Tag thread "beyond my scope"

[killermist]

Some threads (primarily in help) are clearly out of my range of abilities to address, though some times I don't know it until I click into the thread and realize it absolutely isn't my "cup of tea".
It would be useful to tag a thread as "beyond my scope" (essentially burying the thread to me) so that I don't accidentally click into it again.

[cariboo]

How is the forum supposed to know what your level of knowledge is?

[|{urse]

It would be nice if there were a skills check of some sort, to be taken (voluntarily) and your "score" on this skills check would determine your real-world eligibility for providing assistance to new users.

[lisati]

Contributing to a thread is optional, as is bowing out gracefully if you find that you're in over your head. It is conceivable that whatever contribution you do make, however small, might include one of the key elements of the ultimate solution.

[killermist]

as is bowing out gracefully if you find that you're in over your headWhich is why it would be useful for a user (like myself) to be able to tag a thread as beyond their scope (of knowledge, or other) and thus bury the thread to not accidentally enter the thread again.

I clearly know many of my boundaries and more than many of my fuzzy "might know about" edges, but many times, I don't know that I am completely unable to help a thread until I have viewed the first part of a thread. But at that time, I can often determine that "I can not at all help this thread, so seeing it again will only result in frustration." (especially if it is in some fringe topic that I absolutely have NO interest)

[CharlesA]

FYI: Tags are visible to everyone.

[critin]

I follow many posts knowing I can't help, but I do it to learn the answers even if it doesn't apply to my OS's ATM. Learning linux isn't easy for some new users, and I consider reading the posts as classwork--and it helps (me) tremendously.

I hope duplicate answers aren't deleted by the poster, because that can serve as verification of a correct answer.
Please leave the posts as they are.

[critin]

It would be nice if there were a skills check of some sort, to be taken (voluntarily) and your "score" on this skills check would determine your real-world eligibility for providing assistance to new users.

And how would that score be used? Would it be attached to our name? Would the low score be meant to serve as a warning that the answer/advice be taken with less confidence/ignored? It would and it would affect voluntary help on the forums. :P

[lisati]

And how would that score be used? Would it be attached to our name? Would the low score be meant to serve as a warning that the answer/advice be taken with less confidence/ignored? It would and it would affect voluntary help on the forums. :P

Agreed. One of the reasons I hide my bean count from casual exposure is because I might not be able to answer a question posed by someone who mistakes it for some kind of super-guru status.

[|{urse]

Nah, the way I had envisioned it, there would be no visible score or rank or anything. You simply wouldn't be able to post on a thread in the main support categories unless you passed a basic Linux/it skills check. The beans, on the other hand, I think those are a bad idea exactly for the reason lisati mentioned. But hey, I'm not complaining. :)

[killermist]

I don't rely on my bean count to indicate to anyone that my posts are of quality. I count on the quality, helpfulness, or thought-provoking nature of my posts to stand on their own.

I just think it would be useful to have a way to bury threads (to me) that I enter initially thinking I might be of help, but realize after entering that either I know nothing about, and/or I just plain don't care about (and probably never will).

The threads that I can tell by the thread title or summary I won't be help for (or find useful information in), I won't click into. It is the threads that "tricked" me into clicking into them that I'd like to bury so that I won't accidentally click into them again (again being confused into thinking I'd be interested/useful), possibly because they show the indications that I've viewed the thread before.

Even skipping the "beyond my scope" part, some threads, I just never want to see again, so burying them would be a useful function.

[critin]

show the indications that I've viewed the thread before.

Threads that you have viewed are no longer in bold text, but are dimmed. Perhaps that would help?

[killermist]

Threads that you have viewed are no longer in bold text, but are dimmed. Perhaps that would help?
THAT is part of the problem. In that they are differentiated from "you haven't looked at this" threads, they evoke a "what is it about this thread that drew me initally?" reaction. To which the reaction in clicking back into is "Oh, Ya... that. Why can't I bury this thread?"

