Help us decide the future of the Which? community

You can keep links to “Favourite Convos” – (“Latest Conversations – Favourites”) on your existing personal page. I’ve suggested this could be extended to include “Favourite comments”. I agree Vynor.

“Another “useful” thought for you. Could Which create a personal page for everyone who registers? On that page each individual could extract the posts, links and information that is particularly relevant to them. This page could be private, but, since it is for writing that has already been published, it doesn’t have to be. Thus each individual has his own unique store of knowledge, personal to him/her.”
I know, let’s call it “myname@homepages.which.net”… 😉

Creating personal pages is a relatively simple job – for registered users, and it might help in a sort of mini-curating role.

davpar, I have said the same a number of times. The Which? Community forum is hardly used, badly constructed but should be one way Which? Members can communicate Which? issues directly, and receive informative responses. There are, as Members, topics that are best raised out of the public eye I believe. However they appear not to want Members to know about it.

I asked about this 6 months ago:

“Re: Which? Member Community
The community aim is “Welcome to the Which? Member Community. Got a question about anything to do with Which? You’re in the right place.” Clearly very few people use the community and yet you have a million members. Many contribute to Convos. That suggests the communitiy is not meeting a need, particularly when many questions asked of Which? in Convos go unanswered.

Thanks,
David
Posted by DavidWhich”

Well I feel that the response you received is despicable. It clearly shows that they want to use conversation as merely a means of recruiting new members. Now if SKY ran which? they would be promoting their VIP PLATINUM FORUM MEMBERS ONLY SERVICE. Obviously they would raise the subscription. However as members, don’t we already pay for the members only service, even though it is a bit of a ghost town? Wouldn’t the easiest “model” to implement be to make use of the resources currently deployed for non members but incorporate a members only area. The publicity for that might actually generate interest in some of the anonymous visitors becoming members. Perhaps someone could explain the current charging also. I appear to pay which? £4.75 monthly for WHICHONLINE and £18.75 quarterly for WHICH MEMBERSHIP SUBSCRIPTION MAGAZINES. Grateful if a which? official person could tell me what I get for each of my two payments. Particularly interested to know what I get for my online subscription.

Well that was a prompt response. Excellent service. So my £18.75 is to cover membership of which?, receive a magazine and online access to all current services? The £4.75 is now a discounted payment to receive legal advice normally £9? Seems like a good deal. So the two amounts I pay were consolidated at some point with the addition of the full legal advice and discounted. New members pay £10.75 monthly but only receive legal advice about consumer law. They would pay £19.75 monthly to receive what I potentially can access? So that works out annually at £129 for new members – £186 for me – £237 for new members with full legal advice. I save £51 for the ability to receive full legal advice if I should desire. Seems pointless for me to receive legal advice with my home insurance therefore or is it pointless to receive legal advice from which that I may never use, actually have never used and I don’t remember ever having being told that this subscription consolidation was taking place. I may be wrong and you can provide evidence that I was made aware at some point in time. Meanwhile I am left wondering if I have overpaid you for advice I never wanted. Perhaps you could make enquiries on my behalf. A refund to cover the period following consolidation could be payable if I was knowingly unaware don’t you think. Any other forum members in the same position?

Definitely don’t understand. I pay you pro rata £15.50 monthly. I was never aware that I was paying you anything for full legal advice (discounted or otherwise). The quarterly subscription is paid to you via direct debit and the monthly subscription for online services by credit card. Distinctly separate amounts via two payment methods taken out at different times for specific services. I just want you to deal with me in a fair and transparent way. You are the Consumers Association and you have a legal and moral duty to look into this for me. Thanks I know you will and I won’t expect an immediate response. Seven days should be more than enough time for you to make the necessary enquiries and get back to me with your proposals.

Alex

You are correct. Can I blame the heat and a small calculator for my maths. 18.75 x 4 =75 4.75 x 12 = 57 75+57 = 132 (Pro rata monthly = 11).

I definitely never needed full legal advice just the included consumer advice via which legal. I have always had legal advice from my Home Insurance Policy and some other sources as well. So a refund covering the period from the time it was introduced would be great. Also I would like to pay you only once quarterly via direct debit for membership please.

So a good day for me and a fast response from you. Everyone should be happy.

David

Do you have an update for me yet Alex?

I have checked and did not receive your email sent to my new address at BT which I was forced to set up following the impending loss of which.net. Maybe as well as sending to my new email address you could send a copy to my old which.net ones as well. Surely one of them will get through via auto-forwarding???

Sorry Alex I have just realised that I still log into which using my old which email address not my new BT one.

Further investigations reveal that although my username is the existing which.net email address I have advised you of my BT email address for communications and information as part of my account. I intend to retain my old which email address as my username/login because I am nostalgic for the good old days.

Davpar instead of logging into your ISP direct why not get an email client like Thunderbird ? I have been using it for years along with a small Linux type one for Yandex mail , in BT,s US email service you need occasionally to log into them direct but otherwise an email client does the job. With a high security email service from Europe I get notified directly of any messages left in the service by email.

