1 |
Alan McKinnon wrote on 24/10/09 22:18: |
2 |
>>> Why should they do it again when you could just as easily find |
3 |
>>> the previous answer yourself. |
4 |
|
5 |
>> I'll answer my own question, including detail which may be useful |
6 |
>> to other users |
7 |
|
8 |
> It's only useless so you since you have not done the usual research |
9 |
> yourself yet; and it will continue to be useless until you do so. |
10 |
|
11 |
How presumptuous of you to say so. Has the gentoo-user group become the |
12 |
resource of last-resort? Has gentoo-user become restricted, to be used |
13 |
only when all other avenues of exploration have been exhausted? If that |
14 |
is so, then shame on me, I must have missed that announcement too. |
15 |
|
16 |
> I'm sorry you found my answer less than informative and perhaps even |
17 |
> somewhat insulting, obviously I worded it incorrectly. But you see, |
18 |
> your "aw gawd, an 'RTFM' answer..." is the identical reaction to my |
19 |
> original "aw gawd, a 'do my homework for me' question". |
20 |
|
21 |
> Ponder that a little. |
22 |
|
23 |
Your RTFM reply arrived 14 minutes after my question. It clearly showed |
24 |
that you were aware of the answer to my question. A reference to any of |
25 |
the relevant threads would have been very helpful, and would have been |
26 |
much appreciated. |
27 |
|
28 |
However, an answer which merely states that the question has already |
29 |
been answered, but lacking any further reference to the existing answer |
30 |
is utterly worthless. |
31 |
|
32 |
Please consider the futility of uninformative answers to questions. |
33 |
|
34 |
Do you seriously believe that a question can only ever be posed (and |
35 |
answered) once? |
36 |
|
37 |
You are entirely free to chose whether you answer a question or not. |
38 |
However, if you don't want to answer in a helpful manner, it would be |
39 |
better to leave the question unanswered. |
40 |
|
41 |
Should you wish to discuss this further, feel free to contact me off-list. |