Naomi N edited Revision 47. Comment: Added page navigation please vote
Naomi N edited Revision 46. Comment: Attempt of formatting
Naomi N edited Revision 45. Comment: Added please vote about Move option
Naomi N edited Revision 44. Comment: Added bug thread
Naomi N edited Revision 43. Comment: Added date
Naomi N edited Revision 42. Comment: 3 more please votes
Naomi N edited Revision 40. Comment: One more please vote
Naomi N edited Revision 39. Comment: Added one more please vote
Naomi N edited Revision 37. Comment: Removed Note, increased font
Naomi N edited Revision 36. Comment: Added a few please vote statements - someone please add more
Naomi N edited Revision 82. Comment: Formatting
Naomi N edited Revision 83. Comment: Formatting
Naomi N edited Revision 84. Comment: Formatting
Naomi N edited Revision 85. Comment: Formatting
Naomi N edited Revision 86. Comment: Formatting
Naomi N edited Revision 87. Comment: Formatting
How the forums website must look? Do we really need to stick with the word "FORUM" and the concept "FORUM"? Can we "reinvent" this concept and marry it with the existing, yet popular and amazing, concepts out there?
Here is my take on it:
From UX view point; in technical QA, the actual answer along with the candidate answers of much be separated from the comments.
You guys can really get ideas from StackExchange community, especially tags-based posts.. to incorporate "A post may belong to multiple tags/categories". Also, the sticky posts should not be only from Microsoft employees or partners. They may be coming from anyone with highest votes/views/answers/comments or based on some weightage equation to incorporate multiple factors.
I know back in stone age, forums were strictly meant to be "traditional looking forums". But for sake of argument, consider this:
- UX wise Microsoft Community QA website is similar to TechNet social forums.
-Then on TechNet forums we have questions and discussion.
So each aspect of it needs to be diversified. Visually the QA aspect of TechNet forums must be different than discussion.
Discussion means "all comments has leveled hierarchy", they may be traditional forums or they may be similar to chat rooms in Stackoverflow.
QA implies "help". "I need specific answers". "I need multiple suggestions" etc.. But eventually one answer will be the winner. All the related talk goes in comments to question or answer. Voting is a separate criteria: "how community respond to your answer" and it can be negative too.
Further, this idea can be extend to integration of other social and bug reporting technical systems of MSFT. Like:
- ability to share your post or badges or points on SOCL.
- if your question renders a bug identification in some product (say IE), OP or anyone can flag the question to take vote for posting on Connect: "Y number of people with X reputation" need to vote to make it happen. (If this idea gets successful, then altogether the posting of bugs directly to connect may get disallowed. The Connect system may require the user to discuss the issue first with TechNet community and claim it as bug report like that.. believe it or not it will solve two problems, people who use connect know what happen to 90% of your feedback, yet another rant).
- if your answer is general and belongs to Microsoft Community, the you get flagged and your post will be migrated there. (instead getting closed).
Hope someone out there agree with these suggestions and get excited by the way I wish TechNet forums, Microsoft Community and related websites get married. 8-)
Naomi N edited Revision 88. Comment: Added note about Sticky threads and Search
Naomi N edited Revision 89. Comment: Moved implemented requests