Ken Irving wrote: > That's a good point. Someone posts a question, and a lot of views and > ideas may be presented, whether relevant to the OP's question or not. > The OP doesn't "own" the thread that results, and attempts to keep the > discussion focused may degenerate into what's perceived of as attacks, > if not just unuseful (to the OP) information.
I don't feel I have done that except in cases where people are directing
the advice to me specifically. You'd be surprised at the wonderful effects
one simple statement can have to the disposition of a discussion if a post
which is meant as an alternative for other people's edification started thusly:
"I know this won't work for you, but an alternative way to look at it is..."
Acknowledging the other person's position and cluing them in that the
advice is for the broader audience of the list means the OP can clearly see it
isn't directly solely at them and let it slide. Otherwise the perception is
that it *IS* directed at them which changes the tone of the post.
I honestly do not mind someone putting the information out there for the
archives. I did that when I decided to go with Mercurial. I do mind people
posting telling me my opinions are wrong, that how I want to do this work is
wrong, that all matters subjective are wrong. I mind they tell me that
something is easier as if easier is some universal absolute agreeable by all.
I'm pretty sure that they would take equal offense to me suggesting they drop
LaTeX for OOo because *I* happen to find it easier for my specific task at hand.
--
Steve C. Lamb | But who decides what they dream?
PGP Key: 8B6E99C5 | And dream I do...
-------------------------------+---------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
