I find this thread disturbing. Many people in the RDF community have worked a long time and it's just recently that the uptake has broadened (people are looking at JSON-LD and starting to understand what it means, not what any particular authority says that it means, but what it actually means.)
I do believe that problems should be made reproducable and as a group we could industrialize that. For instance, a test project that can be forked in github would be a great place to put in a query, put in a graph, and then put in some rules at which point they could ask good questions. I carefully read the answers to the bad questions because I am intensely curious about strange details in Jena that trip people up. -- Paul Houle [email protected] On Sun, Oct 23, 2016, at 06:07 AM, Colin Maudry 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 > >
