General "FAQ"'s?

[chene]

I wasn't sure where to post this, so it's going here.

I saw an idea from another member a while ago, may have been an old thread or a newer one. They suggested, as I understood it, having one thread that encompasses the useful threads there have been for various topics. They were basically told that it would just be a lot of work and such, but I think it's a great idea and totally worth it. There are so many repeat topics, the search function is not very useful, and I constantly see people being referenced to other topics or just saying more or less the exact same thing for a lot of threads. I would love to see a place to gather everything together and I'd be happy to start working on it if other members think it's worth it. I'm not necessarily asking for help, but we'd certainly get more and better example threads if more people participated.

The way I'm think of it, I would make this a main post and have a bunch of topics such as "Off Switch", "Potty training", etc. with 3-10ish thread suggestions that will answer pretty much all the questions you'd have about it. It's true that often new members wouldn't go to the effort of reading and using it, but I think lots would and anyone who's been around for long enough would use it, and if there were enough topics it would be helpful for everyone.

What are your opinions? Is it worth it? Would enough people use it?

[simba]

People will often want to start a new discussion on a done-to-death topic because they want advice for their particular situation, or they want another take on it (or because they haven't read the other threads.) It would be handy to have a link you could post to when replying to their topic, highlighting useful information from the past.

 

Although it might not seem like it, the majority of my time spent here is going over older threads. They're not as prominent or easy-to-find as newer ones, and it could be handy to have a link to 'the best' for certain topics rather than just the newest or the most easily searched.

 

People rarely come back and say 'Oh I was going to post a topic but then I read something that answered all my questions so I didn't need to'. So you don't hear about those cases and it seems like 'everyone' just posts without reading anything else. I think people would use it.

[GentleLake]

There's already a FAQ page at : http://www.bordercollie.org/boards/index.php?showforum=16

 

Not saying it's comprehensive or that it might not warrant updating, but it does exist.

 

ETA: There's also a page of Archived Threads that "Threads in this forum have been deemed interesting and useful enough to save without being precisely 'faqs.'" http://www.bordercollie.org/boards/index.php?showforum=23

 

Ditto on the possibility that it might not hurt to add some pertinent threads.

[chene]

Yes, I know that is technically an FAQ page, but "not comprehensive" is an understatement. I am suggesting something more like...an encyclopedia, almost? Or just a proper FAQ I guess. I want to include all of the common topics I can find threads for and include several pertinent threads. Don't get me wrong, the FAQ page is great, but it's more just things people should know. Important/interesting discussions. Not the same thing.

EDIT: Same thing about the archived. More just interesting and important things than they are FAQ's.

[juliepoudrier]

I think you'd put a lot of effort into something people won't use. The search function isn't difficult once you learn how to navigate it. I have suggested people search, or read old threads, or whatever ad nauseum over the years, but generally people want to *post* about their topic without bothering to do any research. I don't think the idea you have in mind would change that. JMO.

 

I understand your wanting to gather information all in one place (although that's sort of what this entire forum is supposed to be--good information all in one place), but I respectfully suggest that you might want to wait and actually learn the dynamics of this forum before putting a lot of time and energy into such a project.

 

J.

[chene]

Alright, explain to me how to use the search function to accomplish this. Because I have never had any luck with getting it to give me all of the relevant information.
Maybe I misunderstood your comment on "actually learning the dynamics of this forum" but to me it seems hugely uncalled for. I have been reading this forum every day for more than four months now, old, new, popular and obscure threads alike, and it seems a strangely demeaning comment to make towards someone who is suggesting an idea, not demanding or asserting it. Would you mind explaining what you mean by it?

[Gloria Atwater]

I don't have any answers or suggestions to your inquiry, but I'm curious what you're finding problematical about the Search function?

I think part of the problem in finding a precise answer may be that even if a thread is about something as specific as "fear biting," the many replies are liable to take tangents along the way, so there is rarely a discussion that is devoted strictly to one specific thing. Trying different search terms may be helpful.

