rauch.holger@googlemail.com wrote:
Like I mentioned in my response to Arran, the OP didn't mention whether he had tried anything by himself before posting to this list. Maybe he tried it but he couldn't figure out what the example was telling him (but then he could have mentioned it in his mail)?
Exactly. If he can't be bothered explaining what he's done, I can't be bothered to explain what he needs to do.
Same like in the post to Arran: inferring that people are "too lazy" because they haven't mentioned their own effort is not right, IMHO.
After 10 years of this, experience has given me reason for my opinions. If they don't say they did anything, 90% of the time it's because they didn't do anything.
I'm NOT trying to protect him; all I'm asking for is to be fair to the OP and ask him about his own effort first (i.e. check his honesty). If he then admits that he really hasn't done anything you can still come up with responses like "try harder" (or, better in such a particular case, ignore his post because then it's clearly obvious that he indeed was "too lazy"). Still better (in such a case), unsubscribe him from the list.
I don't unsubscribe people for being lazy. The only people who've been unsubscribed are spammers. As for helping him to ask good questions... no. This isn't a commercial support list. If he can't be bothered explaining what he's done, I can't be bothered to explain what he needs to do.
Please see my paragraph above. I can understand that you are fed up with having to read a post that reads so similar like the many others you probably had to read in the past. But still it's not a good idea to assume that everybody who hasn't included detailed information about his own effort actually is "too lazy" reading the docs (it may apply in quite a few cases, but not in all of them).
Or, they're too lazy to say "I tried X, but it didn't work." But really, when a post says "I want to do X, give me multiple ways how", the *only* possible conclusion is that he's done nothing, and wants to be spoon-fed. No other conclusion is supported by the evidence.
- It won't "educate" the OP to actually "behave better" the next time (since - in his point of view - he's most likely not aware of the fact that one has to clearly point out his own effort(s) in order to make it obvious to all list members that he indeed "tried hard enough" to solve his problem (in the sense of having read the available FAQ and other docs and not having found ways of solving the particular problem in there)
Right... because the near daily pointers to the FAQ on this list, and in the docs, and on the web site aren't enough. People have to be spoon fed.
IMHO, a possible way of educating such users is to tell them once that they are supposed to include information on as to what steps they've taken to solve the problem on their own.
Like it says in the FAQ, and all of the other documentation. The solution to the OP being lazy is for *me* to do more work? Nonsense.
Like I mentioned in my first post: I highly value your technical knowledge about and work for FreeRADIUS. But what's the use of a statement like the one you gave above???
You're excusing someone who's too lazy to help himself, and are asking me to do more work to help him. If you're such an altruist, go help him yourself. Cut & paste the text from the FAQ or "man" page explaining what he has to do. You'll quickly realize it's a waste of time. Really, I truly mean you should do that. Spend a few months trying hard to help people who can't be bothered to read the documentation. There is *very* little you can do to educate them.
I don't consider you "mean" (since I didn't say it). All I'm saying is this: it would probably make everybody's life easier if less assumptions, interpretations, etc. took place on mailing lists. Please think about it. (I didn't "cry", either. It would really help if you take people's concerns seriously. Please try to take that into account.)
I take their concerns seriously. Look at the deluge of features and bug fixes that go in based on peoples email to this list. Alan DeKok.