Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question) end of thread
Just a recommendation.. Book Title: "Pragmatics of Human Communication" Author: Paul Watzlawik a.o. ISBN: 0393010090 and now back to work.. Anton Pirnat
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Scott D. Yelich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Was the issue about an MX pointing to a CNAME ever resolved? Yes; it's verboten. If you do it, don't expect to receive 100% of the mail people try to send to you. Also; please start a new thread when posting a new question; your message showed up in the middle of the "Newbies -- fried, or flame-broiled?" thread. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
"Aaron L. Meehan" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I've said enough. Pretty close to adding a rule for *Outlook* and *Inernet Mail Service* (heh, "Service!") into my .procmailrc, though, for mails to this list, with the SNR getting so bad among you all. The only problem with doing that is the clueful admins with clueless management who force everyone to use the Corporate Email Solution, ie Outlook. Not me right now, but it was me in my last job. -Matt -- | Matthew J. Brown - Senior Network Administrator - NBCi Shopping | | 1983 W. 190th St, Suite 100, Torrance CA 90504 | | Phone: (310) 538-7122| Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Cell: (714) 457-1854| Personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
On 1 Dec 2000, Matt Brown wrote: The only problem with doing that is the clueful admins with clueless management who force everyone to use the Corporate Email Solution, ie Outlook. Not me right now, but it was me in my last job. Agreed. At my last consulting job... it took over 3 weeks to get the corporate email set up... once it was set up, I had mail waiting before I even got in the first time. The third message was a virus from someone I didn't even know (in the company). Everyone was forced to use outlook/express - no ifs-and-or-buts one guy insisted emailing mailing lists with this whereabouts... "I'm going to lunch now" ... "I'm going to be 30 minutes late getting in this morning" ... etc. Scott ps: qmail qmail qmail qmail qmail
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
"asantos" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Or that XEmacs is not an operating system. Actually, XEmacs is as much of an operating system--probably even moreso--than early versions of Windows. -Dave
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
From: Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] Actually, XEmacs is as much of an operating system--probably even moreso--than early versions of Windows. Me, I'd say that neither is an operating system ;) Anyway, I think that a good rule of thumb to qualify a software piece as a operating system is "does the boot in it?". In the case of XEmacs, it obviously doesn't. In the case of Windows... errr... that's it, Windows is a windows manager, not a operating system. Armando
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
I may be out of line here. You are. You post off-topic bullshit to a mailing list about qmail. Oh, and you don't even have the decency to comply to the well-established quoting standards when quoting email from others. This is not a "I am willing to help dumb idiots" mailing list. This is more of a self help mailing list. You help yourself and when you have a problem that can not be answered with the docs and search engines, THEN you can come here. Or you can come here to read announcements for new software, new documentation or new tricks regarding qmail. But if you come here, post moronic questions, get beaten for it, and then have the audacity to come back and whine publicly, then you are the most pathetic creature on Earth and deserve to die slowly and painfully. May the flies of a dozen dead camels' asses rest in your armpits! Felix
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
But if you come here, post moronic questions, get beaten for it, and then have the audacity to come back and whine publicly, then you are the most pathetic creature on Earth and deserve to die slowly and painfully. May the flies of a dozen dead camels' asses rest in your armpits! I cannot get over this attitude. Can it really be that the majority of the qmail community feels like old Felix here? Sounds like the guy was dropped as a baby, beaten up in grammar school, and caught his prom date screwing another chick in the back seat of his car. Relax, Felix. And remember, you're cluttering up the list as much as this "moron". As am I. As will be whomever flames me. Just talk about qmail or nothing at all, you angry people. It's that simple. Ask a question, answer a question, or post nothing, if you want this list traffic to be worthwhile reading. Gregg Felix
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Am Donnerstag, 30. November 2000 20:30 schrieb Barley: But if you come here, post moronic questions, get beaten for it, and then have the audacity to come back and whine publicly, then you are the most pathetic creature on Earth and deserve to die slowly and painfully. May the flies of a dozen dead camels' asses rest in your armpits! I cannot get over this attitude. Can it really be that the majority of the qmail community feels like old Felix here? Yes. Ask a question, answer a question, or post nothing, And waste your time deleteting 10 follow-ups like "oh this list is so impolite as nobody helps me". Gregg Felix -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de| Germany
