ok,
so by posting that URL I didn't expect it to turn into a full week discussion.
It is very apparent that people feel a certain way about someone not
taking the time to look before posting a question in this group.
Anyone else that reads this please take the time to at least google,
or search the archives before posting a single one-lined question.
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 3:12 AM, CK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Kaarthik,
>
> Cerebrus doesn't work full time moderating this group, nor is he paid
> anything for doing it.
>
> Because these discussions work both online and through email, a
> discussion can get heated and out of control very quickly, I often
> find 50 new posts each time I visit, and I feel I look on here a lot.
>
> People with intelligence should be self-moderating, and should try to
> put up with others who cannot.
>
> That said, it is quite a penomenon that people "discussing" on the
> internet will often not be themselves as they are shielded from real
> physical interaction by their keyboard.
>
> We've had numerous threads like this one where people start getting
> angry, I started one by paraphrasing a rediculous question that had
> led to expert leaving the group to try and show people how stupid
> question lead to far more than stupid answers.
>
> I enjoy reading the posts on this group, and answering where I can,
> and occasionally I even ask questions!
>
> This forum only needs one rule to survive happily, Try Google First!
>
> On 24 Nov, 01:45, "Kaarthik Padmanabhan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Cerebrus,
>> Thanks for checking in at last.
>>
>> It does not matter if someone who joins the group, reads or does not read
>> the rules and regulations, It is totally their problem.
>> But at any point if they violate the rules, YOU could remove that person -
>> stating that he or she has crossed the line. But for you to do that, you
>> should have the rules pinned down somewhere at the first place.
>>
>> Resorting to calling people names or making jokes does not seem to be the
>> right approach.
>>
>> Maybe you should have done this long back, probably then maybe you would not
>> have lost "innumerable experts" who got shooed away by slothful idiots and
>> laggard nincompoops.
>>
>> I can understand how frustrating it could get(especially for you) to see a
>> slew of emails for VFAQ's AND subscriptions.
>> But I share the same concern for people who get publicly humiliated and
>> mocked at. Put it in the rules and make it a violation and kick the person
>> out - seems a lot more simpler? Doesn't it?
>>
>> I only hope this thread gets closed with some solution or else it would mean
>> that "someone" has chickened out.
>>
>> And Brandon - are you really following this thread? Santhosh has already
>> answered this infamous question on this thread's 18th reply. And who were
>> the people who took it that long? Oh wait a second.. I do see a "Brandon"
>> somewhere in between there...
>>
>> Kaarthik
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Brandon Betances <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > Amen Brother. There's a huge difference between coherent, intelligent, well
>> > thought out discussions, and asking the same stupid one sentence questions
>> > over again. They fact of the matter is, if the OP would have taken the time
>> > to type Northwind into Wikipedia, which just took me all of 5 seconds to
>> > do,
>> > he would have gotten this answer.
>>
>> > Northwind, a sample database
>> > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database>included in MS
>> > Access <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_Access> and MS SQL
>> > Server<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_SQL_Server>often used in examples
>> > of database queries or data access programming.
>>
>> > Problem solved, question answered, and now week long heated argument that
>> > STILL has'nt answered the question. Matter of fact, its taking me longer to
>> > write this message than it was to find the answer to the question.
>>
>> > Those properties, the ability to research, learn on your own, expand your
>> > knowledge, and know where to turn when in need of help, are what separate a
>> > good programmer from someone who makes a living off other peoples work. No
>> > offense, OP, but if you couldn't use the plethora of tools given to you by
>> > Al Gore, then you wont make it as a "good" software architect.
>>
>> > On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 2:36 PM, Cerebrus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >> A lot has been said in this thread about the role of moderators and
>> >> the need for modification of the Group's rules/regulations and I will
>> >> comment on them, but first, I quote :
>>
>> >> ---
>> >> > If Google was the answer to all the question please tell the aims and
>> >> > objectives of this forum. Please paste
>> >> > "Only Experienced and Advanced Questions and Users Expected!!" in the
>> >> welcome
>> >> > page
>> >> ---
>>
>> >> > (mocking at a person) is not going to invite new users and is surely not
>> >> making this the "most
>> >> > popular Google group for discussions on Microsoft.NET(R) and related
>> >> > technologies".
>> >> ---
>>
>> >> > then let us have those points added to the rules and
>> >> > regulations. Can we?
