The IT Skeptic - Comments for "Why forums are dangerous"

end of discussion

skeptic — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 03:18:20 +0000

*Sigh* can't argue with any of that

Wouldn't be a discussion

buraddo — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 20:22:34 +0000

if we didn't disagree..

But lets agree forums contain by far the largest amount of inaccurate information..

My point was more the impact of information. Forums are forums, if you go to a forum which does not specialize in the topic and take the word of another "peer", then you get what you pay for.. To be honest, the person receiving the information and giving it are probably not in too much risk of doing any damage, because hopefully they won't get too far in their organization researching info that way..

But a CIO taking a vendor whitepaper or a IDC report or anything that has some sort of credibility, that is another level of damage. Would Chokey agree with me ? Even a lesser inaccuracy can have a larger impact..

I disagree a little on what make successful blog, but you da sensei on this one. I tend to believe like all media, the content needs to be interesting, not necessarily 100% accurate. The topics, the way its written, equally contribute to "interesting" as much as the actual accuracy of content. I agree that if it was complete piffle (your word) then probably the readers who not hang around in the long term, but success is measured in months on the internet, not years.

Brad Vaughan

the richest source of piffle

skeptic — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 06:39:09 +0000

I disagree: the forums are by far the richest source of piffle. Even the worst bits of the ITIL books are far more valuable than the twaddle I quoted above. I grant you some vendor white papers are a worry but I think very few would be as bad. All analyst papers get their basic facts right. Bloggers don't last long and don't page-rank if it is bilge (or at least I like to think so). Even ITIL Foundation certification would prevent the worst of this misinformation.

lots of information sources are flawed

buraddo — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 06:11:29 +0000

Is the public media any more valuable? The quality of the published stories is quite variable. Its the gap between the image of credibility and the quality of the information that is the danger. It lulls you into a false sense of security..

By example, is advice from your medical practitioner reliable. They can/do & have given advice which is wrong (probably ignorant and not negligent), but the qualifications on the wall and the position in society make most people give complete trust. These are things that can impact our lives... Just remember, 30 years ago shock therapy was a valid form of psychological therapy..

Information, let the consumer be aware..

Brad Vaughan