[critin]

umm, I guess if reading the title doesn't refresh your memory and marking 'threads read' in the quick links doesn't help--there's nothing more you can do. How much time does it take to realize that you've been there already?
If it's something I know I can't help with, I read the answers and hope to learn something new. But all I have is time and don't mind wasting it here. I understand why busy people need to make the best use of theirs. I hope you find an answer that works.

[CharlesA]

THAT is part of the problem. In that they are differentiated from "you haven't looked at this" threads, they evoke a "what is it about this thread that drew me initally?" reaction. To which the reaction in clicking back into is "Oh, Ya... that. Why can't I bury this thread?"

That is not how forums work. I do not believe there is any way to set a thread to be hidden from a specific user.

You can "mark" a thread via GreaseMonkey (if you configured it like that) by adding a tag to the thread, but that is unfair to other users since the tag would be visible to everyone and clutter up the forum.

If it bothers you that much, why do you go into the support areas?

[Elfy]

You can "mark" a thread via GreaseMonkey (if you configured it like that) by adding a tag to the thread, but that is unfair to other users since the tag would be visible to everyone and clutter up the forum.Very likely that they would be all be removed as well. Let's not go there ;)

I'm no super support guru - but what I do know I have learnt from 2 sources - having to fix things I've broken and from reading threads here that appeared to be voodoo the first time around.

[CharlesA]

Very likely that they would be all be removed as well. Let's not go there ;)

Indeed. It would just make a mess of things.


I'm no super support guru - but what I do know I have learnt from 2 sources - having to fix things I've broken and from reading threads here that appeared to be voodoo the first time around.

Same here. I've actually learned quite a bit from browsing the forums. ;)

[haqking]

If you cant help in a thread, even more reason to follow it and not ignore it that way you will learn something.

Why ignore what you dont know or understand, knowledge is a gift, welcome it everytime you have the opportunity.

And in the future you can help others.

Cheers

[critin]

If you cant help in a thread, even more reason to follow it and not ignore it that way you will learn something.

Why ignore what you dont know or understand, knowledge is a gift, welcome it everytime you have the opportunity.

And in the future you can help others.

Cheers

Exactly! This goes into my favorite quote of the month list.

[killermist]

If you cant help in a thread, even more reason to follow it and not ignore it that way you will learn something.
Threads about interoperability with windows, are a primary case pointing to an entire family of threads I care very little (if at all) about, and have NO reason to take an interest in.

Why ignore what you dont know or understand, knowledge is a gift, welcome it everytime you have the opportunity.
Not all "knowledge" is useful. For me to even accidentally learn the mechanics of how to put on makeup, or theory of dogwalking, or ancient punch-card computer programming would all be a total waste of neurons.

The problem with "Jack of all trades" is "Master of none".

There are some subjects I will never be a master of.
There are others I don't care to EVER know anything about.
My life is sufficiently valuable (to me) that spending any part of my off hours studying subjects I don't know or want to know about just for the sake of some other person that may or may not ask a question in a window when I'll see it, is a waste of my time.

[bruno9779]

You could probably script your way around this.
Maybe a greasemonkey script could give you the chance of marking a thread and store that preference locally.
The same script would look at your "thread blacklist" everytime you refresh the new posts page and would hide or mark in a strong color the unwanted threads.

The biggest drawback I can think of is with performance, once your blacklist grows in size.

Oh, and that my greasemonkey skills are terrible

[bruno9779]

Googling on that idea I have found this:

http://forum.ottawagolf.com/showthread.php?64455-Hiding-Specific-Forums-from-quot-New-Posts-quot-Using-Greasemonkey

It is from some canadian golf Forum, the approach is way different than the one you'd require (you should filter by thread id) but the basics are there.

If you manage to do this with a right-click implementation (skipping the need to edit the script continuosly) I may install it as well.

lol

[|{urse]

I think OP should fashion a working prototype of the feature they are requesting, it would just be a vanilla vbulletin install with a few dummy threads, a "hide this thread from me" button, and a couple cookies to save their preferences.

The only major flaw I see with this is that you will literally be wasting time clicking a "hide" button on something that your brain will most likely recognize and intentionally ignore in a millisecond anyways.