I see the technical team members answering scoring questions from different fields!
Thread Content
Seeing the instruction for team members with specialized skills to try their best not to give scores, some team members expressed regret, feeling that it wasn’t necessary. Hai Chuan Li is full of talented people; some are experts in specific fields, such as those from design institutes, while others have a broad range of skills, like those from factories. I come from the production side, having learned step by step through work at the grassroots level; I have an understanding of all aspects of the factory (though not necessarily an in-depth one). I learn from forums, where I come across things that are familiar to me, things I know about, as well as things I want to know. Naturally, I take a look and offer some thoughts and opinions (all generally within the scope of what I know). Sometimes I see a good question and want to reply, only to find that there’s already a response posted above it. If it continues, it will be like swinging an axe in front of Lu Ban’s workshop. It feels better to express one's awareness and thoughts through evaluation. Some users said that posts should be concise (as a response), which can also avoid the suspicion of spamming. Conversely, there are restrictions recommending that privileges not be exercised in non-professional areas; perhaps some people failed to pay attention at the time and went too far in order to achieve a low P-value, given the limited amount of content in those areas. It interferes too much with the work of other sections. I would like to advise that we should focus on professionalism; when learning*, we should try to minimize various forms of performance to give relevant managers room for management. It’s better to leave some room. Knowing more is not as good as being proficient; in the end, it is still professionals who should make the final judgment! My principle: stick to my field of expertise, strive to learn and develop, stay true to who I am; I don’t seek perfection, but I aim to do better! I believe that those who know Hai Chuan possess good character and are at a higher level than me. I am but a lump of brick; true jade has yet to appear. Siduo’s recommendation guide!
When grading becomes a burden, I think its meaning fades away. A former team member resigned, saying it was to meet the P-value targets – there were too many scores to evaluate each day, and it was impossible to ensure compliance. I believe the P-value is merely a reference for evaluating team members, not a decisive factor. By participating more in discussions, uploading high-quality materials, and helping others solve problems, you can also demonstrate the effectiveness of your work. So I urge everyone: please do not rate just for the sake of rating; ratings should truly be given with care, ensuring quality over quantity and in a targeted manner!
Grading should not be a burden; think about the purpose of coming to Haichuan – it is mainly to learn, to exchange ideas, and to make friends. . . . The “value for money” rating also takes into account the value of the person giving the rating, haha. The P-value is not just a score either. I think as long as I always keep in mind Hai Chuan’s original intentions, and with a humble heart do my best to help others, then a P-value should be attainable. Additionally, having worked in the workshop for many years, I can handle various tasks; I think it’s better to respond actively to posts related to other areas that haven’t been covered before. If one can actually solve the problem, that will also result in a positive rating. Hehe:lol :lol
Regarding what the original poster mentioned, I have personal experience with this. I work in production technology management; I have been involved in scheduling tasks and have some knowledge of various manufacturing processes. Although I studied process engineering in school and still work in this field, during my time handling scheduling duties I also acquired some knowledge of other specialized areas. I don’t say I’m familiar with them, let alone expert in them; even when it comes to process engineering, I can’t claim to be well-versed in it. Over the past few days since I joined the forum, I’ve basically explored all parts of Quanhaichuan. I’ve also shared some personal opinions on certain posts; it’s inevitable that there might be mistakes in those opinions, but my intention was good – to actively participate in discussions and learn from experts. By participating in these discussions, one can also identify one’s own shortcomings and areas of confusion. I think there’s nothing wrong with this; it’s something worth encouraging. However, it’s not acceptable to engage in random discussions or pretend to understand things when one actually doesn’t; such behavior is definitely not encouraged. As for rating posts from different fields, I don’t think it’s necessary. It is both a responsibility and an obligation to evaluate good posts and materials within one’s own field of expertise; but when it comes to fields outside one’s area of specialization, there’s a risk of acting out of self-interest, inflating scores, or simply trying to meet certain metrics. Although I have occasionally overstepped my bounds by giving ratings across different categories in the past, I will be more careful going forward. I fully agree with what the original poster said about giving relevant personnel some leeway.
Before becoming a team member, I would browse various forums; whenever I saw something I thought was good, I couldn’t help but give it points. It feels a bit like a dog chasing a mouse now – meddling where it’s not needed! It’s time to restrain one’s behavior; don’t cultivate someone else’s fields and leave one’s own land uncultivated – after all, there is a division of labor! This post was last edited by wsts00100 on 2008-2-16 18:48.]
I think one should focus on their main major, with their favorite major as a secondary focus, and actively participate in various sections of the forum – it’s better not to be too restrictive!