StringTokenizer

[Chris Smith]

This reminds me of the way people like to rag everyone who ever asks a
question chastising them for not finding the answer first on Google.

They seem to expect some sort of self flagellation before every
question to explain all the combinations they tried on Google before
"interrupting" his holiness with a question.

I very much agree. While there's nothing wrong with suggesting a Google
Search that turns up a number of interesting results (AFTER checking out
the results to see that they are useful), I do see something wrong with
the newfound requirement on this forum that a description of prior
effort accompanies each question. I'm not sure where this comes from,
but it has some very negative effects. For one thing, it creates a good
bit of noise, as such responses criticizing the lack of prior effort are
quite rarely illuminating and useful. It seems to offend people more
often than help them, and it makes this a less pleasant place to be.

That's especially true in this case, where there was a prior
conversation going on! It's only natural to ask questions of someone
with whom you are discussing an issue, and there's even less of an
appropriate research burden there than with starting a new thread. As
Roedy said, USENET discussions, especially non-initial posts, are
partially intended to generate (or continue) discussion. That's a
purpose not served by doing web research.

I think it's interesting, for example, that someone hasn't heard of
Knuth's quote. Someone else might be interested enough to take it up as
a subject of conversation, which could result in all kinds of exposure
to subgroups of software development communities that I am not familiar
with. This would not be possible at all had BADBOY simply done a Google
search and wandered off never responding to this thread.

Granted, I'm around little enough any more that you should probably
ignore what I have to say about this... but for the record, I'm
concerned about this trend. I wonder if it has something to do with how
I also feel less connected to other people on this newsgroup than I once
did...

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation

 

[Anony!]

I very much agree. While there's nothing wrong with suggesting a Google
Search that turns up a number of interesting results (AFTER checking out
the results to see that they are useful), I do see something wrong with
the newfound requirement on this forum that a description of prior
effort accompanies each question. I'm not sure where this comes from,
but it has some very negative effects. For one thing, it creates a good
bit of noise, as such responses criticizing the lack of prior effort are
quite rarely illuminating and useful. It seems to offend people more
often than help them, and it makes this a less pleasant place to be.

That's especially true in this case, where there was a prior
conversation going on! It's only natural to ask questions of someone
with whom you are discussing an issue, and there's even less of an
appropriate research burden there than with starting a new thread. As
Roedy said, USENET discussions, especially non-initial posts, are
partially intended to generate (or continue) discussion. That's a
purpose not served by doing web research.

I think it's interesting, for example, that someone hasn't heard of
Knuth's quote. Someone else might be interested enough to take it up as
a subject of conversation, which could result in all kinds of exposure
to subgroups of software development communities that I am not familiar
with. This would not be possible at all had BADBOY simply done a Google
search and wandered off never responding to this thread.

Granted, I'm around little enough any more that you should probably
ignore what I have to say about this... but for the record, I'm
concerned about this trend. I wonder if it has something to do with how
I also feel less connected to other people on this newsgroup than I once
did...

Well said.

Unfortunately alot of usenet cutomers have the following mentality:

1. It's a privelege to ask a question.
2. Asking a question that they deem is silly will be criticised.
3. Asking a question that they deem lacks individual initiative to problem
solving will be criticised.
4. Asking a school-work type question will be criticised.
5. Asking a question that is not well presented will be criticised.

I disagree with all these. I won't go explaining why, but if you can't see
it then your one of those people who I am talking about.

Take home message is: if you don't want to answer a question because it
falls in (1-5) then don't.

AAA

 

[John B. Matthews]

I very much agree. While there's nothing wrong with suggesting a Google
Search that turns up a number of interesting results (AFTER checking out
the results to see that they are useful), I do see something wrong with
the newfound requirement on this forum that a description of prior
effort accompanies each question. I'm not sure where this comes from,

Perhaps http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html.
It's an excellent guide to getting the most out of your own
questions, and entertaining advice to querants at all skill
levels.

John

 

[Tor Iver Wilhelmsen]

Take home message is: if you don't want to answer a question because it
falls in (1-5) then don't.

There is a different approach to posters in clj.help and
clj.programmer. People who post basic questions in Programmer risk
getting ridiculed, not in .help. There is even a recurring posting
that explains the difference.

 

[Chris Smith]

Perhaps http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html.
It's an excellent guide to getting the most out of your own
questions, and entertaining advice to querants at all skill
levels.

Given my previous response, perhaps you won't find it surprising that I
find Eric Raymond's article to be inanely self-serving and condescending
to others, and wish it would never be mentioned again (though that's
obviously not within my power).

I often wonder why people pay so much attention to this one person, who
seems to clearly not believe in the capacity of humans to help others
except for selfish reasons. Frankly, if I agreed with him, I'd have to
either kill myself or move to a remote desert island and become a
hermit. I wonder why Eric hasn't gone himself... except that I suspect
he mostly just interested in drumming up publicity with his cult-popular
perspective on life, adn doesn't really believe everything he says.

