What is Everyone Doing ?

[jeanGiraud]

Everyone is doing right, either asking or replying. Planet PTC doing wrong !Both *.jspa or Mathcad lists only the last reply in a thread, and that is what makes this site impractical, prone to lose track or pedal in butter ... Why ? Because in intense exchanges like in the pure definition of collaboration, collabs have to look at the entire thread to look for his own reply and other's replies because again, either page lists only the last reply instead ot listing the suite of replies . Sometimes replies go as fasts a typing and posting. That was explained by all collabs, it will be either impossible to visit a "lapsed period of visits" unless revisting all the stuff, and that is asking too much from volunteers with thight time schedule. If a visit has not been replied or solved in one month the originator will have to post again and again. As a consequence of that botherish inconvenience, collabs will tend to read less and much less, even only at night. The Akiva enabled to read quick and look if the suite of visit had accumulated , thus rendering the ideal efficiency and speed. Often and more than often, a short visit can result in piece of tool within minutes. But if we know that the "minute visit" is too long, then collabs will end not care . The designers of this community have missed to distinguish: chat and collaboration. Mathcad chat, that does not exist, and Mathcad collaboration exists very little actually, inefficient,painful.

[SteenGroðe]

I agree. At first I thought it was me that just had to get accustomed, but more and more seems to be awkward.

I have just found out I even can't edit all of my profile. Somehow PTC what me to have the same job for all time...

[jeanGiraud]

>but at some point PTC may realize they need us.< [Steen]
_____________________________

The real question is: what is PTC rationale or inverse rationale ?
About another Mathcad group, there are already too many .
Especially the "Comments group"... no spell check, no formatting,
no attachment . Good thing it does not work, otherwise it would split
the mess even worse. Up until now in more than one month of the best
efforts and correlated suggestions, everything from collaborators is
hitting the wall or the black hole to be more descriptive.

Thanks Steen for coming back .

Jean

[jeanGiraud]

Let's analyze the effectiveness of Planet Mathcad". This site is not sorted, many "groups" or pages, replies are shuffled in the "suite", random success in download, the last reply from clicking on the page JSPA is random in the suite of all replies...etc. Therefore, Planet Mathcad is random all the ways. We can apply the proven physics of picking points at random, picking and helping at random. It follows: "The probability distribution of the distance between two points randomly picked on a line segment is germane to the problem of determining the access time of computer hard drives. In fact, the average access time for a hard drive is precisely the time required to seek across 1/3 of the tracks (Benedict 1995)." Conversely, the probability of collaboration is 1/3 of what it was with the structure of Akiva. To that, add the random effect it impacts on collaborators and the 1/3 figure lowers down. I had rated the effectiveness 25% two weeks ago [exact date ?]. Another collab [Mike ? ] rated 20%. That's effectiveness only, add the "lost threads" and this is a fair picture of the "Mathcad FaceBook", simply deceptive. No matter how each paper has described "walking on moon", with booths, sleepers, "à la basque" ,,, they all wrote "walking on moon". If that community is too rigid, rigid like glass, then make it flexible and spline it to all the points collabs have made. How come a modern web can't be designed to suit ? Too long the head in the sand ...