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Thus spake Dave Sill ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I'm not a big fan of newbie smackdowns, though a repeat offendor might warrant one. I think newbies generally respond better to reward than punishment. E.g., instead of: This is a question that I have asked numerous times and I never got a good response for it: Why would you want to help rude newbies? Don't get me wrong: helping newbies is essential for the survival of the knowledge. But if I have the choice, I will not help people who are so dumb that they will probably get killed the next day because they thought pissing on overland power lines is a bright idea. And that includes people who a. are too dumb to state their question properly (this includes bad grammar, bad spelling, bad quoting and obnoxious signatures) b. are too dumb to state their question in the proper forum c. are not friendly (i.e. demand answer instead of being polite) d. whine when someone points their mistakes out to them If someone who matches any of those points wants my help, he has to pay for it. Or, he can be really really friendly to me. Or he can read the documentation that I put on my web page. If that is not sufficient, then that person is out of luck. No, I am not sorry. The former approach *might* work, but is more likely to offend the newbie. The latter is polite and informative. An educated, unoffended newbie is much more likely to want to change his ways. If he doesn't want to change his ways, then he is welcome to examine the inside of my spacious killfile. Noone is obligated to help idiots. In particular, I am not. Felix
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
How exactly is my MUA broken? Your MTA is not so broken that it could not be fixed if you actually understood what you are doing. Robin chose to be more polite to you than you are to us, so he rather wrote that it's your MUA's fault. Telling someone to RTFM would be helpful, if the manual being referenced as indicated. Say, weren't you the guy who accused Robin of bad spelling? I suggest you should fix your grammar first. When exactly did I call Dave Sill an asshole? I simply made meantion that his HOWTO did not assist in my configuration of qmail. Did you, at any time, consider that this might not be the fault of the documentation but of your own? BTW: It's "mention", not "meantion". This is not a derogatory statement in any fashion. Simply a statement of fact. As for providing clarifications to the document, I very well may once I have qmail configured the way I would like it. What do we have to do to get you and your new-age psycho-babble self-help crap off this list? Please go away and watch a few hundred hours of the fine world-class US "let's all be happy and friendly" mind-control television. That ought to mellow you out a little. What brings me to post? Simple, I like to help people learn more about computing. To me it looks like you enjoy sabotaging other people's means of communication by clogging it with mindless and superfluous off-topic drivel like this very posting. Your discussion of social and meta problems indicates that you looking for topics that nobody understands enough to prove you wrong. Let me assure you: The qmail list is no such place. Why don't you go to soc.* in Usenet? You will meet millions of other people who like to talk about psychology and sociology. Felix
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Am Donnerstag, 30. November 2000 20:30 schrieb Barley: But if you come here, post moronic questions, get beaten for it, and then have the audacity to come back and whine publicly, then you are the most pathetic creature on Earth and deserve to die slowly and painfully. May the flies of a dozen dead camels' asses rest in your armpits! I cannot get over this attitude. Can it really be that the majority of the qmail community feels like old Felix here? Yes. I think you're worng. You see, you, like Felix, are a rude person who enjoys trashing newbies. You were the first person to get incredibly nasty about newbies yesterday, then that joker Robin...now this Felix character. It seem to me that you angry types form a vocal minority. Certainly, it has been a lot more friendly people who have helped me on this list. You people don't help anyone, but rather just mouth off and bolster your egos. Ask a question, answer a question, or post nothing, And waste your time deleteting 10 follow-ups like "oh this list is so impolite as nobody helps me". Better than having to delete those 10 messages plus 10 messages from angry egomaniacs like yourself, plus ten messages from people like me asking why you can't just act like an adult and treat people with respect. I mean, come on, "May the flies of a dozen dead camels' asses rest in your armpits!" is the kind of thing children say to one another. And to say it because someone didn't post a question correctly? Wow, you folks need to get your heads out of your asses. You are older than 12, right? Gregg Felix -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de| Germany
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
"Barley" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I cannot get over this attitude. Can it really be that the majority of the qmail community feels like old Felix here? If I say "yes" can we kill this thread? -Dave
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Quoting John W. Lemons III ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
I've seen this over and over and over. Someone joins the list, probably
because they are having problems (the same reason I joined), posts a
question
Back in the day, it was prudent and _neccessary_ to do thorough
checking of the forum's archives and lurk before posting, unless you
wore fireproof undies. It's still true to this day, although it seems
that someone is complaining about this most basic Internet truth every
week (day?) on this list.
