expanding support options/needs as the fx user base grows

[nrthomas]

I think there are a lot of good points in this thread. Apologies if my comments are moving away from the more general type of discussion.

Mostly I help on IRC because I find the forums inefficient during the problem diagnosis, but each to their own. There are scaling problems if we are thinking about making IRC available via the web, which ties into the "IRC being scary for new users" idea. For example, as a helper I find it difficult to keep track of more than 3 or 4 conversations in #firefox at a time, and IRC newbies are pretty much lost in that level of traffic (at least until they figure out that each line to should be "addressed" to a nick). Maybe qunu can help with that, but one of the great things about IRC is that people have knowledge in different areas. So it's important to make sure each supportee is connected to as many supporters as possible, at least iniitally and if you get to a dead end. Put another way, a one-one conversation is less intimidating to users but they may not get the answer they need very efficiently.

There is also the time-of-day problem with chat, which the forums and newsgroups nicely sidestep. Usually there are most questions when there are most helpers, but not always.

Whether chat-based support should be offered inside the browser or not is a tricky question. I understand that users don't want to d/l another app, possibly having firewall problems, and we need to make it easy to get help, but it is really convenient not to lose the chat history because the user needs to restart into safe mode. Maybe a restart mode for the chat, something that preserves your previous session and reconnects. It's also important for helpers to hear back that the suggested fix has worked, which extension was broken or whatever.

Finally, I'm glad Mossop revived the ideas of feedback from support people to developers, and getting those different groups of supporters together. If we can tie that in with the statistical tracking that is mentioned the wiki, then I think we are in a much better position to communicate to devs & product planners what the "pain points" are for users. I think it's a great shame that the localstore.rdf corruption and bookmark loss after OS shutdown or update haven't been fixed after all this time.

[Lost User 237692]

In regards to "duping" threads, what often happens is the reply to an often-asking question is a link to a Knowledge Base article. The effect of that is that a search leading to any of the duplicate threads leads to the KB article, which should be the most up-to-date information even if the original question was posted a year earlier.

One problem I have, which might actually be a consequence of linking to a Knowledge Base article is that I often don't find the instructions to be very user-friendly. I realize that with all this open-source stuff, developers can find their way around the instructions no problem. But most of us are not developers. We want simple, straight-forward answers to our most pressing concerns.

For instance: I had posted two separate entries on losing tabs on my Firefox at work. I was redirected each time to various diagnostics links. While there's something to be said for trying to fix things on your own using diagnostics, many of us don't have the time to figure it out (especially at work). Even the Firefox-using Techies at my workplace can't figure out how to rectify my tabbing problem. I find those diagnostics to be written in Developer-Speak. So really, this doesn't help the average Joe /Jo.

Now...that being said, if somebody can PLEASE help me with my tabbing problems, I'd appreciate itl!

[Pike2]

SoS, you're working on the assumption that there is a solution to any problem, and that there is a non-involved way to find out which. In particular in a rich ecosystem like Firefox/Thunderbird, it doesn't always turn out that way.

Another problem is that you don't really want to write a KB article in five different versions, depending on how often a user has tackled any Firefox problem, a Firefox problem in that area, or some other coffee-cup-holder related issue before.

User documentation is never "one size fits all", and I wouldn't attempt to design a system such that it won't disrupt a work day when trying to solve a software problem. Recalling the computer problems my mom has, not even "on-site" support can achieve that.

Which may call for an introductionary blurb somewhere on what people can expect, and what they have to live with, and why. Like, if we point them to three documents, one for safe mode, one for about:config, and one referencing those two for the problem they may have. Unless we had some web2.0 way to include referenced docs into the currently seen one on demand. Man, I'm running out of carpet to smoke.

[RobertJ]

I've been "helping" in the FF Support forum for three years. I have some observations which may or may not be useful; but, here they are:

1 - Most people with problems don't search before hand. This is not unique to Mozilla. I'm active on the Apple forums and observe the same behavior. I don't know if this is just a "human thing" or related to your search capability. Let me give an example.

In the last few months Earthlink has changed its DNS to redirect to the Earthlink search page if the url cannot be resolved. If I type Earthlink into the forum search I get 112 posts, most re Thunderbird. If I'm patient enough to try a second time adding Firefox to the query I get 33 posts (still some Thunderbird). The titles are too cryptic to allow me to go "straight to the answer" which is among the 33. Bottom line, it's just easier to post a question.

2 - I agree with

The thing about chatting, though (and this is one reason I stay away from the IRC channel), is the user and the helper have to both be there at the same time for one to help the other.

but for a different reason.

a) Most (not all) posters with problems provide incomplete information (e.g., in the Earthlink case "FF is being hijacked"). In helping one person it took me a couple of back and forths to find that while the person didn't use Earthlink, they had a few months ago and never reconfigured the DNS in their network settings. Turned out that Earthlink changed the DNS redirect about the time FF2 was released; hence, it was a FF problem. The forum venue allows the poster time to "think before typing" and not get defensive.

b) From my perspective I like the forum venue because it allows me to make an effort to insure my answers are correct. In the case of most chat support the expert has a tree of question to work through and, in some cases, can bump the issue to a more knowledgeable person. You generally pay for this.

