[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Sat, 2004-10-23 at 01:06 -0400, Jim Van Meggelen wrote: >> Few will disagree that the careful application of netiquette will be >> a benefit to any newsgroup/mailing list/board; and top posting is >> something that should be used sparingly. Nevertheless, top posting is >> not the horrid crime some might have us believe. When used >> appropriately, it serves very well, and only causes offense to the >> ideologues. "Me too"-type top posing is usually of no benefit, but >> when someone is commenting on a tangled and involved thread, it can >> make sense to frame the entirety of the thread in a thoughtful top >> post. > > Don't forget the same people who refuse to trim the bottom of > the post and we end up with 20(your case only 1) copy of the mailing > list footer.
Sure, but then do we want to start picking on grammar and spelling as well? That's something that drives me nuts, yet I realize that many people consider it to be unimportant. It was a hotly debated topic in Usenet for some years, until it was realized that the community was not served by all of this endless bickering about grammar and punctunation. Many people fear, however, that eventually we wi11 |\|0+ b3 4b13 +0 u|\|d3r5+4|\|d 34(|-| 0+|-|3r 4|\|ym0r3 (thanks to http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/l/leetspea.htm for the translation to leetspeak/133+5p34k). I also consider long, fancy signatures to be needless, but I respect people's right to have them. I see no value in making an issue out of it. >> Then we get to the most dangerous beast, the abusive, expert troll. >> This is someone who clearly is very intelligent and articulate, and >> could argue their value due to a) their willingness to contribute, b) >> their level of knowledge and c) their fantastic writing skills. >> Unfortunately, these folks reduce their value to almost nothing by >> virtue of their pathetic lack of any manners whatsoever. They will >> drive away more people than they help -- and that doesn't bother them >> in the slightest. What a waste of talent. > > As I am sure to be painted by the above brush, let me offer > just a small point here. I have had just a bit of time to > think this over after politely listenening to the same > argument from another person this weekend. > > You seem to not realize that those who are knowlegable are > only so due to the vast amount of time we put into learning. Not at all. I respect that truth. On the other hand, I also know that some people are able to attain knowledge easier than others -- their minds simply absorb knowledge more efficiently. People who are less capable in this regard know this, and may prefer to obtain their answers from someone they consider an expert -- rather than do reserch on their own. Is this an offense; or is it a compliment? > I'm sure there are many people who are like me and are trying > to spend a lot of time learning several projects that have no > overlap. While we seek all this knowlege, I hope the others > like me actually try and do things outside of the computer world as > well. LOL! Well said! > Now I want you to realize that many of the really newbie or > lazy (these are NOT equal in the level I detest) questions > that are answerable with a quick browse of the wiki or a > simple google search end up being equivalent to SPAM in my > mailbox as I try and search for information that furthers my > knowlege. Understand that I learn from looking at what others > are doing, and answers to others questions. Here is a quote that appeared on the mailing list today. It is a profound testament to the newbie's angst: "... it's not that I have not been reading (ask my wife how many nights I have slept in the last week), and it's not that there is not a huge amount of info out there. The problem I am having is finding the info I need in any sort of organized way." Many newbies share this poster's misery, though few may be able to articulate it as well. Should they be flamed for that? I say no. When it comes to problems of *any* sort, people seem to approach them with one of these two (very different) mindsets: The first type try to find someone, anyone, to take their problems away (or at least to blame). The second, however, take ownership of the problem(s), and accept the responsibility for solving same. When people from the first group post messages, you are quite correct if you assume that your efforts on their behalf will be of little benefit - these folks are generally looking to take, not give. But they don't really matter; it's the people from the second group who we need to be aware of, because when you answer their questions, not only will your answers be used to fullest effect, but it is also quite likely that they will in turn pass that knowledge on in kind. You will have sown a seed. Who can say what it will grow into? Once you identify someone from the first group, you may want to gently probe and determine if this condition is cureable or not. If not, then save bandwidth and ignore them. Do not flame them, nag them, bully them, deliver nuggets of wisdom to them, entreat them to mend their selfish ways, or attempt to provide them the therapy they so clearly need; IGNORE THEM. Bandwidth saved; politeness preserved (OK OK; strictly speaking, ignoring someone isn't polite, but we can always pretend that we never