Confused a bit about abuse rejections
I'm a bit curious about some abuse reports I've raised recently that have been rejected. A few examples:
- http://scn.sap.com/community/business-one/blog/2013/06/21/what-is-the-data-insertion-types-in-xcelsius-boxi-30 - obviously not a blog, however my abuse report was rejected and it still stands.
- http://scn.sap.com/community/business-one/blog/2013/07/04/fms-in-automatically-generated-documents - this is a cut and paste of an OSS note, yet my abuse report was rejected.
- http://scn.sap.com/community/business-one/blog/2013/07/04/why-udf-in-row-level-is-blocked-after-partial-copy-to-target-document - another cut and paste of an OSS note yet the abuse report was rejected.
I can't say I'm particularly bothered about people getting points but I don't see the value in having the same content copied from one SAP site to another. In my mind, one of the key points of moderation on any forum is to keep quality up, noise down and ensure users are easily able to search and find the curated content. For that to be successful, we need consistency.
If there was one blog that pointed out the useful OSS notes relating to SAP Business One for example, when they are useful and the real life problems they address (i.e. going above and beyond the very technical content on the OSS note itself) I wouldn't be bothered but what is the point in just copying and pasting the notes into SCN?!
As for the first one, I can't figure out why the abuse was rejected other than maybe the moderator hit the wrong button?! Or maybe I'm just too uptight about this sort of stuff?