On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 03:02:30 -0300, Cristian Gutierrez wrote:
>
> This seems to be partly due to the nature of issues' contexts.
>
> You have trouble with XFree, then you post relevant parts of
> /etc/X11/XF86Config-4 and /var/log/XFree86.0.log (you are usually
> specifically asked for this fil
Pigeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>But the "visible output" from the Windoze communities is of much
>>>lower quality. Googling for an answer to some Windoze problem rarely
>>>turns up much in the way of a useful result. With Linux, you tend to
>>>get more results than you can shake a stick at..
Pigeon wrote:
All very true. But there is also the fact that you can't get in touch with
the developers and maintainers, or if you can, much of their knowledge is
locked away behind "commercial confidentiality" and the like.
Which brings to mind "*The Cluetrain Manifesto:
The End of Business as
On Mon, Jan 19, 2004 at 03:02:30AM -0300, Cristian Gutierrez wrote:
> Anonymous coward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 07:01:03PM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> >>John Hasler wrote:
> >>>Kevin Mark writes:
> >>>
> compare what you get from the windows world. no commun
On 2004-01-19, Paul E Condon penned:
> I a newbie. I've been using Debian about 4y, but I'm a slow learner.
> I picked up on this thread because the topic of helping newbies is
> particularly dear to me. But I didn't notice its beginning. So, I
> decided to look at it in the archives, and I need so
Paul E Condon wrote:
I a newbie. I've been using Debian about 4y, but I'm a slow learner.
I picked up on this thread because the topic of helping newbies is
particularly dear to me. But I didn't notice its beginning. So, I
decided to look at it in the archives, and I need some help.
I cut and pa
I a newbie. I've been using Debian about 4y, but I'm a slow learner.
I picked up on this thread because the topic of helping newbies is
particularly dear to me. But I didn't notice its beginning. So, I
decided to look at it in the archives, and I need some help.
I cut and pasted the subject line
On 2004-01-19, Richard Lyons penned:
> On Monday 19 January 2004 05:27, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>>
>> I was sick this weekend, which meant I sat around the house all
>> weekend with my also-sick fiance rather than going skiing or mountain
>> biking on a gorgeous weekend. So, here's one vote for c
On Monday 19 January 2004 05:27, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> On 2004-01-18, Mac McCaskie penned:
> > ROFLOL,
> >
> > Richard Lyons wrote:
> >> But this has been a bad week for tempers here. Quite a few rants and
> >> upsets. Has anyone else wondered if it's seasonal? Subject for a
> >> little pap
Anonymous coward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 07:01:03PM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
>>John Hasler wrote:
>>>Kevin Mark writes:
>>>
compare what you get from the windows world. no community. no
help. need to buy $$$ books. pay for tech support.
>>
>>This is a
On 2004-01-18, Mac McCaskie penned:
> ROFLOL,
>
> Richard Lyons wrote:
>
>> But this has been a bad week for tempers here. Quite a few rants and
>> upsets. Has anyone else wondered if it's seasonal? Subject for a
>> little paper, perhaps? SUBTLE - Seasonal Usenet Bad Temper Loss
>> Episodes...
On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
> Paul Morgan wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
>>
>> So you would wish, for instance, to deprive me of a package which I
>> can understand and use simply because the documentation is not
>> adequate enough for you, or for someb
On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
>
>
> Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>
>> On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
>>
>>>I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board
>>>without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it.
>>>
>>>Where is the value of providing a widget to
On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
>
>
> Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>
>> Do you really consider basic etiquette to be a debian-specific "bow
>> down and scrape" requirement?
>>
>
> I consider "basic etiquette" to be very benificial when asking for
> advice AND when giving it. It is my hope that th
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 20:37:27 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
>
> The obvious solution to this quandry, would be to put the URL in the man
> page if the page applied to that implementation. Shouldn't that be easy
> to do? (but it does leave out those poor unfortunates that do not have
> internet
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 17:32:49 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Paul Morgan wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
>>
>> So you would wish, for instance, to deprive me of a package which I can
>> understand and use simply because the documentation is not adequate enough
>>
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 07:01:03PM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> John Hasler wrote:
> >Kevin Mark writes:
> >
> >>compare what you get from the windows world. no community. no help. need
> >>to buy $$$ books. pay for tech support.
