1 |
Bob Young posted <FAEEIJPAOFEMBBLKPMJEAEEJDOAA.BYoung@××××××××××.com>, |
2 |
excerpted below, on Fri, 09 Dec 2005 13:14:55 -0800: |
3 |
|
4 |
>>2) For those with content worth reading, the content is /just/ as worth |
5 |
>>reading in plain text. It doesn't need HTML to fancy it up or obscure |
6 |
>>it. In fact, those who DO seem to /need/ HTML, don't often seem to have |
7 |
>>much worth reading -- the spammers, the crackers, and the AOLer types |
8 |
>>that don't even WANT to know how their computer operates, thus being the |
9 |
>>ones most likely to be spreading the malware in the /first/ place, |
10 |
>>therefore the ones anyone who cares about their security is /least/ |
11 |
>>likely to want to have sending them HTML. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> That's waay too general a statement to be valid, and frankly smacks of a |
14 |
> bit of elitism and snobbery. Not everyone who sends html email is a |
15 |
> spammer or cracker, and just because someone isn't interested in |
16 |
> learning what L2 cache is, doesn't mean they are automatically unworthy |
17 |
> of a response to their request for help. |
18 |
|
19 |
Excerpts from Eric S Raymond's "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way". Read |
20 |
the whole thing here, it's worth it! [My comments in brackets as so.] |
21 |
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html |
22 |
|
23 |
The first thing to understand is that hackers actually like hard problems |
24 |
and good, thought-provoking questions about them. If we didn't, we |
25 |
wouldn't be here. If you give us an interesting question to chew on we'll |
26 |
be grateful to you; good questions are a stimulus and a gift. Good |
27 |
questions help us develop our understanding, and often reveal problems we |
28 |
might not have noticed or thought about otherwise. Among hackers, "Good |
29 |
question!" is a strong and sincere compliment. |
30 |
|
31 |
[Absolutely, positively, so! I should mention at this point that "Good |
32 |
argument" is about equally a compliment, and that's exactly what you are |
33 |
doing, so don't take anything below as an insult. It's rather the |
34 |
opposite, or it wouldn't have gotten this far.] |
35 |
|
36 |
Despite this, hackers have a reputation for meeting simple questions with |
37 |
what looks like hostility or arrogance. It sometimes looks like we're |
38 |
reflexively rude to newbies and the ignorant. But this isn't really true. |
39 |
|
40 |
What we are, unapologetically, is hostile to people who seem to be |
41 |
unwilling to think or to do their own homework before asking questions. |
42 |
People like that are time sinks -- they take without giving back, they |
43 |
waste time we could have spent on another question more interesting and |
44 |
another person more worthy of an answer. We call people like this |
45 |
"losers" (and for historical reasons we sometimes spell it |
46 |
"lusers"). |
47 |
|
48 |
We realize that there are many people who just want to use the software we |
49 |
write, and have no interest in learning technical details. [] We |
50 |
acknowledge that, and don't expect everyone to take an interest in the |
51 |
technical matters that fascinate us. Nevertheless, our style of answering |
52 |
questions is tuned for people who do take such an interest and are willing |
53 |
to be active participants in problem-solving. That's not going to change. |
54 |
Nor should it; if it did, we would become less effective at the things we |
55 |
do best. |
56 |
|
57 |
We're (largely) volunteers. We take time out of busy lives to answer |
58 |
questions, and at times we're overwhelmed with them. So we filter |
59 |
ruthlessly. In particular, we throw away questions from people who appear |
60 |
to be losers in order to spend our question-answering time more |
61 |
efficiently, on winners. |
62 |
|
63 |
[That's basically it! And filtering on HTML, after a simple request not |
64 |
to use it, is part of that filtering ruthlessly! However, keep reading.] |
65 |
|
66 |
If you find this attitude obnoxious, condescending, or arrogant, check |
67 |
your assumptions. We're not asking you to genuflect to us -- in fact, |
68 |
most of us would love nothing more than to deal with you as an equal and |
69 |
welcome you into our culture, if you put in the effort required to make |
70 |
that possible. But it's simply not efficient for us to try to help people |
71 |
who are not willing to help themselves. It's OK to be ignorant; it's not |
72 |
OK to play stupid. |
73 |
|
74 |
[Emphasis. It *IS* OK to be ignorant, that's what the asking nicely and |
75 |
explaining why is all about. It's *NOT* OK to play stupid... or one just |
76 |
gets passed by... it's more efficient to spend time more productively |
77 |
elsewhere.] |
78 |
|
79 |
So, while it isn't necessary to already be technically competent to get |
80 |
attention from us, it is necessary to demonstrate the kind of attitude |
81 |
that leads to competence -- alert, thoughtful, observant, willing to be |
82 |
an active partner in developing a solution. If you can't live with this |
83 |
sort of discrimination, we suggest you pay somebody for a commercial |
84 |
support contract instead of asking hackers to personally donate help to |
85 |
you. |
86 |
|
87 |
[Exactly. Just because we donate our time for free doesn't mean we don't |
88 |
consider it valuable!] |
89 |
|
90 |
If you decide to come to us for help, you don't want to be one of the |
91 |
