# Observations about Admins



## putz (27 Sep 2016)

So I've been a member on here for years.  I mostly stick the shadows and creep posts.  Recently I have noticed something that I think should be brought up.  It is 2016 and younger generations rely more and more on computers, message boards etc to get information.  With that being said I don't understand the need for admins to be condescending, ignorant or in some cases just pain assholes to people looking for information.  It's 2016 most people now a days will readily post a questions instead of searching.  In some matters DS are telling people to use the search function on topics that may not have been updated in a year or more.  I can understand directing people to use the search function or Google.  But being condescending and providing "walk through instructions" (one example) on how to use Google is far from professional or acceptable. The search function on this page is not the most user friendly around.  I'd like to think that we haven't driven away some future generations by having some retired or currently serving CAF member being the asshole that is the first contact that these people have with the CAF.


----------



## Lumber (27 Sep 2016)

putz said:
			
		

> So I've been a member on here for years.  I mostly stick the shadows and creep posts.  Recently I have noticed something that I think should be brought up.  It is 2016 and younger generations rely more and more on computers, message boards etc to get information.  With that being said I don't understand the need for admins to be condescending, ignorant or in some cases just pain assholes to people looking for information.  It's 2016 most people now a days will readily post a questions instead of searching.  In some matters DS are telling people to use the search function on topics that may not have been updated in a year or more.  I can understand directing people to use the search function or Google.  But being condescending and providing "walk through instructions" (one example) on how to use Google is far from professional or acceptable. The search function on this page is not the most user friendly around.  I'd like to think that we haven't driven away some future generations by having some retired or currently serving CAF member being the ******* that is the first contact that these people have with the CAF.



If you had used the search function properly, you would have discovered that many other members have brought up this same issue before. Please read the site guidelines and refrain from bringing up the same issues that have already been brought up and ignored before.


----------



## brihard (27 Sep 2016)

Lumber said:
			
		

> If you had used the search function properly, you would have discovered that many other members have brought up this same issue before. Please read the site guidelines and refrain from bringing up the same issues that have already been brought up and ignored before.



You magnificent bastard.


----------



## brihard (27 Sep 2016)

I've said it before and I'll say it again; the site's search function is awful, and most people don't know about the "site:" function on Google. I believe we as a site are pretty terrible to kids who want to learn about the military with the intent of joining. If an 18 year old walked into our armoury all bright eyed and curious, would we tell them to go Google 'Canadian Army' and boot them out the door? I bloody well hope not. The beauty of this page is that at the low low prize of zero effort, you can ignore posts that annoy you, you aren't even stuck being that first guy in CADPAT the kid sees and walks up to.

My two cents, but I recall that the reason I got invited to be an admin in the first place was because of the patience I showed in the recruiting forum.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (27 Sep 2016)

Brihard said:
			
		

> My two cents, but I recall that the reason I got invited to be an admin in the first place was because of the patience I showed in the recruiting forum.



Actually we were friggin' desperate and out of thousands of invites you were the only one dumb enough to say yes..........  :nana:


----------



## Scott (27 Sep 2016)

The post above is much nicer than the old rainbow post or going all caps on someone and calling them stupid.


----------



## RocketRichard (27 Sep 2016)

Lumber & Brihard: best posts I've seen here in awhile. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## brihard (27 Sep 2016)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Actually we were friggin' desperate and out of thousands of invites you were the only one dumb enough to say yes..........  :nana:



That was when I was young and stupid. Now I'm a bit older but sadly still stupid.


----------



## DAA (27 Sep 2016)

putz said:
			
		

> So I've been a member on here for years.  I mostly stick the shadows and creep posts.  Recently I have noticed something that I think should be brought up.  It is 2016 and younger generations rely more and more on computers, message boards etc to get information.  With that being said I don't understand the need for admins to be condescending, ignorant or in some cases just pain assholes to people looking for information.  It's 2016 most people now a days will readily post a questions instead of searching.  In some matters DS are telling people to use the search function on topics that may not have been updated in a year or more.  I can understand directing people to use the search function or Google.  But being condescending and providing "walk through instructions" (one example) on how to use Google is far from professional or acceptable. The search function on this page is not the most user friendly around.  I'd like to think that we haven't driven away some future generations by having some retired or currently serving CAF member being the ******* that is the first contact that these people have with the CAF.



Try volunteering for and being a DS and then you will see why they do, what they do and they're not getting paid for it.  It's voluntary time on their part, whether they have a job or not, they just seem to enjoy providing information and taking S&A whilst doing it.

When you see the same question, over and over again, it get's pretty old and frustrating.  If you want to complain about the site, treat it like your current job and come with not just the complaint but also a solution to what you see as a possible resolution to the problem.   Just maybe, the site owners will see some benefit to what you suggest.


----------



## mariomike (27 Sep 2016)

putz said:
			
		

> It's 2016 most people now a days will readily post a questions instead of searching.  In some matters DS are telling people to use the search function on topics that may not have been updated in a year or more.



I use this Sticky from a Moderator and the Site Owner as my guideline,

Necroposting - Not always a bad idea 
http://army.ca/forums/threads/87278.0.html

Potential Applicants can Ask a CAF Recruiter. DAA and Sgt. Laen are always very helpful.