When you have a problem, subscribing to a mailing list and immediately
posting your question is unwise, as your problem has likely been asked
and answered dozens, if not hundreds, of times.
The vast, VAST majority of questions posted to this list in recent
memory have been asked and answered a bazillion times. Some don't
mind seeing them a bazillion times, most do.
This is Internet 101, but I'm afraid the deluge is starting drown us.
Inane questions are costing us all money. You could argue that it's a
fraction of a penny, but still, for those interested in actually
helping out those who pose good questions, it wastes time and money to
have to wade through those asking about shell syntax. Less noise
would mean UIC's 'net connection would be a little less-stressed, as
well. Alas, I expect trends to continue.
Why is it that all of these people are installing their Redhat CD's
and installing qmail without having the foggiest idea how it all fits
together? Why are they not doing their homework? It's all fine and
dandy for your home playground, but many of these questions are coming
from professionals working with production systems!
So many questions posted here really haven't anything to do with email
or qmail, but rather basic Unix administration fundamentals, which is
decidedly lacking among more and more of the world's Unix
"administrators" these days, it would seem (and not just the low-paid
ones, I'm afraid). Without understanding how your shell works, how to
decipher the syntax of your init scripts? There are many other
examples.
You don't just move from NT to any type of Unix without extensive
research and experience, save for your own home boxes or what not, or
unless you are particularly bright (again, obviously lacking among
many newbie posters here). If you can't do it yourself, then it's
wise to hire someone.
Now, when I installed qmail the first time for a production system, I
was subscribed to the qmail list for awhile already--I knew I HAD to
get rid of sendmaul, and I did my homework! I did it using only Dan's
docs in the qmail tarball! Yes. There was no LWQ. I also learned a
great deal just by reading this list for a month or two. It was PIECE
OF CAKE, especially when one has experience with such monstrosities as
INN--the poor souls having trouble with qmail and posting here would
shoot themselves. Some don't have the luxury of that much time or
experience, granted, but still, there's a limit. Having a firm grasp
of Unix and a little common sense goes a long ways. If you don't have
a firm grasp on Unix, then there are resources out there to help you,
on Usenet, the Web, in printed books, whatever.
The keys to success:
- Read the docs, then read more docs.
- Know the software, your OS, your shell, and basic Unix stuff like
file permissions ("my log says the .qmail file has an x bit set and
program delivery, and qmail won't deliver my mail! how do I fix it??"
how many times have I seen that?!) before you decide to put that new
qmail box in production! Argg. Or hire someone who does.
- Attention to detail.
Heck, there are probably others, but I can't stress the latter enough,
since it's apparent that attention to detail is non-existant for most of
those used to point-and-drool and that ask question on this list.
On a side note, I've tried to unsubscribe from the list because of exactly
this kind of crap from self-important jerks who seem to get a charge out of
kicking people when they are down, but the damn server tells me I'm not
subscribed so it can't unsubscribe me. Go figure.
Well, again, attention to detail is the key. Your envelope sender
address does not match the address that you were subscribed as, for
whatever reason. Look at this mail's return-path for a clue.
I've said enough. Pretty close to adding a rule for *Outlook* and
*Inernet Mail Service* (heh, "Service!") into my .procmailrc, though,
for mails to this list, with the SNR getting so bad among you all.
Sigh.