Duncan I am too old to understand a word of what you just said in response to an issue that which? apparently now have in communicating with me via email (old or new).

I was only trying to be helpful Davpar , I understand your position in regards to which.net but its in Which,s hands to alleviate technical problems . I also am old Davpar that shouldn’t be an issue. I can hold my own with much younger minds.

As a start could you send the communication again to my which.net account please Alex before it closes. For the future you will wish to clarify if the username/login process now requires an active email address rather than a chosen username. Also it would no doubt be useful to you to have access to the email address that is registered on members accounts wouldn’t it? How do I now email you with the email address which is registered on my which? account?

So I will have to use an active e-mail address as my “Conversation” login then if e-mail communications are to be possible. What about my main which.co.uk account? Presumably that is a user name of choice since the contact details are in the account. Did you send the original e-mail again. I haven’t seen anything arrive yet. What is the senders address so I can search?

Alex I have sent you a couple of e-mails with details of my new e-mail address. One from my old address (due to end on Friday) and one from my new BT address. However my attempts to change my Conversation username/login details have failed because in settings my password is rejected. I am unable to change my password and start again without the current password as the system doesn’t appear to allow that. So advice on how to change my Conversation password and/or username now required.

I don’t believe this. I thought that my attempts to change my password had failed as the message I received on site was current password not recognised. Now I have received an e-mail confirming that my password was changed. However I don’t know which of my attempts succeeded and it still didn’t allow me to change the username and it stated each time “Your current password is invalid.
No changes were made to your password or email address.”

Alex. My second I don’t believe it message. My email address has now changed in settings but I am still none the wiser as to how this was achieved.

Thank you Alex. So all is now well. I am back with my new identity. Fairly painless at the end of the day. Now what time is the memorial service for which.net on Friday?

Alex

It is clear to me that your question “Did you have any suggestions on how we could improve?” was answered by many contributors to this forum already many times. The main one of course was to improve by providing a quicker response to enquiries. Maybe that question should be asked of your own technical department and those who developed the practices and procedures to enable you to answer specific questions asap. Perhaps you could explain the actual technical process you are required to go through to provide an answer to a question? For example do you e-mail (internal mail) the appropriate department or contact them by phone? How long do they have to answer an enquiry (deadline for response)? Do you have to provide a holding response to the forum member if an enquiry remains unanswered after a certain time? Are there any guidelines to staff requiring the provision of responses to you or is it that horrible contractual term “best endeavours”?

David

@awhittle, Thanks for the quick reply again Alex! The thread reminded me of the lack of a reply, so I’ve emailed Which? to ensure, firstly, that the letter was received. You never know!

You ask for suggestions. I’ve always (but perhaps incorrectly) regarded Convos as representing Which? as a whole, and not a standalone entity. So I expected that they could be used as a conduit into the organisation when questions seemed worth asking. Other routes are available, such as emailing, but slow, and the Member forum – hardly used. And the questions I’ve asked on Convos have, I think, been relevant to the Convos and, hopefully, of interest to some other contributors. So better asked in public,

My suggestion then is simply to direct questions to appropriate people in the Which? organisation to deal with them – dig out the right people to answer and/or do a bit of research if necessary and let them post a reply. We dealt with customer questions in my organisation very quickly – tried to do it the same day. I don’t necessarily expect that, but left too long and the topic may have moved on too far. So, for example, someone in Which? must know what, if any, BSI committee(s) they sit on and are active in? Someone will know about the Which?Switch policy. Someone will know if they subscribe to BS online (just to follow up my examples). The answers to those should be easy to elicit.

Not many questions are asked on Convos. Mine are not frequent. So I don’t see it as a real burden for Which? to handle.

It was not necessary but it’s welcome to be able to go back to the previous page in surveys. Thanks Patrick.

x

Duncan
Would an InPrivate window from one of the mainstream browsers not overcome the tracking concerns you have?

Tried that Roger the “In Private ” wasn’t all it was cracked up to be . Although FF comes installed on most Linux distros and has plenty of opp outs from tracking its not well known the first thing FF does it – phones home exactly like Windows does continually . I only keep it as a spare and as for Google in both its incarnations well you dont need me to tell you. Even Yandex has “gone commercial ” . I was confronted last week by a new commercial intro webpage from BT in trying to access MY BT , I wasn’t able to , this ended up with an argument with one of the higher tech. advisers after several lower ranks couldn’t help he was actually very helpful but it took 20 minutes and me to try out different changes to the browser I was using to find out that BT now insists on every third party tracker being allowed to track me ,whereas before I could block some tracking and they have a long list of trackers . The cure was I had to completely disable all my blockers only then was I able to access MY BT it kept bouncing me back to the same web page . Its getting bad when your own ISP wants the last penny of income from you to sell to third parties , by the way Vivaldi browser is a no-no in this regard

You need a well-configured outgoing firewall. Little Snitch is pretty good.