READ FIRST Sticky from Captain Mark in Ask a CAF Recruiter, "Before you ask a question,you should be searching the forum or the Forces.ca website for these answers." 
http://milnet.ca/forums/threads/115341.0.html



			
				DAA said:
			
		

> When you see the same question, over and over again, it get's pretty old and frustrating.



We only have two Recruiters allowed to post in Ask a CAF Recruiter. Sgt. Laen and yourself. I am not aware of any others.

Which is why I believe Captain Mark asked applicants, and potential applicants, to first search the site and forces.ca before posting their questions.


----------



## George Wallace (27 Sep 2016)

Scott said:
			
		

> The post above is much nicer than the old rainbow post or going all caps on someone and calling them stupid.



What?

You mean this one?  BEFORE YOU POST - READ THIS:

I had to go back almost a decade to find that.....(ten years for you young pups).   [

Thanks for the post DAA

Sadly Putz, you have been here since 2004 and your contribution today is to make complaint.  The offer has been put out to members of the site to become Mentors and mentor new members.  Have you taken up that offer?  No.  Others have provided their expertise and knowledge without being Mentors or Admins, such as DAA.  With your time as a member of the PPCLI and in the Infantry, are you supplying any such help to the members seeking advice?  Other members, such as mariomike, are quick to answer questions with links to threads that cover the answers in depth.  Have you tried that?  Having been in the military, you have heard the statement that commenting without a solution is not solving anything.  You can ask yourself: Are you part of the solution or part of the problem?   Perhaps, part of the solution may be found in the two examples I just gave; of DAA and mariomike.


----------



## Scott (27 Sep 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> What?
> 
> You mean this one?  BEFORE YOU POST - READ THIS:
> 
> I had to go back almost a decade to find that.....(ten years for you young pups).   [



Nope. Didn't mean that.


----------



## putz (27 Sep 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> What?
> 
> You mean this one?  BEFORE YOU POST - READ THIS:
> 
> ...



What cant make complaints now?  I have given plenty of advice and posted information both on threads and through PM. Mostly through PM as I am not on here regularly and get notifications through email when I am being messaged.  I guess I could be a moderator if you'd be happy with one that's on the site rather irregularly.  It would be true saying that I'm part of the problem if as the one making condescending posts.  I am not though.  But hey jump on the guy making observations and accuse them of being part of the problem.  That's really productive.


----------



## MJP (27 Sep 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> What?
> 
> You mean this one?  BEFORE YOU POST - READ THIS:
> 
> ...



I can think of some people who are the problem........ :


----------



## George Wallace (27 Sep 2016)

MJP said:
			
		

> I can think of some people who are the problem........ :




I had NO DOUBTS that you would.


----------



## AbdullahD (27 Sep 2016)

putz said:
			
		

> What cant make complaints now?  I have given plenty of advice and posted information both on threads and through PM. Mostly through PM as I am not on here regularly and get notifications through email when I am being messaged.  I guess I could be a moderator if you'd be happy with one that's on the site rather irregularly.  It would be true saying that I'm part of the problem if as the one making condescending posts.  I am not though.  But hey jump on the guy making observations and accuse them of being part of the problem.  That's really productive.



Putz, you have a point and a valid one at that. I will even note, it has garnered attention over on cess hole that is reddit...

https://m.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/comments/2ax2lq/spotted_this_on_armyca/

I personally think a small issue exists, but it is not that bad in my opinion. As mentioned early the sites search function is a piece of junk, so much so I never use it. The second is, some people, sometimes have a tough attitude.

But I think that is an evolution from the very respectable and proactive culture army.ca has. Army.ca requires people to be proactive in their research which is a good thing.. a trait I suspect will help a fellow in BMQ. 

Now many members.. most notably MarioMike quickly link people the answers... but sometimes tough reply's do come, that may or has hurt the membership or input on this site. Now I realize in the Armed Forces you should not be a dancing fairy, but if you singe those dancing fairies with fire before you can smarten them out... you may never get the chance to straighten them out.

I suggest instead of lamblasting the lazy or ignorant chaps  you post a link to the posting guidelines and then a link to the relevant material with a standarized joking quip and an attached smiley  then just have it as the standard go to format... and then if they do not smarten up.... let the dogs loose 

The non military pundit hahaha
Abdullah


----------



## mariomike (27 Sep 2016)

AbdullahD said:
			
		

> https://m.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/comments/2ax2lq/spotted_this_on_armyca/



Good grief! They sound disgruntled! Maybe they got kicked off this site?!   

They love flotiste, whoever s/he is.


----------



## George Wallace (27 Sep 2016)

AbdullahD said:
			
		

> I suggest instead of lamblasting the lazy or ignorant chaps  you post a link to the posting guidelines and then a link to the relevant material with a standarized joking quip and an attached smiley  then just have it as the standard go to format... and then if they do not smarten up.... let the dogs loose



We have done that over the years, and had an infamous "Rainbow Post"  to cover all eventualities, which garnered less than positive reviews.  The novelty wears off rather quickly.  There is only one way to satisfy all, all but the lazy or ignorant chaps, and that is to ignore the lazy and ignorant chaps.  That way you don't lambaste anyone; you don't have to do the work for the lazy and find the answer in the forums; you don't have to reply; and others do not have to lambaste you for your reply to a redundant question.


