I agree with the previous engineers that there is really no easy answer for what the original poster asked for but why penalize the engineers for helping by rating their replies with only two stars?  I know the 2-star rating is for "somewhat helpful" answers but for a "somewhat unanswerable" question that's about all you're going to get.  Good luck getting more people to wander into this trap...

PS  As an aside, I think the rating system is broken.  We're all here to help people but engineers who post frequently will get pissed if they get a low rating on an answer because it drags down their average.  Shouldn't any answer that gives stars be counted positive?  Why not get rid of the average?  Or only allow 3/4/5-star ratings or something?

Sorry to hijack the thread...

2 stars to me meant they responded but did not solve, should we give 5 stars to everyone who responds? how many stars do you get for this message? do you get paid based on stars or is it a profile thing? it's an old problem and I revisited. I didn't give them stars a year ago so is no rating better than 2 stars?

wander into this trap? next thing you can start talking about politics and religion, dang dude I was just trying to get some tech

not a soapbox

Correct - the way the current system is perceived, 0 stars is way better than 1 or 2 stars.  The reason being the average "post rating" of a contributor is seen as a measure of that contributor's a) technical competency and b) general helpfulness.

You posed a question that does not have a concrete answer, but both posters (who are extremely knowledgeable by the way) responded with the best answer you'll find anywhere, given CUCM's current capabilities.  I understand that it wasn't the answer you were looking for but there is no button to click that will provide the Meet-me feature you're looking for so in essence you penalized the contributors for answering a question correctly.

I judged from your post count that you're new to these forums and attempted to explain the ramifications of ranking someone's advice low, especially when the answer was as correct as you'll find anywhere.  I'm not trying to beat you down, I'm just trying to explain the "rules" of the board.  I've got no hard feelings and I'll help you on your next problem if I can.  I just wanted to make you aware that SOME people on this board might avoid helping you if you get a reputation for handing out low rankings is all.

PS  Like the majority of people here I volunteer my time to help people less knowledgeable than me - I receive no compensation at all for spending my time here.

very professional explaination, sorry for the attitude

I don't want want to expand on this or further argue on ratings, there are already enough threads going on about this subject on rating system. ie troll thread

I do want to ask for a clarification on why you consider this does not solve your problem.

Question:

I am running 4.x and have a need to restrict outside callers on a  meet-me. I would like to create one meet-me with all access and one with  just internal access. Any suggestions?

Answers:

2 Meet Me numbers on different partitions

One accessible only to internal  users and one for all access.

We can create a Partition  for the Meet-Me numbers only and associate  that partition to

the Calling Search Space of the users with  authorization to access Meet-Me numbers.

"2 stars to me meant they responded but did not solve"

A meet-me DN is no different from a phone DN, if it's a phone DID and you set it in the inbound CSS from your GW then you can call it. Exact same thing if you use that DID for a meet-me.

If you set the DID in a only-internal partition and it's not in the inbound CSS, external users cannot call it, exact same thing for meet-me DNs.

The only method you have to handle whether you can access to a meet-me DN or not is via partitions and CSS which is in both answers.

Unless you're looking for something else, we both understood you wanted to have a meetme DN which is PSTN reachable and one which is only reachable by internal users. Isn't that it??

We can only work with what you provide, we don't have a crystal ball. If that's not what you were looking for then you should have provided further details or explanations. That's just friendly advice.

Philip +5 on both 1s you got because there is absolutely no reason for you to get those.

Again, don't want to expand on this rating stuff, I'm asking just from a technical perspective.

EDIT: typo, had an extra s after the crystal word and for some reason it showed as **. Just corrected it.

HTH

java

If this helps, please rate

www.cisco.com/go/pdihelpdesk

Sounds like the ratings system needs to be clarified and or changed by someone who can change it. Educating individuals in each post seems a little daunting. I admit I'm a selfish person who only comes around when I need the help. Btw, if you still have time to walk me through the steps how do I change a rating, I tried to bump from 2 stars to 3 but no luck.

On the +5 for Phillip, I am playing devils advocate here. Why would he get a rating of a 5 for going off topic? Seems like according to both of you 5 stars would mean the issue was resolved and the answer was spot on to the original question.

IMO, take the stars away and have something as simple as no solution or case solved. Does Cisco plan on becoming another experts-exchange?

WOW, now I feel bad. I am not even half as knowledgeable as most people on this board but I get paid from Cisco for posting. I thought everyone did, sucks to be you guys!

There are already plenty of threads on how ratings should work or be modified. Search "trolls" and you'll find Paolo's discussion,

Another one. https://supportforums.cisco.com/message/3163140

Feel free to jump in and share your thoughts.

Once you rate you cannot change it. This is not implemented.

About the +5 for Philip.

"Why would he get a rating of a 5 for going off topic?"

And why should he get a +1 for going off topic?

Very simple example using your reply to my question. I just want you hear other perspective from what you think and how that can be misunderstood.

JAVA

I don't want want to expand on this or further argue on ratings, there are already enough threads going on about this subject on rating system. ie troll thread

I do want to ask for a clarification on  why you consider this does not solve your problem.

Again, don't want to expand on this rating stuff, I'm asking just  from a technical perspective.

Now, your reply doesn't have the answer to my question... does it??

I mentioned I didn't want to expand on the rating stuff... just  wanted a reply from a technical perspective.

Forget the rest of the thread, just look at my question and your reply.

I could easily consider your reply off-topic. I asked for a technical reply, ie I wanted meet-me to have pwd. But got something completely different.

Based on your logic, your reply deserves a +1.

However, I don't agree with your logic so I won't rate your reply.

I only rate based on the technical advise and don't use it for any other purpose, unless, I see unfair ratings not based on tech advise.

That's all I wanted to say, unless there is any TECHNICAL questions or advise required let's end this thread.

Stuff related to how you think the rating system shoud be, how it should work, if we should keep it or not please use the link to the thread I provided. Dan is looking over that thread and trying to figure out the future of the rating system, any input is welcome.

And since I was writting this down and I just got the reply from Tracy, she should buy us some beers as she gets paid for this and we don't LOL

HTH

java

If this helps, please rate

www.cisco.com/go/pdihelpdesk