April 6, 2009 at 11:53 pm
RBarryYoung (4/6/2009)
majorbloodnock (4/6/2009)
Well, I expect you'll get a lot more posts to this thread agreeing with your article, albeit (frustratingly) all from people who wouldn't commit that cardinal sin in the first place. The converted will stay converted and the unbelievers will continue in their rude and arrogant rut. Nonetheless, I still think you were right to say what you've said. Unless there's a line publicly drawn, a minority will assume that anything must, therefore, be acceptable.However, what I think is irrelevant is the fact that almost everyone on SSC gives their time and knowledge for free. Even if they were paid for their input, I don't believe the distasteful postings would become any the less unacceptable. Whilst I appreciate the very democratic feel of the forums here, I don't feel direct enforcement of the terms and conditions is in the slightest heavy handed, and I hope you don't feel the need to justify yourself to us when you have to do it.
Well said. Very well said, actually.
I agree... very well said.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2009 at 12:03 am
Jeff Moden (4/6/2009)
Lynn Pettis (4/5/2009)
Well said, both the editorial and the pod cast. From that, I really think that my blog posts are particularly relevant. For those who haven't read them, you can find them here and here.I'll be keeping an eye on this thread. I'm especially interested to see what others think.
I quit reading when I got to here on your blog...
The first is to treat the individual with respect. Do this even if they are not showing you that same respect in return. It isn't easy, but it shows strength of character, and eventually the individual may see that and begin to show more respect in return.
I'll not turn the other cheek for anyone who comes storming onto the forum in a rude manner. I don't tolerate it in person and I don't have to take it from a forum user. The only "respect" I'll give such a user is not launching a full volley of high velocity pork chops and abandon the post. There are good people that need help. I'll not spend so much time on those who do not respect those that try to help.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2009 at 6:41 am
Steve,
Great rant! Couldn't agree more, it's nice to be nice!
Mark
April 7, 2009 at 6:57 am
Jeff Moden (4/6/2009)
RBarryYoung (4/6/2009)
majorbloodnock (4/6/2009)
Well, I expect you'll get a lot more posts to this thread agreeing with your article, albeit (frustratingly) all from people who wouldn't commit that cardinal sin in the first place. The converted will stay converted and the unbelievers will continue in their rude and arrogant rut. Nonetheless, I still think you were right to say what you've said. Unless there's a line publicly drawn, a minority will assume that anything must, therefore, be acceptable.However, what I think is irrelevant is the fact that almost everyone on SSC gives their time and knowledge for free. Even if they were paid for their input, I don't believe the distasteful postings would become any the less unacceptable. Whilst I appreciate the very democratic feel of the forums here, I don't feel direct enforcement of the terms and conditions is in the slightest heavy handed, and I hope you don't feel the need to justify yourself to us when you have to do it.
Well said. Very well said, actually.
I agree... very well said.
Um, thanks, guys; I'm flattered. :blush:
Semper in excretia, suus solum profundum variat
April 7, 2009 at 8:01 am
Jeff Moden (4/7/2009)
Jeff Moden (4/6/2009)
Lynn Pettis (4/5/2009)
Well said, both the editorial and the pod cast. From that, I really think that my blog posts are particularly relevant. For those who haven't read them, you can find them here and here.I'll be keeping an eye on this thread. I'm especially interested to see what others think.
I quit reading when I got to here on your blog...
The first is to treat the individual with respect. Do this even if they are not showing you that same respect in return. It isn't easy, but it shows strength of character, and eventually the individual may see that and begin to show more respect in return.
I'll not turn the other cheek for anyone who comes storming onto the forum in a rude manner. I don't tolerate it in person and I don't have to take it from a forum user. The only "respect" I'll give such a user is not launching a full volley of high velocity pork chops and abandon the post. There are good people that need help. I'll not spend so much time on those who do not respect those that try to help.
I'll respect your choice Jeff, but that is what I try to teach my children as well, even when it comes to them dealing with each other. It is also how I have learned to diffuse situations in business and on the soccer pitch. It works, and in the end, if the other person continues to act in an "unexceptable" manner, they are the ones that look bad, not me. It's also why my wife lets me deal with things regarding insurance, car repairs, etc. She is the "explosive" one and I am the diplomat of the family.
April 7, 2009 at 9:27 am
Heh... the way I diffuse it at work is I tell the offender to go to his/her "corner" and come back when they calm down. Hasn't failed yet. It's kinda like you throwing someone off the field for using foul language in front of the kids.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 7, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Jeff Moden (4/7/2009)
Heh... the way I diffuse it at work is I tell the offender to go to his/her "corner" and come back when they calm down. Hasn't failed yet. It's kinda like you throwing someone off the field for using foul language in front of the kids.