For example, if I type "fear biting" and click "forums," I get 168 different discussions, each of which, judging by the titles, address various problems with aggression and biting. If I want to get a little more specific, I can type in "fear bite children" and I get 47 results, numerous of which titles directly mention biting and children. So, at least for my needs, I've been able to make it work.

The problem I think I might see with an FAQ is that there are no specific answers for any dog question. Sure, a person can look up discussions that might help with their fearful, shut-down rescue dog, but an FAQ couldn't or shouldn't be designed to say, "Okay, THIS is what you do with your fearful, shut-down rescue dog." The same if a person has a puppy that's eating the furniture - they can read posts from other people who've dealt with chewing puppies, but what worked for one person's puppy may not work for or apply to my puppy. Each dog and each situation is different.

Perhaps I'm not understanding your questions, but that's basically why I don't think there really can be an FAQ for anything so diverse as the care and keeping of border collies. Sorry if I'm being obtuse about your meaning!

~ Gloria

[chene]

 

 

The problem I think I might see with an FAQ is that there are no specific answers for any dog question. Sure, a person can look up discussions that might help with their fearful, shut-down rescue dog, but an FAQ couldn't or shouldn't be designed to say, "Okay, THIS is what you do with your fearful, shut-down rescue dog." The same if a person has a puppy that's eating the furniture - they can read posts from other people who've dealt with chewing puppies, but what worked for one person's puppy may not work for or apply to my puppy. Each dog and each situation is different.

 

 

I completely agree. Perhaps the word FAQ isn't quite right. You can never tell them you definitely have the solution to their problem. You can, however, say "Here are three applicable things to try." And if the person tries them and it works, great! If it doesn't work, they post their topic and there is a whole new discussion going on. I think there will still be plenty of unique scenarios that prompt interesting tangents. I see those often. But I also see a lot very repetitive threads, especially once you start going back in the years. If those are eliminated there is more room for new discussion.

 

My problem with the search is I too get those 168 (now 169) results, but the first one, for example, is this thread, which has nothing to do with fear biting. Another one is a thread that might be about fear biting, but only has three posts and never went anywhere. A third is about breeders and just happened to have the word "fear" as well as the word "biting" somewhere in the thread. There are some threads there that are actually about fear biting, but most of them are not.

[Gloria Atwater]

Hmm, maybe. But who would choose WHICH discussions best merits inclusion in an FAQ? And what if someone comes along later and an even better discussion arises with more or better information?

Yes, repetitive threads can be an annoyance here - especially to long time board members who find themselves answering the same questions over and over! But as Julie points out, just because a discussion already exists doesn't stop people from posting a new version of it for themselves.

Heck, even getting people to read something as visible as the READ THIS FIRST POST that sits at the top of each section of this forum can be an exercise in futility. We still end up with people posting things in direct conflict with the stated purpose and views noted in that post.

I personally think the dynamic of this forum kind of precludes an FAQ or other hard-and-fast "how to" section. There are too many opinions, too many options, too many situations and too many dogs, as well as too much information coming in and changing thoughts and methods for anyone to try and pick just a few to make up this FAQ.

As I said, who would take on the monumental job of winnowing out which discussions merit inclusion? And what to do if that information should later prove outdated or incorrect?

If this were a more static website with articles posted or editorial/opinion pieces, it might be do-able. But I'm not sure I see a means to make it happen with a constantly-updating discussion forum.

Sorry to seem such a killjoy! These are of course my thoughts only.

~ Gloria

[chene]

It isn't required that every thread that has a relevant or well articulated discussion is put in, but rather that the basic opinions are expressed. If there are ten different opinions in ten different threads, then ten threads would be under that topic. It's not like there is a cut-off where they are no longer "good enough". It isn't a matter of going through every single thread there's ever been about fear aggression to find the best, but rather finding good threads about fear aggression for someone looking for information on their situation. And like I said, while some new members post obliviously, others will not. It's just that the most obvious ones are the ones who don't read before posting. I've seen tons of new members who have taken time to read the forum and become immersed in the culture. It's also not a big deal just to politely link an FAQ thread for a member who has not taken the time to look for it (key word politely).

