I must admit I find a number of the posts aggravating.  So much so that I
stopped reading them long ago.  I would support any effort to clean up the
questions and clearly mark messages that are not going to be answered.
Perhaps we should put together a page that clearly explains exactly what
data is necessary in a question and when one is submitted without proper
background repond with a "won't answer" type message that points to the
specific data  that are missing.  This will hopefully cut down on the noise
as well as give people who are trying a way to get the info they need,
perhaps by rephrasing their question.

Claude

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Colin Maudry <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear Jena developers,
>
> Upon Andy Seaborne’s suggestion, I would like to share with you a
> concern we have with certain posts shared on [email protected].
> In the last couple months, we have seen certain users repeatedly sending
> questions that are either:
>
>   * hardly related to Jena and Fuseki
>   * very basic questions about RDF or SPARQL
>   * betraying the lack of common knowledge in Java programming and
>     coding good practice in general
>
> What’s worse, these users, in spite of repeated remarks, keep on being
> very vague in their questions, requiring the most patient subscribers to
> ask many questions just to obtain a decent understanding of the problem.
> A problem that is, again, often not much related to Jena or Fuseki.
>
> As a subscriber, I’m tired of their consistent failure to propose clear
> and concise questions and I wish the patient people who answer them
> spend their mailing time on more interesting threads. I also fear it
> makes certain subscribers silently go away because of this “noise”.
>
> I first thought of publicly complaining to these users, but I thought
> that the managers of the Jena lists should discuss it and take the
> appropriate measures.
>
> My suggestion is to:
>
>   * inform the subscribers of an upcoming enforcement of the publishing
>     rules (relevance, clearness, completeness, etc.)
>   * stop answering the vague/off-topic/badly presented questions
>   * if they insist, remind them the topic of the list and good practices
>     in problem reporting, and warn them of a possible ban.
>
> Thanks for your attention,
>
> Colin Maudry
> https://twitter.com/CMaudry
>
> ​
>



-- 
I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web
<http://like-like.xenei.com>
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren

Reply via email to