Forum ettiquette
There are two popular "translations" of RTFM prevalent. One is as described and one is Read The Fine Manual. It seems to me that there are also two kinds of responders and their meaning is usually related to their egos and motivation for posting in a help forum.
People who spend a lot of time trying to help others in forums often lose patience with newbie questions and people who ask before they've even tried to find something on their own, which is clearly and simply explained in the manual or, as with Puppy, something that is explained in the "help" right there on the menu.
I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to steer people into good habits which will help them in the future, like reading the manual. However, there is a difference of "tone" between, "read the FM, you idiot" and "have a look at the manual pages for complete information" along with an appropriate URL or link.
My experience with Puppy is that, by far, posters are of the second category and are trying to help, and usually a URL is provided. It's not like that everywhere, I learned to RTFM on newsgroups, that's a bit like learning to swim by being cast into water over your head, but now RTFM is the first thing I think to do.
If beginners would just notice the second sticky post in the beginner forum, or learn to use the forum search, lots of questions might be saved. The nice thing about repeat questions, they become easier to answer.
Edit: Oops, I just noticed that a moderator with sufficient permission moved the sticky to the first post location. I suppose it was Flash. Now if I could just remember how many times I've advised that it is the "second" post I might be able to find them and correct. It's a very useful post in any case.
People who spend a lot of time trying to help others in forums often lose patience with newbie questions and people who ask before they've even tried to find something on their own, which is clearly and simply explained in the manual or, as with Puppy, something that is explained in the "help" right there on the menu.
I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to steer people into good habits which will help them in the future, like reading the manual. However, there is a difference of "tone" between, "read the FM, you idiot" and "have a look at the manual pages for complete information" along with an appropriate URL or link.
My experience with Puppy is that, by far, posters are of the second category and are trying to help, and usually a URL is provided. It's not like that everywhere, I learned to RTFM on newsgroups, that's a bit like learning to swim by being cast into water over your head, but now RTFM is the first thing I think to do.
If beginners would just notice the second sticky post in the beginner forum, or learn to use the forum search, lots of questions might be saved. The nice thing about repeat questions, they become easier to answer.
Edit: Oops, I just noticed that a moderator with sufficient permission moved the sticky to the first post location. I suppose it was Flash. Now if I could just remember how many times I've advised that it is the "second" post I might be able to find them and correct. It's a very useful post in any case.
Someone must have posted to that thread, which moved it to the top. Stickies are ordered just like regular threads, by the order of the latest post. I know, it seems inconsistent with the idea of a sticky, but that's the way it works.nipper wrote:.... Oops, I just noticed that a moderator with sufficient permission moved the sticky to the first post location. I suppose it was Flash. Now if I could just remember how many times I've advised that it is the "second" post I might be able to find them and correct. It's a very useful post in any case.
If you want to refer to a post, it's best to simply put a link to that post.
- Béèm
- Posts: 11763
- Joined: Wed 22 Nov 2006, 00:47
- Location: Brussels IBM Thinkpad R40, 256MB, 20GB, WiFi ipw2100. Frugal Lin'N'Win
I would like to add another one.
When someone references a link, please, out of courtesy, make it clickable.
When someone references a link, please, out of courtesy, make it clickable.
Time savers:
Find packages in a snap and install using Puppy Package Manager (Menu).
[url=http://puppylinux.org/wikka/HomePage]Consult Wikka[/url]
Use peppyy's [url=http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html]puppysearch[/url]
Find packages in a snap and install using Puppy Package Manager (Menu).
[url=http://puppylinux.org/wikka/HomePage]Consult Wikka[/url]
Use peppyy's [url=http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html]puppysearch[/url]
Even more importantly, if you started a thread to find the solution to a problem and the solution was forthcoming, please edit your original post to add [Solved] to the subject line.Nathan F wrote:If you have found a solution to a problem, a shortcut, or anything else that someone might find useful, share it by writing a tutorial or whatever you feel is appropriate. This applies to everyone, including new users, as the more experienced may take for granted some things that a new user may not understand.
Going along with this, please be specific and try to include ALL of the steps that you took.
That achieves two things:
1. Those who are prowling the forum looking for people who need help - including me - won't waste time reading a thread where the answer has already been provided, and
2.Those who need help with the same problem will know instantly that their answer lies within; a very comforting discovery as most of us have found out at one time or another.
Remember, we all love the Puppy or we wouldn't be spending our free, and sometimes borrowed, time here.
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com
- Béèm
- Posts: 11763
- Joined: Wed 22 Nov 2006, 00:47
- Location: Brussels IBM Thinkpad R40, 256MB, 20GB, WiFi ipw2100. Frugal Lin'N'Win
Me too, that relieves the burden of doing it manually.jonyo wrote:I'd like to know why they are no longer automatically clickable, as they once were.Béèm wrote:I would like to add another one.
