Minimum info required when posting new topics.

Hi all,

I have noticed that in about half of all postings, so little information about the subject in question is provided, that the first responses are request for more information.

For. ex: "Our PLC has this problem .. please help", or "the MMI stopped working" etc.

Shouldn't there be a general rule, that a minimum level of hardware and software information must be provided by the first posting.
When somebody is asking others to help, I find it arrogant when that person doesn't have the time to provide sufficient info.

Info could be:
Hardware make, typenumber, firmwarenumber.
Software make, typenumber, revision number.
For PC: Operating system etc.

Just my opinion ...

Posting new topics

In full aggreement, but maybe thats just up to all using this wonderful facility to uphold. Whether the Guys can provide a small section in the "Header/Subject" I don't know, but as you say perhaps, System Type/Make/Model/ etc may help from the start. I would suppose that the Guys try to leave these areas open as much as possible to allow for the diversity of the topics, from PLC to HMI, from Schematics to standards, from control to process, from sensors to actuators, from PID to OPC,from oh my god, does this site handle a lot or what !!!!!!!!

In a little reference to this, is it just me, or do we have a lot of posts from people seeking "FREE" software. I'm always of the opinion that if you want to program, you've got to have valid/licensed software. I know there can be exceptions but not many. The guys have always had the "interactive" operated very fairly and I doubt whether anyone abuses the helpfulness of others too much. Its one thing providing "CODE" which can be so helpful for people to visualize the concepts discussed, but quite another seeking Freebies.

anyhow,

Cheers for all.

If specific help is requested for a particular problem, then I think that the "specifics" should be provided by the person asking.

But if the question is one about a broad or general topic, then I too think that the topic should be as "open" as possible.

Tips for Newbies

As long as this "new" forum has been in place, there's been a section at the top of the page:

New Here? Please read this important info!!!

To quote from it:

---

5. Tips for Posting

When posing your question, remember that the various PLC’s use some terms and symbols that are unique to their product line. If you specify a question strictly in the unique terms used by your particular PLC you might be excluding some people from helping you. This is because some people won't recognize or understand the specific terms you are using.

While the general rule, “If you can program one PLC, you can program them all ” certainly is true, it is only true to the extent that one needs to learn the particular identifiers and symbols of the unfamiliar PLC.

So, try to be as general as possible so as to include all of the possible respondents, and yet be as specific as necessary to clearly identify the problem.

---

Now those of us who KNOW, understand how important having the make, model, and rev level can be, AT TIMES (other times, it doesn't make a bit of difference). But newbies, almost by definition, don't understand this. Sometimes they are looking for help that is truly PLC independent (like, unfortunately, the traffic light problem). Others seem to think that register SMB47 or N7:0 is going be the same program to program, simply because they've never seen more than the one program that they are struggling with.

That's one reason why I post using the [LADDER] tags, rather than attaching an RSLogix screen shot - unless I'm sure that the responder is talking about an AB PLC; it keeps answers generic.

There's very little that we can do to "require" specific info (unless Phil wants to start requiring that only registered users can post, and make reading the "New Here?" part of the registration process, like some kind of EULA, which he flatly wouldn't do, nor should he want to.

What usually happens is that, if more info is needed, someone asks for it. Often the poster never responds. Or the poster responds with just enough information to make you realize that the problem is bigger than the original post first let on.

What can I say? It stinks, but you've gotta live with it. That's why we get paid the big bucks to work this site. lolis

We don't need to answer or ask additional questions.

I feel for the tech support guys that must put up with this every day.
They have a tough job.

I don't think you will change the nature of people.

The average beginning poster looks upon his request as the beginning of a tech support call. It's almost as if they see this forum as a telephone call or a chat room where answers are instant or that somebody will help them formulate their questions with more feedback.

Just thoughts on the issue ... no solutions

I have also noticed that replies are getting in short supply from the original poster.
It seems they read the answers and then dissapear never to enter here again. (unless, of course, they need help again at a later date)

AND 'Thank-you's' are just about never heard anymore ( I know some of you are decent and polite)

I saw one the other day that asked a question and finished with the demand - please answer ASAP. I would not have replied to that one at any cost.

I agree with Jay, they treat it as a tech support service - so no need for common manners and niceties.

I've said it before - properly formulating the question is 50% of getting a correct answer. That is true on this forum, for developing a program, and for designing a successful system.

I also get frustrated by the sloppy questions and fuzzy thinking we see here (and other places as well). Let's face it: thinking through a problem to provide background info and properly identifying the symptoms and constraints is hard work. Some guys are too lazy, but many others are too new to engineering to understand the thought process. I'm not sure that there is any solution.

JesperMP said:

PC or/and PLC 

Hardware make    :        

-typenumber      :

-firmwarenumber  :

Software make    :

-typenumber      :

-revision number :

Operating system :

etc.

Click to expand...

I agree Jesper !