>
> This is an outright falsehood. There are just as many,
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 05:32:49PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Paul Morgan wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> >
> >So you would wish, for instance, to deprive me of a package which I can
> >understand and use simply because the documentation is not adequate enou
On Saturday 17 January 2004 2:22 pm, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> If there's a package that will solve a problem for me, I would rather
> have it available without any documentation at all than have it
> completely unavailable due to lack of documentation.
Amen, I actually find I get better support
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 08:40:30PM -0500, Carl Fink wrote:
> If I write a better manual for some mid-level utility like xfe, no one but
> the xfe developer is likely to ever realize it, despite the fact that xfe is
> quite good.
Xfe is quite good, but I wish the problem with how slow it scrolls wh
Bijan Soleymani writes:
> If they're doing it for professional purposes then they can afford to
> spend a lot of time figuring it out on their own.
Quite the opposite. However what they _can_ afford is paid technical
support. And it is available.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse H
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board
> without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it.
> Where is the value of providing a widget to a customer without
> giving them a clue a
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 10:23:37 -0600, Mac McCaskie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> rigid? not hardly, I am asking everyone to be less rigid on what
> the noobies must to do. It should not be asked of them to bow down
> and scrape in order to gain admission into the great and sacred
> learning hall.
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 10:34:47PM -0600, Jacob S. wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:04:48 -0500
> Carl Fink <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I repeat what I implied before: Debian isn't for beginners who want
> > hand-holding. There are plenty of distributions that specifically do
> > supply just
rating system.
>
> Jacob, comparing yourself to Windows in order to look good isn't very
> challenging. :-)
True, but Mr. McCaskie did when he started talking about a "lack of
documentation in Linux" - look at the start of the"Documentation and
Usability" part of th
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 08:21:13PM -0600, Jacob S. wrote:
> There's one more point I'm surprised nobody's mentioned yet. The
> documentation for the "other" operating system.
Jacob, comparing yourself to Windows in order to look good isn't very
challenging. :-)
I repeat what I implied before
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 09:43:28PM -0500, Brett Carrington wrote:
> I don't doubt that Debian is used where there is -no- Internet access or
> where Internet access is prohibited. Besides this, websites move, URLs
> change and documentation doesn't.
I often use Debian on systems without internet a
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 07:07:46PM -0600, David wrote:
> I think one needs to ask himself why he is using Debian, or Linux in any
> form. You have people administering servers, or other very intense
> professional usages. I think these people deserve serions attention.
If they're doing it for pr
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 08:37:27PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
>
> The obvious solution to this quandry, would be to put the URL in the man
> page if the page applied to that implementation. Shouldn't that be easy
> to do? (but it does leave out those poor unfortunates that do not have
> inter
Micha Feigin wrote:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 05:02:59PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
-The third part puzzles me. How would you know how to use it without
some type of instructions.
google et al, home page, man, info, -h/--help, source code
(hopefully commented), trial and error, mailing lists,
On Sun, 18 Jan 2004 03:25:04 +0200
Micha Feigin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 01:22:58PM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> > On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
> > > I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package
> > > on-board without adaqate instruction on wha
On Sun, Jan 18, 2004 at 12:04:26AM +, Richard Lyons wrote:
> On Saturday 17 January 2004 22:35, Kent West wrote:
> > Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> [...]
> > >I honestly wonder how people who are as impolitic as the OP manage
> > > to keep their day jobs.
> [...]
> > Whereas the regulars, such as
ROFLOL,
Richard Lyons wrote:
But this has been a bad week for tempers here. Quite a few rants and
upsets. Has anyone else wondered if it's seasonal? Subject for a
little paper, perhaps? SUBTLE - Seasonal Usenet Bad Temper Loss
Episodes... Climatic Recurring Influences on the Internet Commu
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 05:02:59PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
>
>
> Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>
> >On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
> >
> >>I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board
> >>without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it.
> >>
> >>Where is th
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 05:02:59PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
>
> Monique Y. Herman wrote:
>
> >On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
> >That word "customer"; doesn't it imply that you paid for the product?
> -No
As has been repeatedly pointed out, but I think this point cannot
be overemphasized
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 01:22:58PM -0700, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
> > I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board
> > without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it.