Again, the idea isn't so much an FAQ or "how to" in the sense of Q&A. It's a "here are the frequently asked questions. And here are the frequently stated answers." I took the term FAQ because it's what was used by the person with the original idea. And although there are many controversial topics, there are many more where people just agree, and you have twenty members posting essentially the exact same thing. I can't advertise this thread as a "this is what you should do", but I can say "here are some ideas so members don't have to type the same ones out over and over".

This forum is very much an anecdotal place. No one can ever claim to be "the correct answer", but they can provide information based on their own experiences. This thread would not change any of that. It isn't telling. It's offering. That's the best I can explain it.

[juliepoudrier]

I think you did misunderstand my comment. I have been on this forum many years, and I can tell you that people will post their oft-repeated questions whether or not a FAQ section exists. I clearly stated to you that no disrespect was intended. I can't force you not to interpret it as disrespectful if that's what you choose to do.

 

I have read the rest of this thread and it seems you're set on setting up such a FAQ section. I would suggest contacting the list moderator (Eileen Stein) as she will have the final say about creation of any new parts to this forum. I just don't think it will be used in the way you hope--and I say that from years of experience here, not as a means of denigrating you or your idea.

 

Just remember that members come and go, and ideas about at least some topics change over time, so someone will have to keep on top of that and make sure that the FAQs remain up-to-date with the latest information. This would be especially true for any topics related to health and behavioral issues.

 

J.

 

 

Maybe I misunderstood your comment on "actually learning the dynamics of this forum" but to me it seems hugely uncalled for. I have been reading this forum every day for more than four months now, old, new, popular and obscure threads alike, and it seems a strangely demeaning comment to make towards someone who is suggesting an idea, not demanding or asserting it. Would you mind explaining what you mean by it?

[Pippin's person]

It's a good idea, chene, and could be very helpful. One of the things that you want to think through is how to maintain such a resource. In general, it's becoming clearer and clearer in many arenas that static lists of links or FAQs tend not to be used that much. What people look for is dynamic information (that's why people are more likely to google something than to find a FAQ or link index and search through it). The search function on this page isn't nearly as dynamic as something like google and I agree, that can be frustrating (though I have found that googling a topic I'm interested in often brings up exaclty the right set of threads in this forum).

 

So, as you think about doing something like this, you'll want to think about a plan for maintaining and updating it. To me, that's the most critical piece of a resource like the one you're proposing.

 

Four months of reading is a great introduction to the forum and the threads, but it might not be quite enough to have given you a sense of the dynamics of the community itself. Having been in the community for around a decade now, one of the things that I see is that the majority of the people posting at any given time will drift away or leave abruptly for various reasons (mostly predictable ones) and as new people join, the feel and interactional nature of the forum shift a bit--not entirely of course because a small set of people have been fairly stable for a long time--but still, the feel changes, the topics change, etc. When I first joined, the majority of the topics were about stockwork, trialling and livestock; there was a period when rescue and its politics were frequent topics; agility had quite a run for a while; raw feeding, vaccines, reinforcement-based training all represented the majority of topics at different points but don't at this point in time. There are far more threads right now on living with pet border collies and training young dogs in basic manners than I remember in the past. Breeding is a perennial topic, but it's less hot right now than it has been.

 

I say that to point out how challenging what you are proposing will be--doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, but it's just a word of caution much like Julie's that you have to realize it could be a great deal of work with not much payoff. If you think you can offer a better solution to the static/dynamic problem, though, and have a good plan for doing so, be sure and talk to the moderator before you do too much work.

 

ETA: I see Julie just posted virtually the same information. Sorry for the duplication--but perhaps take that as advice in and of itself.

