For what it's worth Richard, you've started as many threads here on the MG list in the last few days as there have been in previous months. It's generally a pretty low-traffic list -- hence Vicky's comment. (I am not implying that it should remain low-traffic or that increased traffic should cause anyone any grief. Quite the contrary, volume should be whatever it needs to be, and people will adapt to suit their preferences. I'm just making a point.) Therefore, it's easy to come to the conclusion that you're asking to have the docs explained to you instead of reading them for yourself -- but to your credit, at least half of your threads have been either somewhat deeply technical, or conceptual things that may not be well explained elsewhere (ie: your question about the getters and setters that you couldn't find being used; but they turned out to be the bits that CS needs to inject dependencies.)
I have to say that I am frequently guilty of this myself. I will often ask a peer if he know's Foo's phone extension (instead of looking it up in our phone directory), or "what was the url variable we picked to clear cached queries?" when I could have opened up the code and looked for myself. I'm sure everyone's been guilty of that at at least one point during their lives. For that reason, when asking for help (especially from mailing lists and support forums), I try to make it clear that I've googled my problem by providing links to things I've found that were close but not helpful because of X; that I've read the documentation by linking to relevant docs and describing what may be missing or poorly explained; and lastly (if applicable, like in this situation) by giving code samples that aren't running as expected, that I just don't understand, or that otherwise demonstrate my problem. It's always good to give your own requests a healthy dose of criticism, and besides showing that you've done the proper research, sometimes this approach will yield the answer. Many-a-email-draft and forum-posts have been unsent and trashed because during the writing I've stumbled on my answer. And if nothing else, the quality of your posts will be very high, making them very answerable. :) </$0.02> Adam On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:07 PM, cs01rsw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > thanks j glad we sorted this out > > good luck > > richard > > On Sep 12, 4:58 pm, Jared Rypka-Hauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As I am concerned you had barged into a ModelGlue list demanding an > > education in ColdSpring, OO architecture and design, ModelGlue and UI > > development and then spit in the face of one of the people who was > > most active in helping you. Apparently, it was a misunderstanding and > > I'm glad that it has been righted. Kudos to you for apologizing and > > making it right. > > > > I should have said something more like "Dude, Chris was only trying > > to help, seriously, that's not what he meant" rather than jumping > > directly to invective. I was pissed... someone had impugned my friend > > who was trying to help them, and I was trying to make a point: If > > you're going to spit in the face of your helpers, go learn to help > > yourself. That was, and is, my only point, and it still stands even > > if it no longer applies in this situation. > > > > So, apparently you and I have had our own misunderstanding, for which > > I apologize. I was unclear in my response to your assault on Chris. > > It had nothing to do with patience, your level of knowledge or > > anything else. It had to do exclusively with your reaction to someone > > who was putting in every effort to assist you and receiving your > > scorn in return. > > > > Anyone who knows me knows I can be an arrogant dickhead, but that I > > am also reasonable and more than willing to make things right where I > > was wrong. I regret that our first encounter was of this nature and > > that I chose to respond the way I did. Please accept my apology for > > being quick to react. > > > > Hopefully we can all just get along and play nice now... us "so- > > called experts" lose patience so easily one never knows what might > > happen if these shenanigans continue. ;) > > > > J > > > > On Sep 12, 2008, at 10:03 AM, cs01rsw wrote: > > > > > > > > > there is a common belief amongst the so called experts that they get > > > frustrated with people who may not know as much, and also their egos > > > stretch to unbelievable heights. the good thing about the cf community > > > is that i rarely see this. the cf community really seems to be there > > > to help people no matter what their experience level, or questions. > > > > > people giving advice also need to learn to take it and not be too > > > hostile - not mentioned any names (j), and the so called experts need > > > understand that cultures are different and the nature of people is > > > different, and that sometimes advice may not get across in the way > > > that it is meant. ... > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "model-glue" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/model-glue?hl=en For more about Model-Glue, check http://www.model-glue.com . -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
