(1) Explain your problem, don't simply post "This isn't working". What were you doing when you faced the problem? What have you tried to resolve - did you look for a solution using "Search" ? Has it happened just once or several times?
(2) It's also good to get feedback when a solution is found, return to the original post to explain how it was resolved so that more people can also use the results.
Dear planners (especially PP Admins),
The PP Forum was one of the utmost support resources for me. I remember the PP family helps about queries I have made and answers I get. I also remember when you search your problem in forum it was 90% findable.
I am grateful to be informed about other software and solutions in the market but when I am surfing forums it does not matter how easy or recurred question is the posts suddenly returns to a which software has the best solution. This situation makes posts to fill-up and hard to find a solution via search. Due to these facts planners (who do not have chance to change the software they work 99% of time) who needs a small help (or information) ends with reading tons of answers which helps them none. This situation results in people opening new subjects for each question rather than searching for previous posts.
I just want to share my observations.
Regards,
Safak
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Maybe difficult to undestand, but I believe that Rafael is doing the right thing.
"Resource Leveling" is the only way forward.
Com'on Rafael, I would like to hear about MBS, RBS, etc....
Sufak:
I tried to move this to the Improving PP forum, but I can't for some reason.
I agree there has been a recent tendency for threads requesting help with a particular problem with a particular brand of software to get hijacked somewhat with posts explaining why another software is better, instead of helping to answer the original question. This is unfortunate.
Rafael:
It is not cencorship to request contributors to keep their posts on topic rather than using an honest query as a vehicle to allow you to make a favoured point again.
I must confess that while I value your planning expertise and willingness to share it on this forum, I have recently found myself skipping over your posts as soon as I see the phrases "resource levelling" or "spider", becuase there are only so many times I can read the same message. I worry that I will lose out on some valuable insights from yourself by doing this, but I just don't have the time to read all the posts on PP in detail and I feel at the moment I am more likely to benefit or be able to benefit others with my limited time by ignoring your posts since most of them will be about the same subject over and over again.
You make a valid point that since new users are constantly joining PP there is good reason to repeat the same message, but there is a law of diminshing returns at work here, and in my opinion sometimes you edge away from ensuring all members are a ware of an important issue into using PP to mount a personal crusade.
The above is meant with the utmost respect and is just my opinion (and just because I am a moderator should not be taken as PP official policy)
Cheers,
G
Rafael,
I do not want to offend people but my post is not about any cencorship or monopoly ((!)where a single software terminology is being used majority of world wide accepted "Best Practice" documents). It is harder to find an answer to a specific item which (100% sure) posted before. It was much more easier 2 years ago.
I think many PP followers (inc. myself) enjoys the contribution of you, Mr.Testro and Mr.Liberzon (and others that I cannot name here) with alternatives. Contrary to pragraph above I had no idea for Spider(C) 2 years ago, now its demo is on my computer for a long time. But I think it is possible to keep threads more clean.
Maybe post should be carried to "Improving Planning Planet Website".
Regards,
Safak
Safak,
You shall realize that a warning about software errors are in order, it is a responsibility of any professional forum to allow for the call of errors in the software, especially when posted under general titles. Some institutions take the easy road and avoid the issues, and this is wrong.
If your software is in error in its modeling of a posted issue it shall be called to the attention to all, even when posted under a specific software title, censorship is wrong especially when calling for errors. Everyone have the right to know the BUGS and errors on all software. It would be naive to expect software vendors will say their software is incapable of even figuring out correctly the most basics like correct float values, like adequate modeling of shifts. These are very relevant issues, errors and pitfalls shall be continuously called as there are and will always be new members of the community. If you do not care, no problem, but allow others to be informed.
PP is a forum of international membership. It does not promotes a single software it promotes many, in the interest of preventing a single software become the dominant, or so dominant it becomes a Monopoly.
PP accepts regional consul forums and allows for its members to communicate on their native language, be either English, Russian, French or Kurdish if a Kurdish community properly applies for it.
PP is against censorship.
Best regards,
Rafael
Email: PPadmin@planningplanet.com
Replies