----------



## AbdullahD (27 Sep 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> We have done that over the years, and had an infamous "Rainbow Post"  to cover all eventualities, which garnered less than positive reviews.  The novelty wears off rather quickly.  There is only one way to satisfy all, all but the lazy or ignorant chaps, and that is to ignore the lazy and ignorant chaps.  That way you don't lambaste anyone; you don't have to do the work for the lazy and find the answer in the forums; you don't have to reply; and others do not have to lambaste you for your reply to a redundant question.



Well then I am left the idea of a standardized exam 

Code in an examination of why a person is joining up, in an interactive manner mind you. Then point them directly to the relevant threads and at the end of all that allow them to post


----------



## DAA (27 Sep 2016)

putz said:
			
		

> What cant make complaints now?  I have given plenty of advice and posted information both on threads and through PM. Mostly through PM as I am not on here regularly and get notifications through email when I am being messaged.  I guess I could be a moderator if you'd be happy with one that's on the site rather irregularly.  It would be true saying that I'm part of the problem if as the one making condescending posts.  I am not though.  But hey jump on the guy making observations and accuse them of being part of the problem.  That's really productive.



Problem being was your lead in statement to your comment, which was...



			
				putz said:
			
		

> So I've been a member on here for years.  I mostly stick the shadows and creep posts.  Recently I have noticed something that I think should be brought up.



I've seen some of your posts and you do contribute nicely to the conversations which go on here and I hope you stick around and continue to contribute, when you can.       

Sticking in the shadows and creeping, then suddenly jumping out........isn't always a good thing to do and may have scared some people.


----------



## kratz (27 Sep 2016)

To the Op:

Building on George Wallace's post, all to often, too many people ignore what they agree to for the site standards and then become upset when as a forum, it is enforced. Much like joining the military is a learning curve, it is with this site...who mirror our Canadian military culture. 

Your posts are useful. Sniping, not so much.


----------



## Scott (27 Sep 2016)

I can only speak from my experience as a mod and as a member of these forums.

I wander by some of those repetitive posts and marvel at the work a guy like mariomike does to go and chase down the links and post them for the benefit of the OP. Seeing this over the years makes me kind of lazy in that I rarely look in on those posts because I know they'll be handled or they'll just die, no action is actually _required_.

I think it takes *less* effort to be kind to someone than to immediately be a dick, and even less till to just surf on by. There are always exceptions and with some the exceptions become the rule.

Sometimes the hardest thing to say is nothing. I try to keep that in mind.


----------



## mba2011 (27 Sep 2016)

I am going to add my unsolicited 2 cents about this thread, simply because I can.

This site can be a tremendous resource. The information that can be found on this site is fantastic, and can be very helpful. That said; there is, at times, a negative view of this site, because of the actions of some members. I completely understand the DS and other member's frustrations with repeat questions and redundant posts; but in some cases, it is handled poorly. 

One poinent example comes to mind. A new user posted a question about a trade and the courses he would have to complete to reach OFP in that trade, along with a few closely related questions. Rather than a courteous/polite/socially acceptable response, he was berated and decried for not using the search by a member (no names no pack drill), which was followed up by a PM. The OP, who I know outside of the military by reputation in the field, was completely dumbfounded that a question was met by such a response. Before I said anything, I searched for answers to his questions, and after 20 mins, I had not yet found a satisfactory response. Following that, I messaged the Op, and apologized, as a member of this site for the reply he got, and gave him the answer to his question which was within my arcs and experience. Aside from the 20 mins I spent searching just to see what I could find, it took me under 2 mins to provide a civil response and help direct his questions that I could not answer. 

As stated, I completely understand the frustrations of the redundant questions. It takes a few seconds to paste a response of "Use the search function/read the guidelines" but it would only take a few more to provide a civil answer or even guidance. This site is a fantastic resource, but if we as members (myself included) drive away people or discourage them from joining in the discussions, what is the point of the site? 

Again, my unsolicited 2 cents.


----------



## cupper (27 Sep 2016)

AbdullahD said:
			
		

> https://m.reddit.com/r/CanadianForces/comments/2ax2lq/spotted_this_on_armyca/



George, I think They are on to you.



> I think George Wallace has "did you search the forums" on a macro key. Gotta get that post count up! The sites a joke.


----------



## mariomike (27 Sep 2016)

A thread I remember, and re-read today. It may be relevant to this discussion. Our Site Owner was an active participant,

On asking questions & hostile dog-pile replies. 
http://army.ca/forums/threads/90702.0.html
4 pages.


----------



## Scott (27 Sep 2016)

mariomike said:
			
		

> A thread I remember, and re-read today. It may be relevant to this discussion. Our Site Owner was an active participant,
> 
> On asking questions & hostile dog-pile replies.
> http://army.ca/forums/threads/90702.0.html
> 4 pages.



Ah, so was I. 

Glad I have less time and have mellowed a bunch since then. 8)


----------



## RedcapCrusader (27 Sep 2016)

Honestly, I thought the same thing when I first signed up. 

