Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #28993

Re: Group with more traffic than CAE?

Show all headers | View raw

On 12/30/2019 12:46 PM, klaus.kragelund@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi
> 
> This group has not much traffic
> 
> Any recommendations for an alternative group?

That depends on what you want from that group.

USENET is really only good at providing *opinions*.  Folks
aren't really going to put in the time to help you SOLVE your
problem because it's just YOUR problem -- largely unrelated
to THEIR work (unless they've already solved exactly the same
problem).  It's like sitting in a bar (pub?):  you don't
expect to make any progress on *solving* anything -- other
than quenching your thirst and killing some time.

With a bit of effort, you can likely find a forum (or three) that
will address the particular issues with which you're concerned.
But, you'll likely need to find *several* in order to address each
SET of potential issues!

E.g., if you're looking for help with a particular toolchain,
then you're more likely to find REAL ANSWERS to your questions
from folks who are actually using that toolchain (instead of
OPINIONS as to what the problem *might* be -- from a USENET group)

I'm not fond of the forum format (lack of threading, in most).
OTOH, it usually offers the ability to include non-ASCII objects
in your posts which can go a long way to clearing up details.

In all public exchanges, the risk of disclosure is high so you're
limited to talking in generalities -- or, deliberately obfuscating
the REAL issue to prevent it from leaking out.  Private exchanges
avoid this as you can choose *what* to share with *who* -- and rely
on relationships that you've built to protect that confidentiality.

Additionally, you can find places where non-technical exchanges
happen -- where you can delve into the application domain instead of
just dealing with folks who are only concerned with technical
issues/solutions (ignorant of the particular users and uses involved).
E.g., I wouldn't waste my time asking CAE denizens about mouth-stick
design (though I'm sure someONE here may have been involved in such!)

[If you aren't involved in such groups, you're probably missing out on
some great resources that would improve the utility of your design!]

Mailing lists and one-on-one email exchanges are my preferred means
of interaction, nowadays.  The folks you end up interacting with are
more motivated to help you solve your problem instead of just opining
about some (likely inappropriate) *potential* solution.

A few times a year, a group of colleagues from around the country get
together for an "off-site" where we can play show-and-tell and dig
more deeply into each others' actual implementations.  This makes the
issues we've been discussing "more real" and deepen our understandings
of the problems we've discussed and addressed in the preceding months.

But, this can be costly (in terms of money AND time).  Especially if it's
your turn to "host"!  :<  And, you have to consider the impact on spouses
and families (its hard for them NOT to see it as YOU "being on vacation"!)

You might look for local "user groups" that might exist for some one-on-one
interaction (even if only to build those relationships that you can later
exploit).  Local Maker-Houses and LUGs are probably a good place to start.
Having folks nearby has added benefit when you need to borrow a piece
of equipment or have someone act as a "live" test subject.  And, even folks
outside your field of interest can often provide amazing insights that
you'd have overlooked had you not engaged them!

Best wishes for this coming year!

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Group with more traffic than CAE? klaus.kragelund@gmail.com - 2019-12-30 11:46 -0800
  Re: Group with more traffic than CAE? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-12-30 21:00 +0100
  Re: Group with more traffic than CAE? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-02 14:20 -0700

csiph-web