Gentoo Archives: gentoo-amd64

From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>
To: gentoo-amd64@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-amd64] RE: RE: Re: gcc compile failed after 2005.1-r1 instalation [OT- html posts]
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 23:28:00
Message-Id: pan.2005.12.09.23.21.48.140494@cox.net
In Reply to: RE: [gentoo-amd64] RE: Re: gcc compile failed after 2005.1-r1 instalation [OT- html posts] by Bob Young
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