3 - Over the months I have developed a set of "canned answers". Once I determine what the real problem is and how sophisticated the user is I provide a targeted answer. While the knowledge base may contain the answer in a particular section, some users may not be able or willing to wade through. In that case my answer may be just an abstract of the KB.

4 - Lastly on the more human side of things: a) I do get tired of answering the same questions, b) I'm not inclined to help anyone who starts with a rant and c) I'm not inclined to help someone that posts four or more issues under some subject like FF2 is a piece of #^^%#.

Hope this is helpful.

[guanxi]

Our goal is to deliver solutions to end users. So far, we've discussed how to provide access to resources.

1) We also need to evaluate how well those resources perform, and why:<ol>
<li> What fraction of problems on forums/irc/newsgroups are successfully resolved?
<li> Are some kinds of problems resolved more/less frequently?
<li> Do some resources provide solutions more/less often?
<li> Do successful solutions depend on other factors? Completeness/accuracy of initial problem descriptions (if so, we could provide a form)? Native language (or are we only concerned with English here)? Time of day (if so, we could adjust resources or inform the user)? A combination of factors (e.g., maybe IRC is a better place to go with networking issues)? Something else?
</ol>


2) I suspect we can be much more effective if we give 'helpers' better resources. In other words, we need to support not only end users, but also the 'helpers' themselves. I've noticed many issues unresolved (or I've even seen the wrong information provided to users) because 'helpers' were uninformed or lacked basic diagnostic techniques. It's not their fault: To find all the resources, figure out how to use them, and learn support skills would take a week. We need to help the helpers:<ol>
<li> Make written resources they need, including Bugzilla, etc., more easily accessible. Helpers need a single point of access to resources, too.
<li> Provide access to additional knowledge for tough problems, including a helper forum/IRC/newgroup, and via some form of escalation.
<li> Quick, easy, basic training in troubleshooting and problem diagnosis. Even just a simple procedure or two on one small page could be a big help. We can't require training, so we should make it as quick, easy, and appealing to read as possible. More experienced helpers can refer newcomers to the training.
</ol>

[guanxi]

Some form of escalation would also help us use our resources more effectively: Inevitably, some helpers will have more expertise than others. Instead of wasting the more expert support helpers' time on simple problems, and wasting less experienced helpers time on difficult problems, it would be great if we could match the right helper with the right problem. I think the simplest solution would be to enable helpers to mark difficult questions for 'Escalation' or to mark them for escalation in a particular category (e.g., "Escalation - themes").

[VanillaMozilla]

The Firefox Help documentation has no mention of troubleshooting. Maybe this has something to do with why users try to troubleshoot by uninstalling and reinstalling, then giving up and using IE when that doesn't work.

This is bug 362984.

For my sanity, please don't mention that nobody looks at the Help document. If that were true, then the canonical response should be to remove the Help documentation.

[old np]

Having some sort of dispute resolution system is definitely needed

See here for discussion.

[Lucy]

...
2 - I agree with

The thing about chatting, though (and this is one reason I stay away from the IRC channel), is the user and the helper have to both be there at the same time for one to help the other.

but for a different reason.

a) Most (not all) posters with problems provide incomplete information (e.g., in the Earthlink case "FF is being hijacked"). In helping one person it took me a couple of back and forths to find that while the person didn't use Earthlink, they had a few months ago and never reconfigured the DNS in their network settings. Turned out that Earthlink changed the DNS redirect about the time FF2 was released; hence, it was a FF problem. The forum venue allows the poster time to "think before typing" and not get defensive.

b) From my perspective I like the forum venue because it allows me to make an effort to insure my answers are correct. In the case of most chat support the expert has a tree of question to work through and, in some cases, can bump the issue to a more knowledgeable person. You generally pay for this.

3 - Over the months I have developed a set of "canned answers". Once I determine what the real problem is and how sophisticated the user is I provide a targeted answer. While the knowledge base may contain the answer in a particular section, some users may not be able or willing to wade through. In that case my answer may be just an abstract of the KB.

4 - Lastly on the more human side of things: a) I do get tired of answering the same questions, b) I'm not inclined to help anyone who starts with a rant and c) I'm not inclined to help someone that posts four or more issues under some subject like FF2 is a piece of #^^%#.

Hope this is helpful.

I find it interesting the people who say they don't like helping on irc and the reasons they give, because the reasons you say you DON'T like it are the reasons why I DO, as in you say well you can't do X on irc, well I like it because I DO do X there MUCH easier.

