I agree. That's why I proposed to guide such people as the first attempt giving them the benefit of the doubt.
On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 11:52 AM Christophe Pettus <x...@thebuild.com> wrote: > > > > On Jan 15, 2021, at 22:19, Hemil Ruparel <hemilruparel2...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > I have no problems if there are one or two questions which are exactly > the same. I give them the benefit of doubt. What I won't tolerate are > entitled people who think we work for them for free and that they are > entitled to receive and answer. > > I suppose it would be rude to point out that PostgreSQL list style is to > not top-post? I have to say, if you are going to be firm with people about > etiquette... > > If someone gets abusive about not receiving help (and it does happen, > sadly), that's exactly the kind of thing the Code of Conduct was designed > for. If they are seriously spamming the list, likewise. > > For a lot of people, though, they just aren't familiar with list > etiquette, do not have English as their first language and are not clear > what is being asked of them, or just don't know the resources out there. > > I would assume they are acting in good faith. If you politely point out > resources to them and they get snappish, then it can become a CoC issue. > Otherwise, I think that being generous in what we receive and accurate in > what we reply, as with any protocol, is the right answer. > -- > -- Christophe Pettus > x...@thebuild.com > >
