Break up this forum?

[Cecil]

7 hours ago, R C-R said:

We users do not need to know which app or OS the OP is using to decide if we want to post anything to that discussion or not

May not need, does not eliminate the replies requesting this information, flooding initial reply requesting information.

 

7 hours ago, R C-R said:

anyone wants to assist other users with any of that and it is important to know which OS or app is involved to do that and that information is not included in the OP or obvious from the nature of the question, then they can either ask for it or provide general information applicable to all platforms & apps or simply move on to some other topic & leave it to other users or the staff to deal with that one.

7 hours ago, R C-R said:

OS or app is involved to do that and that information is not included in the OP or obvious from the nature of the question, then they can either ask for it or provide general information applicable to all platforms

7 hours ago, R C-R said:

If anyone wants to assist other users with any of that and it is important to know which OS or app is involved to do that and that information is not included in the OP or obvious from the nature of the question, then they can either ask for it or provide general information applicable to all platforms & apps or simply move on to some other topic & leave it to other users or the staff to deal with that one.

7 hours ago, R C-R said:

Both questions & answers to them do not need to be, nor should they be, confined to one app or one OS.

Those processing your working knowledge, compliment, seeking answer to a specific program I suggest do. Especially those who are truly unfamiliar with purchase program and struggle with providing basic facts to allow users, with you knowledge to assist them. 

Comcernign your last paragraph, three time unable to highlight/quote,  simply was of time and floods boards with multiple request, IMHO.

 

[R C-R]

2 minutes ago, Cecil said:

May not need, does not eliminate the replies requesting this information, flooding initial reply requesting information.

Why should the forum software in any way try to eliminate or discourage replies requesting more information, if or when other users think that would help solve the OP's issue?

More to the point, why should the forum software require OP's to choose from a predefined set of tags that may not be relevant to their query, & may very well limit the replies to a subset of those that would be? More generally, why should the forum software force those looking for help to make any choices that for any reason they feel uncomfortable or ill equipped to make, which may well discourage them from posting anything here?

This forum is & should forever remain focused on offering product support to everyone, particularly those who may be completely unfamiliar with the apps or struggle with providing basic facts. That is a big part of how we can help them get the support they deserve.

[Alfred]

19 hours ago, R C-R said:

Forced, required, & mandatory all mean the same thing.

 

17 hours ago, Cecil said:

I guess it depends on user, your need for assistance, and adequate response.

How is the meaning of ‘forced’, ‘required’ or ‘mandatory’ affected by any of that?

[Cecil]

17 minutes ago, R C-R said:

This forum is & should forever remain focused on offering product support to everyone, particularly those who may be completely unfamiliar with the apps or struggle with providing basic facts. That is a big part of how we can help them get the support they deserve.

I think by guiding those you mention above, especially those completely unfamiliar with apps and forum structure, forum structure offers the best support.

R C-R if you were preparing instructional aid on the three Affinity Apps, I believe you would divide the basic functions of each app individually and summarize how each app interfaces with each other.  Each chapter would focus primary and functionally on each app.  As is, we have a large forum book, Desktop, Windows and MAC, questions, without chapters, outline, index or other meaningful guides to aid users, especially first time users.  
 

The forum also mandates that users that subscribe to this subject a dump of all post, many of little to no interest to them.   Your perspective, honorable, that every user can gain knowledge by consolidating all possible cross functionality between app is “yours”, not necessarily all.  I say this with confidence as the paid Affinity lessons are based on Apps, not a combination of cross compatibility of all Affinity apps.  Additionally the numerous times users have requested separation. Be safe.

[R C-R]

17 minutes ago, Cecil said:

I think by guiding those you mention above, especially those completely unfamiliar with apps and forum structure, forum structure offers the best support.

I am in no way opposed to "guiding" those users when they need help with that. (I thought my initial comment asking why the forum software should in any way try to eliminate or discourage replies requesting more information would have made that clear.)

But requiring mandatory tags as a prerequisite to starting a topic does not by itself provide any guidance & may in fact discourage users who most need help with that from posting anything.