Why Ian when my blockers are so good even my ISP has problems with me accessing their new web site ? We are not talking viruses here but snooping for profit. Tracking servers are blocked/ malware websites and a whole lot more its more a case of broken websites because I cut down the snooping. I have a LInux type firewall that can block all outgoing traffic or allow only certain apps access but that isn’t the case here its me allowing snooping or not.Even if I didnt use the Linux firewall there are other apps that can block outgoing packages but when you use a browser it can allow a website to gather all your info -system / type of hardware / and a whole lot more , even emails can gather info by displaying photos etc thats why Thunderbird sometimes blocks remote access to emails on your email client and just shows text.

I remember in the very early days of this game – 1996 when I first went on the web – there were a couple of files that I investigated on a BT modem disc that were thinly disguised snoopers. I wrote a stiff letter but… lost the will to follow it up after receiving platitudes I am ashamed to say.

Constructing a meaningful survey, giving an adequate balanced background and reaching sufficient and diverse respondents is a challenge, and I have found this lacking in some past Which? surveys. A year or two ago this claim was made “In our survey of Which? campaign supporters over the weekend, 94% of nearly 30,000 people told us that car manufacturers are not being fair to UK consumers.“. Maybe it was true, but I found it more than just surprising and wondered quite what background was given and what questions were asked. I think Which? should give all this information rather than just publish a “result.”

A survey of all which.net customers might be good to see how happy they are and whether the closure was handled to their satisfaction, with all the background of course. 🙂

I believe that was one of the most egregious aspects of the which.net debacle: the complete lack of any user consultation. And exactly what Which? railed against when it involved the banks and ATMs. For sheer duplicity it takes the biscuit.

I was very disappointed by the design of the survey. Like Ian I found the multiple choice answers rather curious. How could interacting with Which? make anyone much less involved? Anyway, I look forward to developments.

Thanks for letting us know, Oscar. I had assumed that the survey was for subscribers and now knowing that it was offered to non-members and supporters I can see more sense in the questions.

Alex, thanks for the prompt email reply the requested details have been forwarded to you!

@awhittle, When you say you stopped it, what do you mean? Do you no longer charge for Which? online? What about Legal Service?

Good morning Alex. Thanks for replying. Since I posted I learned that Which? magazine is not available as a separate electronic subscription. I would have thought that this might appeal to younger members but no doubt the marketing team will have done their research.

The page you have given a link to shows the cost of subscription to Which? magazine after the free trial. In the case of the Which? Money this is not shown and with other magazines it’s necessary to phone to enquire. If goods are in a shop I would not bother to enquire unless it was a product I was in urgent need of.

Don’t be Patrick. This level of detail falls significantly within the realms of delegated authority – but of course being a Dilloer through and through I am interested in the way it’s shaping up.

Roger, this update will also answer your question.

This post is in response to a conversation in The Lobby which fits very nicely here – and I have a feeling we might continue talking so I hope you don’t mind I redirect the conversation here.

Since joining Which? a few weeks ago, I’ve picked up the research and strategy development that Richard spoke to you all about here in the Future Which? Community discussion. We are currently processing all the information from the research and setting out our path forward. We’re very much at the beginning stages of this. So your feedback is really helpful for me to know how to drive the strategic development.

…Also very helpful is my time here talking with you all this week so far, and I’ll be here every day next week too. I’m grateful for anything you say, so please don’t hold back. You know Convo best.

This may seem a bit disjointed but I’m going to pick up on some of your points from the other thread below.

I’m glad that @VynorHill likes the current framework! And the rest of you are asking the same questions we are, about what it means to host a discussion space in 2018, what type of community Which? Conversation can become, what’s needed to support it with expertise, and where people see Which?s role in these conversations.

I’m also a huge fan of the Apple Forums, with ‘Helpful’ posts clearly marked, and ‘Solutions’ plainly visible. The exchange of detailed questions and advice in these peer-to-peer communities are backed up by a network of ‘superusers’ (community members who are experts in specific topics), and intricate strategies and tools to ensure Apple staff and technical experts step in at the right time to correct erroneous advice, glean insight to make product improvements, and to bring clarity to lengthy conversations where people are going round and round. And likewise, there are many (many!) staff monitoring comments and issues, bringing consumer insight back into their business so they can drive business value from the important feedback people are giving.

Think you might all enjoy having a look at this overview of how the Apple support community works.

One thing I love about Apple’s forums is how you can easily scan down a page and see what posts were marked as ‘Helpful’. A ‘Solution’ may only help the original poster after all – very often our specific technical issue is unique. So, when the community members curate the best answers by marking them as ‘Helpful’ this helps the rest of us skim over all the other conversation (because we all know things meander and go off-topic), and identify the answers that may help. This definitely helped me with an iPhone issue where the Solution was not for me, but after scanning a few pages one of the Helpful answers was just the ticket.

