I am enjoying this though
If you are enjoying this, I am happy to keep playing, because I do like being forced to think hard about things. It's also a pleasure to be able to debate things at a level that is a step above the banal "yes it is"/"no it isn't" level.
There is room for improvement in a lot of things that aren't necessarily problems. Would you disagree?
I admit that I did ponder upon this at length. I think I do disagree, but I could be convinced otherwise.
There are two main reasons for introducing change; to fix something or to prevent something happening. When I take my car in for servicing, both reasons come into play. So my brake pads are replaced, fixing the problem of poor stopping power, and the general servicing is a preventative measure, reducing the risk of breaking down.
Accepting, though, that the car is well maintained and runs highly acceptably, I might wonder whether I could improve its performance generally. Accordingly, I might kit it up with better suspension and other modifications. I might then relish its improved handling and performance. So this looks like a change where no problem existed before, and one intrdouced neither to fix something or to prevent something happening, but I've got something better for it.
On the basis of this, I would have to agree "there is room for improvement in a lot of things that aren't necessarily problems". But because I like being contrary, I will find a way to disagree. So I will introduce another type of problem, which I will call "retrospective dissatisfaction". Having made my performance inprovements to the car, I look back and say "I don't know why I didn't do this before and I don't know how I put up with the previous situatin for so long".
So there is a question of motivation here. What prompted me to seek better performance in the first place? Curiosity, maybe, and the feeling that somehow the car could run better? What prompts anyone to seek inprovements in their life, their work or whatever? This is not readily identified as a 'problem' as such, but a vague and maybe unidentified, dissatisfaction with the way things are is something we try to fix by changing what we do. By defining it as a problem I can therefore quite happily continue to disagree with you.
There is no cost involved in this-- zero cost is cost effective. My suggestion is not one I'm making just for the sake of having more rules. There is a deliverable benefit which could come out of it-- again, the idea of having more meaningful and transparent involvement by the professional community here. Do you think that is a bad idea?
I would say that there is not "no cost" involved in this. For example, we've already been spending time and intellectual effort discussing this (when I should really be out mowing the lawns or something), and if a change is to be made to the forum, someone has to do something. But I agree that it is not a major cost.
However, my reference to 'cost effectiveness' was probably not quite the right term to use, because my main concern was at what I believe to be the biggest hurdle to the idea, which is the difficulty in establishing compliance. If we ask people to do something, and we can't tell whether or not they're doing it, then I'm not convinced of the value of asking them in the first place.
If we then seek to introduce something (though I don't know what this is) to establish compliance, the penalties involved with this (cost, time, intellectual effort, whatever) may not be worth the benefits obtainable from doing it.
Perhaps other forums have done this successfully. You mentioned Gearslutz. I will now drive down another avenue and say that if these other forums have done it, well, best luck to them, and if I want to hear what specialists and experts and company representatives have to say, then I'll go there. Is there any need for this forum to replicate what's already available?
I should tell you, though, that I am not opposed to change. When I used to work in a 'normal' job, my motto used to be "if it ain't broke, break it", and I was always seeking out new and better ways of doing things. However, I did pick my targets, so it wasn't simply "change for change's sake". And with all these changes, there was an underlying drive to decentralise and to distribute power and responsibility downwards and outwards. I have a highly jaundiced view of authoritarianism, centralised control and regulation, but a profound respect for the capacity of people to be rational, autonmous beings if given the chance to do so.
