Thanks for the Opportunity, Henry !

Good job.

Some advices:
- don't remove topics or reactions
- only standardize topic title and code parts.
- some topics can be closed for new reactions.
for other advices read first topic reactions.

A question: which email address using for a moderator request. Both?
greetings.

We saw that our comment on topic 000004.htm has been removed.
A good way of changing the guidelines we saw how Richard Howard update his
KixCrypt topic each time. Each time a new entry was inserted and his first entry
was updated according his latest reaction.

Once such things happens on other board, which makes us a fright of publishing infor-
mation for other. For putting information on it cost everyone time.

In our opinion: any reaction of anyone may not be removed from any topic at all.
Such changes make it impossible to find wanted text back. Before a real removement the
member should be informed.

Simple. Make corrections like
- specification of [code] and [/code].
- standardization of titles.
- add short guidelines to a topic when f.e. a member put his reaction on the wrong place.
- close topics for additional comments.
are acceptable.
Removing reactions of members is something which unwanted.
greetings.

btw: the remove reaction was

Dear,

Thanks for this request-for-comment item. For our reaction see
previous topic
http://kixtart.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=12&t=000001
greetings.

btw: Martijn and other members don't think we are against the forum, but
we doesn't like extremly regulation of using it.a

WE MUST REMEMBER "everything on this board is VOLUNTEER WORK"

Don't give members a nasty fright in publishing a very nice UDF (idea).

[ 09 January 2002: Message edited by: MCA ]

I cleaned up the GUIDELINES thread because I wanted it to be as short and clear as possible. But maybe I should have given a warning that I was gonna do that first.

sorry, my bad

I agree with you that this forum should be as accessible for everyone as the other ones, but imho it's more clear if, once the UDF is stable, all the replies are gone. This way people can be sure that they only have to cut-n-paste the code part in the original message instead of having to read through the intire thread.

So, shall we say:
If an author of the original post wants the replies removed, he can post a reply asking me to do that or mail me?

I was also thinking of closing the stable UDF's. Is this a good idea or should we always keep them open?

my E-mail account: rogertheyoung@hotmail.com
can be used for questions and is also useable for MSN.

My two cents ... i agree with your point about clearing replys - but like you said, only if the author wants them cleared.

In terms of closing threads ... I personally myself would never want to close a thread ... the only time I could think of is when a thread gets so long (40 posts or more) that the conversation must be closed and restarted in a new thread ... at which point the moderator would post the message saying this thread is closed - here's a link to the new one.

-Shawn

The moderator could of course, make a request of the author to do so as not all participants are fully aware of the forum etiquette.

[ 09 January 2002: Message edited by: LLigetfa ]

I was suggesting the option that an author of the original post gives me the green light to delete all replies to his/her post.

But it's true that someone can delete his own reply or post without my intervention.

Dictatorship? I hope I haven't given the impression of this...

If you read Welcome MartijnL, you will see a recurring sentiment that there should not be any deleting. Personally, I don't agree, but then again, I'm a dictator.

I agree that there is a lot that could be cleaned up and hope that each author would exercise self-discipline. However, I don't really see it as being so bad. I recognize that it will generate extra hits in searches and may overwhelm some when reading, but if the actual UDF code is limited to the first post, a reader can choose to ignore the diarrhoea that follows.

I admire your dedication and recognize the difficult task before you. I can only hope that others will co-operate to keep your task managable. We should all be vigilant, asking rogue posters to request deletion of their miss-posted threads.

[ 09 January 2002: Message edited by: LLigetfa ]

1) New member comes to kixtart.org and creates a new bbs profile.

2) By default (and I don't know what the actual value is) ... his "Show topics from last N days" setting gets set to 30 days.

3) New member goes to our shiny new UDF forum and only sees abouts 2 pages of UDF's ... the rest of them are buried (hidden) by the timestamp filter ... in about a month or so, they'll probably only see 1 page ... then who knows, if no activity for a while, maybe no pages !!!

Of course, if the member goes to the dropdown box and selects "Show all topics", the problem goes away ... but who remembers to do that (especially new folk) ?

This begs the question - can we set the default Show topics setting to "Show All" for the UDF forum ... my gut feeling says no, but I thought this was worthy of mentioning.

Maybe Rogier, you can include a paragraph in a FAQ or in the GUILDELINES that mentions this fact. I think the UDF search feature is ok becuase the default there is "Any Date" ... unless I'm mistaken about that.

-Shawn

Prelude to a CHM

That's why the topic header MUST look like:

UDFNAME() - Short description

I cut on the - sign...

I see it broke some descriptions though... well, once I have a system to easily update it, I'll ask henry to put the link in the UDF forum description.

Both pages with UDF summaries are mostly updated once a day. The title of iexplorer window shows directly
the date of last update.
Both HTML pages are direct linked to the related UDF pages.
greetings.

I didn't see your page before, but I looks good!
http://home.wanadoo.nl/scripting/specials/kix-udf1.htm

Do you have an automatic update system?

It might be a good idea to put a link to your page in the forum description!

If you wouldn't mind ofcourse...

[ 09 January 2002: Message edited by: DrillSergeant ]

TotalMem( $Systemname ) - Determine amount of memory installed using WMI has 24 posts. It generated a ton of interest as others determined that we could effectively replace SMBIOS and other third party apps using similar methodolgies.

When I took Perfmon Counters and I opened this up for discussion, but was told that I needed to migrate to the COM Section as Perfmon Counters.

Anyway, as a matter of protocol.. How should we approach this when seeking answers and then taking the final product and then publishing it? I know that some of you have Chat mediums like AIM, MSN, ICQ, etc. do these type of things warrant a discussion in chat? Why can't for example open up a discussion on the board when seeking answers?

I know I have thrown a ton of questions in this response.

Thanks for listening.

- Kent

Indeed we have automate the process. The biggest problem was that the format was
changing many times.
Your version can give users another way of searching for required UDF.

We have no problems with a link in the description field.

Also the UDFs of scriptlogic are combined to one page
http://home.wanadoo.nl/scripting/specials/kix-udf2.htm
Our idea for the future is that this page gets also links to plain-text version
of published UDFs, which reduce the cut-n-paste problem and which make it very
easy to use. The implementation of this feature is much easier when only
the UDF code is using the [code] .. [/code] structure.
Roger, other ideas are always welcome.
greetings.

[ 10 January 2002: Message edited by: MCA ]

Additional reaction:

• The biggest problem is that a lot of functions aren't started on the other
  forums.
  So a discussion mostly starts on this forum, which is indeed an unwanted si-
  tuation.
  - There should be a way of moving interesting discussion parts to
  another forum with only a link to it.
  Some other sites copy such information in a new created topic with a remark
  of the creators. For an example see the http://www.kixscripts.com forum.
  - Another suggestion is to remove only the unrelevant information of topic-reactions.
  Sometimes users want to share some relevant information about the UDF with us.
  
• We agree with Les that the moderator could of course, make a request of the
  author to do so as not all participants are fully aware of the forum etiquette.
  After a period everybody can see what kind of contents a topic should contain.
  
• "how new members approach the board" is indeed a threat. They will not read
  all pages. A lot of usefull information and UDFs will be bypass by them. Even
  with "Show All" this will not be gone.
  For this reason Shawn we has create a little procedure which can combine
  all entry information of this forum on one HTML page and which reformat the UDF
  page of "www.scriptlogic.com" to another HTML page. The most interesting part is,
  that it has direct links to related forum issue.
  You can see both pages also as a mirror page. So the UDF information is always
  in some way available.