What these forums don’t have is something like Which? Conversation. But many other support communities have more ‘editorial’ style posts in another section that functions like a blog (similar to Which? Conversation). This editorial/conversational area sits alongside the forums and the navigation is clear – so that people can find the right place to read and debate, or to ask for help with a specific situation.

Do you think that the future Which? Community would benefit of some aspects of a ‘support community’? If so, how?

@johnward said there are fewer than ten ‘help’ enquiries in a week in Convo, and this is probably for the reason he highlighted – the site isn’t organised to make them accessible to those who may be able to help. Equally, people can’t readily identify where they can ask about issues they need detailed help. And also, as John said, there isn’t robust support from Which? staff to monitor and assist – many people in need just don’t get response for the reasons he stated.

The ‘regulars’ of any community can grow tired of sharing the same answers over and over – so I loved John’s idea of a Which? Conversation FAQ / booklet. Sometimes communities have repositories of knowledge (‘knowledge base’) like this – where a great answer is converted into a piece of content in a knowledge base, easily searchable and accessible to all. What do others think about this idea?

@wavechange, You’re right, people do like to talk about their challenges – this is the very nature of the existence of communities at all, and I thought this comment of yours was really insightful about how to help those newcomers (or infrequent posters) feel at home: “Let’s take a common scenario when someone posts a question but omits to give some key information. The most helpful approach would probably be a prompt response asking for the missing information, but some enquiries are used by regulars to have a discussion, often in depth. Often we never hear any more from the person who made the enquiry and perhaps they feel overwhelmed or embarrassed.”

@malcolm-r You hit the nail on the head: “perhaps they are not being lazy, but bringing examples to our attention where they feel the “regulations” (and regulators) are wrong, in the hope that Which? might try to instigate some changes.” …I haven’t been here long, but I’ve been reading and noticing that people do seem to come to Convo for this very reason – to impact Which?’s work, in the process of finding help from others.

John also said: “Some of us might have better things to do with our time than to continue feeding this situation which is so different from the early period.” I’d love to hear what you all think about what a future Which? Community can retain the feeling of ‘the early period’ and resolve some of the issues above? What is the early period? Please describe this time to me in detail so I can be sure we keep the culture of Convo alive and well.

—–

Thanks to you all for for your advice on how we can better serve you, and the whole the community. This journey with you is going to take some time while we get the necessary community product tools in place, and our processes and operations up and running.

We’re looking at new community platforms to resolve many of these issues, and we’ll be setting up the internal processes to support a new community. Not just how the community is organised into discussion areas, but also tools to help us monitor and manage comments – and be able to reply to them.

I’ve made lots of notes, and will continue doing so. In all honesty, we are limited by the current platform we’re using, but know that I’m also looking at how we can push the platform further while we’re awaiting a shiny new community. One relevant example here is that our platform now doesn’t let me move your comments from one area to another. 🙂

Several of you mentioned things you were promised that you haven’t seen. That may be something I can help with. Would you also get back to me about this? My notepad is ready!

Looking forward to talking more with you about this!

Thanks very much for the feedback, Elena. I am aware of the Apple support community but so rarely have I had problems I’m not sure how it works. Maybe there are other sites we can learn from too.

One concern that is shared by regulars is issues that are raised in Conversations by Which? resulting in many comments being posted supporting the need for action and apparently no further action being taken. Amazon selling goods with two-pin plugs, third-party ink cartridges being rejected by printers, and retailers failing to take responsibility for handling claims for faulty goods are some examples. In these and other cases it is clear that Trading Standards should be taking action. Since these issues have been raised by Which? it seems reasonable to assume that they are within its remit to pursue and it concerns us that little appears to happen.

Thanks again Elena. My question about Convos is a fundamental one. Are they intended just as a platform for Which? members and others to have entertaining and instructive chats, as you might in the pub? Or is the material discussed and the arguments and propositions put forwarded intended as material that Which? will use in its strategy and in its publications? Frankly, I see very little evidence of the latter, both through the lack of use seemingly made of material, and the distinct lack of contributions made by Which? “specialists” to Convos (I exclude those who run the Convos!).

We’ve discussed at length about whether Which? has any intention of constructively engaging with, and working with, its members (and other contributors). There is little sign that it really wants to do this.

Its a pleasantly cool but overcast day and I’m in the middle of a pile of ironing, so sorry to appear a little critical. It would be good, though, if Which? came clean.

@wavechange – This is another excellent comment. I feel your frustration, and I admire you championing these issues which very much need a resolution for consumers. I’m looking into some information on this and will come back to you.

The idea of curating FAQs was first proposed in 1998, Elena. We suggested the “idea of a Which? (forum as it was then) FAQ / booklet, the idea being that – as you noted – “sometimes communities have repositories of knowledge (‘knowledge base’) like this – where a great answer is converted into a piece of content in a knowledge base, easily searchable and accessible to all”, and we’ve continued suggesting it on an irregular basis for the past five years at least.