Aaron
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Thus spake Barley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): Man, this Robin character is nuts. Coder-superiority syndrome big time. Why is it that tech geeks are so sure that their field of knowledge is the only one that indicates general intelligence? Hahaha, you idiot can't even be bothered to use a search engine to look Robin's previous work out to place a proper insult? What kind of pathetic wimp are you, anyway? Robin is not a coder. If Robin is anything like his/her mailing list personality in real life, I'm sure few people would consider him/her nearly as intelligent as he/she considers him/herself. True intelligence is indicated by a broader understanding of things, and the contributions that many different people have to offer. Hahaha, how can someone like _you_ dare to say anything about intelligence? Especially about other people's intelligence?! You wouldn't know intelligence when it fell on your foot! You mentioned Darwinism in a former post, Robin. How exactly is an angry geek who knows a whole lot about electronic boxes, but less than nothing about interacting successfully with the 5 billion other real-live people on the planet suited for survival in a Darwinian sense? Something tells me if you and I were dropped in the wilderness together, I'd be the one coming out alive, if only because I had you skewered on a spit over a fire within the first day. In fact it's hard to envision a role for you at all in any world that wasn't utterly computer-dependant. Robin's day job is not computer related. Now why don't you go answer some questions instead of flaming me back. Show us all how clever you are, Robin. Gregg, why don't you be a good boy and piss off. Go away. Leave. There is nobody here who has any interest in your pathetic flaming. And, now that you showed your real face, noone would help you even if you learned how to spell, how to quote or how to phrase your questions correctly. Begone, parasite. Felix
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
I don't disagree with a lot of what you said, but I still fail to see why a newbie posting a question should illicit waves of vulgarity and self aggrandizing diatribes from a select few that have deemed themselves too busy to help, but not too busy to hurt. Back in "the day" (yes, I actually predate the web) I don't recall this kind of behavior being nearly as common as it is now. Granted this may be a reaction to an increase of newbie traffic, but that doesn't make it right, nor does it make the list any better, because newbies will come in regardless of how previous newbies are chastised by definition. -Original Message- From: Aaron L. Meehan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 3:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question) Quoting John W. Lemons III ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I've seen this over and over and over. Someone joins the list, probably because they are having problems (the same reason I joined), posts a question Back in the day, it was prudent and _neccessary_ to do thorough checking of the forum's archives and lurk before posting, unless you wore fireproof undies. It's still true to this day, although it seems that someone is complaining about this most basic Internet truth every week (day?) on this list. snip
HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 12:55:33PM -0800, Barley wrote: I think you're worng. STOP THIS BULLSHIT. NOW! IT'S ALREADY MORE THAN ENOUGH. And if you think you must continue, take it to private mail. \Maex
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Am Donnerstag, 30. November 2000 21:55 schrieb Barley: You see, you, like Felix, are a rude person who enjoys trashing newbies. You were the first person to get incredibly nasty about newbies yesterday, then that joker Robin...now this Felix character. It seem to me that you angry types form a vocal minority. Certainly, it has been a lot more friendly people who have helped me on this list. You people don't help anyone, but rather just mouth off and bolster your egos. I expect that everyone asking us for free advice thinks about the problem himself, provides necessary infos, has read the docs and is polite. nothing more. If anybody want's more, he should pay for help. Ask a question, answer a question, or post nothing, And waste your time deleteting 10 follow-ups like "oh this list is so impolite as nobody helps me". Better than having to delete those 10 messages plus 10 messages from angry egomaniacs like yourself, plus ten messages from people like me asking why you can't just act like an adult and treat people with respect. If only one of this stupid unable-to-read-the-documentation and unable-to-think nebies does not ask and decides to read again, it was worth it. -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de| Germany
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Thus spake Barley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): You mentioned Darwinism in a former post, Robin. How exactly is an angry geek who knows a whole lot about electronic boxes, but less than nothing about interacting successfully with the 5 billion other real-live people on the planet suited for survival in a Darwinian sense? You wouldn't say that if you knew how many of us wanted to sleep with him. -- Kate http://www.katewerk.com
