- diud-diud
- 10-31-2011, 02:57 PM
Who would agree to a NCNS section where both hobbyist and providers could post. That way the NCNS could be easily searched. Providers could answer to the allegation and they could also post their NCNS's if they wanted. Though I don't see why the would.
- phildo
- 10-31-2011, 03:07 PM
Yep...keep it out of here and reviews...call it the failure to launch forum
- 69er
- 10-31-2011, 03:18 PM
A NCNS section would be fine... but that is not my primary concern, as we are told to put those in CoEd today. They are as searchable there, as they are in a NCNS section.
I think the most important idea is to link NCNS items to her profile, just like reviews. Some might say you could perform a search if interested... The problem is that search here at ECCIE, is just not very good, so wading through the information becomes a chore. That is why reviews have been linked to provider profiles. I think that NCNS should be treated in the same way, and linked to a provider profile.
I'm not very worried about NCNS reports being incorrectly posted. We accept reviews today, and I personally believe 95% of reviews are way to much a way to "stroke the guys ego" as much as they are about the provider. I think the NCNS items that end up in a providers profile will show their true colors, just as a biased review does today.
I also believe that most here are smart enough to realize that something can happen and sidetrack even the most reliable of us. So, If I see one NCNS, it is not any worse than one "No" review, it is cause to make me read others more carefully, but not necessarily a reason to not see the provider. When I start seeing multiple NCNS, I might decide that an appointment might be ok, but to be ready with a backup plan. We've seen plenty of providers that regularly flake out and turn out as a NCNS, yet they continue to be popular, as when they are there, they are great.
I just view this as a way to give more complete information to customers.
I think the most important idea is to link NCNS items to her profile, just like reviews. Some might say you could perform a search if interested... The problem is that search here at ECCIE, is just not very good, so wading through the information becomes a chore. That is why reviews have been linked to provider profiles. I think that NCNS should be treated in the same way, and linked to a provider profile.
I'm not very worried about NCNS reports being incorrectly posted. We accept reviews today, and I personally believe 95% of reviews are way to much a way to "stroke the guys ego" as much as they are about the provider. I think the NCNS items that end up in a providers profile will show their true colors, just as a biased review does today.
I also believe that most here are smart enough to realize that something can happen and sidetrack even the most reliable of us. So, If I see one NCNS, it is not any worse than one "No" review, it is cause to make me read others more carefully, but not necessarily a reason to not see the provider. When I start seeing multiple NCNS, I might decide that an appointment might be ok, but to be ready with a backup plan. We've seen plenty of providers that regularly flake out and turn out as a NCNS, yet they continue to be popular, as when they are there, they are great.
I just view this as a way to give more complete information to customers.
- Guest082216-1
- 10-31-2011, 03:30 PM
We already have that. All NC/NS are suppose to be threads here in Co-Ed. Do you have any idea how many NC/NS turn out to NOT be NC/NS? Or simple error that gets resolved? Or someone trying to hurt the proider or hobbiest? Most of them
While a seperate forum would be nice, the programer has a lot of other itmes to work on. A seperate forum has been discussed before and is not out of the question, just a low priority given we have a working solution, inperfect that it might be.
While a seperate forum would be nice, the programer has a lot of other itmes to work on. A seperate forum has been discussed before and is not out of the question, just a low priority given we have a working solution, inperfect that it might be.