Mods, please discuss the new Solution banner

[Rick of Rick and Peg]

Recently I've seen a green banner with the word Solution in it on the first post in a thread. I'm guessing that it means the thread contains an answer to a question but rather than me guessing could this be described?

When the Solution banner is up does that mean the thread is closed?

Anything else new?

 

[trecile]

This is a new feature that we are experimenting with.
If there is a clear correct answer to the question then one of the mods will mark it as the "solution," but the thread remains open, as often there are follow up posts that add more context or information.
At least that's my understanding of how it works!

 

[alexwalker]

This is a new feature that we are experimenting with.
If there is a clear correct answer to the question then one of the mods will mark it as the "solution," but the thread remains open, as often there are follow up posts that add more context or information.
At least that's my understanding of how it works!

Sounds like a good feature.

 

[Sirage]

the "solution,"

That could lead to an every deepening philosophical rabbit hole, judging by the the often endless variety of knowledge, suggestions, ideas and opinions that appear on threads on this forum

 

[Rick of Rick and Peg]

Anything else new?

Ivar just announced today that donating members now have the ability to search their private conversations.

https://www.caminodesantiago.me/community/threads/search-your-private-messages.84542/

 

[dougfitz]

This is a new feature that we are experimenting with.
If there is a clear correct answer to the question then one of the mods will mark it as the "solution," but the thread remains open, as often there are follow up posts that add more context or information.
At least that's my understanding of how it works!

That is an interesting explanation. The one instance that I have seem most recently, the response so labelled didn't even answer the question asked by the person starting the thread. It makes me wonder what protocols moderators have in place for this and other circumstances where they might have got it wrong.

More than that, I also wonder if this will have a muzzling effect on members contributing to threads where there might still be useful information to share, but the moderators have 'declared' there to be a 'solution'. So far, on just one post where it has clearly not been 'a clear correct answer', I don't think this has been a useful new feature.

 

[Rick of Rick and Peg]

The one instance that I have seem most recently, the response so labelled didn't even answer the question asked by the person starting the thread.

FYI, I looked for this thread to see which one it was using the forum search engine. Searching using the keyword solution doesn't find the posts with the green Solution banner.

 

[Theatregal]

The one instance that I have seem most recently, the response so labelled didn't even answer the question asked by the person starting the thread.

My post was the one labeled with the broad green "solution" banner and I must admit I found it a bit jarring. I replied to the OP with some information that might assist with further research and certainly didn't intend to present it as a solution to the OP.

 

[Damien Reynolds]

To the mods: Nothing I write is ever a solution (well you probably know this already). Unless it's about pizza.

 

[Theatregal]

To the mods: Nothing I write is ever a solution (well you probably know this already). Unless it's about pizza.

Masa-Pizza a Corte, in Santiago de Compostela. (not a solution) but The absolute best

 

[Peterexpatkiwi]

I also wonder if this will have a muzzling effect on members contributing to threads where there might still be useful information to share, but the moderators have 'declared' there to be a 'solution'.

On this forum? Really? You surprise me Doug! Or am I just more cynical than you?

People still share incorrect, completely irrelevant opinions and information long, long after the OP's question has been answered, or they've returned home.
At least now, someone new to the thread with the same/ similar question can actually find the correct answer!

A recent case in point: https://www.caminodesantiago.me/com...fintely-closed-until-march.84529/post-1208942

Will it have it's teething problems? Probably. Personally, I think it's an excellent idea.

 

[Damien Reynolds]

People still share incorrect, completely irrelevant opinions and information long, long after the OP's question has been answered, or they've returned home.

Been there. Done that.

 

[JCLima]

I don't understand the necessity of the solution banner. If it's marked solved, this implies end of discussion, nothing else added can be valid. It's an odd, unnecessary block.

It helps other people find the answer in case they come to the forum with the same question

 

[dougfitz]

A recent case in point: https://www.caminodesantiago.me/com...fintely-closed-until-march.84529/post-1208942

Will it have it's teething problems? Probably. Personally, I think it's an excellent idea.