When someone references a link, please, out of courtesy, make it clickable.
Murga should know I suppose.
Time savers:
Find packages in a snap and install using Puppy Package Manager (Menu).
[url=http://puppylinux.org/wikka/HomePage]Consult Wikka[/url]
Use peppyy's [url=http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html]puppysearch[/url]
Find packages in a snap and install using Puppy Package Manager (Menu).
[url=http://puppylinux.org/wikka/HomePage]Consult Wikka[/url]
Use peppyy's [url=http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html]puppysearch[/url]
It changed the last time John updated the forum software and I can't see any way to change it back. You'll just have to remember to do it manually.
There are two possibilities. If you want to make a URL clickable, all you have to do is highlight the URL in the compose window, then click the "URL" button above the compose window. If it's a word or phrase you want to make clickable then there's another step. You highlight the word or phrase in the compose window, click the "URL" button, then go back in the compose window and add = followed by the URL, inside the brackets. You can see what I mean by clicking the "quote" button of a post with a clickable word or phrase in it.
There are two possibilities. If you want to make a URL clickable, all you have to do is highlight the URL in the compose window, then click the "URL" button above the compose window. If it's a word or phrase you want to make clickable then there's another step. You highlight the word or phrase in the compose window, click the "URL" button, then go back in the compose window and add = followed by the URL, inside the brackets. You can see what I mean by clicking the "quote" button of a post with a clickable word or phrase in it.
I'm going to express my opinion and it is probably not going to make me popular. I'm not evangelical about this opinion but it is the way I choose to operate.
The way Flash described it is fine, when one puts a URL as a link. However it's possible to give one of those clickable links a name, for instance "click me" and then that is what is displayed. It's probably correct that a lot of people click links without examining where the link, which they have seen as a name, is actually going. It's fairly trivial then to craft a link that presents itself as something other than what it actually is. For example, give the link a name of the form of a URL, http://...etc. and then you have a link that goes somewhere different from where it presents. Many clickers would not notice.
This is not a big security risk, however there is always the choice between what is convenient and security. I choose to post my URLs as plain text, they are what they spell. I realise that means people have to cut-and-paste, however, I think cut-and-paste is a skill that is useful and if someone doesn't know how, it should be possible to help them learn.
Now please don't misunderstand, I'm not accusing anyone on the forum of any nefarious activity or dishonesty. I wonder though, do the moderators have enough time to follow all links presented in posts, perhaps they do, in which case the scenario I presented isn't likely.
So, for me, it is not a case of discourtesy. I choose to present my URLs as plain text. I see nothing wrong with telling someone how to craft the tags, if they ask, ...if they ask, not just because you like it that way. I have not nor will not try to change your behaviour, you do things your way and I will do things mine. And as I have stated previously, if the forum guidelines change, I will abide by the standard and not post URLs in plain text.
The way Flash described it is fine, when one puts a URL as a link. However it's possible to give one of those clickable links a name, for instance "click me" and then that is what is displayed. It's probably correct that a lot of people click links without examining where the link, which they have seen as a name, is actually going. It's fairly trivial then to craft a link that presents itself as something other than what it actually is. For example, give the link a name of the form of a URL, http://...etc. and then you have a link that goes somewhere different from where it presents. Many clickers would not notice.
This is not a big security risk, however there is always the choice between what is convenient and security. I choose to post my URLs as plain text, they are what they spell. I realise that means people have to cut-and-paste, however, I think cut-and-paste is a skill that is useful and if someone doesn't know how, it should be possible to help them learn.
Now please don't misunderstand, I'm not accusing anyone on the forum of any nefarious activity or dishonesty. I wonder though, do the moderators have enough time to follow all links presented in posts, perhaps they do, in which case the scenario I presented isn't likely.
So, for me, it is not a case of discourtesy. I choose to present my URLs as plain text. I see nothing wrong with telling someone how to craft the tags, if they ask, ...if they ask, not just because you like it that way. I have not nor will not try to change your behaviour, you do things your way and I will do things mine. And as I have stated previously, if the forum guidelines change, I will abide by the standard and not post URLs in plain text.
- Pizzasgood
- Posts: 6183
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 20:28
- Location: Knoxville, TN, USA
Clickable links are much more convenient for me. Reason: I can middle-click it to immediately open a background tab, with a single action (or left-click for a foreground tab). If I have to copy-paste, that means I have to double-click the URL to select it, then click the "new tab" button (or press ctrl-t), then middle click on the little icon in the left part of the URL bar. Then, if I wanted to read that tab later, I have to navigate back to the original tab (which could involve scrolling my mousewheel to scroll through the 20+ tabs I might have open). So that's between four and thirty actions, depending on how you count. Taking the optimistic outlook, that's still four times as much work as just middle-clicking a link.
Also, clickable links are much easier to notice at a glance than plaintext.