However, over time, especially now that I am responsible for training and caring for new and potential recruits; it is much preferred that they do their homework. 

It shows good initiative and is also a good judge of character. Far more often I've come across a potential recruit that had done ZERO ground work themselves, come to me and get the run down. Get through the Recruiting process, sworn in, only to jump ship when they're told they have to shave, or cut their hair, or that they have to work long hours on little sleep. 

I stopped wasting my time. 

I'd ask what they know about the CAF, the Army, the MP Branch; if they didn't have basic knowledge and expectations, I'd give them a little taste and then tell them to do a little more research online or at the CFRC. If they did, I'd lay the nitty and gritty on them and let them sleep on it. 

Since adapting to my new approach, I've had much more suitable recruits come across my desk. 

*TL;DR*: There needs to be a fine balance between leaving them to sink or swim, and spoon feeding them. 

I'm all for supporting and mentoring newbies, but they have to show they want it.


----------



## BeaverMan (27 Sep 2016)

Was just about to post about the same issue when I came across this thread. I'm  not new to the military but am new to this site. I myself am in the process of reenlisting under a new MOC and am looking for information on the new trade I am hoping to join. I'm used to using other sites search function and have tried doing so with this site but in some cases in recent post were people were asking the same questions I'm looking for are directed to posts as far back as 2003 and the information is greatly out of date. I know once enrolled and with access to the DWAN a lot more information will open up to me but for now people like myself don't have many options on where to find information. It wouldn't hurt that before posting links to previous posts the people replying check the post themselves to see if the information contained is still valid before giving out of date and misinformation.


----------



## mariomike (27 Sep 2016)

Scott said:
			
		

> Ah, so was I.
> 
> Glad I have less time and have mellowed a bunch since then. 8)



Remember this Scott? "Dogpile the Nurturer!"  It's a tough crowd. 

They say spoon-feeding adults only teaches them the shape of the spoon.



			
				BeaverMan said:
			
		

> I'm used to using other sites search function and have tried doing so with this site but in some cases in recent post were people were asking the same questions I'm looking for are directed to posts as far back as 2003 and the information is greatly out of date.



Why not ask your questions in that thread? Your Q and A's will keep the thread up to date.

Disclaimer

Milnet.ca is a private effort, and is in no way sponsored by or connected to the Department Of National Defence, the Canadian Forces, or any other military organization. Milnet.ca is not supported in any manner, either official or unofficial. As a result, it often does not get the time or resources that it often requires, however it also means that it can operate without the worry of following official administrative guidelines and restrictions. 

Despite this freedom, Milnet.ca attempts to provide accurate and timely information of interest to serving and potential members of the CF, however any information obtained from this page comes "as is" and it's accuracy cannot be guaranteed. 

The only sure thing on here is Ask a CAF Recruiter.


----------



## BeaverMan (28 Sep 2016)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Why not ask your questions in that thread?



Another smaller issue I've found with that issue is people who do this are often belittled for bumping an old thread by posting in it. It's kind of a catch 22. The funniest one I found was when someone did ask a question in an old thread looking for more information they were given a link to the same thread they posted in.


----------



## mariomike (28 Sep 2016)

BeaverMan said:
			
		

> Another smaller issue I've found with that issue is people who do this are often belittled for bumping an old thread by posting in it. It's kind of a catch 22.



I use this Sticky from a Moderator and the Site Owner as my guideline,

Necroposting - Not always a bad idea 
http://army.ca/forums/threads/87278.0.html

Potential Applicants can Ask a CAF Recruiter. DAA and Sgt. Laen are always very helpful.

READ FIRST Sticky from Captain Mark in Ask a CAF Recruiter, "Before you ask a question, you should be searching the forum or the Forces.ca website for these answers." 
http://milnet.ca/forums/threads/115341.0.html



			
				George Wallace said:
			
		

> Others have provided their expertise and knowledge without being Mentors or Admins, such as DAA.



Some have even become Subscribers or Donors.


----------



## bang (28 Sep 2016)

Howdy, 

The OP has a big point, despite the shortcomings in his arguments (volunteers are mean, etc etc). This site is structured off of late 90's to early-2000's tech, a long time before search optimization became a big thing in the minds of most developers. I want to offer knowledge of other tools in case the repetitive questions ever become too much for the mods and admins.

First, I want to separate the types of topics which I see into two abstract categories: First, you have the banter, shop-talk, news, gossip and all the stuff that's suitable for a bulletin board structure like this site. What you have here is perfect for opinions, observations and the like. The other type of topics involve questions where there is only one correct answer. Those are the sort of topics you may see individuals asking over and over again... 

In programming and development, a site called Stack Overflow (Site - Wiki) appeared and became the choice destination for Q+A. Instead of a "File Explorer"-style directory structure common in bulletin boards such as Milnet.ca, there's a search bar, some tags, and a legion of moderators and volunteers who gain privilege by giving solid answers to questions by their peers for basic rights such as commenting, adding tags or even editing the original post for syntax and phrasing. In addition, admins are elected or appointed who have magical powers, not unlike here. I get stuck with humdiggers all of a time in my day-to-day civie job, but I find that these style Q+A boards have been my salvation, my code review, and a place where I can learn through the toils of the others. Heck, I barely post as most of my questions get asked twice. But that's not a really big deal as all duplicate questions tend to get linked to the original question - something that creates original content in the algorithms that drive search engine results, meaning it becomes more likely that Google or another search engine can pick up the answer before the newbie has to dig within the site...