Thank you for pointing out this thread. Wow! Two clearly correct answers were provided before the one some moderator selected as the 'solution'. What distinguished the third response from the two clearly correct responses that preceded it? Was it that the third was by a moderator? I think that there is something fundamentally unsettling to have a function that moderators can use to highlight their own or other moderators' posts in some way over responses provided by other members. Maybe that can be addressed, but it is a flaw in these arrangements until it is fixed.

 

[Peterexpatkiwi]

Thank you for pointing out this thread. Wow! Two clearly correct answers were provided before the one some moderator selected as the 'solution'. What distinguished the third response from the two clearly correct responses that preceded it? Was it that the third was by a moderator? I think that there is something fundamentally unsettling to have a function that moderators can use to highlight their own or other moderators' posts in some way over responses provided by other members. Maybe that can be addressed, but it is a flaw in these arrangements until it is fixed.

Ummm - what do you see that I don't?

Whilst in post#2 @Tincatinker indirectly answered the question by referring the OP to a previous thread, that thread dates from 2017/ 2018. Is it the case this year, a full 6 years later? I don't consider that as a clear answer. Whilst it happens to be correct, it could just as easily not be.

In post #3, @Bradypus said 'yes', which is NOT correct, as the route is closed for a minimum of an entire month longer. So the first correct Post that I see is #4, that from Trecile. Who coincidentally is a moderator.

 

[peregrina2000]

I encourage everyone to sit back and not jump to judgment or rash conclusions. This is a new feature, we are test-driving it on a very limited basis, and yes of course, as @Peterexpatkiwi says, there will be “teething problems.” It will be interesting to see whether there are even many threads whose questions ask a question that can be identified as having a “correct solution.”

We do not plan to use this feature to vote for our favorite response, it is a feature that will be used when we can agree that there is a definite correct answer to be had. Questions like — Where does the train to Almería leave from? How do you catch the bus at the Madrid airport? What time does the León cathedral open for visits?, etc etc. You would be surprised at how many wrong answers get posted, not intentionally of course, but for people who are looking for good information, the feature could help sort the wheat from the chaff.

But the suggestion that the mods have an interest in highlighting their own posts, especially from a long-time member who knows who we are and how we operate, is a bit insulting. The “two clearly correct answers” that preceded the one selected as the “solution,” were not clearly correct. The question asked whether the Napoleon route was closed until March. The first response was not a response, it was a link to another thread (nothing wrong with that, it’s just not a good candidate to be highlighted as having the correct response). The second post was a one-word “yes.” This is incomplete because it could imply that the closure ends in March, which is clearly not the case.

Feedback from forum members on the feature will be helpful as we start to use it, but I hope we can start with an assumption of moderator good faith.

 

[dougfitz]

Ummm - what do you see that I don't?

Whilst in post#2 @Tincatinker indirectly answered the question by referring the OP to a previous thread, that thread dates from 2017/ 2018. Is it the case this year, a full 6 years later? I don't consider that as a clear answer. Whilst it happens to be correct, it could just as easily not be.

In post #3, @Bradypus said 'yes', which is NOT correct, as the route is closed for a minimum of an entire month longer. So the first correct Post that I see is #4, that from Trecile. Who coincidentally is a moderator.

I disagree. The first reply not only provides the explicit context for the response, it is both clear and correct. More, it implicitly answers the second question posed by the OP in that thread. There wasn't any more that needed to be said in terms of providing a clear and complete answer. The later response by @trecile provides additional context, certainly, but doesn't add anything to the completeness of the answers already provided.

 

[dougfitz]

The second post was a one-word “yes.” This is incomplete because it could imply that the closure ends in March, which is clearly not the case.

I see no such implication, and have already addressed the reasoning for my analysis. I need say no more.

As to whether you are upset, I would challenge whether, in providing a function that appears to be something that can only be used by moderators, it was a sensible thing to demonstrate this with one of your own posts. And in this case, one which some might think that there were two equally clear and correct preceding answers. There's little you can say that won't make this look biased to me.