The importation point, really, is that we’ve also offered to assist with the curation, but Which? seems curiously distant about using volunteers.

Should we perhaps assume this is going to change?

I’m not quite clear on what you’re saying, Ian.

Some community platforms have a knowledge base built into them – so that people who Google information can easily find what they need. This knowledge base would be populated with content from the community – all those frequently asked questions. If not a ‘knowledge base’ specifically (as a function), any community member would be able to create a ‘topic’ and they could gather all this information there.

These questions are very similar to the ones others have mentioned, and to which I replied to say we’re also asking of ourselves – and you all. ‘What is the Which? community’ is what we’re working on now. And around that we’ll set up all the necessary processes, staffing and training that would make such a space successful. To do this we’re analysing all the information from our research, survey and interviews, and your ongoing feedback.

We’re not there yet – and won’t be for a while – so your insight is what’s helping us improve. The current community is experiencing ‘growing pains’ – it needs to be something more than it is. And having been here with you these last four days, I see these same shortcomings, and I also feel the frustration.

Don’t know how we can come any cleaner than this!

Elena G. says: Today 15:20

I’m not quite clear on what you’re saying, Ian.

I suppose the point I’m making is that those of us who started with the Which? online forum in 1995/6 saw its signficant potential and were eager (and younger) to see it succeed. To that end we saw the problems that were starting to emerge and in particular the issue of repeated questions, so we proposed the idea of a knowledge base.

We offered to undertake duties, such as moderation, curation and organisation but none of these offers was ever taken up.

Fast forward 22 years (!) and similar suggestions are still being made, with similar encouragement by Which? staffers. The question I’m asking is ‘has anything changed?”. Is Which? about to depart from 22 years of not using volunteers to help its online offering and actually harness the power of its membership or not?

In more practical terms, the Apple help site is divided into two quite distinct areas: direct specialist advice and help and a social aspect, frequented by those who’ve acquired the appropriate status.

This place has enormous potential, especially as some still have faith that Which? represents something special, but for it to fulfil a fraction of that potential it will have to harness the membership.

Moderation should only be in the hands of the Which? staff who look after Convos.

Those of us who are there in the evenings and at weekends can and do help by reporting comments that are clearly offensive, promotional, etc. It is one useful role we have been invited to do and I’m happy that the actual moderation is done by Which? staff.

[Post removed by the moderators for violating the Community Guidelines. Please be polite to all members, contribute positively to the community in your comments, and do not ‘shout’ using all capital letters.]

malcolm r said Today 16:58
Moderation should only be in the hands of the Which? staff who look after Convos.

There are options, Malcolm, and in fact many systems, such as the acclaimed Apple one, do use volunteers to moderate.

They don’t take people who simply offer, however; the moderation rights have to be gained by repeated and effective contributions and a long track record of positive, helpful and creative postings.

Why should volunteers be allowed to moderate? It comes down to logistics. Apple’s system works so well precisely because they use volunteers with a proven track record over a significant period of time and specifically because it reduces the burden on the staff.

Think of the staff in several tiers: tier 2 are those with whom we interact in here, tier 3 the likes of Patrick, Tier 4 the directors and so on. Tier 1 status could be earned by regulars who have demonstrated a positive committent to the place over time.

It is, of course, only a suggestion, but it’s a suggestion based on years of working with forums and discussion groups and also the experience of world leaders such as Apple who clearly find it works to their benefit.

I agree. Continuing the existing reporting option is the best way of maintaining a friendly and courteous Convo – apart from contributors thinking before posting, or using edit, about how remarks they make can be taken badly or misinterpreted.

The existing reporting option was introduced by Patrick as a part of an overall strategy to make W?Cs more accessible and ease the load on the staff.

And this is another point: forums and blogs such as this involve people and, as such, can be regarded as living entities. My experience over the years has been that generally – in the initial stages – its the forum / blog owners that set the tone, what is acceptable and unacceptable.

Over time, a good forum will acquire a group of regular participants. In the main this tends to be those with a fair bit of time to spare – retirees, the uber-wealthy and those whose families have left the nest, to employ a thoroughly flogged cliche.

If stage one has been successful, then the core group members start to assume more responsibilities of their own accord. This is what happened in the original 1995/6 forum here.

Stage three is when some of those regulars have proved themselves to be trustworthy and willing to relive the full time staff of some of the load. The usual strategy is to extend some moderation privs: in the first instance that would be little more than the ability to enter an off-board topic. Apple calls it ‘The lounge’, a topic only accessible to those who’ve proved their value in the main forum.

It could also include at a higher stage the ability to create new topics.

Moderation in the sense of post-editing and removal would always have to remain with the site administrators for legal reasons. Which? remains legally liable for anything posted in here and the insurers alone almost certainly wouldn’t permit non-salaried staff to have such powers.

But I agree of course with your point about “remarks (we) make (that) can be taken badly or misinterpreted.” Lacking aural and visual cues knwing when someone’s making a joke can be very, very difficult.