2a) It's MUCH easier to get complete information from someone on IRC because they're right there and ready to answer questions. I don't think I could wait the 4-5 days it would take to ask the same questions back and forth that I can do in 2 minutes on IRC

b) I'm not sure why you think IRC doesn't afford you this. I'm also not sure where the second half of b fits in, but on IRC if you don't have an answer there are more knowledgable people that you can either ping, or who are watching and will jump in.

3. Again, IRC doesn't preclude this, this is what most of us do. We'll link to the kb article, ask them to read it through, and then let them know we'll walk them through it if they need it. You get instant feedback on how specific you need to be, and can tailor your response on the spot.

4. well most of 4 just doesn't happen on irc. If you start with a rant the bot will kick you for flooding. While we do have some people that come in and start with Firefox sucks, rather than I need help, usually when you ask them "well what's wrong with it" and then explain how to fix it they're very grateful and say "oh cool, firefox totaly rocks, thank you guys!"

I don't mean to extend this more into a forums vs. irc issue, but I do think it's important to sort this sort of stuff out at some point especially as I have said myself for a while that there should be more interaction between the irc and forums communities.

[Frank Lion]

... You get instant feedback on how specific you need to be, and can tailor your response on the spot.

Sorry Lucy, but when on IRC, any IRC, did someone give feedback in any more than one and a half lines max? If people were giving detailed replies, as they do in forums, then fine, but they don't and that the reality of it. People in real life just don't talk like that. I've had longer 'chats' sitting next to people in the dentists.

I've seen this all over the Net on IRC and assume it must be some odd thing to do with the nature of IRC, extremely brief answers where there is no need to be. I should add that these conclusions are based on observation of others on various IRC sites and not through asking questions personally. Just thought I'd add that, so I don't get the old, 'How can we better adddress your concerns and issues in the future?' type stuff.

Many customers/users just don't find IRC a user-friendly medium to be in.

[Lucy]

I'm sorry, but when you're trying to give someone instructions, exactly how much more than "I don't understand" or "I can't find that" do you need?

I also don't understand this generalization you have about people leaving long detailed responses on forums. Yes, the people you end up helping do, because they're the people that get help. I've yet to see an issue where I need a long detailed description of something *past* the initial description of what's wrong. Everything after that is pretty much yes or no.

[malliz]

Franks right, non-techie people are not comfortable on IRC, I mean I don't like it and I am a geek. And sure it's a pain sometimes that it may take several days of posting to get to the bottom a bug for one person but at the same time you could also have solved 20 other problems for different people. You said that you spent 5 hours fixing a problem for one person on IRC have you any idea how many posts there can be on the Firefox Support forum in that time? not to mention Thunderbird, Seamonkey et'c.

Edit: And I am not saying that IRQ doesn't also need resources, I think more can be done for every form of support. This thread was started as a think tank not a competition, so lets keep it that way.

[Frank Lion]

I also don't understand this generalization you have about people leaving long detailed responses on forums.

I would be grateful if you did not misquote me. I said 'detailed responses' and not 'long detailed responses'. There is a difference, as I'm sure you know.

I'm sorry, but when you're trying to give someone instructions, exactly how much more than "I don't understand" or "I can't find that" do you need?

Well, IRC people can start by understanding, as we do here, that the people you are replying to :

1. May never have posted ANY Support questions before and are in unfamiliar territory.

2. Are often, almost by definition, extremely unsure of what they are talking about and may well feel ill at ease answering a machine gunning of short, robotic questions in real time.

It is that 'how much more?' understanding of people that makes all the difference and explains why, much to the puzzlement of IRC support people worldwide, why many people do not immediately turn to IRC or if they do, not want to repeat it.

However, for people who understand and are comfortable with the IRC medium, I see it as an extremely useful resource.

[venus_de_mpls]

However, for people who understand and are comfortable with the IRC medium, I see it as an extremely useful resource.

I also think it's a wonderful resource. But for me the medium is too intimate and I think a lot of people seeking help feel the same way. I know it seems odd that people have little problem announcing 'to the world' they are clueless when dealing with some problem they are experiencing but it feels more anonymous some how.

[Pike2]

venus, I'd say that badly depends on character, and maybe even more so on culture.

Maybe, irc is not intimate enough. Finding out who is who is likely the biggest problem for folks on IRC, even when you're hanging around in the devver rooms. phpBB has that feature of telling you how long the person is in the forum, how often she posts, that she may be from Minneapolis.

What I like about the latest reply is that it shifts the focus from IRC can do this or forums can do that over to "I'm a human and I'd feel more comfortable with you being at %(that)s distance." I think that's a valuable finding, in that the support entry points should probably advertise the different mediums not so much in how they technically work, but how humans interact there.

And more importantly even, that there is not one good and working solution.