Has _Milnet.ca _considered creating a separate Q+A section for members modeled after a Stack Overflow-clone? I've checked whether someone else has brought it up via the search and it may be an original thought. If so, there's plenty of clones out there. Here is a link that lists them all - in the form of a Stack Overflow clone...

While I'm showing off this new toy, I want to be clear that I don't intend to be derisive to all the volunteers who keep the content of this site at the highest standard. You do a good job. But if a future deluge of repetitive questions ever gets too much and those in charge wish to iterate, this is a tech that's been around since 2008 and still is strong in finding solutions to many problems.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Sep 2016)

BeaverMan said:
			
		

> Another smaller issue I've found with that issue is people who do this are often belittled for bumping an old thread by posting in it. It's kind of a catch 22. The funniest one I found was when someone did ask a question in an old thread looking for more information they were given a link to the same thread they posted in.



Often that is a result of a "Clean up" where several topics covering the same question are being merged to one to cut down on searching and reading several threads and getting timelines mixed up.  Although you may find some of the info dated, it may still be relevant; or as the threads are merged, you can read the changes that have taken place over time to the answer to that question.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Sep 2016)

cupper said:
			
		

> George, I think They are on to you.



Yes.  And I have a feeling I know some of them as well.  TheCapedMoosesader sounds oh so familiar to a person I know.  That site has also attracted many of the malcontents who had been raising shyte on this site, or were unhappy not getting the answers they wanted to hear here; some being a case of "if I can't get what I want from Dad, I will ask Mom." 

As you can see, by reading their posts, we have persons who prefer their style of website, just as we have persons who prefer the style of this website.  Everyone is free to visit either or; or both.  

This being the internet, it is often too easy to offend when offence is not intended.  Some people are offended too easily.  Some people read or write posts and interpret then in ways that were not intended.  How often have you seen someone get offended by a reply that simply said "No", when they had asked a question expecting a long positive answer to that question?

A couple years ago, we had to admit that this site's SEARCH function does not work as well as it should.  We seriously advise people to use Google, enter in their search parameters "army.ca, question/key words" and use Google.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Sep 2016)

Bang said:
			
		

> The OP has a big point, despite the shortcomings in his arguments (volunteers are mean, etc etc). This site is structured off of late 90's to early-2000's tech, a long time before search optimization became a big thing in the minds of most developers.



We have acknowledged that shortcoming in the site SEARCH function, and have been recommending the use of Google to find army.ca/milnet.ca/navy.ca/airforce.ca forums  (all actually the same, just different colour formats)



			
				Bang said:
			
		

> First, I want to separate the types of topics which I see into two abstract categories: First, you have the banter, shop-talk, news, gossip and all the stuff that's suitable for a bulletin board structure like this site. What you have here is perfect for opinions, observations and the like. The other type of topics involve questions where there is only one correct answer. Those are the sort of topics you may see individuals asking over and over again...



I am not sure how you browse this site, but do you look at this index page and the subsequent sub-index pages, and does it not fill your request:

http://army.ca/forums/index.php

Reference abstract categories, does Radio Chatter not fill that bill?



			
				Bang said:
			
		

> In programming and development, a site called Stack Overflow (Site - Wiki) appeared and became the choice destination for Q+A. Instead of a "File Explorer"-style directory structure common in bulletin boards such as Milnet.ca, there's a search bar, some tags, and a legion of moderators and volunteers who gain privilege by giving solid answers to questions by their peers for basic rights such as commenting, adding tags or even editing the original post for syntax and phrasing. In addition, admins are elected or appointed who have magical powers, not unlike here. I get stuck with humdiggers all of a time in my day-to-day civie job, but I find that these style Q+A boards have been my salvation, my code review, and a place where I can learn through the toils of the others. Heck, I barely post as most of my questions get asked twice. But that's not a really big deal as all duplicate questions tend to get linked to the original question - something that creates original content in the algorithms that drive search engine results, meaning it becomes more likely that Google or another search engine can pick up the answer before the newbie has to dig within the site...



Yes.  We often point newbies to Google to preform a more effective SEARCH.

This site does have a Wiki although it is very seldom visited (to the best of my knowledge):  http://army.ca/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

This site is constantly changing.  The ASK A CAF RECRUITER was added last year with actual CAF Recruiters handling the questions.  We are debating adding a few other forums to deal with Emergency Planning or something along those lines.  The site is not stagnant, but we also have to remember that as a privately owned site, the bandwidth and storage that we have available is also limited.



			
				Bang said:
			
		

> Has _Milnet.ca _considered creating a separate Q+A section for members modeled after a Stack Overflow-clone? I've checked whether someone else has brought it up via the search and it may be an original thought. If so, there's plenty of clones out there. Here is a link that lists them all - in the form of a Stack Overflow clone...