26 minutes ago, Cecil said:

As is, we have a large forum book, Desktop, Windows and MAC, questions, without chapters, outline, index or other meaningful guides to aid users, especially first time users.  

As you say, it has no chapters or outline, so by no stretch of the imagination does it resemble a book, nor is it intended to. It is simply a product support forum, open to anyone who is looking for help with anything related to the Affinity products.

41 minutes ago, Cecil said:

The forum also mandates that users that subscribe to this subject a dump of all post, many of little to no interest to them.  

Replying to a topic automatically turns on "following" it, but there is an "Unfollow" option & several options that control if or how users are notified about additions to it.

As for the "numerous" requests for separated forums, only a relatively small number of forum users have requested that, & there is nothing even remotely close to a consensus among them about the most appropriate way to do that.

[Cecil]

2 minutes ago, R C-R said:

But requiring mandatory tags as a prerequisite to starting a topic does not by itself provide any guidance & may in fact discourage users who most need help with that from posting anything.

I totally reject mandatory tags and never suggested them.  I suggested, first post, a simple way to guide users, providing information that would allow others to provide meaningful guidance.

The reference to Book was not meant to implied, as you know, the forum is a book.  I do believe the forum is an instructional aid, and should be structured to do so.

as for numerous requests, the same high volume users post the same rejections.

[R C-R]

6 minutes ago, Cecil said:

 I do believe the forum is an instructional aid, and should be structured to do so.

While this forum could be considered as an instructional aid of a sort, its structure closely follows the well established one of an online support forum familiar to many users.

It also provides a number features like streams, several notification options, & (lame as it is) a search feature to assist users in getting the most out of it.

[Cecil]

3 hours ago, Alfred said:

 

How is the meaning of ‘forced’, ‘required’ or ‘mandatory’ affected by any of that?

My post had nothing to do with forced, required or mandatory use of tags. I did add post that suggested forum update: + Create, Topic to add applicable Affinity App and users OS.  I’m not going to get in a play on words, too old for that.  I just believe it the initial post provides App and OS, it would eliminate the usual first reply...it would help you get assistance if you provide which app and OS.  As additional benefit, forum users would identify App and OS in question.  This was intended for the numerous request to separate Desktop Questions and Answer by App.  Some had suggested mandatory tags, I choose a different path.  I thank you for your helpful input.  One more check for free 2.0.

[Pšenda]

2 hours ago, R C-R said:

But requiring mandatory tags

Sorry, but the only one who talks here constantly and asks for the mandatory tags is you.

[R C-R]

2 hours ago, Pšenda said:

Sorry, but the only one who talks here constantly and asks for the mandatory tags is you.

@BofG said "Maybe a good compromise would be to force the user to select a tag denoting which app their post relates to?" in this post of this topic.

@Cecil said "I requested that they add a new box, after create New Topic, that required the user to add their program to advance to their question" in this post, also in this topic.

It has also mentioned in other similar themed topics, including this one.

[Cecil]

6 hours ago, Alfred said:

 

How is the meaning of ‘forced’, ‘required’ or ‘mandatory’ affected by any of that?

In the context that 1) he was suggesting something I did not state 2) if one needs to create new Topic they will provide requested information, not mandatory or required, as it not required or mandatory to post question.  
 

Silly game playing on words to submit a post without providing, IMHO, meaningful contribution to subject.  I see you did get a symbolic trophy from it, congrats.

[Cecil]

16 minutes ago, R C-R said:

@Cecil said "I requested that they add a new box, after create New Topic, that required the user to add their program to advance to their question" in this post, also in this topic

I did not consider restructuring of the form a tag(s), but I guess Topic and Title are tags, as used by forum, but part of the initial request, which possibly could be simple check mark, by clicking on window menu with fly out of appropriate data.  The forum has Title now and I observed: first names, email address and many more.

[R C-R]

10 minutes ago, Cecil said:

In the context that 1) he was suggesting something I did not state 2) if one needs to create new Topic they will provide requested information, not mandatory or required, as it not required or mandatory to post question.  