losers. You don't want to seem like one, either. The best way to get a |
92 |
rapid and responsive answer is to ask it like a person with smarts, |
93 |
confidence, and clues who just happens to need help on one particular |
94 |
problem. |
95 |
|
96 |
[...You don't want to seem like one, either... And the fastest way to |
97 |
find oneself ignored is to turn down repeated invitations to quit seeming |
98 |
like one. Again, that's in general, not you, or this wouldn't have been |
99 |
worth posting.] |
100 |
|
101 |
>>The two factors coupled together, the security issue and the lack of |
102 |
>>content that really /needs/ html to be valuable (if it /needs/ it, send |
103 |
>>a link, parsing HTML is what BROWSERS are for!), are persuasive enough |
104 |
>>for many of us. |
105 |
> |
106 |
> You're certainly entitled to your opinion, it just seems that the |
107 |
> arguments you're basing it on are rooted in the past, and don't allow |
108 |
> for the possibility that maybe things are different now, or that your |
109 |
> perception is colored by prejudices and generalizations that are |
110 |
> incorrect. |
111 |
|
112 |
I won't argue the point altho I obviously disagree, but it's not just /my/ |
113 |
opinion, and it just so happens that enough folks with enough answers have |
114 |
the same general opinion, that cutting them out of one's query audience, |
115 |
or of the audience that finds a reply worth their time, is precisely the |
116 |
sort of mistake the folks doing most of the querying should be worried |
117 |
about making, which is what I'm pointing out. |
118 |
|
119 |
Sure, folks can continue to post HTML if they want. I'll even defend |
120 |
their right to do so (see below). However, that doesn't alter the fact |
121 |
that many use that as convenient reason to "ruthlessly filter", so if they |
122 |
see the question at all, they'll quickly stop paying attention to that |
123 |
poster if they don't kindly stop -- don't seem cooperative -- when asked |
124 |
nicely to do so. |
125 |
|
126 |
> Do you allow html to be rendered when you browse the web? If so, why is |
127 |
> email more dangerous when your email client can easily be configured to |
128 |
> render html just as safely as your browser? |
129 |
|
130 |
Because it's a way of cutting down the noise. There's the security |
131 |
aspect, but there's noise as well. "Ruthlessly filter..." |
132 |
|
133 |
As for the browser, that's what it was designed for. That's NOT what mail |
134 |
was designed for. As I stated, links to a web page are perfectly fine, |
135 |
where that may be necessary, but let the mail communicate a plain message |
136 |
in the manner intended, and let the web be for what it was intended for, |
137 |
and let us folks do our "ruthless filtering" as just one more way of |
138 |
managing all the signals competing for attention at once. |
139 |
|
140 |
All that said... a very real observation... it can be a very humbling |
141 |
experience when one /used/ to being one of the technical elite ends up in |
142 |
in the company of those equally or better skilled than he is. I've been |
143 |
in that situation, and it does take a bit to adjust. Personally, I'm of |
144 |
the opinion that's one of the big reasons behind the big ego clashes |
145 |
familiar to anyone that has been in FLOSS for long. People used to |
146 |
playing the roll of /the/ answer guru, used to having folks therefore do |
147 |
as they are asked with little question because they haven't the |
148 |
knowledget to question, now finding they know less about something they |
149 |
none-the-less have formed strong opinions on, than the next guy, with |
150 |
equally strong opinions. Big egos -- someone gets theirs crushed. |
151 |
After being in the position myself, thereby knowing what it feels |
152 |
like, I've seen it happen on the Gentoo-dev list, among other places, a |
153 |
number of times. It's also the root behind the xorg/xfree fork, and the |
154 |
dynamic that is continuing to keep reiser4 out of the mainline kernel. |
155 |
Anyway, I /do/ try to be personally mindful of that, which again is one |
156 |
reason I try to ask, and explain nicely. Of course, we all are human, and |
157 |
it doesn't always come out as intended. |
158 |
|
159 |
One more angle, I've been on the other side of a similar debate, as well, |
160 |
and as a result know the mail/news/mime RFCs probably rather better than |
161 |
most. HTML (or the wrapped lines of text-flowed, in my case) doesn't |
162 |
generally break them (tho some implementations might in some minor detail |
163 |
or another), but rather, goes beyond them, while being backward |
164 |
compatible. Great! And, folks are free to use it if they desire. However, |
165 |
folks are equally free to filter them for doing so! Both freedoms are |
166 |
considered more or less absolute on lists or newsgroups. That said, the |
167 |
one group tends to have more power because they are the ones the other |
168 |
group tends to be asking favors of. Thus, the group asking the favors can |
169 |
behave as they like, but the one with the ability to grant them is |
170 |
ultimately calling the shots. |
171 |
|
172 |
-- |
173 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
174 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
175 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in |
176 |
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html |
177 |
|
178 |
|
179 |
-- |
180 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |