Why my post has been unnecessarily rejected?

[former_member182297]

Hello experts,

My last post "How to find the Ehp version? " has been rejected by the Moderators of this forum .I received an email telling me to -  "go to your Notifications tab under the Actions menu. Please see our Rules of Engagement for more information on why content is rejected."

I checked and re-checked the "The Rules of Engagement" but I found no issues with my post. I feel nothing is wrong & I am being unnecessarily harassed .

a)A same type of post was allowed to be posted earlier ,so there was no "copyright" issues . Please check : http://scn.sap.com/thread/3278835 

The author was  Dheen AJ posted in Dec 11, 2012. So why my post with similar content but with different output /results  has been rejected . The 2 questions are different in that because -

My SAP_ABA version was showing as 700 Level 0005 whereas in that post Banaj Kumar showed a similar but different output viz. his SAP_ABA version was 700 Level 0009

The two results cannot have same meaning here because they must have indicated 2 different Ehp levels!!

So again I ask  the Moderators - On what ground my post was rejected? Neither copyright issues nor exactly similar content can be the reasons. I cannot get my answer from the post of Dheen AJ as pointed out by "Gaurav Kumar Pandey" .

I wonder how such an international support site can act like these to me(that too without any apparent reasons that can be seen nor the reasons being pointed out to me by the Moderators). The email that is received is just so mechanical but often there is no hints as to the reasons of rejection that can be easily seen in The Rules of Engagement".

Regards

[former_member186576 · Accepted solution]

It's time for moderators actions and words to be moderated at a higher level. They must be held accountable as well. If someone's discussion is rejected, then the message must specify the name of the moderator and specify the exact reason for rejection.Also moderator should follow the rejected discussion author so when the author try to communicate to that moderator through direct message, the communication can go through.

[matt · Accepted solution]

Sam P wrote:

It's time for moderators actions and words to be moderated at a higher level. 

What makes you think this doesn't already happen?

They must be held accountable as well.

We are accountable. We can be held to account by posting here, for example.

 If someone's discussion is rejected, then the message must specify the name of the moderator and specify the exact reason for rejection.Also moderator should follow the rejected discussion author so when the author try to communicate to that moderator through direct message, the communication can go through.

There is a restriction of 255 characters for the message of why the post has been rejected. Within that restriction I, and many other moderators, attempt to give an exact reason for rejection. Some moderators are remiss, and don't do this. In any case, if the reason isn't clear, then all the member has to do is post here and ask for further details. Which, in the interests of transparency, is always forthcoming.

It would be good if the software would allow communication as you suggest, but it doesn't. The list of moderators per space is freely available, however, so this seems workable enough.

On the flipside, consider that I reject maybe 20-50 posts per day. The vast majority of people accept the decision without complaint. There is also a balance required for good use of moderator time - it's not unlimited and we are all unpaid volunteers, who do the work because we want to support the community.

The more time we have to spend discussing moderator action, the less time we have for keeping the site free of spammers, scammers and adverstisers.

[former_member182297 · Accepted solution]

Hi Mr. Billingham,

What Sam P said I fully agree to. That is what I also wanted to say but couldn't say in such short concise way. Excellent post by Sam!!

At least one thing he said must be adhered to in future,I quote here from his earlier post-

"....the message must specify the name of the moderator and specify the exact reason for rejection".

Thank You Sam.

With Best Regards

[matt · Accepted solution]

I would love the software to be able to say who rejected what and enable discussions directly. However, in its current form, it doesn't allow for that. I'd also like to be able to check posters' rejection histories - but I can't do that either. We have the software that we have, and until that changes there's not much going to be done about it. We just have to work with it.

Regarding "specify the exact reason for rejection" - this is already done the vast majority of the time, and is part of what moderators are already asked to do.

Given that

a) There are hundreds of posts rejected every day, and only a very small minority seek clarification

and

b) It's easy enough to get clarification by posting here

it's not really that massively important.

[moshenaveh]

Hi Pradip,

FYI, I just rejected a document version you posted which was a version of this thread. Documents shouldn't be used for this.

As I said before, and as listed in the rejection note, you are more than welcome to reach out when you have moderation concerns.

Regards,

Moshe

[former_member186576]

It’s well understood that moderators are good and hard working people who volunteer their valuable time to help the community. Their intention must be always be to help and if the result of their action (members leaving SCN) doesn't match the purpose of their role, then it’s time for another level of discussion for those in-charge of moderators.