 

[MARSKA]

Good idea to use the SOLUTION banner , IMO.

 

[trecile]

Thank you for pointing out this thread. Wow! Two clearly correct answers were provided before the one some moderator selected as the 'solution'. What distinguished the third response from the two clearly correct responses that preceded it? Was it that the third was by a moderator? I think that there is something fundamentally unsettling to have a function that moderators can use to highlight their own or other moderators' posts in some way over responses provided by other members. Maybe that can be addressed, but it is a flaw in these arrangements until it is fixed.

Ummm - what do you see that I don't?

Whilst in post#2 @Tincatinker indirectly answered the question by referring the OP to a previous thread, that thread dates from 2017/ 2018. Is it the case this year, a full 6 years later? I don't consider that as a clear answer. Whilst it happens to be correct, it could just as easily not be.

In post #3, @Bradypus said 'yes', which is NOT correct, as the route is closed for a minimum of an entire month longer. So the first correct Post that I see is #4, that from Trecile. Who coincidentally is a moderator.

That was exactly my reasoning. @Tincatinker did have a correct response, but it was in the form of a link to another thread.

The next response was this, which implies that the Napoleon route is open in March.

I see no such implication, and have already addressed the reasoning for my analysis. I need say no more.

Clearly, saying that the Napoleon route is closed until March is incorrect. It is closed until April.

And there's another comment farther down the thread that says that it's closed all through April, which is also untrue.

If starting in SJPdP, the only allowed route is through Valcarlos now through end of April, or longer

Having a "solution" to this question at the top of the thread helps to eliminate confusion.

This Question and Solution format is new to us, and we are working on how best to implement it.

 

[TravellingMan22]

Isn’t the important point here, that it is being tried out and tested, on a limited basis. It’s seem logical to have an option to ‘ring fence’ the correct answer, but the process and protocols need to be worked up and you can only do that by testing and adapting!

 

[dougfitz]

Clearly, saying that the Napoleon route is closed until March is incorrect. It is closed until April.

The statement was in response to a question whether Route Napoleon was closed until March. Saying 'yes' is entirely and completely correct. You might have added the fact that it was closed through to 1 Apr, context maybe, but that wasn't the question that was asked.

This Question and Solution format is new to us, and we are working on how best to implement it.

I'm glad to hear that. Clearly I think there is still much to learn.

 

[C clearly]

I need say no more.

 

[Theatregal]

*Edited my post above to step back a bit. Think I got a bit reactionary when my response to the OP of the
"What mountains are near O Cebreiro ?" was the one targeted in this thread. It's a bit jaw-dropping the path some threads take.

 

[Rick of Rick and Peg]

If you keep this feature I would like to see two changes.

I've been using my smartphone for the forum so this comment may not apply to larger displays but I don't like the banner stripe with the snippet of the solution post underneath. I find it confusing. If I were designing this I would check out the look of a centered box with a bit of space above and below and maybe occupying 80% of the horizontal display. I'd experiment with borders, rounded versus squared corners and fill colors. Using cascading style sheets (CSS) on a simple HTML test page these experiments shouldn't take up two much time. I wouldn't add any text except within the box.

Inside the box I would like to get rid the the Solution text and put in "The moderators like the response in post #7 below" (with "post #7 below" linked).

@dougfitz, what do you think of that wording? It isn't saying anything is correct or not and the selected post need not be the first one satisfying the OP's question or request; it might be one that goes above and beyond. It might stop further posts with incorrect information but I don't think it would stifle further posts. It could even be used for posts not asking a question but direct attention to a superb post with lots of information.

One glitch I see is the wording for the post number. If the number was 7 as in my example but someone deleted post 5 the numbering might be off (or would we see posts with the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, ... but none labeled as #5?).

 

[Rick of Rick and Peg]

An addition to my post immediately above. The text in the box could alternately say in plural:
"The moderators like the responses in post #7 and post #11 below"

 

[David Tallan]

Inside the box I would like to get rid the the Solution text and put in "The moderators like the response in post #7 below" (with "post #7 below" linked).