I think I understand now, thank you. If you wish to create an FAQ now, please do! We can then review it and format it onto a page to post here in the community – hearing from the community’s regular members about their advice on the questions which come up regularly would be great. We can organise it into sections and make a little list at the top with links, so people can drop down to the relevant section for them. And from there any question that becomes frequent again can go into this area.

The only thing is… We have an FAQ already. So maybe one of you has an idea on what this can be called? Alternatively we could rename the FAQ to ‘How to use Which? Conversation’.

We will be looking at volunteer programmes as part of the strategy development for the Which? Community – for example ‘champions’ or ‘topic experts’. Letting a community moderate itself can make things uncomfortable between members – so we’ll use [our staff] moderators to keep the culture positive. But in the new community there will be an ability to assign permissions to people who might like to help us move posts to the right place, for example, and help with community housekeeping.

I couldn’t agree more that we’ll need to harness the membership, and the community members themselves who may not be members. That’s how communities work! Thank you for your thoughts.

Edit: To make this comment more clear I added the words ‘our staff’ before ‘moderators’ above.

Thanks for that. Okay, I will talk to at least two others I suspect might be willing to help (one an original forum member from the mid-90s…) and we’ll make a start.

Hello Elena – I am glad you are picking up and exploring openly the points that have been made recently in respect of the functionality of Which? Conversation.

When I suggested that we identify and composite the many pieces of advice that have been offered over the years to common consumer and domestic issues I deliberately avoided calling it FAQ’s because I don’t think that is an adequate title for the content. I gave it a sort of working title of ‘Frequently Given Answers’ because I wanted to provide instant help to enquirers on a wide range of topics and avoid having to keep repeating ourselves because the original answer had been buried. A problem with both titles is that if FAQ’s [or FGA’s] works and people no longer have to ask the questions [because the answers are readily available] then the frequency of the questions will fall away and they will drop off the list. In practice, ‘FAQ’s’ is a widely discredited term because in essence they are the questions which the promoters want to short-cut rather than the ones enquirers are actually asking and the list of FAQ’s bears no relationship to frequency of asking at all! This is a long way round of saying that I therefore like your idea of giving it a more comprehensive title such as ‘How to Use Which? Conversation’. My own suggestion would be something snappy like “What Do We Know?”.

I think such content would have to build up over time and require a substantial amount of editing to first pull together out of the Conversation comments all those that addressed a particular problem, then check them to see which answers were the best and technically accurate, and then consolidate them to eliminate duplications and to incorporate additional relevant points suggested by different contributors. This process would obviously remove any personal attachment to the answers. I have not thought how it might deal with second opinions that differ from a more commonly held one but could still be a workable solution.

At the end of the exercise for each item there would be a de-personalised ‘work sheet’ that would probably be little different from what is already available on a more relevant website – at least in the case of parking questions, energy prices, and some of the other important topics that recur. Does that nullify the idea? I would hope not.

I find this to be one of the most purposeful discussions we have had for a very long time on where we are going with Which? Conversation and I am very grateful for the example you are setting in terms of positive engagement, dialogue, and deliberation of a number of parallel or conflicting ideas. I hope this will not be dismissed on high as excessive navel-gazing and that it is a portent of our future relationship as contributors with the drivers of a useful public function and not just a hot waffle shop. Well done.

Post removed by the moderators due to a violation of the Community Guidelines. Please do not shout using all capital letters.

Yes, everyone, please continue to report. And where you see others getting heated, encourage them to report as well. We will pick it up.

There are times when your reports cannot be actioned because they don’t cross the line, but your eagle eye helps us spot members who we need to keep an eye on in case they do become problematic. And also your reports (the type of comments they are) are helping us shape the future of moderation here in the community. The world is a different place now than it was a few years ago – with fake news and Cambridge Analytica and the like. It has become difficult for hosts of a conversational platform to manage some of the ‘hate speech’ and erroneous information, and everyone is adapting their processes and guidelines to this.

You’re absolutely right that moderation the sense of removing content, warning members with repeated offences and so on, would need to be conducted by Which?. In some part for the reason you stated, but also because we want all of you to have good relationships with each other – and let us be the ‘bad guys’ when we have to (which isn’t all that frequent here, fortunately!).

You are speaking my language Ian: “forums and blogs such as this involve people and, as such, can be regarded as living entities” Communities are living, breathing organisms. And you’re right that the founding culture sets the tone of what’s to come.

I come from a long history of communities (longer than I care to remember!) and both personally and professionally, they have shaped my life. I’ve worked with many groups of ‘regulars’ like your good selves and I see this as a partnership. The Which? community needs you. I must say again, I feel the same frustrations that you’ve all expressed, and wish we had all the necessary tools and processes in place right now to be able to make the changes that would end your frustrations (or allow new ones to emerge which will take the community forward once again!).

I’ll definitely be thinking on ways to support you all – a private area to talk to each other, and us, is something I think would be a good start. What do you think?