got the email and face is saved all around). I have seen it happen on many occasions that a person will make the philosophical leap from the first group to the second group completely due to the healing benefits of being ignored. It forces one to ask oneself "what did I do wrong?", which opens the door to all kinds of introspection. But folks from the second group are as precious as gold, because we cannot assure the success of Asterisk unless we enthusiastically embrace the newbies. The danger is that for every one undesireable newbie we flame into oblivion, we scare away ten precious newbies of the kind we need so much; for it is they who will ultimately determine the success of this phenomenon called Asterisk. There are more than 5000 people subscribed to this list. The diversity represented by this crowd is something few of us would find in our communities. In fact, it is possible that the only thing we can be sure we have in common is an interest in Asterisk. Whenever we post, we might do well to have a picture in mind of such a crowd standing before us. If we really want to contribute to the success of Asterisk, we need to treat our newbies well. > So when you try and run off those who know a fair amount but > don't meet your manners requirement, I want you to think > about why you feel newbie or lazy users should be of higher > value than those with the knowlege? Why do you wish to > preserve their participation at the detriment to those who > have more answers than questions? Those are leading questions you are asking; my motives are not what you are claiming they are. You seem to be of the mind that this has to do with The Newbies vs. The Royals (http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html); I contend that it does not. These lists should be about community-building, not weeding out those who do not meet certain criteria. Politeness is not some old-fashined concept that has no place in our sophisticated world. To the contrary, in our global communities we must be extra careful to avoid giving (and taking) offence. It happens at least once a day that I read something on this list that -- at first glance -- seems very rude. Upon further reading, it becomes obvious that the poster is simply not a native English speaker, and that the meaning is probably something other than what I am reading. Should I then take offence and flame said miscreant out of "my" mailing list? The issue here is not with newbies, it is with bullies. When someone acts like a bully, their motives are irrelevant; the behaviour is contrary to the good of the community. In any social system, it is generally agreed that, when identified, bullies must immediately be dealt with. This is not because of a need to impose a "requirement" on anyone; it is to protect the community from tyrants. It is ALWAYS possible to debate without becoming hostile, and people who attack those they do not agree with ALWAYS do more harm than good. So let's talk about why (as you say) I ". . . feel newbie or lazy users should be of higher value than those with the knowlege". Well, firstly, I do NOT lump newbies and lazy users together. As I stated before, I see two kinds of newbies: those who demand that their problems be solved, and those who ask for help. The first group can be ignored, but it is the second group that the bullies seem quite happy to drive away. You feel that your position as one of the more knowledgeable members of this list should give you primacy of place over the newbies. I say it places an enormous responsibility on you. Remember that no one is obligated to help. If you have the knowledge, and you want to share it, the community will benefit from your experience. But if a question is beneath you, and you just don't want to answer yet another newbie message: don't. If you feel you must say something, say it with a mind toward building something, not destroying something. That's how we can build this community; how we can contribute to Asterisk's success. > Hoping that the person I talked to this weekend is actually > reading. I don't consider myself any more important than > anyone else in this list, but rather I like others, wish to > defend this channel of information > from descending below useful signal to noise ratio. That is a worthy goal, and one which most would support. The problem is: one person's signal is another's noise. How to we separate them? I would argue that the answer is: "very carefully." Perhaps we need a few new lists: Asterisk-Newbies Asterisk-Clubhouse (no newbies allowed) Asterisk-Flame-Me-Spank-Me Asterisk-Manadarin, Spanish, English, Bengali, Hindi, Portuguese, Russian, Japanese, German, Wu (the ten most widely-spoken languages, according to Ethnologue http://www.ethnologue.com/info.asp). I am certain that the top nine are all well-represented in these lists, although I'll admit that before today, I'd never heard of Wu. Let's not forget French, Cantonese, Italian, Arabic, Dutch (somebody stop me!) . . . Can any one of us possibly appreciate the magnitude of what we have here? All that aside, as far as I can tell, this list is Asterisk-USERS. So, anyone who uses Asterisk should be welcome here, regardless of their qualifications. The least we can do is be polite. _______________________________________________ Asterisk-Users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