I wouldn't want this wording because I don't think the functionality should be used as a popularity contest, either within the moderator group or more broadly across the forum. I think it should be used sparingly and only when a clear, unambiguous, and factual answer is asked for and given. So I would never want to see it used with the most common questions on the forum (hiking shoes or hiking boots, poncho or rain jacket or umbrella, book ahead or don't book ahead, what is the best way to get to SJPP, etc.). A question like "Who wrote The Pilgrimage Road to Santiago: The Complete Cultural Handbook?" is fair game, though.

I think that, for those few threads that fit the functionality, if there are a number of correct answers in the thread it doesn't matter very much which is chosen. The key thing is that a correct answer is highlighted and easily available to people who read the thread and just want to get an answer and go. If people want to peruse the thread and find more, or discuss the answers, they can go ahead and do so.

 

[peregrino_tom]

When you are introducing something that affects others, it's courteous and good inclusive practice to explain what you are about to do before you do it. We didn't get a heads-up thread in this case, but I suggest that would be a useful way to go in future.

 

[Peterexpatkiwi]

I've been using my smartphone for the forum so this comment may not apply to larger displays but I don't like the banner stripe with the snippet of the solution post underneath

I, too, use my smartphone but I have to say I don't find this confusing at all. You simply click the 'view full post' and the entire post is there before you. Quite a useful feature I thought.

I agree with David on this, I do not feel that the wording should be changed. Keep it simple. If you look you can find several other posts where this feature has been used. (They're easy to find they've got a green tick beside them.) One from @Anniesantiago springs to mind. She asked a question, received a clear concise answer, it was marked accordingly. Should anyone else be searching for the same information they will know that that answer is actually correct.

@peregrino_tom , I take your point. And the one or two changes I have seen in the short time I've been on the forum are normally well advertised. Such as the useful feature that Ivan recently introduced for searching in your private messages.
Had it happened in this case it clearly would have avoided at least some of this controversy!

Finally as I said before I sincerely doubt it will stifle further conversation. It certainly did not in the thread I highlighted above (post #11) !!

 

[WGroleau]

My post was the one labeled with the broad green "solution" banner and I must admit I found it a bit jarring. I replied to the OP with some information that might assist with further research and certainly didn't intend to present it as a solution to the OP.

In my opinion, if someone asks a question or poses a problem, it should be the sole privilege of the asker to decide which post, if any, solves it.

 

[JCLima]

In my opinion, if someone asks a question or poses a problem, it should be the sole privilege of the asker to decide which post, if any, solves it.

The asker might not know enough to be able to determine which answer is actually correct

 

[Peterexpatkiwi]

In my opinion, if someone asks a question or poses a problem, it should be the sole privilege of the asker to decide which post, if any, solves it.

If they’re experienced enough, they might know which answer is correct. But more often than not, they don’t know.

In addition to this, all too often people post information on here from their past experience . Which at the time was correct, but no longer.

 

[trecile]

When you are introducing something that affects others, it's courteous and good inclusive practice to explain what you are about to do before you do it. We didn't get a heads-up thread in this case, but I suggest that would be a useful way to go in future.

Thank you. You are correct, this should have been done. This note has been added to the thread about the Napoleon Route:

Moderator note: This thread has been changed by a moderator to a new type of thread on the forum called a Question Thread. In this type a thread a moderator can choose one post to be the "solution" to the question. We will attempt to choose the response that best answers the question. We are still working out the best way to implement this new feature.

 

[henrythedog]

I’m fairly sure the moderators have enough to do just keeping the contributors roughly in order.

Other that the ‘what is 2 plus 2 threads’ where there is simply one factually correct answer, the only thread on a disputed Camino topic which was answered (IMHO) fully and factually was @C clearly ’s summation of the ‘can I take my poles on the ‘plane?’ conundrum.