Mr. Pradip Choudhary had a question and wants to clarify it on SCN. Moderators assumed that he violated SCN rules and rejected the discussion. Author screams foul and voiced his concern that adequate search was made before posting the discussion. The same moderators who rejected that discussion must take it as a challenge and prove it to the community that discussion was rejected because there are plenty of similar post available on SCN.  Yes, it's not moderator job to search and find answers for members, however in this particular scenario,to put this matter to rest,please provide the similar links which serve as a solution to the rejected post which will also add credibility to all the moderator’s actions.

[matt]

Sam P wrote:

It’s well understood that moderators are good and hard working people who volunteer their valuable time to help the community. Their intention must be always be to help and if the result of their action (members leaving SCN) doesn't match the purpose of their role, then it’s time for another level of discussion for those in-charge of moderators.

Oh that it were so simple. Your argument is flawed because you have made the assumption that a members leaving SCN is the most harmful thing that can happen to the community. It isn't. Contributors who add useful content and have a depth of experience leaving SCN is the most harmful thing that can happen to the community.

Without decent moderation filtering out FAQ, easily searched, basic, "do my job for me", stuff covered in courses, along with spam, scam and other dross, experts don't stay. This was the state of SCN before moderation came in.

There will always be leavers. There will always be people who take offence. There will always be people who don't like the way the site is run. There are always people who will leave a site because they don't like the moderation. While it's important to listen to constructive criticism and ideas, I do not think we cannot, and, morally, we should not, pander to a very very tiny minority at the expense of the majority.

Moderators are not mentors.

[moshenaveh]

Hello,

Please contact me via Email (can be found in my profile) if you thin escalation is needed.

Regard,

Moshe

[matt]

Having your post rejected isn't harassment - it's part of moderation, designed to keep the site useful the majority of people. An answer to your post would have overall, in the judgement of the moderator, harmed the site. I.e. allowing your post helps one person, rejecting it helps thousands. It's a subjective judgement about balancing different groups' rights.

You have a right to challenge moderator action - by, for example, posting here. You can also email the administrators, who will further examine the issue.

It is absolutely right to be able to discuss moderation. At some point though, a final decision will be taken on whether to allow your post through. You can either accept that judgement (understanding that any community has rules that might adversely affect your freedom to do what you like), or find a community that more meets your expectation.

[former_member183424]

Lets start with this SCN design, when you got a notification of thread rejection, then link of rules of engagement is attached automatically, moderator has no control to change or edit it. Moderator only can add a reason.

Why encouraging people to do SAP then you are preventing newcomers like me to gain "BASIC" knowledge .

Do you know now a days, there are plenty way to gain your basic knowledge like SAP help documentation on SAP system, help.sap.com, enormous collection of blogs/documents/discussions/wikis, various websites are now providing help for any field/table/transaction code and any activity. So why you have to create a discussion to gain your basic knowledge. Basic knowledge comes by reading documentation. Being a newcomer, everyone should read help documentation first to gain basic knowledge.

If SAP is to be used & dominated by only people who have high points &  who have Gold ,Diamonds,Silver,Platinum,  Emerald medals etc

Of-course not. We never dominated any people in SCN (even sometime we are dominated from people with having glass level). Someone get these levels by providing help to others. Nothing matter if anyone has high points or low point (or even any high level), knowledge is the main thing.

At last, you have shared two option from rules of engagement,

1. Share expertise transparently.

Of-course SCN will accept your knowledge. But don't you think it should be unique. Why SCN will keep a content which is already there with various documents/blogs/discussions ?

2. Be professional and courteous.

Here it is written that "for asking questions or posting something you don’t like." It is quite clear that anyone should not berate other members to ask a question which he doesn't like. But a moderator has some additional rules including this. You question was not rejected because of moderator doesn't like your question. The community is intended to be open on a variety of topics but not for a topic which was already discussed many times here.

[Reagan]

>>So again I ask  the Moderators - On what ground my post was rejected?<<

1 - Your question is too basic.

2 - With the amount of information you have provided in your thread it is clear that you wanted others to find the answer for you.

3 - It doesn't matter whether the information what you see is different compared to the one on the other thread. Identifying the EHP, SP stack and kernel versions of an SAP system is not a difficult task. A quick Google search will get you the answers as this was discussed before.

The answer you are looking for is present in the thread which you have pointed out. If you say that you have checked the thread then I can say that you didn't either read the thread properly or you need training.

>>I feel nothing is wrong & I am being unnecessarily harassed.<<

Are you OK?

