Hi;
I agree with the journalist approach. Unfortunately it seems
journalists have such a poor reputation these days that the approach is
likely to be dismissed.
On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 20:13 -0600, Jeff Vian wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 17:27 +0000, James Wilkinson wrote:
> > Charles Howse wrote:
> > > However...the more things I've tried before posting leads to a "wordier"
> > > post when I finally do ask for help if I'm going to try and avoid a bunch of
> > > "I tried that, it didn't work."
> > >
> > > So how do we balance the amount of information we give vs. avoiding
> > > verbosity vs. "Oh, I see the OP has already tried what I was going to
> > > suggest." vs. getting the problem solved?
> >
> > I'd suggest newspaper-style reporting: include the important stuff
> > first, and give less important stuff later.
[snip]
> <rant>
> If the "journalist" writer is being honest!!!
> Too often nowdays the headline and the first few paragraphs give the
> negative point of view and the bottom of the article contain the facts
> that make it a 'so what' story.
> </rant>
[snip]
> > Headline (subject line): what's wrong
> >
> > First paragraph: repeat what's wrong in one or two sentences, including
> > why you think something is wrong, and what you might expect to happen.
> >
> > Next paragraph or so: this is where you go into details about the
> > problem. This is where it's appropriate to suggest theories. If you
> > think your troubleshooting has closed off major lines of enquiry (e.g.
> > "it works under Windows so it's not hardware"), you might mention this
> > here. If you have particular reasons for suspecting a particular area,
> > you can say so here. You should also post what you consider to be the
> > most relevant data.
> >
> > Rest of the e-mail: what else you've tried, package / hardware details
> > (if appropriate).
> >
I appreciate the help I have gotten from this mailing list and others
(particularly direct help from members of my local LUG). I have started
to -- and it seems to be working -- using mail in the manner suggested
above:
* a meaningful headline -- they seem to get more responses than
'sexy' or 'cute' or 'meaningless' subject lines -- I have tried
all kinds;
* a short first paragraph that succinctly outlines the problem and
ends with a specific request for a defined type of help;
* a Post-amble. A Post-amble, to me, is what might logically go
into a preamble. I even label the last section as Post-amble to
warn the potential responder that he is entering a free flowing
description of what I see as the problem, how it seems to have
come about and what I have tried.
I believe by using the Post-amble format, I am striking a kind of deal
with a potential responder that says "I have started in a manner that
makes it easier for you to decide to help or not. Now, in the
Post-amble, I am proceeding in a way that makes it easier for me to
explain my situation." I think that's fair.
By the way, I think its only polite that if you don't want to respond,
don't respond. If its locatable in a manual, state the manual; if its
easy to google for, state or suggest some search criteria. In fact, as
a learning experience, suggested criteria can be more helpful in the
long run than a direct URL.
Regards Bill