Whatever the context, whether it is a tag or something else, it certainly seems like you are asking for some mandatory app indicator as a condition for posting a question. If not, what did you mean by "I think a simple, mandatory addition to any new Post may help" in this reply in a similarly themed topic?

[Cecil]

1 minute ago, R C-R said:

Whatever the context, whether it is a tag or something else, it certainly seems like you are asking for some mandatory app indicator as a condition for posting a question. If not, what did you mean by "I think a simple, mandatory addition to any new Post may help" in this reply in a similarly themed topic?

Mandatory as is the submittal of the initial forum request, while preserving the current structure, as many suggest separating the thread by individual apps.  At most, if forum can be changed with window menu fly outs, two simple additional check marks.  One to check your app and the other to select your OS.

[Pšenda]

54 minutes ago, R C-R said:

@BofG said "Maybe a good compromise would be to force the user to select a tag denoting which app their post relates to?" in this post of this topic.

@Cecil said "I requested that they add a new box, after create New Topic, that required the user to add their program to advance to their question" in this post, also in this topic.

Apparently I can't read, but I don't really see "Mandatory" in the links. And if you do not understand the meaning of the word "Mandatory", there is no point in continuing the discussion with you.

P. S. Unfortunately, this discussion has lost its sense long ago.

 

I am glad that, unlike you, Serif is aware of the inadequacy of the current state of the forum and hopefully will correct/upgrade it soon.

Dan C : "perhaps with further tagging & search functionalities so that specific users can choose to filter, if they wish."

I suppose he is well aware of the risk that if existing experienced users discourage the forum's hostility, then there will be no advice to beginners.

Edited April 15, 2020 by Pšenda

[R C-R]

10 minutes ago, BofG said:

How about instead of requiring a tag for what app the question relates to, the user instead just indicates which apps from the suite they have?

What should they do if they do not have any of the apps & are seeking pre-purchase information, for example which app(s) would be best for some specific kind of work or the update/upgrade policy?

 

11 minutes ago, Cecil said:

Mandatory as is the submittal of the initial forum request, while preserving the current structure, as many suggest separating the thread by individual apps.  At most, if forum can be changed with window menu fly outs, two simple additional check marks.  One to check your app and the other to select your OS.

Whatever the method, you still seem to be asking for some sort of mandatory picking of both an app & an OS as a requirement to be allowed to start a topic.

[R C-R]

3 minutes ago, Pšenda said:

Apparently I can't read, but I don't really see "Mandatory" in the links. And if you do not understand the meaning of the word "Mandatory", there is no point in continuing the discussion with you.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mandatory

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/mandatory

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/mandatory

https://www.definitions.net/definition/mandatory

https://www.yourdictionary.com/mandatory

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/mandatory

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/mandatory

Synonyms include obligatory, compulsory, forced, required, preemptory, & involuntary. Antonyms include elective, optional, & voluntary.

[R C-R]

10 minutes ago, BofG said:

Not tick any of the boxes

"For the best response, please tick each of the Affinity applications that you have.

[  ] Designer

[  ] Photo

[  ] Publisher

[  ] I hate checkboxes, leave me alone."

Reminds me of this:

[R C-R]

5 minutes ago, BofG said:

I wish Windows 10 had that option.

I wish Macs did too.

[Pšenda]

13 minutes ago, R C-R said:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mandatory

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/mandatory

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/mandatory

https://www.definitions.net/definition/mandatory

https://www.yourdictionary.com/mandatory

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/mandatory

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/mandatory

Synonyms include obligatory, compulsory, forced, required, preemptory, & involuntary. Antonyms include elective, optional, & voluntary.

How does it prove that you understand the meaning of this word? The fact that you can find it on the Internet (bravo) does not mean that you fully understand its meaning and the difference between what others suggest.

This proves for example your conclusion 

28 minutes ago, R C-R said:

you still seem to be asking for some sort of mandatory picking of both an app & an OS as a requirement to be allowed to start a topic.

which no one ever spoke or suggested.

