- Members1125
- Experts Exchange (EECorporate)
- Created2014-11-12
- AccessPublic
- TypeCommunity
Location
- San Luis Obispo,
- California,
- United States
Top Contributors
Option to "Commit" to question
Often when there is question with complex/long code do develop/tweak/adjust, there is situation where few experts are involved and then the possible solutions are posted in few seconds and then the first solution is accepted and the others are unfairly left out and their work is not appreciated.
I think the option where you will have the button for experts to "say" that they are "commit-ed" to question which will imply to other experts looking at same question that there is someone working on possible solution and after the solution have been posted the commit notification will be lifted so that eventually other experts can contribute.
This option does not need to be exclusive other experts can post to this question but it will give hint that there is someone working on it and that the free experts can look at other questions...
I think the option where you will have the button for experts to "say" that they are "commit-ed" to question which will imply to other experts looking at same question that there is someone working on possible solution and after the solution have been posted the commit notification will be lifted so that eventually other experts can contribute.
This option does not need to be exclusive other experts can post to this question but it will give hint that there is someone working on it and that the free experts can look at other questions...
Rank: Master
Expert Comment
Surely the overriding goal is to provide the best answers to the Consumers (members who ask questions and consume the content).
Experts Exchange cannot guarantee that; it tried once and it's a fool's errand. Experts Exchange cannot even guarantee a response.
The ONLY thing Experts Exchange, as a company, can do effectively is to provide systems that facilitate that interaction -- and if EE does that, then it will be successful. However, doing that is counter-intuitive for almost every manager I've ever met. There must be thousands of books and articles telling managers to put their subordinates in a position to succeed, and innumerable managers who say they do that but who double-check their work, issue memos with lots of rules and make sure the time clock is punched for every ten minute break.
But that isn't true of most of the sites EE would consider competitors (or of EE itself).
LinkedIn, I'm sure, wants its members to be successful at furthering our careers -- yet to date, I haven't seen any material sent by them it (suggested jobs or groups) that has anything to do with what I enjoy doing, and for some reason I'm inundated with requests to be added to the contact lists of people I don't know (and, in reading their profiles, don't want to know).
Of course, LinkedIn doesn't really care all that much if I pay to join or not, because its business model is based on gathering enough information about me that they can put "appropriate" advertising in front of me, and to that end, it doesn't really care much whether its systems are any good (e.g., I can no longer scroll through my list of contacts quickly and easily). It just cares that I show up often enough to see the advertising.
EE isn't like that. Its model is built on YOU being successful. But you're only going to be successful if the volunteers who help you are also successful -- and since their use of the site is "disposable time" (in contrast to yours, which is directly tied to you being successful in your job or business), EE should be working very hard to keep those people happy and entertained... because not doing so will most assuredly drive them elsewhere.
Experts Exchange cannot guarantee that; it tried once and it's a fool's errand. Experts Exchange cannot even guarantee a response.
The ONLY thing Experts Exchange, as a company, can do effectively is to provide systems that facilitate that interaction -- and if EE does that, then it will be successful. However, doing that is counter-intuitive for almost every manager I've ever met. There must be thousands of books and articles telling managers to put their subordinates in a position to succeed, and innumerable managers who say they do that but who double-check their work, issue memos with lots of rules and make sure the time clock is punched for every ten minute break.
But that isn't true of most of the sites EE would consider competitors (or of EE itself).
LinkedIn, I'm sure, wants its members to be successful at furthering our careers -- yet to date, I haven't seen any material sent by them it (suggested jobs or groups) that has anything to do with what I enjoy doing, and for some reason I'm inundated with requests to be added to the contact lists of people I don't know (and, in reading their profiles, don't want to know).
Of course, LinkedIn doesn't really care all that much if I pay to join or not, because its business model is based on gathering enough information about me that they can put "appropriate" advertising in front of me, and to that end, it doesn't really care much whether its systems are any good (e.g., I can no longer scroll through my list of contacts quickly and easily). It just cares that I show up often enough to see the advertising.
EE isn't like that. Its model is built on YOU being successful. But you're only going to be successful if the volunteers who help you are also successful -- and since their use of the site is "disposable time" (in contrast to yours, which is directly tied to you being successful in your job or business), EE should be working very hard to keep those people happy and entertained... because not doing so will most assuredly drive them elsewhere.
Rank: Sage
Expert Comment
I came here initially because a search for a programming issue offered a few sites with answers, but this one said I could get a free T-shirt. It took me about ten years to get one, but I have several now and I learned a lot along the way. I've stuck around partly because I am confident that if I do need to ask a question that I will get a good answer, and that includes an informed 'no that cannot be done'.
Rank: Genius
Expert Comment
Sometimes the quick answer is untested, and doesn't work. I always test my answers, which takes longer, but they are much more likely to work on the questioner's computer. I would like a "Commit" option to give me time to do the testing, but if the quick answer works, it is fair for that expert to get the points.
Expert Comment
No, I don't think that is really what the overriding goal should be, or has been. That's too focused.
The overriding goal is (or should be) to provide the best experience possible to the EE community, to keep them engaged in using the site and contributing (while successfully keeping the lights on and servers running). There is recognition that every contributor (Asker or Answer) has his or her own motivation for supplying the content and efforts that they do. Those motivations have a broad scope. Some are synergistic, some are complementary, some are competing and some are antagonistic. The goal is to successfully keep the creation of good content coming.
Answers are commoditized. You can find those on many, many sites. The key differentiator at EE is that you connect to a community that is quite good at supplying answers. The community cannot be commoditized. It has been, needs to be, and will continue to be nurtured.
At some points in time more successfully than others :)