I'm not complaining or requesting that other people do what I do. Just explaining my viewpoint. IMHO, one of the biggest problems in the world aside from greed and hate is the "my Way is the Only Way" school of thought.
If I have to spend four times as much effort on certain links, so be it. Not the biggest issue in my life
Also, clickable links are much easier to notice at a glance than plaintext.
I'm not complaining or requesting that other people do what I do. Just explaining my viewpoint. IMHO, one of the biggest problems in the world aside from greed and hate is the "my Way is the Only Way" school of thought.
If I have to spend four times as much effort on certain links, so be it. Not the biggest issue in my life
[size=75]Between depriving a man of one hour from his life and depriving him of his life there exists only a difference of degree. --Muad'Dib[/size]
[img]http://www.browserloadofcoolness.com/sig.png[/img]
[img]http://www.browserloadofcoolness.com/sig.png[/img]
- Béèm
- Posts: 11763
- Joined: Wed 22 Nov 2006, 00:47
- Location: Brussels IBM Thinkpad R40, 256MB, 20GB, WiFi ipw2100. Frugal Lin'N'Win
OK, that's a pity and we'll have to live with it.Flash wrote:It changed the last time John updated the forum software and I can't see any way to change it back. You'll just have to remember to do it manually.
There are two possibilities. If you want to make a URL clickable, all you have to do is highlight the URL in the compose window, then click the "URL" button above the compose window. If it's a word or phrase you want to make clickable then there's another step. You highlight the word or phrase in the compose window, click the "URL" button, then go back in the compose window and add = followed by the URL, inside the brackets. You can see what I mean by clicking the "quote" button of a post with a clickable word or phrase in it.
Reminding how to make a clickable is a good idea. I think most of the time doing, becoming an automatism already.
Time savers:
Find packages in a snap and install using Puppy Package Manager (Menu).
[url=http://puppylinux.org/wikka/HomePage]Consult Wikka[/url]
Use peppyy's [url=http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html]puppysearch[/url]
Find packages in a snap and install using Puppy Package Manager (Menu).
[url=http://puppylinux.org/wikka/HomePage]Consult Wikka[/url]
Use peppyy's [url=http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html]puppysearch[/url]
While the ideal situation would be a return to the way things were before the forum update,
there is another very acceptable way of handling this, and that is with the "Direct Link" Firefox extension...
Highlight URL...
right-click on it...
DirectLink>open...
opens in new tab.
Very handy on lots of websites where links are not clickable.
Works well in all versions of Firefox, Swiftfox, and BonEcho.
Should work with all Mozilla browsers.
There is also "Plain Text to Link" which does similar and more.
I use both. Both good.
there is another very acceptable way of handling this, and that is with the "Direct Link" Firefox extension...
Highlight URL...
right-click on it...
DirectLink>open...
opens in new tab.
Very handy on lots of websites where links are not clickable.
Works well in all versions of Firefox, Swiftfox, and BonEcho.
Should work with all Mozilla browsers.
There is also "Plain Text to Link" which does similar and more.
I use both. Both good.
Thanks!
Thank you for the explaination. I offer you another reason to be kind: I have a learning disability that makes it difficult if not impossible, to learn anything by reading alone and usually have to be shown "how-to". I doubt I am the only one.Nathan F wrote:"Read the F*ing Manual"
Does anyone know where to find a glossary of terms of the secret language (lingo) of Linux?
...so closeIsis wrote:Does anyone know where to find a glossary of terms of the secret language (lingo) of Linux?
[size=84][i]hangout:[/i] ##b0rked on irc.freenode.net
[i]diversion:[/i] [url]http://alienjeff.net[/url] - visit The Fringe
[i]quote:[/i] "The foundation of authority is based upon the consent of the people." - Thomas Hooker[/size]
[i]diversion:[/i] [url]http://alienjeff.net[/url] - visit The Fringe
[i]quote:[/i] "The foundation of authority is based upon the consent of the people." - Thomas Hooker[/size]
AJ, sometimes you crack me up!alienjeff wrote:...so closeIsis wrote:Does anyone know where to find a glossary of terms of the secret language (lingo) of Linux?
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com
And in Opera 9.50 you can - highlight link then right click and select 'Go To Web Address' - opens in new tab.While the ideal situation would be a return to the way things were before the forum update,
there is another very acceptable way of handling this, and that is with the "Direct Link" Firefox extension...
You could put text urls in a different colour to attract the readers attention
Hello,
I would just like to add, we should if possible, make the answer as simple as possible. Ive seen many cases where the answer given was over complicated, and the same results could be achieved through a few clicks in the GUI.
If the answer has "Open a console" in it, you`ve lost half of them already.
I would just like to add, we should if possible, make the answer as simple as possible. Ive seen many cases where the answer given was over complicated, and the same results could be achieved through a few clicks in the GUI.