[R C-R]

1 minute ago, Pšenda said:

... which no one ever spoke or suggested.

??? @Cecil has literally used the word "mandatory" in several posts requesting picking of both an app & an OS as a requirement to be allowed to start a topic.

[Cecil]

3 minutes ago, R C-R said:

What should they do if they do not have any of the apps & are seeking pre-purchase information, for example which app(s) would be best for some specific kind of work or the update/upgrade policy?

 

Whatever the method, you still seem to be asking for some sort of mandatory picking of both an app & an OS as a requirement to be allowed to start a topic.

News and Information?  
 

 May I inquiry your resistance to modify current form request and such alarm?  I read your post for over a year now on this subject and your reasons stated many times with cross platform info, additional knowledge gained, etc. I’m not disputing your point of view; however, many others desire to separate the current thread by application.  They want to subscribe to Affinity Photo only, for example.  They don’t want to scroll through 20 questions to see the first AP question, it’s really that simple, a matter of choice.  I thought my suggestion adding application and OS would allow a path to improve current format, allowing all to scroll faster, looking for key trigger words like Publisher and Windows match.  It does not change users ability to read each post.  
 

I just filled in a one page form to get a free Procreate brush.  I complied because I wanted the brush. 
 

I offered, I thought, a means to improve the initial user request.  

[Cecil]

9 minutes ago, Pšenda said:

How does it prove that you understand the meaning of this word? The fact that you can find it on the Internet (bravo) does not mean that you fully understand its meaning and the difference between what others suggest.

This proves for example your conclusion 

which no one ever spoke or suggested.

I did, in my initial suggestion, used the word mandatory; however, it was used to imply that if the forum changed their format, one would have to click applicable application and OS.  In this case, it would be mandatory for user to continue. 

[R C-R]

2 minutes ago, Cecil said:

I’m not disputing your point of view; however, many others desire to separate the current thread by application.  They want to subscribe to Affinity Photo only, for example.  They don’t want to scroll through 20 questions to see the first AP question, it’s really that simple, a matter of choice.

They have the choice of searching the forum (& the rest of the internet) for topics related to using various features of AP. That will often include topics about how to use those same features in AD or APub, but so what? If something works the same in all the apps (& a huge number of features do) why would that be a problem?

It would be different if the apps did not include so many of the same tools, Studio panels, & other UI features, or used different native file formats, but they do, even to the point of each of them including File menu items to edit a document in the other two. Because of this, any scheme to separate topics by application (and/or desktop OS) would obscure the fact that in reality they are far more alike than they are different, & that they have been designed from the beginning to maximize that affinity they have for each other.

[Cecil]

2 hours ago, R C-R said:

scheme to separate topics

The main point I made throughout my discussion was totally against separation of thread, by applications/OS.  It was not a scheme, it was adding the application and OS, by clickable fly out if possible, to the initial new topic, within the current Desktop thread.  This was to provide a method to scroll through topics of interest for those that frequently request the current thread be separated by application.  What if it to death, spell check and grammar it to death, but please don’t suggest I schemed to separate the thread.  

 

2 hours ago, R C-R said:

would obscure the fact that in reality they are far more alike than they are different, & that they have been designed from the beginning to maximize that affinity they have for each other.

I don’t disagree...I don’t totally agree or have the number/% of Affinity users that own 1, 2 or 3 of the applications.  I’m not disagreeing with your personal logic, I’m not agreeing that the majority agree or disagree.  I do see both sides of the coin and suggested a change.  I compare it to the severe weather this weekend, resulting in over 30 deaths in US...Texas - Nc.  All SE states were advised to ensure their Weather Radio, cell phones, and tablets notifications were on.  Your suggestion, not a scheme, was to insist Alaska, California....do the same, as weather is information and weather applicable to all 50 states. Some individuals choose not...choice.  
 

I would suggest if a user owns single app and their choice is limited to one Desktop (MAC & Windows) Questions & Answers thread, their interest may be limited to one specific app. They are part of Affinity family and forum.