It didn’t stop the question being raised, but I and several others use a link to C’s post as a standard response whenever it resurfaces..

 

[Camino Chrissy]

I have not read all of these many posts, but my opinion is that it is a rather unnecessary change, requiring more work for the moderators. Some solutions may be missed as it is suggested and encouraged that we use the report button to make the the mods aware of posts they didn't notice. I see the banner as more of a haphazard "hit and miss" solution.

If I notice a solution banner, I now would probably question myself and analyze if my comment is then "worthy" to share or not as was already mentioned. I sometimes post a bit of silliness, in addition to sharing my opinions on various topics, and enjoy the freedom to be myself.

That said, there is nothing wrong with brainstorming and trying new things to improve and make the forum better.

 

[dougfitz]

Earlier, @C clearly reminded those participating in the forum that I had made this statement.

I need say no more.

That attribution is correct, but it has been taken out of context, where I stated that I did not need to repeat the analysis that I had provided in an earlier post. A more complete quote where that is clear is:

I see no such implication, and have already addressed the reasoning for my analysis. I need say no more.

I might have said no more about any of this if, but then this was posted:

Clearly, saying that the Napoleon route is closed until March is incorrect. It is closed until April.

This repeats the assertion I objected to earlier, as if mere repetition would make it correct when it wasn't correct before. This statement, examined in isolation and not in the context of the question that was asked, doesn't withstand analysis. The word 'until' is normally used with an inclusive meaning, so a statement that something is available until March would normally carry the meaning that it is available until the end of March, and won't be available in April. This is clearly the case with Route Napoleon, which is closed by government decree until 31 March.

So suggesting this:

Clearly, saying that the Napoleon route is closed until March is incorrect. It is closed until April.

flies in the face of the conventional meaning of the word until if the intent was to indicate that it was open in April.

To me, this goes to the broader subject of whether the designation of a Solution Post is worthwhile, and whether a set of guidelines can be developed that address its further use. Given the clear failures that have been identified in the two threads that have been discussed here, my own view is that any further implementation should be deferred while @ivar and the moderators work through the matters that have been raised here.

 

[Damien Reynolds]

Earlier, @C clearly reminded those participating in the forum that I had made this statement.

That attribution is correct, but it has been taken out of context, where I stated that I did not need to repeat the analysis that I had provided in an earlier post. A more complete quote where that is clear is:

I might have said no more about any of this if, but then this was posted:

This repeats the assertion I objected to earlier, as if mere repetition would make it correct when it wasn't correct before. This statement, examined in isolation and not in the context of the question that was asked, doesn't withstand analysis. The word 'until' is normally used with an inclusive meaning, so a statement that something is available until March would normally carry the meaning that it is available until the end of March, and won't be available in April. This is clearly the case with Route Napoleon, which is closed by government decree until 31 March.

So suggesting this:

flies in the face of the conventional meaning of the word until if the intent was to indicate that it was open in April.

To me, this goes to the broader subject of whether the designation of a Solution Post is worthwhile, and whether a set of guidelines can be developed that address its further use. Given the clear failures that have been identified in the two threads that have been discussed here, my own view is that any further implementation should be deferred while @ivar and the moderators work through the matters that have been raised here.

Get over it.

 

[peregrina2000]

So suggesting this:
flies in the face of the conventional meaning of the word until if the intent was to indicate that it was open in April.

This is getting extremely silly but I will rise to your bait since I spent 40 years as an educator. Your conventional meaning of the word “until” may be that it is inclusive, but many others believe that the conventional meaning of the word “until” is that it is exclusive. There are lots of internet tutorials on this topic if you want to pursue it further.

Whether you believe it’s inclusive or exclusive, the fact that there is disagreement among educated people about its meaning provides rock solid corroboration of the moderators’ decision. The simple “yes” answer in response to “Is the pass closed until March” would be interpreted differently depending on whether the reader falls into the inclusive camp or the exclusive camp, which means it cannot be the “correct” solution. It is too ambiguous. This is compounded by the fact that non-native speakers of English (many of whom participate on the forum) frequently use “until” in an exclusive way, when they mean the opposite. I have frequently noticed this, more with speakers of Portuguese than Spanish.

