Brent Eades wrote:
> If I can add one final note on the (rather tired) netiquette thread: I object
> to pseudonymous usernames on lists like this generally, just a personal
> peeve of mine I suppose. When I'm proffering hard-won advice and
> assistance to people, I like to have some rough idea who they are. So
> poor ol' "typsy" strikes out yet again, in my books.
Have avoided this thread to date, but since Brent hit on my reason
exactly . . . a different perspective.
When making choices about what questions I have time to delve into and
which I don't (a tight commodity of late), the final weight is "will the
person benefit and maybe return the favor (to myself or someone else)
some day"? If it meets one of those two questions at the end of the
day, it's more likely to make the cut when i start doling out my time as
a resource.
The best way to make this decision, especially with newbies, is to run a
quick check--see some sites, maybe see if they've posted elsewhere,
otherwise get a feel for the person and how you might best help them.
I hate the aol accounts largely because you can't even run a simple
finger for user info. You can't get a reference point, nor pointers to
home pages. The only thing you can do is search Usenet and see if the
account is old enough to have posted elsewhere (this one apparently
wasn't).
Given that, there was no way to check on this account, an explicit
failure to provide reference sites, no suggestion that this account had
been around for long since not a single post turned up in a single
usenet search anywhere, nor did it turn up in a web page. It didn't
matter what the message said--I couldn't put a person behind it, so it
went to trash bin. There's too many people using others to do their
work these days -- writers that post a question to get it answered in
detailed form by someone else so they can save time, techs too lazy to
look up an answer for a client so they feed off others, and other
similar types that, in short, aren't going to learn or aren't going to
return (or at least pass along to another) a favor. And they most often
hide behind the anonymity of aol.com and msn.com :P
Anyway, as another perspective on the advice thing, if you want to be a
member of a community and get some input/feedback/response, you have to
be open about it (IMHO). People that hide behind user names and provide
no other link to some trail that can be followed (even when asked) tend
to raise my suspicion filters right away.
The WCA works because we all "know" each other, or at least who people
are (thanks to introductions!). Very few of the people that answer
regularly are recluses in the digital world--and that's what makes the
list work. Newbies (and all of us!) need to keep that in mind . . .
because it matters (I'm willing to bet for many others besides me) in
the decision to answer even before someone even gets to the actual
content of the message itself ;)
Brett
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The Web Consultants Association : Register on our web site Now
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
If you lose the instructions All subscription/unsubscribing can be done
directly from our website for all our lists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