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
From: Markus Stumpf [EMAIL PROTECTED] STOP THIS BULLSHIT. NOW! IT'S ALREADY MORE THAN ENOUGH. "...a dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness. Bad manners. Lack of consideration for others in minor matters. A loss of politeness, of gentle manners, is more significant than a riot. This symptom is especially serious in that an individual displaying it never thinks of it as a sign of ill health but as proof of his/her strength." - Robert Anson Heinlein Isn't it interesting that Stumf, Leitner and Socha all come from Germany? Just a coincidence, I suppose. 'nough said. Armando
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 09:27:57PM +0100, Felix von Leitner wrote: Thus spake Dave Sill ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I'm not a big fan of newbie smackdowns, though a repeat offendor might warrant one. I think newbies generally respond better to reward than punishment. E.g., instead of: This is a question that I have asked numerous times and I never got a good response for it: Why would you want to help rude newbies? You wouldn't. But, unfortunately, someone ends up doing so, leading to a continuous wrong-doing trend. Don't get me wrong: helping newbies is essential for the survival of the knowledge. But if I have the choice, I will not help people who are so dumb that they will probably get killed the next day because they thought pissing on overland power lines is a bright idea. Ease down, Felix. Don't look at it as a matter of dumbness. It's more of an inadequacy issue. Keep reading; And that includes people who a. are too dumb to state their question properly (this includes bad grammar, bad spelling, bad quoting and obnoxious signatures) Please... The internet wasn't built for english speakers, nor by english speakers. But, as we all know, english (or english-ish approaches) is a common language for all of us. My own english is far from perfect, and I very often find myself twisting my brain trying to figure out what a supplier or business partner is trying to tell me in a meeting. As long as we're not talking about l33t dud3z, nor native speakers, that shouldn't be a problem. (at least not a major one) b. are too dumb to state their question in the proper forum That's not dumbness. That's rudeness or inadequacy. By inadequate, I'm talking about those guys who've never seen a unix shell until two days ago, have no clue whatsoever of what C is, expect the docs to _talk_ them step by step into procedures, or, the most common case, expect someone to give them an out-of-the-box solution for free. What frightens me is that more and more of these seem to be in charge of someone's mail, webspace, databases, whatever. They sould never, ever, be allowed to touch a damn root prompt, unless the machine is nowhere near a network. THAT's how people should learn. Unfortunately, a large group of new "sysadmins" are teaching themselves through experience in production environments and, what's worse, they're using either pre-built packages, or scripts someone else gave them (either because they were polite, or because they whined for a week and someone got tired and gave them a solution). This usually leads to a situation where things do work, but the "ladmin" has no clue on "why", "how", and "what to do if it fails". Also, more and more of these ladmins seem to be unaware of the fact that Linux isn't the only non-Windows OS. They don't know what Unix is. They have no idea of how to configure things without the nifty GTK or curses interface; and ultimately, editing source or slightly changing a script is a nightmarish idea. But what truly pisses me off is the fact that they expect a qmail (example) list to solve their problems with bash scripting, kernel options, DNS. And they don't seem to realize this is NOT the proper place to do so, and refuse to read the docs where answers to most issues are clear. But then again, if they have no Unix backgound or knowledge at all, how will a simple answer like "Change the uid of that directory to that of the user running the daemon" help? c. are not friendly (i.e. demand answer instead of being polite) Oh, well... Why doesn't everyone just ignore those? d. whine when someone points their mistakes out to them Hey, Felix... They're the Unix Gurus in there. They convinced everyone else NT was no good, and should be replaced. How dare WE tell them they're wrong? If he doesn't want to change his ways, then he is welcome to examine the inside of my spacious killfile. Noone is obligated to help idiots. In particular, I am not. Noone is. But the base fact is: They should never come this far without basic IT and Unix skills. RC -- +--- | Ricardo Cerqueira | PGP Key fingerprint - B7 05 13 CE 48 0A BF 1E 87 21 83 DB 28 DE 03 42 | Novis Telecom - Engenharia ISP / Rede Técnica | Pç. Duque Saldanha, 1, 7º E / 1050-094 Lisboa / Portugal | Tel: +351 2 1010 - Fax: +351 2 1010 4459 PGP signature
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
Isn't it interesting that Stumf, Leitner and Socha all come from Germany? Just a coincidence, I suppose. And that they all talk sweepingly of "genetic superiority"? I thought I was the only one who noticed... 'nough said. Armando
