On Sat, 2001-12-01 at 07:34, Tom Allison wrote: > My point is this: > If all you ever want is the step by step instructions, that is all you > will ever know.
<diatribe> This is more or less the key for me to understanding why other people can't be bothered to read the manual. If it's not in a step by step format for their exact problem they assume somewhere, someone else is to blame for their problems. The real solution is to understand that step by step instructions and example config files are tools to properly comprehend the CONCEPTS and their RELATIONSHIPS to the REQUIREMENTS to solve your PROBLEM. Once you learn what goals need to be accomplished and the steps needed to take them, you don't need step by step instructions anymore. You can map your own route from point A to point B independent of a particular howto. Learning how to absorb massive amounts of Documentation and incorporate the concepts ino your knowledge base is critical to understanding where a particular point A and point B are for undefined problems. Sometimes some people get this very quickly, people like Systems Analysts and Sysadmins usually, others often don't for a long while. The secret is not to know everything, but where to go looking for it. If you can't be bothered to read Documentation, you shouldn't be given control over your own systems. I'm really serious on this point, if you don't want to learn how to fix it right you shouldn't ever try. To the people that say "That's why Linux will never be a desktop": I agree, the system is too complicated for most users, especially those who expect and demand that a free product meet their expectations immediately without trying to contribute anything but criticism. There is no one solution or default config, default enabling of unused services is why Red Worm and things spread like wildfire through Windows. Linux can provide solutions to most tasks, you have to understand what those are and why before you can implement them. Of course those who do climb out of the newbie pit often look back and see how obvious the solutions are to their old problems and figure everyone should understand those now simple concepts, thats why I think it's hard to write docs for newbies. It doesn't help that most error messages are a tad bit cryptic to new users and especially ones from Windows who only ever see a blue screen and just shrug and reboot. They've been trained to ignore why the problem happened and not to look for the solutions. Onto the main point of the thread. The RTFM sayers aren't all lumped into the same grouping. I haven't seen all that much of a RTFM one liner to a question much here, we actually care about users here. The other camp is trying to point someone in the right direction usually after providing the solution or a large hint. Self sufficiency as an admin is really the ultimate goal of helping list questions here in my opinion. When I see short questions that are actually answerable by RTFM and it's someone relatively new I quote the FM for them and tell them where I found it, suggestions to use the command apropos to provide clues to the FM etc. On the other hand if it's technical questions by experienced users I recognize I answer them succinctly because I know that the answer will provide understanding to the recpient independent of a lecture. But, if people keep asking the same question after being given an answer, or sometimes two or three that will work, or the answer is RTFMLA (MLA=Mailing List Archives). One ability that needs to be learned is how to search for previous solutions from archives and google. Most questions I have have already been answered somewhere else. It gets annoying to see them same question over and over, and over and over about 2 weeks later when the same issue hits testing from unstable. </diatribe> --mike