Hopefully, the Site owner can decipher all your points and give you an answer to whether the site can handle such modifications.  The other factor is the membership and what style of site they prefer to surf.


----------



## MasterInstructor (28 Sep 2016)

I totally agree with the OP. This is not a welcoming environment. I joined about 7 years ago and learned my lesson very quickly not to post here unless I really needed to. I kept my activity to a minimum. Sometimes it is a good source of information but mostly I hear admins, moderators or other old users giving shit to people. If you are going to take time to respond, either respond with some information or do not respond. Do not waste your time and add a reply that does not contribute anything.


----------



## Scott (28 Sep 2016)

The site does tend to (still) eat some people more quickly than others. I can raise my hand in having a part of that in the past, but also put my hand up and state that I have been trying to be a part of a change. I am sure we have banned people for the wrong reasons, people who could contribute and people who just had a wrong run in with someone and had no recourse. That definitely sucks to accept. But, I also know we have banned some real racist assholes, people who were here to smear others from a position of relative anonymity, people here to try and con the membership, people here solely to disrupt, etcetera. I like to think we have been right more than we have been wrong.

I don't always get it right. I try to improve though.

The ask a recruiter section was a great idea and came about long after it really should have, IMO. It has its issues, but for the most part we have folks not on the moderating staff taking care of that, which suits me just fine.

Bang, I am definitely interested din your ideas and can only hope Mike will find some time to take a look at this when he's not swamped by work, other work, family, etc. I think anything that can help the site is worth looking into - the long history of the search function points to a resolution, of some sort, being a requirement. Not simply linking someone, quite tongue in cheek I might add, to Let Me Google That For You. It can work for some, but not for others.

Lastly, I am still trying to improve. I am happy with the very mostly positive interactions I have with people here over the last couple of years, even when we are disagreeing.


----------



## Lumber (28 Sep 2016)

MasterInstructor said:
			
		

> I totally agree with the OP. This is not a welcoming environment. I joined about 7 years ago and learned my lesson very quickly not to post here unless I really needed to. I kept my activity to a minimum. Sometimes it is a good source of information but mostly I hear admins, moderators or other old users giving crap to people. If you are going to take time to respond, either respond with some information or do not respond. Do not waste your time and add a reply that does not contribute anything.



My response to OP was meant to be humourous, and you know what? Apparently it was; lots of people lol'd, but you chose to "downvote" it. And while I didn't directly address OP's issue, I didn't berate or belittle him (assuming you accept the humour of my post). If that's not a positive contribution, I don't know what is.


----------



## dapaterson (28 Sep 2016)

Lumber said:
			
		

> My response to OP was meant to be humourous, and you know what? Apparently it was; lots of people lol'd, but you just to "downvote" it. And while I didn't directly address OP's issue, I didn't berate or belittle him (assuming you accept the humour of my post). If that's not a positive contribution, I don't know what is.



Clearly, you forgot to add an emoticon.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Sep 2016)

Lumber said:
			
		

> My response to OP was meant to be humourous, and you know what? Apparently it was; lots of people lol'd, but you just to "downvote" it. And while I didn't directly address OP's issue, I didn't berate or belittle him (assuming you accept the humour of my post). If that's not a positive contribution, I don't know what is.



One of the common occurrences here; the poster's humour is not always translated/interpreted as such by someone.......and we spiral from there.


----------



## Lumber (28 Sep 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Clearly, you forgot to add an emoticon.


----------



## Mike Bobbitt (28 Sep 2016)

As usual, I'm a bit late to the party, but I believe this is an important discussion to have. Tone is still our biggest problem here, hands down. We are making progress, but there is still work to be done.

I'm going to try really hard not to be long-winded here as it's largely covering ground I have already covered, in threads already cross-linked here. I think we all (users and staff) need to follow some simple rules:

[list type=decimal]
[*]Be professional in your posts. That doesn't necessarily equate to "nice" but it does mean no name calling or ALL CAPS YELLING.
[*]Keep on walkin'. If you are having trouble complying with rule #1, there is another option: Don't post. Someone else can handle it. And if nobody handles it, then it probably wasn't a critical request. The poster may take "no response" as a hint to search, without being lambasted or coddled. If you do reply, try not to exacerbate the situation or get emotionally riled up in your response. The idea is to de-escalate, not to provoke.
[*]Give feedback. The MilPoints system is here for a reason. It allows users and staff to make their impressions of a post or user known. Please adhere to rule #1 when giving feedback.
[/list]

I know we have had issues, including recently with tone. I will say though that any issues that have been brought to my attention have been dealt with. (That doesn't mean all parties were happy with the result, but I reviewed, made a call and took action.) If you see someone, staff or user, being unnecessarily rude, let me know and I will step in.

Bang: I'm a big fan of the StackExchange model, I use it regularly. Some of the code/architecture of this site is a result of StackExchange learning. I'm looking into options there, it seems like there is a paid/hosted Enterprise version available, but those are two terms I try hard to stay away from if I can.