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Barley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 30 November 2000 at 11:30:46 -0800 But if you come here, post moronic questions, get beaten for it, and then have the audacity to come back and whine publicly, then you are the most pathetic creature on Earth and deserve to die slowly and painfully. May the flies of a dozen dead camels' asses rest in your armpits! I cannot get over this attitude. Can it really be that the majority of the qmail community feels like old Felix here? Well, no. And yes. I prefer that people who waste our time through laziness not be beaten; but I have no objection to people ignoring them, I often do myself. And if they come back whining about getting not help, and get a polite explanation of why not, and start flaming, well, by then I figure they've volunteered. I think that people who don't understand how far from qualified to install any MTA they are, and who don't understand the social dynamics of user community lists for complex technical products, and who don't seem to be interested in *learning* any of those things, are pretty pitiful. I stop short of thinking they deserve a slow, painful, death, myself, though. In other words, I agree with most of the analysis, but prefer to use gentler language in my descriptions. -- David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED] SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/ Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Felix von Leitner [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 30 November 2000 at 21:27:57 +0100 Thus spake Dave Sill ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): I'm not a big fan of newbie smackdowns, though a repeat offendor might warrant one. I think newbies generally respond better to reward than punishment. E.g., instead of: This is a question that I have asked numerous times and I never got a good response for it: Why would you want to help rude newbies? It makes me feel superior. Also, it tends to keep the tone of the group more pleasant. Don't get me wrong: helping newbies is essential for the survival of the knowledge. But if I have the choice, I will not help people who are so dumb that they will probably get killed the next day because they thought pissing on overland power lines is a bright idea. I wouldn't want to go anywhere *close* to somebody that dumb; they might do something that would attract incoming fire, too. Luckily, they're rare. The exact category "pissing on overland power lines" doesn't seem to exist in the cause-of-death statistics, but at a rough guess there are, um, zero people killed that way each year. So I don't worry about them *too* much. And that includes people who a. are too dumb to state their question properly (this includes bad grammar, bad spelling, bad quoting and obnoxious signatures) Remembering that English is not the first language for everybody; I make considerably more allowances for somebody who is writing English better than I write German or Russian, than I do for people who obviously just aren't trying. b. are too dumb to state their question in the proper forum c. are not friendly (i.e. demand answer instead of being polite) d. whine when someone points their mistakes out to them If someone who matches any of those points wants my help, he has to pay for it. Or, he can be really really friendly to me. Or he can read the documentation that I put on my web page. If that is not sufficient, then that person is out of luck. No, I am not sorry. Your time, your rules. I certainly agree that my correct reponse to being caught in an error is somewhere in the range from "Ah! Thanks" to "Doh!" to "I see I was having a particularly braindead moment, thanks for bailing me out", and does not extend to whining. The former approach *might* work, but is more likely to offend the newbie. The latter is polite and informative. An educated, unoffended newbie is much more likely to want to change his ways. If he doesn't want to change his ways, then he is welcome to examine the inside of my spacious killfile. Noone is obligated to help idiots. In particular, I am not. True. You're welcome to killfile them, or just ignore the messages. You're certainly not under any obligation. And it's obvious that your attitude will be better if you don't try! Just so you don't get to the point of arguing that it's actively *wrong* to help them (which you haven't yet). -- David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED] SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/ Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
Barley wrote: And that they all talk sweepingly of "genetic superiority"? I thought I was the only one who noticed... Let's see, if USENET history is any indication, flame wars usually die down the moment people start calling each other Nazis. Glad to see this one's almost over. By the way, for what it's worth, my installation of Outlook Express seems to do replies the way its supposed to: "Re: " in the subject line, and a "References: " field in the header to keep the archive happy. I'm not saying this on behalf of Microsoft, but merely on behalf of me when I beg you not to set up filters based on what email client somebody is using. I'm good! Really I am! ---Kris Kelley
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Was the issue about an MX pointing to a CNAME ever resolved? Scott
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
Am Freitag, 1. Dezember 2000 00:54 schrieb asantos:
Isn't it interesting that Stumf, Leitner and Socha all come from Germany?