Oh, one more thing: I couldn’t agree more – the text-based nature of the conversation leads to misunderstanding. I plan to update our guidelines in the next couple months to set out a few key points like this which will be guidelines for positive interactions.

It would be great to have the opportunity to communicate with one or more members, especially over off-topic matters that are unlikely to interest anyone else. It is very rewarding to have discussions with those who have a common interest.

What we normally understand as trolling is obviously unacceptable but there are numerous other ways that are used occasionally to alienate others on this and other forums. Examples include deliberately misunderstanding information that is clear when read in context of the post, and contributors being dismissive of constructive suggestions by others.

We are not going to agree over everything and the fact that different points of view are expressed is an essential part of the appeal of any forum.

I’ll include “putting down” constructive comments where they may not coincide with another’s view. However there is always time to edit a comment – 30 minutes I think – so second thoughts can be applied.

Nevertheless, we are all subject to human frailties and reaction to a response that seems less than polite will happen. In many cases reporting is unnecessary as other readers will see the point and take it in their stride, as long as the dispute is not perpetuated, I’d suggest.

When there are contentious topics – Brexit as a current example – we should be presenting perceived facts, opinions, views from all different perspectives without them being derided. We may be right in what we say, we may be wrong, or it may not be a right or wrong, but shooting the messenger is not the way.

You’ll be happy to know I have private messages on my list of future improvements @wavechange. This is an essential feature we need in our future community.

I have to agree – I love varying opinions and views. This is also essential, and people should feel comfortable to express theirs and be respected. 🙂

You’ve taught me something new Malcolm – and I can confirm that everyone can edit their posts for 30 minutes. This helps with those second thoughts you mentioned, and with typos! And having 30 minutes is fairly standard.

Malcolm – I have not paid much attention to the Brexit debate because many of the comments simply relate to the subject we have been invited to discuss. Obviously there are likely to be benefits and disadvantages of leaving the EU, but few of the comments that I have read acknowledge this. I wonder what use the debate has served except to display prejudice.

Elena – The 30 minute period has many uses. For example, I have edited this post to show that it is a response to Malcolm, now that you have inserted two posts. It’s obvious in this example but sometimes it would not be clear without the change. We did have to push to be allowed to edit posts in the early days because it was frustrating posting a comment, spotting a typo and not being able to do anything about it. Now we just have the frustration of looking back after 31 minutes and spotting a mistake. 🙂

I think it’s worth being aware that some improvements that have been requested in the past but not made have been down to the limitations of the existing software rather than any unwillingness to introduce changes.

@wavechange, I have seen your comment and am looking into some information for you. It may be next week, but I will be sure I get a reply for you. 🙂

@wavechange – I have not forgotten you. I’ll hopefully have some information soon.

Same happened to me this morning.

I occasionally find that Conversation locks up and although I am signed in it is impossible to post a comment and my avatar does not appear alongside the comment box. I find that if I reopen in a new tab it clears but today it was necessary to do that twice before it cleared. I don’t know whether that is exactly the same as Roger and Ian are experiencing but it is strange that it is occurring when there is relatively little traffic on the site.

I always sign in using the top right of the web-page to do so as cookies are removed by my blockers , so I dont have automatic sign in unless I leave the web-page up but I accept that . If those who are now experiencing trouble using a different method to me it might be that Which are conforming to the new identity rules of the EU-GDPR. It might ,of course , be somebody working on the server programming but then that would affect me too.

I have occasionally had a problem in the past but it’s working fine at the moment.

The locking-up that I experience is intermittent so there is no obvious explanation.

The other odd thing is that sometimes I remain signed-in for weeks on end [I never sign out, I just exit] and sometimes I have to re-sign in after a few days.

John as Roger rightly says ordinary cookies have a set expiration time , there are others which are long term but they eventually expire as well.

Hi Roger, and everyone else reading – Thank you for mentioning this. We haven’t done any maintenance on the site today so I’m not sure what could’ve caused this other than expiring cookies, as has already been discussed. Did you get your email address updated ok? If you need any help let me know.

Edit: After showing your comments to one of my colleagues we think there may be a technical issue which we’re going to investigate further. If we need any further information, I’ll come back here to ask. 🙂

Update: If you encounter this problem again please use the top sign-in menu for now.

John Ward said:August 2018

I occasionally find that Conversation locks up and although I am signed in it is impossible to post a comment and my avatar does not appear alongside the comment box..

Ah. Yes; that started happening at around the same time, but I didn’t link the two in my mind. I simply refresh the page, at which point it decided to work.

Funny; Which? has always had these sort of odd little issues.

I’m very encouraged by Elena’s posts. Patrick Steen did give us considerable encouragement during the creation of the ‘new’ Which? Conversation which despite the occasional gremlins is greatly superior to what went before. For a long time, some of us have been keen to offer our help in various other ways.

Hello @vynorhill, and thanks for your thoughtful and very helpful comment!