 

ETA again: Fascinating to look through the FAQ and Archived Threads areas--reflects exactly the shifting nature of the interests, styles and discussion points I referenced above.

[chene]

Julie, I am not by any means set on creating an FAQ if members don't believe it would be worth it. Of course I will debate it, but ultimately if you are correct I won't bother. To be honest, I didn't expect a positive response. Like I said, the idea was already turned down once the first time it was proposed.

Right now, like you guys are saying, it comes down to whether the payoff is greater than the work. There will always be reasons not to, but will it be helpful enough? As no one has ever tried this on this forum, I'm not convinced that it wouldn't be read. I'm not convinced it would be read, either, of course. I just think it's difficult to know. It's a bit odd, the difference in mentality between myself and a lot of members. I'm not sure if it's the lifestyle, or the age difference, or what. I saw it with the dog house I am building too. It's like, if there is any chance it will fail people don't do it. Maybe that's not exactly it, but there's just such a sense of...not wasting time. Not taking risks. I just don't see the point of that. In my mind, it can't hut to try.

That's a good point about maintaining it, though. I'll give it some thought.

[Mom of Mya]

As a new member, I can say I would like to see something like this in terms of one spot you could go and find all the relavent links that all of the older members have put on for like book references, good training videos links, etc. like that. I have read some of the other links but sometimes they are so cumbersome to get through because of the many responses. And if you research books or videos on the internet there are a ton and it is helpful to have recommendations from people on here as to which are the best to use.

 

I am probably one that has reposted something but if I read the other links and try the things I have read and still seem to be having issues with something then I could very well be re-asking an old question but get new ideas sometimes on different ways to try something, sometimes maybe even as subtle of doing something the same way but a different approach to it works.

 

I loved the link you sent me to Chene on how a border collie should look. I loved seeing all the different pictures and weights and heights, it really lets you see the wide array of differences there are in bcs.

 

This is just my opinion and maybe something like this is on here but I have not found it.. I hope I get the point I am trying to get across and this is not way too confusing.

[Maralynn]

The forum has been around for over a dozen years and has had a couple major changes in the 9 or so years that I've been a member so I don't know as one can say that it hasn't already been tried... The other thing to point out is that long time members have become pretty well aware of the realities of the forum. They've seen patterns, they've seen human nature, they understand the nuances of this particular forum. This isn't to say that this proposed idea won't work or wouldn't be useful (a fresh set of eyes can bring positive change in many situations) but rather that there are some valid reasons it hasn't yet been done. The success will also depend on how each person wants to use the forum. Are they fine just gleaning information? Or is the interaction part important to them as well? Some new people feel ignored and snubbed if you point them right to a FAQ section instead of interacting with them.

[Tess's Girl]

Just my personal experience, I also belong to a Doberman Forum that seems to have much more activity than this one. They have something like an FAQ, at each forum they have stickies with threads relevant to the topic. For example, on their breeder forum they have links to topics about finding a good breeder, what makes a reputable breeder, etc.

 

Without fail people post about things they can find in those stickies. Like someone else said, when people come to a forum they typically just start posting without looking first. I've only been a member of the Doberman forum for a couple of months and there are constantly people posting the same exact questions and getting the same exact answers. So I think SOME people would use it, but not MOST.

 

I also think updating our current FAQ and Archive sections would be a good idea.

 

If you want to work on something like that I would contact Eileen and see what she thinks.

[Camden's Mom]

My two cents:

 

I think the Archives are a really good idea but they are not updated or managed. All of the posts, with the exception of Dan and Sue's Excellent Adventure (which I've read more then once, btw ) are from 2006 or earlier. Speaking of shifting conversation and community, some of the archive threads are still very relevant and interesting to read and some seem out dated, although they may have been relevant when they were pinned.

