We have a community member who is about to hit a mile stone in contributing posts.
He is quite helpful to other members and we would like to offer him the Trusted Forum Contributor rank.
However we would like to hear from everyone's thought in regards to this contributor for your possible future peer.
This is his ID tag - tmittelstaedt
Please tell me of your thought!
I think the only way to determine this would be to have a fight to the death. If he wins we shall welcome him with open arms, but if he loses...well, I'm not too sure then. I guess we could probably let him in anyways.
Now this is truly a whimsical response!
I doubt he will accept a fight to the death but I can see him putting up his dukes for a good exchanges of banther in the community.
I believe this individual has some outstanding solutions provided to many forum users. However, he has also posted some very aggrivating attacks on Comcast which I personally do not appreciate. If any of the Trusted Forum Contributors have major Comcast issues, I though that this is the place to convey those instead of providing public condemnation of Comcast for IPV6 not fully implemented yet, how much money that individual's business operating costs are, etc., etc.
I thought this group of contributors main objective is to provide positive expert assistance to Comcast Business users when it is possible to do so. It makes me feel very uncomfortable when someone with my same user title is downing Comcast for any reason. Yes, we all know that Comcast is not perfect in all their practices, but for any of us to render any condemnation in agreement with other users, again, makes me very uncomfortable. Also, it does not bestow any positiveness to assisting forum users.
Looking through his post, it seems he was inactive for a good four months early this year and is just now coming back. I'd really hate to ding him for things in the past. Though, I did notice that his post do seem to be a bit abrasive at times. It's hard to have a preference here as it recent post history is pretty short, so it's tough to say if he'll keep doing that. I'd personally say we give him a bit more time to see if his post change a bit.
Thank you all for your honest opinion in regards to inviting tmittelstaedt as a peer.
I do acknowledge some of his older posts are quite abrasive and not constructive to anyone.
At its core, this community's intent is for peer to peer engagements in a safe positive environment.
You our Trusted Forum Contributors epitomize this value in the community and we truly appreciate all of you.
However, we also have to take chances to better serve.
Sometimes this takes in form of strong criticisms and we appreciate it as it is an oppourtunity for growth.
tmittelstaedt is quite informed but as VBSSP-Rich stated he is not ready to join this peer group.
After seeing all of your posts, we are considering to offer him a 'lower tier' rank as a trial period.
The title will be: Forum Contributor
This rank will have limitation such not being able to post stickies, access to the Water Cooler, or future implementation to come. However, he will still have direct access to the moderators.
The trial period will be 90 days, and there be a vote amongst the peers to decide whether to let him in to group.
Additionally during this period, if everyone can 'gently' nudge him toward 'right' direction, it will much appreciated.
I really think one of the Comcast Administrators should speak to tmittelstaedt user about making post like his latest today : http://forums.businesshelp.comcast.com/t5/IPV6/Summary-of-Comcast-s-support-of-IPv6-on-their-Cable-M... . This post contains a great deal of technical non-factual and incorrect information about Comcast internet modems and giving the community members an inaccurate assessment of Comcast current addressing ALL IPV6 issues with ALL of their business class modems.
Today, I received a private message from a forum user asking why he has a SMC running 100/20, but according to tmittelstaedt user post link http://lists.cluenet.de/pipermail/ipv6-ops/2015-June/010664.html, it says that the SMC only supports 50 MB and below internet speed, which is totally inaccurate. tmittelstaedt user does state that he is not a Comcast employee, which is a saving grace for Comcast and the community forum. I do not have any choice but to respond to this private message that some of tmittelstaedt user's technical facts are inaccurate.
Yet, another inaccurate Netgear 3000 technnical statement tmittelstaedt user makes is "This device does not support the higher speed 150Mbt+ Comcast service that is being rolled out.". tmittelstaedt user's inference that Comcast will not be fixing ALL modems FW for IPV6 due to the significant installed base of all three is just ludicrous to say the least.
Bottom line here is that this is exactly the type of Comcast downgrading without any just cause that should have a halt put on this user's posts. My recommendation would be to remove this post and inform him to make the necessary technical corrections to its contents and to pass it by a Comcast administrator for review prior to his re-submission post.
Just some food for thought......
Thank you for bringing this me and I appreciate it.
I agreed this article quite unbecoming of a contributor.
I've move this article to the conversation section and reach out to him to re-work it. - Link
He really is trying to 'help' the community but this does not bold well for him in the future.
Can any of you reach out to him, so he can be 'polished'?
I will also work him but hearing from his upper-classman will definately help.
It is has been roughly 90 days since tmittelstaedt was placed as a potential peer for the trusted rank.
What do you guys think of him as of late?
I would like to hear to everyone for a vote of peerage.
As far as this recent post
I do not see any direct improvement for this user to refrain from trying to shove it up Comcast's rectum. I honestly can say that none of our current group contributors conduct themselves in this same manner.
Just some food for thought....
Sadly, I don't think much have changed for him. He's still a bit over the top with his post and routinely blurs the line between flaming and helping.
Thank you for your thoughts.
I was hoping that he will learn to emulate everyone's approach's in support of the community, but this did not happen.
With that said he is not going to be invited to the Trusted rank.
Thank you all for your thought.