>> >> > There are a lot of things documented. Are you telling me that
>> >> > only undocumented and unexplained queries have been answered by people
>> >> in
>> >> > this group so far?
>> >> ---
>>
>> >> > this is not in rules and regulations of the
>> >> > forum so newbies would be eager to ask such questions. And it will be
>> >> good
>> >> > some senior members mark such questions as closed for the begining
>> >> itself
>> >> > there by avoiding some one abuse for this and avoiding a bulk thread
>> >> like
>> >> > this ;)
>>
>> >> > Something like
>>
>> >> > ===========
>> >> > CLOSED FOR GOOGLE
>> >> > ===========
>>
>> >> ---
>> >> > No one has answered the question about including some points to the
>> >> rules and
>> >> > regulations yet. Moderator! KNOCK KNOCK - are you there?
>>
>> >> > Let us get something constructive here with this one. Something like
>> >> this
>> >> > would not offend anyone:
>>
>> >> > 1. Avoid posting questions which have already been asked. Please
>> >> search
>> >> > the group for similar questions, before you post yours
>> >> > 2. Post your questions with some example code wherever possible.
>> >> > Arbitrary questions will not be entertained.
>> >> > 3. Users repeatedly violating these terms will be automatically
>> >> > unsubscribed from the list.
>> >> ---
>>
>> >> My comments are as follows :
>>
>> >> 1. The aims and objectives of this Group are the same as those of any
>> >> online technical discussion forum - mutually productive interaction
>> >> between intelligent members of a community. A user does not need to be
>> >> advanced or experienced to be able to Google. That is the point many
>> >> members have been trying to make. I want to add that this Group has
>> >> never been anti-newbie. One common element in most such discussions is
>> >> that all people who ask stupid un-researched questions are branded as
>> >> newbies and the impression is created that the experts in this Group
>> >> do not want to help newbies. This is a grossly misleading
>> >> characterization. All newbies are not lazy, indolent idiots who demand
>> >> to be assisted with the most basic of problems. A person could be very
>> >> experienced and still not be bothered to do the slightest research.
>>
>> >> 2. This is the most popular Google group for Microsoft.NET discussions
>> >> because of its members who are highly respected, highly knowledgable
>> >> and highly passionate about the subject. It has *not* become popular
>> >> because we chose to spoonfeed slothful idiots so that a good public
>> >> impression could be maintained. We are not a corporation and we do not
>> >> care about our Public relations image. We have had innumerable experts
>> >> leave the Group because it had become a forum for "homework questions"
>> >> and the majority of us did not find it intellectually stimulating at
>> >> all to answer a VFAQ. When laggard nincompoops leave the Group no one
>> >> notices but when experts leave the Group, the loss is widely felt
>> >> because these are the people who actually contribute to make this a
>> >> better community.
>>
>> >> 3. It is I who wrote the "Welcome message" of the Group two years back
>> >> and it is I who takes the sole responsibility for its
>> >> comprehensiveness (or lack, thereof). I welcome suggestions about it,
>> >> but before you send me manuscripts full of ideas, answer me two
>> >> questions - Do you know what percentage of members have never
>> >> (bothered to) read the Welcome message? After about 3 years moderating
>> >> this Group, my estimate is that about 70% of members simply ignored
>> >> that message and the included rules/regulations. Yes, that is the
>> >> reason I later changed a part of it to red and bold faced. Do you know
>> >> how many emails I get on my personal email address asking me to
>> >> subscribe them to the Group's membership ? About 1-2 every day. I
>> >> always check and they're almost always already subscribed. I mean, how
>> >> hard is it to see the "Join this Group" link on the right ?
>>
>> >> Even if I chose to include the suggested guidelines explicitly, I
>> >> doubt it would have much effect on the behaviour of those whose
>> >> languor is so great that they find it easier to ask a question here
>> >> rather than Google it, for those who would rather write an incoherent
>> >> question fully of misspellings that doesn't disclose any details about
>> >> the problem rather than spending a few minutes gathering their
>> >> thoughts.
>>
>> >> 4. There have been suggestions that this thread be closed. This group
>> >> is for discussions and I do not close any threads until the language
>> >> becomes ugly or the atmosphere becomes vitiated. Therefore, this
>> >> thread will remain open for the present.
>>
>> >> There can be no excuse for laziness and therefore, we do not excuse
>> >> it.
>>
>> >> --
>> >> Cerebrus.
>> >> Group Moderator.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