> >
> > Where is the value of providing a widget to a cu
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 05:55:57PM -0600, Todd Pytel wrote:
> I'll let you in on a non-secret, to everyone but yourself. There already
> *is* an awareness of the need for documentation. Sadly, no one wants to
> do it- it's boring, time-consuming, constantly outdated, and just not
> much fun. Your
Kevin Mark wrote:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 07:01:03PM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
John Hasler wrote:
Kevin Mark writes:
compare what you get from the windows world. no community. no help. need
to buy $$$ books. pay for tech support.
This is an outright falsehood. There are just as many,
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 07:01:03PM -0500, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> John Hasler wrote:
> >Kevin Mark writes:
> >
> >>compare what you get from the windows world. no community. no help. need
> >>to buy $$$ books. pay for tech support.
>
> This is an outright falsehood. There are just as many,
On Saturday 17 January 2004 22:35, Kent West wrote:
> Monique Y. Herman wrote:
[...]
> >I honestly wonder how people who are as impolitic as the OP manage
> > to keep their day jobs.
[...]
> Whereas the regulars, such as Monique above, are correct in what they
> say, I'd like to speak up in behalf
John Hasler wrote:
Kevin Mark writes:
compare what you get from the windows world. no community. no help. need
to buy $$$ books. pay for tech support.
This is an outright falsehood. There are just as many, if not more,
MS Windows oriented user groups/communities as there are for GNU/Linux.
G
I won't even respond to your other statements, because I don't think I
could do so politely.
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 17:32:49 -0600
Mac McCaskie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > To complain about the documentation is what is known as "looking a
> > gift horse in the mouth".
>
> (I'll let you in on a s
On 2004-01-17, Kent West penned:
>
> Whereas the regulars, such as Monique above, are correct in what they
> say, I'd like to speak up in behalf of the OP.
>
> He's not been with us long, and doesn't yet understand the culture of
> this list. He got frustrated, and he vented. I've done worse, even
Paul Morgan wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
So you would wish, for instance, to deprive me of a package which I can
understand and use simply because the documentation is not adequate enough
for you, or for somebody non-me, anyway?
Yes, because otherwise a value jud
Kevin Mark writes:
> compare what you get from the windows world. no community. no help. need
> to buy $$$ books. pay for tech support.
Whereas here you get community and free help, and can _also_ buy books and
tech support. If what you are getting for free isn't good enough try
offering mon
Monique Y. Herman wrote:
On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board
without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it.
Where is the value of providing a widget to a customer without giving
them a clue as to what the widget
Monique Y. Herman wrote:
Do you really consider basic etiquette to be a debian-specific "bow down
and scrape" requirement?
I consider "basic etiquette" to be very benificial when asking for
advice AND when giving it. It is my hope that this conversation (aka
debate) will accomplish a few smal
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 12:10:38PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Colin and Stephen
>
> Let me understand you correctly. You admit the documentation needs
> improvement and might be slightly un-helpful to noobies.
Ian Murdoch said that debian is a process...not a product. It is ever
changing and
Monique Y. Herman wrote:
I love debian, and I do try to help people in those limited places where
I might have a clue. But if someone posts to a debian user list
insulting the entire debian (volunteer) organization and threatening to
take their ball and go home, I say, good riddance.
I honestly w
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 13:18:50 -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board
> without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it.
>
> Where is the value of providing a widget to a customer without giving
> them a clue as to what the wi
On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
> I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board
> without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it.
>
> Where is the value of providing a widget to a customer without giving
> them a clue as to what the widget is or what to do wi
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 08:46:31AM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> If you want Debian to eventually follow DOS, then neglect new users and
> ignore documentation. Keep knowledge to yourselves and allow only club
> members to know the secret incantations.
IMO one of the strengths of Debian is that
Kent writes:
> This is a peeve of mine. I was under the impression that nothing got into
> the archives without a man page, even if the man page said nothing more
> than "sorry, there's no information here".
>From Debian-Policy:
12.1 Manual pages
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Where is the value of providing a widget to a customer without giving
> them a clue as to what the widget is or what to do with it.
>
Well here's your problem. You think Debian is a product and you are a
customer. Well then just send your receipt[1] to
On 2004-01-17, Mac McCaskie penned:
>
>
> Colin Watson wrote:
>
>> It wasn't Monique.
