You have my vote on that. I think there would be many more thoughtful discussions if most average folks didn't feel like they need to put on a suit of armor just to join the discussion. But alas...it seems to be that way in every discussion group.
>Carrol,. I agree with you that some would learn slower or not at all, but I >think you are incorrect on your devaluation of respect. It's easy to say >that medicine tastes bad but is necessary. But I propose to the group that >the damage is more than the help. There are many lurkers that would surely >participate more and in turn learn more through being active rather than >just lurking if indeed they could trust that they would not be humiliated if >one of their questions was not up to par. So, although a demeaning message >may be given to one of the few deserving participants, it will cause many >participants not to grow as fast as they would if they were actively >conversing. >I really don't think you're argument holds water because of that. Besides >the same finite resource you refer to are wasted with the rant as with the >question. If the resources are the reason for the rant, then the rant is >self defeating. > >Larry Puckette >Network Analyst CCNA,MCP,LANCP >Temple Inland >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >512/434-1838 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=26620&t=25805 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