There is no point in asking questions which are very basic and that were discussed in the past and if I come across such thread I will reject them. If you classify them as "Harassment" then I recommend you can take this matter to the SCN team. The contact details are available on SCN. Just search and find it.

>>I wonder how such an international support site can act like these to me(that too without any apparent reasons that can be seen nor the reasons being pointed out to me by the Moderators).<<

I didn't bother to write an explanation because the reasons are clearly mentioned here - Please see our Rules of Engagement for more information on why content is rejected."

Take time to read and bookmark it. You get 5 points for that.

[former_member182297]

Hello Sir Benjamin,

1)What appears to you as basic doesn't mean it is basic to that poster. Does he has no right to know because everyone else feels it is basic?

2)Secondly, is it written in the "Rules of Engagement" that questions related to Ehp version is basic? Further I already wrote in my first post that I have gone through the "Rules of Engagement" twice but not found anything wrong with my post . Now you say about 'basic' things but I cannot find the word 'basic' once in the page -

3)If the question is so 'basic' ,then why was it allowed so many times in the past?

I will give you multiple links for that-

a)

2)

3)

4)

There are many more if I search google . The point is the values are all different from one post to another.

If you have read my first where  I clearly pointed out that my 700 Level 0005  for  SAP_ABA version is different from 700 Level 0009.

And I dont know (because there's nothing written what that particular code means beside that SAP_ABA, for a beginner with no guidance that is like a Hebrew language)what that code means from all those other posts .

So there is nothing wrong in that as far as I feel.

BR

[former_member182297]

Firstly tell me friends , am I writing this posts in a free forum ?Why encouraging people to do SAP then you are preventing newcomers like me to gain "BASIC" knowledge .

If SAP is to be used & dominated by only people who have high points &  who have Gold ,Diamonds,Silver,Platinum,  Emerald medals etc ,then why not reserve these forums for their own battleground/playfield ,why hunt on cats & mouses like me when you are a lion of a forest?

You all then dont want to share knowledge

Why dont you prevent beginners from joining this forum & fix eligibility  as Certificate license number of SAP?

Next if someday I ask question related to some functional topics you will delete my posts this way bcoz you feel that it is being repeated whereas it is not.

>Has anyone in this forum before now written a post or document saying what are the new Tcodes introduced in Ehp7?

>Has anyone in this forum ever written a post or document saying what is the code for Ehp7?

BR

[former_member182297]

Reagan Benjamin wrote:..............
..............................................
Take time to read The SCN Rules of Engagement and bookmark it. You get 5 points for that.

Further to point out you said that bookmarking will give me 5 points which I did after reading the topic the 3rd time & I didn't get one single point till now. It has been more than 2 hours.

So you dont even have basic information & you are shouting in the forum saying "Basic Basic  Basic  Basic "  lol

Are you yourself OK?

And what about others including you maybe- didn't you ever ask people for help when you couldn't find the answer yourself?

Anyways ....

But before closing this topic I want to point out to all including the Moderators who deliberately deleted my post saying that I violated the  "SCN Rules of Engagement" ,that you are pointing out to me ,before that please read these points -

1.Share expertise transparently. SCN is a community site that encourages public knowledge sharing. Be open about your knowledge and how you obtained it.

2.Be professional and courteous. Temper negative emotions, keeping communications professional. Do not berate other members for asking questions or posting something you don’t like. The community is intended to be open on a variety of topics.

Hope Benjamin and others who voted for removal of my post reads the above two points.

With Regards

-

[abdullahqureshi]

Because "Rules of Engagement" mission has been expired on Feb 1,2014.

[Former Member]

Hi Pradip,

Some points that hopefully will help you with your future engagement on SCN:-

• SCN is NOT a support site - it is a community forum where members decide if and when to offer help, guidance and knowledge sharing.  So in short, don't expect any answers to your questions
• The Rules of Engagement are a basic guide as it would be impossible and impractical to try and capture each and every single rule or guideline for the whole of the SCN community, especially as many of the different spaces have differing standards, expectations and community approaches
• SCN is NOT a site to support newbies learn SAP.  There are vast amounts of other more appropriate channels for this and whilst everyone is happy to help out, please remember this is supposed to be a professional community where professionals can share knowledge and challenges, not a place where people can ask for help with HelloWorld time after time.
• Most importantly, instead of putting your energies into this pointless argument, which is just wasting yours and everyone else's time, why not take the advice given and apply it in a positive manner

As an aside, finding out the EHP level of a system is a very basic task.  Regardless of how new you are to the SAP world, this is the sort of question that can be easily answered by asking someone you work with, or someone on the admin side of the system you are using.  If they don't know, a simple Google for "How to find the EHP of my SAP system" would no doubt give you the answer.  It is not something appropriate for SCN.  On top of this, learning how to help yourself in the SAP world is the most valuable skill you can acquire - simply posting every little thing to SCN is not the way to make this happen.

