Thanks, Tim, I appreciate that OE is tough.  As I said in another e-mail 
(privately) I use Outlook at the office, and have no difficulty with it. 
But the fact is that I use OE at home.  I suppose I could make all this 
simpler by using Outllok here as well, after all, it is installed on my 
computer, but I'm trying to keep things simple.  For my home needs, OE works 
reasonably well.
But here's the thing: much of the instructional/troubleshooting material for 
SpamBayes is written in computer technical language, and for those of us who 
don't understand that language, we're left rather in the dark.  And asking 
smart questions presupposes that one knows what the questions are.  At the 
outset, I stated the OS I was using, and the fact that I was using OE.  You 
said that was good information.  Thenb you countered that I hadn't stated 
that I had installed Spam Bayes.  You're right.  But the reason I couldn't 
get it to work was because I _had_ installed it, and it wasn't working. 
that's how I noticed the problem.  The latest info I have from Tony is that 
Spam Bayes is installed and working.  However, it isn't processing any of my 
e-mails, so it might as well not be there.  He asked me to send him my log 
files and I did so.  (By the way, this time he was helpful--he told me 
exactly where to go to find the log files, so I was able to comply with his 
instructions.  That's the kind of help I need.)  At this point, all I need 
is his feedback on what the log files show so that we can proceed to our 
next step.
One more thing--As most of us do, I use many computer programs both at work 
and at home, and occasionally it happens that we have to have recourse to 
technical support of one sort or another.  I can unequivocally state that 
this is the first time I have ever encountered a situation like this--where 
I keep having to go back and explain that I don't understand, and I keep 
getting refererd back to the same set of instructions that I said I didn't 
understand in the first place, where i have been belittled and told that I 
don't ask smart questions, or anything of the sort of thing I have 
experienced here.  Literally the first time ever.  "you didn't say you 
installed it" is an example.  That's offensive and goes along with "you 
didn't say whether you had your computer turned on or not."  As I said, Tim, 
this is the first time ever.  No one has ever addressed me in the fashion 
that I've experienced here.  The idea is not to trip up or outsmart the 
user, but to help him/her.  At least I think it should be.  So far everyone 
has told me how stupid I am.  I didn't explain the problem.  I didn't follow 
the instructions.   I didn't say I had installed the program.  I didn't ask 
smart questions.  Everything has been about what I didn't do, and nothing 
has been about how to help solve the problem, which obviously must be me, 
because I'm stupid.  But my problem is that I have never been stupid before, 
and I have clearly regressed to a profound level of obtuse stupidity as a 
consequence of trying to use Spam Bayes on Outlook Express.  But in the 
meantime, the program still isn't doing anything, so I would appreciate 
instructions that a stupid person can understand, and not being banged on 
the head every time I make a mistake, which by the way, were mistakes that 
only the initiated apparently know something about.  Since I do quite a bit 
of technical writing, I would be pleased to assist this outfit in 
translating the techno-jargon into plain, everyday English that even we 
stupid people can comprehend.
thanks,

LGH
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tim Peters" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Louise Hirsch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Tony Meyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2005 11:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Spambayes] can't get spam bayes to work


[Louise Hirsch]
> Tony, the only reason I sent the e-mails to you was because I had received
> an e-mail from you.  I'm so sorry you find it necessary to continually
> berate me

I suppose offense is in the eye of the offended, but what I've seen
here is Tony trying to be helpful and you taking offense.  He's trying
to get more information -- that's all.

>--all I've done is ask for help, and you send me a file telling me
> how to ask smart questions, implying that I've been asking stupid
> questions.

"How To Ask Questions The Smart Way" (the title of Eric Raymond's
essay) isn't about the content of questions, it's about how questions
are _asked_.  No question is "stupid", but it's quite possible to ask
questions in _ways_ such that you'll never get a useful answer.

Now, like it or not, OE is a feeble email client, and Microsoft has
gone out of its way to make it hard to extend.  It's in their interest
to have you buy the full-blown Outlook instead, and OE is missing all
the features (which are in Outlook) that make it possible for third
parties to extend OE pleasantly.  So just know in advance that setting
up this program to work with OE is necessarily harder than it is for
many other email clients.  Patience and a presumption of good will are
highly recommended.

> This is my fifth e-mail.  In my very first e-mail I told you that I had
> downloaded spambayes, installed it, followed all the instructions and it
> wasn't working.

Case in point.  This is your original email:

    I'm running Windows XP, Outlook Express.

That was helpful information.

    I downloaded Spam Bayes,

That too.

    but now what?  The instructions might as well be in Chinese.  I simply 
can't
    make heads or tails of anything in there.

You didn't say you installed it.  And quite the opposite of saying you
"followed all the instructions", you said you couldn't make any sense
whatsoever out of _any_ of the instructions.  Then you went on to ask
for a complete rewrite of the instructions, without explaining
anything more about what you did, what you saw happen as a result, or
what you expected to happen instead (all basic points covered in
Eric's essay).

Tony doesn't know what you did, or what you tried, or even what you
mean by that it "doesn't work".  He's not telepathic.  You have to
explain your actions, results and expectations clearly enough so that
someone on the other side of the world can deduce every relevant
detail.

> You sent me to the faq's, despite the fact that I had already told you 
> that I
> had done that (i.e., followed all instructions.)

Sorry, I think it's simply unreasonable to expect someone to read "I
simply can't make heads or tails of anything" as "I followed all
instructions".  Specifically which step of the instructions in the FAQ
did you get stuck on?  For example, you didn't get stuck on

    1. Download the latest version of SpamBayes from the download page.

It's been hard to guess so far whether you got beyond step 2:

    2. Run the installer - you want "sb_server", not the Outlook plug-in.

Take it step by step, and your problem will get solved.

...
> And here we are, five e-mails later, and the best you can come up with is 
> to
> tell me that I ask stupid questions.

He's not saying that.  He's saying that if you want help (which is
fine!), you need to help those trying to help you.  These are
technical problems, so resolutions depend on knowing details.

> I realize you're a volunteer, and that this program is offered free of
> charge, but why can't it be simpler to operate?

As above, OE is difficult to work with.  You would, for example, have
a much easier time with the full Outlook product.

> If you would like me to rewrite the instructions in a format so that 
> people who
> are not computer scientists can read it, I'd be happy to volunteer for 
> that aspect.

That would be great!  What you get here is the total of what others
contribute, and improving the parts you found too hard is exactly how
progress gets made in a project of this kind. 

_______________________________________________
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/spambayes
Check the FAQ before asking: http://spambayes.sf.net/faq.html

Reply via email to