If the answer has "Open a console" in it, you`ve lost half of them already.
Linux is a command line operating system. Without the command line and its shell, there would be no GUI or console to complain about. No one would get lost, nothing would be over complicated, it just wouldn't exist.puppyluvr wrote::D Hello,
I would just like to add, we should if possible, make the answer as simple as possible. Ive seen many cases where the answer given was over complicated, and the same results could be achieved through a few clicks in the GUI.
If the answer has "Open a console" in it, you`ve lost half of them already.
A few lines below is an example of something I posted today, only a snippet of a longer post.
Another poster already posted a good solution using an application that needs an NT version of Windows. Is our question answered? Sure for Windows users willing to install Windows software to solve Linux problems, which by the way, already have the software installed.
Neglect Linux users? I don't want to.
I could have made the answer more simple, but I answered in some detail, but I really don't think as much as I could have.
- A Linux solution is as follows:
dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/sdb
Where /dev/sda is the unmounted source
Where /dev/sdb is the unmounted target
Where /dev/sdb is the same size or slightly larger, ideally the same size and even the same make and model.
The default sector by sector copy size is 512 bytes and takes longer than if you specify a larger size using the bs= command at the end of your command string. You can increase the speed of the copy by multiplying 512 by powers of 2 Being conservative in how I do things, I'd probably stop at 8192 or 16384. Usually, I just let it run its course at default values.
If you want to restore the device you reverse the process.
-------------------------
Puppy has a program call Pudd Copy Drive / Partition
In this case we want a drive copy.
Could you just say 'Pudd' and feel you did a good job? Challenge yourself to explain how to do the drive copy in Pudd with sufficient detail that the user can more or less just follow your instructions. Then we can do a word count.
--------------------------
It is not easier for me to give details, explanations and alternatives as I did in that post. It takes more time. It's harder. I'm trying to give better service.
I generally feel I'm dealing with intelligent people. People smart enough to open a terminal emulator and type in commands and hit the enter key.
I've never had anyone I was helping, that I can remember tell me I've lost them by the CLI, and I give the commands for them to type. An ABC type of thing. We've all had a hard time helping people. Please affirm what you assert: If the answer has "Open a console" in it, you`ve lost half of them already.
Absent any significant feedback along those lines, I think the assertion has little or no merit. Maybe doing something on a console would lose you. But your assertion has nothing to do with you. It specifically states 'them', meaning others. ( 1/2 of them )
If your assertion is challenged. I think you would have to support it by examples. Additionally, we cannot omit instances of when people didn't understand what they were doing with a GUI utility.
Examples: How do I do change an Icon? How do I burn a CD-ROM? How do I change themes? X won't start. How do I change wallpapers? Of course people get lost trying to figure things out with GUI programs.
Sometimes there is a CLI answer and sometimes there is a GUI answer. Today I gave this GUI answer:
- As far as image advertising, the vast majority of them will disappear simply by configuring SeaMonkey not to load remote images.
This is something any user can do an a few seconds.
Edit -> Preferences -> Privacy & Security -> Images
Accept images that come from originating server only
I try and give answers appropriate to the situation. This is shown by examples I posted today. A GUI answer to the exclusion of a CLI answer doesn't seem appropriate to me as a rule for forum helpers to go by.
You mean like "switch to Ewwbuntu" or "go back to Windows?"puppyluvr wrote:I would just like to add, we should if possible, make the answer as simple as possible.
But seriously, there are fine lines between an answer being too brief, just right, and overblown. Hopefully you're not leaning towards legislating how forum volunteers reply to requests for help.
In some cases this is quite true. On other cases, the shortest path is via the command line. And it's important to remember:Ive seen many cases where the answer given was over complicated, and the same results could be achieved through a few clicks in the GUI.
1) not all console-based "fixes" have GUIs,
2) quite often "a few clicks in the GUI" is much more involved to explain in writing than the command line explanation.
Like it or not, this "mortality rate," for lack of a better term, is what it is. Continual over-"GUification" (over being the key word) of an OS will ultimately increase the mortality rate. The sooner a user learns that the CLI is his/her friend and that the real power is via the CLI and not the GUI, the sooner the user can really use the OS, and not the other way around.If the answer has "Open a console" in it, you`ve lost half of them already.
And the sooner the user is helping a new wave of newbs.
[size=84][i]hangout:[/i] ##b0rked on irc.freenode.net
[i]diversion:[/i] [url]http://alienjeff.net[/url] - visit The Fringe
[i]quote:[/i] "The foundation of authority is based upon the consent of the people." - Thomas Hooker[/size]
[i]diversion:[/i] [url]http://alienjeff.net[/url] - visit The Fringe
[i]quote:[/i] "The foundation of authority is based upon the consent of the people." - Thomas Hooker[/size]