Further, just because it has been asked before on SCN doesn't mean it will be allowed again - in fact if something has been asked (and answered) previously, that is often grounds enough to reject a discussion.  This is an organic community, and hence what is deemed acceptable can change over time.

Finally, I'll repeat my advice - put your energies into working WITH the SCN community, rather than complaining and trying to push against it.

Cheers,

G.

[former_member182297]

Hi Ryan,

My post may not be liked by someone or by a group of people here,but that doesn't mean my right to post a thread should not be there unless it insults or hurts someone or it contains slang. I needed a information that will not help me learn SAP ,it is just that my computer has been installed a wrong version ,so i was checking with people here . If some people don't like that ,doesn't mean that my post/thread should be removed entirely.

Also,i am not asking for help to everyone,whoever wishes can help me ,that's his or her choice & I have no problem or complaints against that ,what pains as well as angers me is when that person(s) removes my thread by complaining to the moderator. He/She could have ignored the post & continued his work . Likewise I am not meddling in other's business. There is a saying which you will be knowing more than me - "Oil your own machine" . I am throwing the question to an open forum ,now one can accept or reject/ignore  to answer that but why should he /she get it removed?

Hope you understood me what I  wrote.

Thanks & Regards

[Former Member]

Hi Pradip,

I understand exactly what you are saying, however you don't appear to be understanding what I and others are telling you.

Yes, you have the right to post to SCN, however the broader community has the right to decide if it is acceptable content.  In this case, your original discussion wasn't.  That decision isn't based on simple measures of whether it hurts someone or is slang, there are many more criteria that are used, as well as individual moderators discretion, and of course based on the Rules of Engagement.

The people complaining to moderators, as you put it, are doing their bit for the community by helping to clear out content that collectively, we as the community don't believe adds value.  If everyone ignored such content, SCN would very, very quickly fill up with rubbish, low value, quantity over quality content and it would become useless to everyone.

I'm going to give up on this discussion as it is clear you are set in your in your opinion on this topic, however as I've already said at this juncture you have a choice as to whether you work with the community or not.

Cheers,

G.

[former_member182297]

Hello Sir Ryan,

This is where I disagree with you. You said "however the broader community has the right to decide if it is acceptable content"  ,then by that you mean the majority? So you don't care for a singular view, there might be a person(s) who don't belong to that broader community of yours ,but is willing to answer my question. It is not proper to take away the rights of that person who can answer my question & the rights of mine by removing the thread.

2ndly, you are time & again, saying that there are ample articles,posts scattered here & there or over the internet , in some other site that can be easily searched by using Google /search engines ,so its a very 'basic' question . I don't understand what you all meant by 'basic' i.e. does it point to the SAP Basic module ?

Anyways, I take it that you mean its a very simple question in that sense maybe basic,whatever , but the point is I also time & again, pointing out to you & your SAP forum's "broader community", that can you find one site or article that gives exactly the figures that are there in the picture in my first post of the deleted thread and which explains what those figures exactly mean??

I doubt & maybe guarantee that you cannot find one such link . What Gaurav said is after seeing my figures but in the thread he was pointing to viz this one -

doesn't contain that information that could have helped me decide what Ehp version I have?

And I already read that post before starting my thread(which is deleted by the Moderators now) ,that Gaurav and others who voted against my thread knew very well.

Since I couldn't decide by reading that post ,so I decided to start that deleted thread.

Still after all these explanations ,I know you all won't agree that it was wrong to have deleted my thread .

Further ,I am not coming here to l learn SAP ,so it is wrong for you to judge by only a few questions. Everyone who has something he has no answers to come here to get an answer or two,that doesn't mean that he is totally dependent on this forum to learn SAP. Same with me.If you didn't answer my question instead of deleting that , i wouldn't have cried .I would try to get help from my teachers, or offline resources. You are wrong in thinking that I depend on this forum to learn SAP.

So Sir, let's close it here ,otherwise these never-ending debate will go on & on,throwing blames on each other is no use & doesn't look good in a forum like these .... let's put  a FULLSTOP RIGHT HERE.

With Best Regards

[joao_sousa2]

but is willing to answer my question. It is not proper to take away the rights of that person who can answer my question & the rights of mine by removing the thread.