Cheers
Mike


----------



## Pikache (28 Sep 2016)

putz said:
			
		

> So I've been a member on here for years.  I mostly stick the shadows and creep posts.  Recently I have noticed something that I think should be brought up.  It is 2016 and younger generations rely more and more on computers, message boards etc to get information.  With that being said I don't understand the need for admins to be condescending, ignorant or in some cases just pain assholes to people looking for information.  It's 2016 most people now a days will readily post a questions instead of searching.  In some matters DS are telling people to use the search function on topics that may not have been updated in a year or more.  I can understand directing people to use the search function or Google.  But being condescending and providing "walk through instructions" (one example) on how to use Google is far from professional or acceptable. The search function on this page is not the most user friendly around.  I'd like to think that we haven't driven away some future generations by having some retired or currently serving CAF member being the ******* that is the first contact that these people have with the CAF.





			
				MasterInstructor said:
			
		

> I totally agree with the OP. This is not a welcoming environment. I joined about 7 years ago and learned my lesson very quickly not to post here unless I really needed to. I kept my activity to a minimum. Sometimes it is a good source of information but mostly I hear admins, moderators or other old users giving crap to people. If you are going to take time to respond, either respond with some information or do not respond. Do not waste your time and add a reply that does not contribute anything.


Thanks for your posts. They identify some of the key issues that this forum and DS try to find the right solutions to pretty much everyday.

I don't have my DS hat on right now, but I will use some of my experience as an user and DS of this forum. Nor do I speak for Mike Bobbitt or fellow DS. Just my 2 cents.

Army.ca is the most credible forum based open source site on the Internet for CAF and CAF related discussions. The user base varies from privates to RSMs, from junior lieutenants to generals. Reservists to regs to special forces. Current serving members to retired. Of all trades and varied lengths of service. And a mix bag of civilians of various walks of life. The collective knowledge and the experience of the user base is what gives this site credibility. 
This is why the DS operates the way we do, is to protect that credibility and integrity of the site. 

This site is not a typical Internet forum. While we are open to everyone, our audience tends to be current or ex CAF members. While this forum is meant to be an informal place for people to talk, there is always that bit of military atmosphere here. And for a lot of civvies, they don't understand this.

The way I imagine this site is that it's like a mess where everyone can mingle, be informal, share a few stories and drinks. But there is still a hierarchy and military etiquette still exists. If you're a junior sgt and you want to talk to the RSM in the mess, you don't have to come to attention, but you better not be wasting the RSM's time. If you're a junior lieutenant and you want to talk to the CO, you better not be wasting his time.

This is why we keep harping things like do a search before you ask a question or think before you speak. And we lay the ban hammer on serial offenders. Heavy handed perhaps, but we frankly don't have the time to waste and we only want people who will add to the site. IIRC, all of DS are current or ex CAF members, some SNCOs and senior offers, with long time as DS on this forum.

We had a period where jtfnintendosnipers and university kids went unchecked and it was a serious headache that took a while to get rid of. We had complaints from current and ex serving members that felt that the site was losing credibility and integrity with too many users shooting their lips off and adding just white noise to the site. (And I still hear from some members that this site is too lax sometimes and the reputation of the site suffered) Plus some legal issues that came up and such that forced Mike to adopt certain SOPs.

In the end, our primary target audience is current and ex CAF members, and the 90% solution SOPs that the DS came up with won't satisfy everyone. But as far as the DS is concerned, this is the best solution we can work with. (And this is the guideline Mike mandates us to work under)

So, this site is not for everyone. It's not reddit or other forums, but this site will always be CAF oriented with certain military atmosphere. (IE, we don't use the term 'Moderator', but 'Directing Staff' with similar responsibilities, but different tone) Most of the topics discussed on this board is CAF or CAF related. We want to be open to everyone, but we know that the way this site operates is not to everyone's satisfaction. It is a bit of acquired tastes.

Having said that, if you have done your due diligence and need an answer or help, we will get it to you or direct you to someone who can. Full stop. Example, if a civilian interested in joining CAF uses this site, gets his/her questions answered, joins CAF and later turns around and helps out another civilian looking to join CAF, that's a big win.

This is my informal guide to posting in Army.ca 
1. Be professional. If you're a current or ex serving member, how you present yourself, even only on the Internet, adds or subtracts from CAF reputation. If you're a civilian looking to join the CAF, some of members posting here may be your peers, superiors or subordinates. Make a good impression. You'd be surprised how small the Canadian military is.
2. Think before you speak. If you're going to post something, make sure it's logical, reasoned well and be prepared to back it up.
3. Stick to your lanes. Talk about what you know about or experienced. Because otherwise, you will get called out if you're wrong and get hammered.
4. Do your research before asking a question. People will likely be more willing to help if you try to find the answers on your own prior to. And it's a skill encouraged in CAF.
5. Listen more than you speak. While we encourage active participation, I find that I learn more on this board by listening more than I talk.
5. Have fun! In the end, this board is meant to be enjoyable. I have made friends through this board that I would have not otherwise had the chance to, and I am very glad for this board.

Personally, I want to thank all the users that participate on this board. Your feedback is critical to solve any issues or improve this forum. Please do not hesitate to contact the DS (report to moderator button or PM function) if you see anything that requires a DS's attention.