None of this would bother me, except that Eric Raymond, an extremist
with a very unusual outlook on life, is so often designated as the
spokesperson for the whole technical community. That's ludicrous. He
might speak for a sizable subset of UNIX free software hackers (though
his frequent disagreements with Richard Stallman, for example, speak
otherwise), but he certainly is not any kind of a fair spokesperson for
any larger group than that.

So to summarize: Though I've never met him, it appears that Eric Raymond
is an inconsiderate ass, and I don't particularly relish the thought of
ever meeting him. I also don't want to spend time with other people who
follow his recommendations for behavior. And make no mistake,
recommending behavior to other members of technical communities IS the
larger part of the result of his articles and essays.

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation

 

[Anony!]

Given my previous response, perhaps you won't find it surprising that I
find Eric Raymond's article to be inanely self-serving and condescending
to others, and wish it would never be mentioned again (though that's
obviously not within my power).

I often wonder why people pay so much attention to this one person, who
seems to clearly not believe in the capacity of humans to help others
except for selfish reasons. Frankly, if I agreed with him, I'd have to
either kill myself or move to a remote desert island and become a
hermit. I wonder why Eric hasn't gone himself... except that I suspect
he mostly just interested in drumming up publicity with his cult-popular
perspective on life, adn doesn't really believe everything he says.

None of this would bother me, except that Eric Raymond, an extremist
with a very unusual outlook on life, is so often designated as the
spokesperson for the whole technical community. That's ludicrous. He
might speak for a sizable subset of UNIX free software hackers (though
his frequent disagreements with Richard Stallman, for example, speak
otherwise), but he certainly is not any kind of a fair spokesperson for
any larger group than that.

So to summarize: Though I've never met him, it appears that Eric Raymond
is an inconsiderate ass, and I don't particularly relish the thought of
ever meeting him. I also don't want to spend time with other people who
follow his recommendations for behavior. And make no mistake,
recommending behavior to other members of technical communities IS the
larger part of the result of his articles and essays.

nice essay =]

AaA

 

[John B. Matthews]

John B. Matthews wrote:

Given my previous response, perhaps you won't find it surprising that I
find Eric Raymond's article to be inanely self-serving and condescending
to others, and wish it would never be mentioned again (though that's
obviously not within my power).

I often wonder why people pay so much attention to this one person, who
seems to clearly not believe in the capacity of humans to help others
except for selfish reasons. Frankly, if I agreed with him, I'd have to
either kill myself or move to a remote desert island and become a
hermit. I wonder why Eric hasn't gone himself... except that I suspect
he mostly just interested in drumming up publicity with his cult-popular
perspective on life, adn doesn't really believe everything he says.

None of this would bother me, except that Eric Raymond, an extremist
with a very unusual outlook on life, is so often designated as the
spokesperson for the whole technical community. That's ludicrous. He
might speak for a sizable subset of UNIX free software hackers (though
his frequent disagreements with Richard Stallman, for example, speak
otherwise), but he certainly is not any kind of a fair spokesperson for
any larger group than that.

So to summarize: Though I've never met him, it appears that Eric Raymond
is an inconsiderate ass, and I don't particularly relish the thought of
ever meeting him. I also don't want to spend time with other people who
follow his recommendations for behavior. And make no mistake,
recommending behavior to other members of technical communities IS the
larger part of the result of his articles and essays.

So you _do_ know "where this comes from."

John

 

[Chris Smith]

So you _do_ know "where this comes from."

To some extent. I wonder why this has suddenly become so common on
comp.lang.java.programmer, when the attitiude was rare less than a year
ago.

--
www.designacourse.com
The Easiest Way to Train Anyone... Anywhere.

Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer/Technical Trainer
MindIQ Corporation

 

[Ben Wilson]

To some extent. I wonder why this has suddenly become so common on
comp.lang.java.programmer, when the attitiude was rare less than a year
ago.

Knowledge is power, you see, and the price of oil is pretty high nowadays...

 

[John B. Matthews]

To some extent. I wonder why this has suddenly become so common on
comp.lang.java.programmer, when the attitiude was rare less than a year
ago.

Is this perhaps a kind of selection bias? Most cljp readers say
nothing; a small fraction respond; a still smaller fraction
complain about the question(s). A small increase in complainers
might have a disproportionate affect on the "feel" of the group.

Without defending ESR, _per_se_, I would still urge responders
to examine the new section at the bottom of the page, "How To
Answer Questions in a Helpful Way"

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

To which I would add your dictum: "If you're just responding to
complain about the question, don't!"

John

 

[zutroi]

They seem to expect some sort of self flagellation before every
question to explain all the combinations they tried on Google before
"interrupting" his holiness with a question.

well said.

--
bob (rdr00)

Outgoing mail is NOT certified Virus Free.
For all I know, there's a dirty big fsckin' virus stuck onto
the end of this message and if you're using a Microsfot product,
then I'd say that you're fscked.