That's your opinion. In this thread you have been given the opinion of top contributors and moderators of this site, and it doesn't match yours.

SCN isn't paid support, so if you don't like this community it's your right to search another one. In fact I have left two communities in the past because I didn't agree with the moderation and it's pointless to keep trying to fight it because moderators usually enforce the general guidance of the community administrators (whether you agree with it or not). Did I believe I was right? Hell yea, but everyone always thinks they are "right".

The fact that the data wasn't the same as in the other thread doesn't mean you can make the same question again with different data. Abstraction is important, or else people would keep asking the same questions over and over again just because problems are always specific.

Message was edited by: Joao Sousa

[former_member182297]

Hello Joao,

So you all are suggesting that I should leave this forum, since the Moderators & many others don't like my posts !!!

But, I think I cannot be told to leave this forum if some people don't like me, as this forum is not privately owned by Moderators. Is it? Or is this forum is owned & run by SAP Germany.

So how can a group of people from this forum suggest me to leave?

[matt]

No. He's suggesting that if you don't like the way the place is run, there are plenty of other places you can go that perhaps are run more according to your preferences.

No one is telling you to leave the site. Simply that if you stay, you will need to accept that sometimes moderators will take actions you don't like. But this is the same for all interactive forums.

You were moderated because your actions were, in the opinion of the moderator, harmful to the site. Not because he or she didn't like you. If we disliked you and wanted you to go, we wouldn't be giving up our time trying to explain to you how things work here. Personally, I'd rather you stay and become a useful member of the community. But the choice is entirely yours. People are only barred for wilfully and gratuitously ignore the rules and moderator instruction. Not for arguing the toss.

The moderators are unpaid volunteers, who give up their time to try to keep the site usable and useful for the greater benefit of the majority of members. I spend ~one hour a day doing this, for very little recognition and the occasional threat.

Really, I think you are taking offence where none is given - implied or otherwise.

[joao_sousa2]

I'm suggesting that if you completly disagree with the moderation of a particular forum, fighting against moderators (and by proxy "admins") may not be a very efficient use of your time.

[former_member189797]

Hi Pradip,

Other SCN thread is related to your query.
Yours is SAP_APPL 600 (If I remember correctly) so its SAP ERP 6.0 (without any EHP).

SP level are not related to EHP level . Its the release of leading component which should be checked.
For ERP system, leading component is SAP_APPL.

I hope it helps.

BR,
Gaurav

[former_member182297]

Hi Gaurav,

AS i told Divyanshu,I again repeat to you ,my data is different and the "Other SCN thread is NOT  related to MY query."

Then what is the meaning of 700 in SAP_ABA?

BR

[divyanshu_srivastava3]

Hi Pradip,

Please don't take this rejection otherwise. I am not a moderator but as a member of this community I would like to apprise you that your thread was possibly rejected because you failed to search the answer as similar queries already exists on SCN forum. So, such rejection is because of "failed to search" reason. Even this happens to others and me.

I replied on you thread and you have the answer on your email on how to find out the EHP level.

So, relax and cheers.

Regards,

[former_member182297]

Divyanshu Srivastava wrote:

Hi Pradip,

Please don't take this rejection otherwise. I am not a moderator but as a member of this community I would like to apprise you that your thread was possibly rejected because you failed to search the answer as similar queries already exists on SCN forum. So, such rejection is because of "failed to search" reason. Even this happens to others and me.

I replied on you thread and you have the answer on your email on how to find out the EHP level.
So, relax and cheers.

Regards,

Hi Divyanshu,

You said "failed to search" reason ,whereas I did check that answer before posting. As didn't answered my query (see explanations in my 1st post) so I  posted this question which though looks similar to that question but data is different. See my SAP_APPL is 600 and level is 0002 which is not similar to the pics shown in that post. Similarly for SAP_ABA it is 700 instead of 702 as in the thread Mr. Gaurav posted  and level is 0005 instead of 0009 in the

thread.

Hope you now have got me & understood my query!!

[divyanshu_srivastava3]

Hi Pradeep,

I am taking a random example of a netweaver system.

SAP_BASIS 701 0002

So here you can say 0002 is support pack level.

701 is read as EHP 1 for the netweaver 7.0

if it was 731 then EHP 1 for netweaver 7.3

if it was ECC system and you were asked to find out ehp level  of ECC system then you should have checked

SAP_APPL same way as we did above.

Regards,

[former_member204995]

@Divyanshu Srivastava;   Although i applaud your cool.   But it is not simple to relax in such circumstances.  I have been there more than twice.