal from the coax or optical. In short, the optical and coax are not a "replacement" at all; simply a different audio source. When I see this, I will post an image of the outputs and inputs on the back of the DVD player and receiver and explain how its done (I do this because not all amps and DVD players have them, only the better ones).

I try not to interfere but sometimes, as in the former example, the poster won't solve his problem and in others like the latter, the client is being misinformed and will not experience one of the best features on his/her system.

I hate to admit it but in posts where I'm not participating, I've also PM'd the poster telling him "Listen to what Ced (or JVC) are saying because the others are just plain wrong". I guess I do that in a PM because I just don't want to start a flame war when a newbie is seeking answers; its just counterproductive. Is there a better way when people are being misinformed?

 

I would like to make it clear that I am NOT singling any particular member out, this is just a thread that I read , one of many, so I thought I would make my comments known about this practice.

 

@Gwen ... I didn't think you were. Sorry if it seemed that way.