Forum for DSC/Citadel?

[andrew_johnson]

Will there be a specific forum ("board") here for DSC? Please consider it.

[cs42]

Well, in my point of view it suits good into the LabVIEW board. The splitting of the LabVIEW board in three never fitted quite right for me, because many question in the DSC section e.g. are deeply related to normal LabVIEW programming issues. So often I didn't know quite where to post a question (e.g. if I've got a problem with MAX).

[Molly K]

andrew johnson -

When we decided to upgrade the forums, we analyzed the existing board architecture to determine how effective it had been in order to determine what the new architecture should be. We weighed pros and cons of having too many or too few boards, and we feel that the list we ended up with is the most appropriate compromise.

Having more boards runs the risk of dividing the community into smaller sections that has the potential of excluding members who could answer each others questions. It also has the potential of being an overwhelming list of boards to choose from -- especially when applications involve several products. Oftentimes, users will post the same question in several boards hoping to find someone who can help them which is inefficient. Having fewer boards runs the risk of gathering users together who really have nothing in common.

When the volume of discussions in the LabVIEW board reaches a point where it can support granular categories focused on all toolkits and modules separately, we will be happy to reconsider the architecture.

Thanks,

[MichaelAivaliotis]

---

@Molly K wrote:
andrew johnson -

When we decided to upgrade the forums, we analyzed the existing board architecture to determine how effective it had been in order to determine what the new architecture should be. We weighed pros and cons of having too many or too few boards, and we feel that the list we ended up with is the most appropriate compromise.

Having more boards runs the risk of dividing the community into smaller sections that has the potential of excluding members who could answer each others questions. It also has the potential of being an overwhelming list of boards to choose from -- especially when applications involve several products. Oftentimes, users will post the same question in several boards hoping to find someone who can help them which is inefficient. Having fewer boards runs the risk of gathering users together who really have nothing in common.

When the volume of discussions in the LabVIEW board reaches a point where it can support granular categories focused on all toolkits and modules separately, we will be happy to reconsider the architecture.

Thanks,

---

When the volume of posts increases? Are you kidding? There are thousands of posts already in the LabVIEW forum, I think there is enough stuff there to be able to categorize. Can't you have Subcategories (subforums) underneath LabVIEW?

[andrew_johnson]

I understand the added overhead of managing and policing multiple forums. I suggest that there are intrinsic issues with DSC/Citadel that merit separate discussion from posts on array manipulation. Just as there are serious issues with VISA, with ActiveX, with many other technologies supported in labview.

Perhaps an "advanced" forum, or "other" forum... or split off a "LabVIEW 101" forum.

[andrew_johnson]

Is there any means of editing posts?

Let me put the DSC/Citadel issue a different way: It's sold as an add-on toolkit, not bundled with Labview. Should it not have its own forum as do the other add-on products? I'm trying to understand how these divisions are decided.

Thanks.