Nico Meijer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Mike,
> > Can FreeBSD act like Windows Terminal Server, i.e. remote access, multiple
> > sessions?
> Yes.

I wanted to start a brief discussion about these kinds of answers to questions.

I've been seeing this quite a bit lately.  I don't know if it's just one person,
of if multiple folks have picked up on it.

This is not an answer to the question.  It does not answer the question and does
not contribute to the OPs knowledge of FreeBSD, nor does it contribute to the
list archives.  It's also a violation of the rule against "me too" answers as
laid out in "How to Get the Best Results from FreeBSD-Questions".  It doesn't
even serve to educate the OP on how to ask better questins.

First off, there are actually two questions hidden in the post: "Can FreeBSD
act as a WTS?", and "can FreeBSD provide the same services as WTS?"  Is "yes"
your answer to both of them?  Because, if it is, I'd like to know which
software allows it to function as a WTS, since my searches have not found any
such software.

This leads to the implied question of "what software provides the capability"
which (despite not being voice, directly) is pretty obvious.  You've totally
ignored that question.  You could say that "technically, he didn't ask" but it
boils down to just being rude.

I'm curious as to whether this is only my opinion, or if others feel the same
way.  I don't think answers like this reflect well on FreeBSD or the FreeBSD
community.  Short answers like "see 'man foo'" are appropriate, as they impart
some knowledge and tell the OP that his question is answered in the indicated
documentation, but this doesn't follow that template.

I do feel that, althought Grog's document doesn't specifically chastise these
types of answers, that they are _not_ in the "spirit" of that document, and do
not serve the purpose of this mailing list.

Bill Moran
Potential Technologies
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to