Angelo Machils wrote:
> What personally bugs me the most is the too radical replies to things
> like someone making the mistake of posting a testmessage, or putting the
> reply text above the original one, or just reply with 'RTFM' or 'look in
> internet'.
To be fair, I have seen very few "RTFM" or "look in Internet" replies
that haven't pointed the questioner to the FM or the Web site in
question. Sometimes, they're rather general pointers ("search the list
archives, this has been answered recently").
Ideally, and in theory, the questioner gains:
* the knowledge that there is an answer out there, so it's worth
looking,
* where to start looking,
* a method of trouble-shooting and problem-solving that will serve them
well in the future. (For example, "Try linuxprinting.org" is the
right place to start looking for a whole host of printing problems.
It can answer questions the original questioner hadn't known they
should be asking.)
And usually, an "official" web site carries more weight than a random
post on a mailing list. Even a pointer to another user's post carries
the implication that both the original poster and the current respondent
agree with the contents of the post.
So a one line pointer to the answer can be one of the most helpful
answers imaginable.
Now there are two problems with this. And both of them are to do with
human culture.
One is that people are used to "cushion phrases". "I was sorry to hear
you were having trouble with your printer. Did you know you can find out
most answers at linuxprinting.org?" takes time to type. [1] So busy
respondents often don't take the time to put it in. But it often comes
across as being rude.
The other one is that cultures based on some human languages tend not to
put in "Would you mind trying...", whereas other cultures expect it. So
you get cultural confusion.
I'm not sure that I've got any quick answers. If you're using an editor
that allows macros or abbreviations, the equivalent of a
:ab _sorry Hi there.^M^MSorry to hear you're having trouble.^M^MPlease try
might be worth investigating. Regulars will spot it as noise, but
newcomers might find it more friendly.
But I think my sigmonster (the script that chooses my signature) might
be trying to tell me something about manuals in general...
James.
[1] Yes, I know. I'm a quick typist. And I have no links with
linuxprinting.org: they're simply a (good and) convenient example...
--
E-mail address: james | "Hardware simply does not work like the manual says
@westexe.demon.co.uk | and no amount of Zen contemplation will ever make you
| at one with a 3c905B ethernet card."
| -- Alan Cox