> oops, so sue me
I was remarking on the OP's incredibly poor form in "asking a question."
Quite a misattribution, in this case. I'm glad that Colin pointed it
out.
> rigid? not hardly, I am asking everyone to
I think my point would be closer to not allowing a package on-board
without adaqate instruction on what it was and how to use it.
Where is the value of providing a widget to a customer without giving
them a clue as to what the widget is or what to do with it.
Mac McCaskie
Kent West wrote:
Ma
Todd Pytel wrote:
But
don't waste your time and energy, as the saying goes, trying to teach a
pig to sing. You know the result of that...
Pork Rounds?
Row, row, row your boat . . .
Row, row, row your boat . . .
Or as some philosophers might sing it:
Propel, propel, propel your craft,
Smoot
Mac McCaskie wrote:
-Found packages with no available documentation
This is a peeve of mine. I was under the impression that nothing got
into the archives without a man page, even if the man page said nothing
more than "sorry, there's no information here".
Perhaps that rule only applies to the
Todd Pytel writes:
> If someone is interested in writing the docs, they will. Otherwise, they
> won't. That's it. Apart from doing it yourself, there is nothing more you
> can do...
That's not true. He could _pay_ one of us to write the missing docs.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Hors
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 12:10:38 -0600
Mac McCaskie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Colin and Stephen
>
> Let me understand you correctly. You admit the documentation needs
> improvement and might be slightly un-helpful to noobies. So your
> solutions are (1) to tell (not ask) the noobie to do fix i
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 12:10:38PM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> ... your solutions are (1) to tell (not ask) the noobie to do fix
> it (the same one that doesn't know enough about how to use the
> system)
To HELP fix it, by submitting bug reports explaining what
documentation is missing or incorre
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 12:10:38PM -0600 or thereabouts, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Colin and Stephen
>
> Let me understand you correctly. You admit the documentation needs
> improvement and might be slightly un-helpful to noobies. So your
> solutions are (1) to tell (not ask) the noobie to do fix
Colin and Stephen
Let me understand you correctly. You admit the documentation needs
improvement and might be slightly un-helpful to noobies. So your
solutions are (1) to tell (not ask) the noobie to do fix it (the same
one that doesn't know enough about how to use the system) and (2) blame
Mac McCaskie wrote:
I will have to ditto Monique's frustration.
Frustration over Joseph Guida MD's trolling? Excellent, that's how the
majority that have responded to this post feel as well! =)
I am a debian noobie. However, I started working with IBM PC's in '83
and later graduated to XT's
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 10:23:37AM -0600 or thereabouts, Mac McCaskie wrote:
[...]
> Now that I have your attention.
>
> Just get over yourself and look at it from the viewpoint of someone
> trying to learn a very complicated and disjointed system with an immense
> amount of mostly barely usef
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 10:23:37AM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> >rigid and spout rubbish about "secret incantations".
> .
> .
> >patronizing nonsense.
>
> rigid? not hardly, I am asking everyone to be less rigid on what the
> noobies must to do. It should not be asked of t
Colin Watson wrote:
It wasn't Monique.
oops, so sue me
rigid and spout rubbish about "secret incantations".
.
.
patronizing nonsense.
rigid? not hardly, I am asking everyone to be less rigid on what the
noobies must to do. It should not be asked of them to bow down and
scrape in order to ga
Hi!
The problem is not what Joseph Guida MD asked, IMHO the problem is HOW he asked.
I'm a newbie too, but I managed to use Debian. I read documentation or ask
people who are using Debian too.
Best wishes:
Viktor Hercinger
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsub
On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 08:46:31AM -0600, Mac McCaskie wrote:
> I will have to ditto Monique's frustration.
It wasn't Monique.
> If you want Debian to eventually follow DOS, then neglect new users and
> ignore documentation. Keep knowledge to yourselves and allow only club
> members to know th
I will have to ditto Monique's frustration.
I am a debian noobie. However, I started working with IBM PC's in '83
and later graduated to XT's on the job. The first windows I installed
was 2.0 (a runtime version for a tape backup program). Over the years
I've seen Novell perfect it's security
70 matches
Mail list logo