Just a coincidence, I suppose.
What about writing a rule for your mailer: if ( $sender =~ /.de$/ ) { kill
mail; }. Then you can happily read all the lusers bullshit without being
disturbed by us nazis tryin to get world domination. Maybe you won't get the
3rd world war announcement Germany will surely start soon, anyway.
--
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de| Germany
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
about interacting successfully with the 5 billion other real-live people on the planet suited for survival in a Darwinian sense? You wouldn't say that if you knew how many of us wanted to sleep with him. -- Kate http://www.katewerk.com Hrm i thought Robin was a woman ;) Rick
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Quoting rmiddleton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): about interacting successfully with the 5 billion other real-live people on the planet suited for survival in a Darwinian sense? You wouldn't say that if you knew how many of us wanted to sleep with him. Hrm i thought Robin was a woman ;) You wouldn't believe how much money we made with that webcam... -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/ "If you are too low a lifeform to be able to learn how to use the manual page subsystem, why should we help you?" (Theo de Raadt)
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
From: Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Isn't it interesting that Stumf, Leitner and Socha all come from Germany?
Just a coincidence, I suppose.
What about writing a rule for your mailer: if ( $sender =~ /.de$/ ) { kill
mail; }. Then you can happily read all the lusers bullshit without being
disturbed by us nazis tryin to get world domination. Maybe you won't get
the
3rd world war announcement Germany will surely start soon, anyway.
Sorry, I'll rephrase that:
"Isn't it interesting that Stumf, Leitner, Socha and Brauer all come from
Germany?
Just a coincidence, I suppose."
I didn't mention nazis, NSAP or world domination. I hope I haven't struck a
raw nerve there.
As for that perly thing... can you please rewrite it in Plankalkul?
Armando
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
On Fri, 01 Dec 2000, Henning Brauer wrote:
What about writing a rule for your mailer: if ( $sender =~ /.de$/ ) {
kill mail; }. Then you can happily read all the lusers bullshit
without being disturbed by us nazis tryin to get world domination.
Maybe you won't get the 3rd world war announcement Germany will
surely start soon, anyway.
Bwah, if you are happy with sending another few million of your youth
to die in the battlefields, then go ahead. But a better idea would be
a civil war, that way the rest of the world won't take you accountable
for anything this time (and surely you'll win this time).
Sorry, couldn't help it.
--
"California no longer exists, the dream is long dead ..."
- Mediterraneo -
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 03:21:40PM -0800, Barley wrote: Isn't it interesting that Stumf, Leitner and Socha all come from Germany? Just a coincidence, I suppose. And that they all talk sweepingly of "genetic superiority"? I thought I was the only one who noticed... Isn't it funny, how *some* people that live in a country and a culture - that killed thousands of black people - that killed thousands of red indians - that killed thousands of people with the atomic bomb - that killed thousands of people in Vietnam - that still has racial discrimination in their own country - that has a Ku Klux Clan - that practises capital punishment - who's number of nazi supporters outnumbers those in the rest of the world - who has the highest crime rate in "western civilation" - where it is forbidden to show naked breasts (you know the things you got your first meal from in your life) on TV, but it is prefectly ok to broadcast a detailed sequence of a man chopping off the head of another man with a chainsaw during children's hour still feel so superior to the rest of the world? And isn't it funny that the same people at the end always come down to calling every German a nazi, really a sign of high grade intelligence and that really "indicates a broader understanding of things". Oh, and isn't it interesting that Barley, asantos and Collins all use Microsoft MUAs? And did you notice that their names don't contain the vowel "u"? Just a coincidence, I suppose ... A few people on this list have asked to stop that thread. But I think it was too well hidden for you to understand. So I posted some capital letters. Maybe you still didn't understand, maybe you're one of those who always have to have the last word/post. Hey, hurry up, send a reply and you've won! \Maex
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
Am Donnerstag, 30. November 2000 22:21 schrieb Horacio:
On Fri, 01 Dec 2000, Henning Brauer wrote:
What about writing a rule for your mailer: if ( $sender =~ /.de$/ ) {
kill mail; }. Then you can happily read all the lusers bullshit
without being disturbed by us nazis tryin to get world domination.