I am sorry to belabor this issue. I need say no more. And I mean it.

 

[Peterexpatkiwi]

The word 'until' is normally used with an inclusive meaning, so a statement that something is available until March would normally carry the meaning that it is available until the end of March, and won't be available in April.

Whilst I disagree completely, I at least now understand your point.

To me 'until a particular time' means during the period BEFORE that time.

Collins dictionary defines at as: "If something happens until a particular time, it happens during the period before that time and stops at that time."

A quick Google search came up with the following synonyms :
before , prior to, up until, up till (informal), till , by, right up until, right up to the moment.

So 'until March' means that something is available through until (this year) the 29th of February. Not the 1st of March the 22nd of March or any other date in March. Or even, as you say "until the end of March".

Perhaps this is simply one of those cultural differences that crop up from time to time.

Whilst I am a trained TESOL teacher, I am not per se a trained English teacher. It will be interesting to get the opinion of one of our resident English language experts on this. And by that I mean somebody that actually studied English, not that just thinks they know!

Edited to add: @peregrina2000 provided an excellent explanation whilst I was typing.

 

[C clearly]

It will be interesting to get the opinion of one of our resident English language experts

But no, English doesn't work like that! It is a democratic language with no authoritatve body.

English is also rich with opportunities to be ambiguous - either deliberately or not, which is the situation with "until April."

 

[truenorthpilgrm]

Can we add a emoji reaction because omg. Sometimes it blows my mind how simple things are finely chewed over like a tough piece of meat on this forum.

*edited sentence structure

 

[dougfitz]

So 'until March' means that something is available through until (this year) the 29th of February. Not the 1st of March the 22nd of March or any other date in March. Or even, as you say "until the end of March".

I clearly disagree. But that isn't really the issue. The post was an example of what I think can go wrong with the notion that moderators are going to be capable of selecting the 'clear and correct' response that should be tagged as the 'solution'. Is more work required to address the issues this new feature has revealed? Clearly. Should the moderators stop using it until they have? Perhaps, or perhaps they should be more cautious about tagging posts where there might be some doubt. That's their call, but I do hope they get it right if this is to be a regular feature of the forum.

 

[Peterexpatkiwi]

Perhaps, or perhaps they should be more cautious about tagging posts where there might be some doubt. That's their call, but I do hope they get it right if this is to be a regular feature of the forum.

I think that our disagreement over the meaning of 'only' proves that they have done exactly that.

As per the post below:

Whether you believe it’s inclusive or exclusive, the fact that there is disagreement among educated people about its meaning provides rock solid corroboration of the moderators’ decision.

If you look at one or two of the other threads that have the green tick, I think you will also see that an appropriate, full, clear, unambiguous solution has been chosen.

 

[Rick of Rick and Peg]

If you look at one or two of the other threads that have the green tick, I think you will also see that an appropriate, full, clear, unambiguous solution has been chosen.

As I wrote before searches don't find these Solution threads. Maybe identifying them with a green tick icon where the "Live from the camino" one is should be considered.

 

[Peterexpatkiwi]

As I wrote before searches don't find these Solution threads. Maybe identifying them with a green tick icon where the "Live from the camino" one is should be considered.

You’re right, it could be useful if you are researching a specific question like @Anniesantiago did recently ( Where does the bus to SJPP drop you off). Seeing the would assure you that a valid answer had been found, rather than spending forever going down rabbit holes.
Not that they’re not fun at times!

 

[C clearly]

As I wrote before searches don't find these Solution threads.

Normal searches of relevant key words will find the threads - same as other threads. A search for "solution" will not if that word is not used in the title or text, and it usually wouldn't be. Normally you wouldn't search the forum for all threads with definitive answers. You would be searching for threads on a topic, or asking a question using the key words - not the word "solution". I found the thread you were looking for by searching "napoleon pass closed."