 

As a new member to this community I wouldn't mind seeing particularly useful threads once again pinned in the archives. Maybe even do some spring cleaning of the older pinned threads? While I like the idea, I acknowledge that this would require upkeep and management of the archives section, requiring someone (Eileen?) to take a great amount of their own time to manage just one section.

 

Perhaps a way to get around the labor required (and the personal opinion of the one tasked to manage and upkeep the archive section) would be to create an archive "vote". Each thread on this forum could have an "archive" button at the top. If a user feels the thread has been especially useful, impactful or just a really good conversation they can "vote" to archive the thread. A threshold could be set (100 votes?) at which point the thread is automatically pinned to the archive section.

 

I dunno, maybe I'm just talking out of my... thinking outside of the box, lol. I just wanted to agree with chene that it seems like there could be a better way to file and manage useful threads. As others have said sometimes a really amazing conversation might happen in a thread dedicated to another topic all together. Perhaps a compelling discussion about breeding might happen in a topic about food aggression... it would be nice to be able to reference that a couple of months later without the burden of trying to remember "now what was that topic originally about??"

 

Lastly, the search function on this forum has... um... a learning curve. I have no problems with it now but a year ago, when I was soaking up as much as I could and trying to decide if I wanted to join this community, I remember finding it very frustrating to navigate the search function.

[GentleLake]

I certainly wouldn't discourage you from tackling it if you've a mind to do it -- and of course it met the approval of the powers that be -- but agree that it would be an enormous undertaking and would require at least some follow up on a regular basis to be really useful.

That said, the others are absolutely correct in saying that many people won't bother to even look at it before posting their questions. Just look how often new people come here all gung ho about looking for a great breeder . . . when what they want is the antithesis of what the USBCC and these Boards are all about, because they've never even bothered to take a look a the "Read This First" information that would have told them we weren't going to be endorsing the kinds of breeders they're looking for.

 

ETA: I suspect the reason the existing FAQ and Archived Threads sections hasn't been updates is because keeping it current would be such a daunting task that no one cared to keep up with it.

[chene]

Some really good points here. It seems to me that this would be the kind of resource new, but not really new members would use, which is fair enough. I think Camden's Mom has the right idea about something like a voting system, because then it would be much less work with the same result, and since it's minimal work it wouldn't matter how much it was used as long as it was used some. I also think it would be still nice if there were a way to separate the threads into categories, even if they're board ones. The main problem I have is that I don't want this to end up being work for Eileen, which is why I offered to do it myself in the first place.

[Sue R]

...with the exception of Dan and Sue's Excellent Adventure (which I've read more then once, btw ...

Dan wags his tail and says, "Thank you - that's my favorite topic, too!"

[JohnC]

For those who don't like the search function, I just wanted to mention that can do site specific searches with Google by typing your search terms followed by “site:” plus the web site address. This is fine for the occasional query, but for a site you search frequently, you can create a custom Google search engine in only a couple of minutes. The following explains how to do this in the Chrome browser. Other browsers have similar capabilities.

 

Right click in the URL/Search bar & select “Edit Search Engines”. Go to the bottom of the list and add a new one as follows: (The name & keyword can be anything you want. )

 

Name: Border Collie Forums

Keyword: bc

URL: http:// www,google.com/ search?ie=UTF-8&q=site:bordercollie.org/boards/+%s

 

Note: remove spaces in the URL.

Now in your search bar, you can just type the keyword (“bc” in this case) followed your search terms to only search this board. Works great and in 8 months, I've never had a Border Collie question that I haven't been able to find an answer to. Of course, if everyone was like me, this place would be a ghost town.

[juliepoudrier]

Wow, thanks for this tip!

 

J.

[Pippin's person]

Ditto wow--very useful--thanks

[Camden's Mom]

I've done something similar, using google to search "BC Boards *fill in the blank with subject I'm looking for*" and had good results too but this is even better. Thanks, JohnC!!

[chene]

That is awesome, I'll make sure to try it out! Like Camden's Mom I had just taken to using google anyways.