Path: news.mathworks.com!not-for-mail
From: <HIDDEN>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: Re: Doubt on usefulness of the FEX
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:25:08 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Magma Geosciences Inc.
Lines: 5
Message-ID: <hgoi2k$a0$1@fred.mathworks.com>
References: <gev97h$pim$1@fred.mathworks.com>
Reply-To: <HIDDEN>
NNTP-Posting-Host: webapp-02-blr.mathworks.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: fred.mathworks.com 1261423508 320 172.30.248.37 (21 Dec 2009 19:25:08 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@mathworks.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:25:08 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: MATLAB Central Newsreader 872154
Xref: news.mathworks.com comp.soft-sys.matlab:594197

I'd echo the comments of many about the occasional low signal to noise ratio on some of the FEX boards, and the time taken to sift the wheat from the chaff.

National Instruments has very active LabVIEW forums (http://forums.ni.com/ni/board?board.id=170) with methods for rating contributors and individual posts, as well as fairly effective search tools, and a number of active posters who function as unofficial moderators.

A possible source for some ideas for improvements?