Only they don't get to come back after calming down. They are gone for the duration of the game. Longer if the club/CHSAA get involved and deem it appropriate to ban the offender from future games.
April 8, 2009 at 4:20 pm
I think that the standard rule of thumb one should use when seeking somone's assistance is that a "reasonable" attempt should be made to troubleshoot and resolve an issue before requesting assistance. I've always attempted to learn as much as possible about an issue before seeking the assistance of someone else. One should also include as much supporting information as possible when describing the problem.
What I really hate is the proverbial responses that are limited to "it didn't work, now what?". To me that is a clear indication that the person requesting assistance is not sincere in learning to resolve their own issue, but merely wants someone else to slave out the solution and deliver it on a silver platter. If someone doesn't have the time display the proper etiquette when requesting my assistance, then why should I waste my time in assisting them?
Personally, I'm glad that you put that yahoo in his place Steve.
April 11, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Lynn Pettis (4/7/2009)
Jeff Moden (4/7/2009)
Only they don't get to come back after calming down.
BWA-HAA!!! That's not a fault... that's a feature. 😛
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
April 11, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Surf Bum (4/8/2009)
Personally, I'm glad that you put that yahoo in his place Steve.
I'm not sure I did much. Lynn did a good job of turning things around.
I can understand just wanting an answer. If you post on a photography site (or some site where you're an amateur) at some point, if you've tried and shown that you have thought about it, you might just want an answer.
And it's probably appropriate to give one if the person has made an effort, and is stuck. You can probably still teach them, but along with the answer.
April 13, 2009 at 3:03 pm
I don't post questions often. I find that if I do the research, I can usually solve the problem. This is just to say that I do not have a lot of experience posting questions and getting answers, or visa versa.
Here is a question for the people who tend to have the answers: It would be my preference and inclination to post a question that has all those details that you say you are looking for. I also spend a lot of time trying to write clear descriptions and discuss solutions tried already. The problem is that this kind of post would probably end up being pretty long--especially because if I get to the point that I actually have to post a question, (I'm near to tears and) we are probably not talking about a simple issue. I've been told by people that they do not like to read my posts because the text is too long. So, my worry would be that if I included all the background details, no one would read my post.
Do you ever skip the long ones just because they are long? Would a shorter post with less background details be preferable in some cases? (The whole "it depends" kind of thing.) It kind of seems like a dumb question given this entire discussion. However, I wonder if the best way to get a response is somewhere in the middle. Remember, I don't have a lot of experience with question posts. Maybe you really do mean it that you want all that detail. I'm curious to hear what people have to say for future reference.
Thanks. - JJ
April 13, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Here is my take. When you look at your post, could someone with no knowledge of the problem domain understand the problem you are presenting. If so, then you have provided enough information. Does that help?
April 13, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Your reply makes perfect sense.
I still wonder if a human element isn't involved. It seems to me that a shorter post might draw someone in enough to be curious and interested enough to ask further questions. A longer post might turn someone off from even trying to answer or reading the full problem statement even though the longer post contains all the necessary information. I think that most humans don't want to read a lot of text. It is why publishers talk a lot about white space. But I could be wrong about the people here.
I was just curious if anyone had thought about length of posts and their real reactions to them. Kind of along the lines of: be careful what you ask for.
Thanks for your reply.
April 13, 2009 at 5:46 pm
In my blog, th flip side, I mention that the post should be concise yet detaled. Sort of an oxymoron, but it works.. The code should be well formatted with appropriate white space. The sample data readily consumbable without reformatting. The sample data easily comparable to the output.
You only need enough of an explaination so that people can understand the problem. They don't need all the details of the system, nor necessarily all the data from the tables, either in rows or columns. Just what is needed to understand and assist in solving the problem.
April 13, 2009 at 9:01 pm
I'd have to say it falls into it depends. I don't mind reading a bit, but sometimes people post several hundred lines of code and, quite frankly, I don't want to have to plow through page after page of poorly written code. Especially when, after wondering for a while and posting a series of suggestions, you get a response that says they can't rewrite anything, they just want it to run faster... That's clearly not you, but you can see where really long posts might push people away after a while.
It just depends on the query, how the question is posed. Personally, I like to see the question up front and the explanation about the question second. That way I can decide if I want to read everything rather than skip it because it looks long. But then, I'm lazy and not nearly a saint like Lynn.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 73 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply