Next year: a name names forum

[anon]

First, thanks ElDuderino for everything. I wanted to asked whether it would it be possible to have a separate sub-forum for confirmed hires? It is probably too late this year, but it could work for next year.

The current thread not only makes the search function useless for any school in the thread, but the unified thread has also invited off-topic discussions that didn't happen as much in previous years. Not to mention what a giant pain it is to figure out what has been updated when the school name(s) aren't listed.

I can't be the only one who finds the approach this year to be absurdly annoying and inefficient. Does anyone else agree that a separate forum with dedicated threads for each school would be a major improvement?

[wiki]

Mar 5, 2012 10:22:50 GMT -5 anon said:

First, thanks ElDuderino for everything. I wanted to asked whether it would it be possible to have a separate sub-forum for confirmed hires? It is probably too late this year, but it could work for next year.

The current thread not only makes the search function useless for any school in the thread, but the unified thread has also invited off-topic discussions that didn't happen as much in previous years. Not to mention what a giant pain it is to figure out what has been updated when the school name(s) aren't listed.

I can't be the only one who finds the approach this year to be absurdly annoying and inefficient. Does anyone else agree that a separate forum with dedicated threads for each school would be a major improvement?

Agree completely. Doesn't the format this year basically replicate the wiki in a clumsier way?

A sub-section would be way better.

[suggestion]

Perhaps those with strong opinions about how things should be organized should take charge and actually set up the forum for next year instead of just bitching and moaning.

I hate how on this forum the ratio of posts where people share information to posts where people complain about how the information was shared or call it false is approaching 1:1

[umm]

This forum is designed to be a permanent home so future job market cohorts can take advantage of previous discussions. There is one user who has the administrative privileges needed to create a sub-forum: ElDuderino. This meta forum exists exactly and precisely to suggest future changes and enhancement to how things are organized, which is exactly what the OP did.

I don't understand why the above poster is getting so defensive about such a clearly inefficient way of listing hires.

[Both]

I don't see why both can't be in place. I like being able to scan through the names and places for all the hires in one location without having to click on a thousand links. At the same time, I can see the value of having a dedicated post for each one.

[search functionality]

The OP is right, though, that if you use the search function at all, the long list of hires repeated over and over makes it impossible to use. I used the search function to return to job ads as I was finishing applications later in the year and it became impossible.

[curious]

It strikes me that much more information about hires was shared this year (in this format) than in previous years on the wiki or in dedicated threads.

Does anyone know if that is the case?

[last year]

Last year there was a fair amount of information shared in dedicated threads.

[seriously]

The current format (repeating long lists of names adding one at a time) is unwieldy, and effectively disables the proboards.com search functions. One solution: create a separate "board" named "2011-2012 Hires: Named Names" and move all "name names" threads there. That way you can uncheck that board when you do a search. I personally don't care if that board just has a single thread or one for each school; that could be hashed out later.

Even with that change, it still seems that this sort of data management issue is best handled in the wiki format. We already have a "confirmed hires" section, we could easily add the names there. Here are the concerns I've heard raised:

1. Some posters don't want to be identified on the wiki via their ip address. They could use a service like "www.hidemyass.com" that masks those addresses, but it does add another layer of complexity to the process of simply adding a name.

2. Some job recipients don't want to be identified. Our administrator can eliminate such posts from the forum, but does the administrator also have ability to delete wiki changes from the history log?

[ElDuderino]

First, let me just say that this is precisely the place to complain or suggest things, and I appreciate feedback.

As for why there was no hires subsection this year, I've explained this elsewhere, but here it goes again. Take a look at last year's "hires" subsection. Less than half the threads actually named someone, and often it was just a repetition of the same discussions and questions already started on the "status" forum. Conversely, a lot of the names that were shared on the "hires" section also appeared on the status forum.

So I thought it made sense unifying the two, and thought that the natural outcome would be that hires would be named in the thread for a particular position.

You are right that the current "name names" thread is unwieldy, and as I said in the thread itself I don't understand why people feel the name to copy and paste the entire list over and over. But it apparently works for some folks.


I am going to recreate the "hires" subforum for this year and move that thread there as an interim soluction.

As for the above suggestion, no, even as admin of the wiki I cannot remove entries from the history there. On the other hand, people should feel free to create IDs in the wikidot forum, since not even I, as admin, have access to account information there, and if you have an id there your changes get tracked by the id and not the ip.

[seriously]

Thanks, ElDuderino, for moving the thread. We have "search" functions again!

I suggest making the new "Moved: Name Names Here" note sticky.

[anon]

Thanks, ElDuderino. I started this thread and I just wanted to be clear that I meant the giant repeating list of names was 'absurdly annoying and inefficient' not the changes that you made. Intent can be lost easily on the intertubes and I wasn't trying to criticize the great job you're doing.