You describe the different groups of members well, and this overview (and everyone’s thoughts on this so far) are really bringing me up-to-speed with all things Convo.

I will also need time to think about and respond to all of your posts – so no issues at all. 🙂

My goal is to 100% connect Which? Conversation to the organisation – and this is not easy in any business. This requires an organisation-wide understanding of communities, of social media, and of the value a two-way conversation between organisations and people can bring. Success, for me, would be to hear you say (once the work is done and dusted…and that won’t be for a while unfortunately), “I think the community is no longer kept at arms’ length from the organisation.”

I love your idea on feeding back ideas for the magazine into the business. As part of our community strategy development we’ll create processes to capture such feedback and for bringing that into the relevant areas of the business. We do a lot of this now, but it is not enough.

I’m curious what others think about an FAQ. FAQs are becoming outdated for the reason you describe. There are some great articles about it if you Google whether FAQs are still relevant – these articles really challenge me to think differently – but I haven’t yet found that perfect alternative solution. I tend to group the questions into an index people can browse quickly.

I LOVE your suggestion of referring people to an answer that’s already been posted. That won’t be perfect for every single time, but what you’re describing is ‘curation’ of helpful content – something community regulars like yourselves, and staff managing the community, can do. It can also be helpful to connect people to people (experts on a specific topic).

Our moderators are both in-house and out-sourced. This is standard practice for communities, and ensures there is a watchful eye, should anything happen (you never know!).

And yes, we will change the look and feel and the functionality of the entire site. Around that many processes will be put in place to support all the processes you describe.

I have always been very cross with FAQs. Firstly they smack of laziness on the part of the organisation which can not be bothered to talk to its customers or wishes to hide behind the questions and not have a direct means of communication. The number of times I’ve searched page after page for a contact number or E.mail address!…. Secondly when ever I actually look for my answer, it is never there. My particular question may require up to date information or a “what if” reply and no FAQ can be personalised to give these. Chat boxes with supposed staff are almost as bad in this respect with writers misunderstanding the simplest of questions. I realise that a Which FAQ would not serve the same purpose but I believe there are better ways of being helpful.
Thank you for your reply and good luck in your quests, all of which seem worth pursuing.

Thanks for your reply! We must be able to find a way to do it well. Have a lovely weekend @vynorhill

To repeat what has been said often in the past, a great deal of useful information is contributed to Convos, and very useful links provided, but once out of sight the disappear into the mists of time. A great shame such a valuable resource is lost.

Another related thread started here in the cooker complaints Conversation –
https://conversation.which.co.uk/home-energy/best-cooker-oven-problems-issues-cooking/#comment-1537826
I am sure there was more and I am still looking.

In the same vein, John, three of us are actively working on compiling a spreadsheet of common questions and their answers. If you’d care to become involved please ask Patrick S to pass your email on to me or Roger and we will fill you in on the details. I’m happy for Patrick S to pass on my email to you.

I think this question is best asked of Patrick, who is currently looking at community development.

My understanding is that at present, Which? Conversation provides a friendly environment for discussing a variety of topics published at intervals. We have the opportunity to make brief contributions or put in considerable effort. I do not know whether it was envisaged that contributors would help each other solve problems, but to some extent this has happened. Regular visitors will learn more about topics as a result of interaction, much as they would from speaking to people in a pub.

From looking at contributions to Convos by their team, these tend to focus on providing relevant information covered on the website, giving more information about what is covered in a Convo introduction or pointing out earlier discussions (which might have usefully been appended to the current Convo introduction). Sometimes a question or discussion prompts the team to add useful links, for example to new and relevant reports.

You propose that Which? should provide a reply to questions that go unanswered for a couple of weeks. I doubt that Which? has the resources to take this on because if we knew that we were going to get authoritative answers for questions posted here I’m sure that many of us could come up with plenty of good but challenging questions.

What might be possible would be for Convos written by Which? staff to be visited by the author on a regular basis to provide some answers and relevant advice, and updating the introduction where appropriate, for example to provide useful links. Perhaps my greatest dislike of Which? Convo is topics that never have any further input from the author, though to be fair, some of them have resulted in some useful discussion.

One of the problems with answering questions is that we are often not provided with sufficient information to provide an answer. If a contributor is not a registered user they may never find answers to their question.

I am not sure we will ever see the remit of Which? explained in detail but am more confident about finding out where we are going with Which? Convo.

I have said before the W?Cs has something of an identity crisis. I believe than when it was started it may well have had an entirely different remit compared with today.

That’s completely understandable, as any forum changes as it becomes an online community with a core group who then, through interaction and contribution, change the nature of the forum itself.

That’s good, since an online community can be viewed as a living entity, and things which are alive change constantly. Over time, in fact, they will go one of two ways: they’ll expand and diversify as they harness the power of their component parts, or they’ll wither and die or – as in the case of the original forum – be deliberately starved of interaction and eventually destroyed.