Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!bfmny0!tneff
From: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff)
Newsgroups: news.newusers.questions
Subject: Re: Telling people to Read The F Manual (Was: Kill files)
Message-ID: <14729@bfmny0.UU.NET>
Date: 25 Sep 89 14:28:43 GMT
References: <14695@bfmny0.UU.NET> <130@ubbs-nh.MV.COM>
Reply-To: tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET (Tom Neff)
Organization: ^
Lines: 92
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
In article <130@ubbs-nh.MV.COM> noel@ubbs-nh.MV.COM (N. Del More) writes:
>1. It takes up as much if not more bandwidth to follow-up on a users
> request for information only to tell him to RTFM.
Nonsense. If you try to do the manual's job for it, you will get 10
little niggling correction followups from everyone else who thinks
they understand the manual better than you do. Proven time and again
in practice. And then next month, you will have the privilege of
starting all over again.
On the other hand telling users to read the manual before posting
questions requires very little bandwidth, except when the professional
second-guessers decide to make an issue of it. :-)
> . Additionally, the poster may have ALREADY RTFM,
> but may instead be posting in order to clarify his/her
> understanding of the subject.
It happens all the time -- and when it does, the user says so. And
the question is more interesting.
>3. Telling someone to RTFM does nothing to satisfy his or her need
> for information, nor does it contribute to the knowledge or under-
> standing of other readers.
Oh yes it does - it sends him and others to the manual! Come on now.
If I go over to comp.lang.c and post something saying, "I AM NEW HEAR
AMD I WANT TO INKRIMENT A VURIABLE BY 1 (OONE) IN "c" AN D CAN YOU TEL
ME HOW." -- what do you think the appropriate response is? Post a
chapter length dissertation netwide on the ++ operator, together with
the expected raft of followups? Or mail, yes MAIL the guy a kind
request to RTFM before posting?
The reason one might not MAIL, yes MAIL such a response in
newusers.questions is precisely that you want to broadcast the RTFM
message widely.
>4. Increasingly, users of *nix systems are unfamiliar and/or
> inexperienced with the Operating System. Additionally, it is
> also increasingly common that these users are using a system
> which is based upon microcomputer technology, and as such these
> sites may not have access to a System Administrator who is as
> thoroughly familiar with *nix as that found in larger/corporate
> sites.
If you run UNIX you should have manuals. If you don't have manuals
you can buy them in the bookstore. Rn requires none of the above.
And even if you have to run upstairs to check them, you should do so
rather than posting the question as a news article to the net. You
will assuredly get the answer quicker by going upstairs. And the
exercise will do you good.
>6. The FM's tend to be written by technically oriented individuals and
> are in many cases difficult to understand, especially for the
> newer users and/or non-professional administrators who have not
> been long exposed to *nix.
Fine, then if no other human being at your office or school understands
what you want to know, and the manual entry is cryptic, you post something
(or mail to someone you know is an expert) saying "I've read the manual
about doing X, but I don't understand what Y means, or what the syntax
for Z is supposed to be"; and you will get informative followups and
all readers may learn something. Happens all the time.
> For example:
>The kill file is a function of the "rn" program and may be used to
>eliminate the need to read undesired postings. Its syntax is basically:
>
> //
>
>for example, to junk all articles in the "control" newsgroup having as
>the subject line "Cancel" the following entry would be added to the
>$HOME/News/control/KILL file:
>
> /Cancel/j
>
>further information concerning kill files and other "rn" commands may be
>found in the rn.1 manual page.
Wonderful (although you omitted the THRU line and the global KILL file)
but why wasn't this simply posted as a followup way back when this
started, rather than offered as an "exhibit" in this silly argument?
Rather than criticize the followups of others (ESPECIALLY via article!!),
it is better to provide a better posting yourself.
Now turn to Hymn 356, "Let Us Feed Vaal"...
--
Machines will never think, for "thought" ?! Tom Neff
will be redefined, as often as needed, !? tneff@bfmny0.UU.NET
as that which a machine cannot do. ?! ...uunet!bfmny0!tneff