My 2 cents


----------



## mariomike (28 Sep 2016)

PikaChe said:
			
		

> The user base varies from privates to RSMs, from junior lieutenants to generals. Reservists to regs to special forces. Current serving members to retired. Of all trades and varied lengths of service. And a mix bag of civilians of various walks of life.



1) Profile: Nothing says anyone has to, and I understand the concern for PERSEC, but personally I appreciate it when posters fill them in,

Gender, age, location, military experience, trade, rank, unit and notes about themselves.

2) User Name Changes: "Please announce all name changes here". 

Reference: 
So some of you think its funny(rant)
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/54579.0.html
2 pages.

3) And this, from a successful applicant, 



			
				Scarlett said:
			
		

> < snip >  my tip to you is to use the search function on this forum. I have been able to find an answer on here to every question I've had.


----------



## the 48th regulator (28 Sep 2016)

Sometimes paying off the DS, makes them a little less grumpier towards you and your posts.

 :-X

I accept paypal, and Interact transfers.



Just saying.


----------



## bang (29 Sep 2016)

Mike Bobbitt said:
			
		

> Bang: I'm a big fan of the StackExchange model, I use it regularly. Some of the code/architecture of this site is a result of StackExchange learning. I'm looking into options there, it seems like there is a paid/hosted Enterprise version available, but those are two terms I try hard to stay away from if I can.



I feel for you. Enterprise is a scary, slow-moving beast that's not fun to work with. While there's still a lot of questions on whether integrating a StackExchange Q+A model would be worth it, I'd suggest Question2Answer over the others just because it's PHP and while the explicit solutions aren't up there, it appears that a couple people have figured out how to integrate it with Simple Machines Forums, like this site! The last thing anyone needs is another logon...

I won't push this any further, as any sufficiently large technical problem becomes a political problem and this place has a good thing going as it is.  Best wishes!


----------



## George Wallace (29 Sep 2016)

Bang said:
			
		

> I won't push this any further, .....



I don't think you have much to worry about on that front.  Knowledgeable, well thought out, suggestions only help us improve the site.


----------



## PuckChaser (1 Oct 2016)

DAA said:
			
		

> Try volunteering for and being a DS and then you will see why they do, what they do and they're not getting paid for it.  It's voluntary time on their part, whether they have a job or not, they just seem to enjoy providing information and taking S&A whilst doing it.
> 
> When you see the same question, over and over again, it get's pretty old and frustrating.  If you want to complain about the site, treat it like your current job and come with not just the complaint but also a solution to what you see as a possible resolution to the problem.   Just maybe, the site owners will see some benefit to what you suggest.



The problem is that being a volunteer shouldn't give you carte blanche to be a dick to people. There is distinctly 2 different classes of admins that lurk around, ones that go out of their way to either politely or humourously point out the forum rules, and the other minority that gives this place a bad reputation.



			
				Mike Bobbitt said:
			
		

> [list type=decimal]
> [*]Give feedback. The MilPoints system is here for a reason. It allows users and staff to make their impressions of a post or user known. Please adhere to rule #1 when giving feedback.
> [/list]



Unfortunately the MilPoints system can't be used fully because there are those admins who believe they are beyond criticism and will complain directly to you if they're peer reviewed in any way that doesn't conform to how they see themselves. 

That being said, this is still a large source of credible information and discussion demonstrated by CAF recruiting wanting to take an active role here, not in the reddit page. Its unfortunate, but for every 100 great, helpful posts by DS, the 1 crap post by a DS member ends up representing the whole forum.


----------



## mariomike (1 Oct 2016)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> The problem is that being a volunteer shouldn't give you carte blanche to be a dick to people. There is distinctly 2 different classes of admins that lurk around, ones that go out of their way to either politely or humourously point out the forum rules, and the other minority that gives this place a bad reputation.
> 
> Unfortunately the MilPoints system can't be used fully because there are those admins who believe they are beyond criticism and will complain directly to you if they're peer reviewed in any way that doesn't conform to how they see themselves.
> 
> That being said, this is still a large source of credible information and discussion demonstrated by CAF recruiting wanting to take an active role here, not in the reddit page. Its unfortunate, but for every 100 great, helpful posts by DS, the 1 crap post by a DS member ends up representing the whole forum.


----------



## McG (1 Oct 2016)

There are other options available if you feel a moderator's behavior has crossed lines with abrasiveness.  You can use the report to moderator feature in the bottom right of every post, or you can PM the site owner with your complaint and a link to the offending thread.

My preference for how we should discuss has always been as defined in this thread:  http://army.ca/forums/threads/51970.0.html


----------



## mariomike (1 Oct 2016)

I don't see a shortage volunteers willing to handle Enforcement on here. 

The Moderators I respect are the ones who perform the thankless task of merging threads. 
No scolding. No lecturing. No talking down to people. I've never understood the need for that.
They just do it without comment. They are Milnet.ca's unsung heroes!


----------



## McG (1 Oct 2016)

mariomike said:
			
		

> The Moderators I respect are the ones who perform the thankless task of merging threads.
> No scolding. No lecturing. No talking down to people. ...
> They just do it without comment. They are Milnet.ca's unsung heroes!


Often the approach that goes unnoticed by the majority is the approach that sets a thread right the fastest.


----------