Maybe you won't get the 3rd world war announcement Germany will
surely start soon, anyway.
Bwah, if you are happy with sending another few million of your youth
to die in the battlefields, then go ahead. But a better idea would be
a civil war, that way the rest of the world won't take you accountable
for anything this time (and surely you'll win this time).
I'm getting the impression you haven't got the irony.
Sorry, couldn't help it.
--
Henning Brauer | BS Web Services
Hostmaster BSWS| Roedingsmarkt 14
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg
www.bsws.de| Germany
RE: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
Isn't it funny, how *some* people that live in a country and a culture - that killed thousands of black people - that killed thousands of red indians - that killed thousands of people with the atomic bomb - that killed thousands of people in Vietnam You forgot the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, both in the war and after, whom we're still trodding under the boots of our puppet apparatus, the so called "United Nations." -- gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Hrm i thought Robin was a woman ;) You wouldn't believe how much money we made with that webcam... -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/ hah! that owns! now smack your dad for the chick's name ;)
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Thus spake David Dyer-Bennet ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): a. are too dumb to state their question properly (this includes bad grammar, bad spelling, bad quoting and obnoxious signatures) Remembering that English is not the first language for everybody; I make considerably more allowances for somebody who is writing English better than I write German or Russian, than I do for people who obviously just aren't trying. English is not my mother tongue. I expect from others what I expect from myself. I would never post a question in German or ultra-broken Mandarin to a Chinese mailing list. If your English is so bad that your English teacher commited suicide with a flame thrower after reading your essays, then you need more practice and should not post to mailing lists. Buy a few tapes or whatever. If I can't understand your question, I can't answer you. It is in your own interest to phrase it correctly. If he doesn't want to change his ways, then he is welcome to examine the inside of my spacious killfile. Noone is obligated to help idiots. In particular, I am not. True. You're welcome to killfile them, or just ignore the messages. You're certainly not under any obligation. And it's obvious that your attitude will be better if you don't try! If that was a solution, I would be doing it instead of talking about it. The fact is that I still see the hundreds of replies from others, no matter how deep I bury the idiots in my killfile. So not only do they still cause traffic to my SMTP server that I have to pay, they also cost me precious time. So the only real solution is to get rid of the lusers for good. I hope to discourage them by flaming a few of the particularly nasty ones here. Just so you don't get to the point of arguing that it's actively *wrong* to help them (which you haven't yet). If they are rude and you help them, you tell the lurkers that it's OK to be rude because you are helped anyway. And, if I killfile rude lusers, and you answer to them in public, I will still waste time reading your reply, which will quote the question from the idiot so I will still see it. So: yes, I think nobody should answer rude questions. Felix
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
* Markus Stumpf [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001130 20:23]: Isn't it funny, how *some* people that live in a country and a culture - that killed thousands of black people [snip] Yeah yeah yeah, at least *we* know that David Hasselhof is talentless. /pg -- Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Many computer scientists have fallen into the trap of trying to define languages like George Orwell's Newspeak, in which it is impossible to think bad thoughts. What they end up doing is killing the creativity of programming. --- Larry Wall
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
Thus spake Markus Stumpf ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): - who has the highest crime rate in "western civilation" - where it is forbidden to show naked breasts (you know the things you got your first meal from in your life) on TV, but it is prefectly ok to broadcast a detailed sequence of a man chopping off the head of another man with a chainsaw during children's hour still feel so superior to the rest of the world? Heck, they can't even elect a president ;-) Who can take a country seriously where ten percent of the population are in prison? Felix
Re: HELL, STOP IT (was: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question))
Thus spake Barley ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): And that they all talk sweepingly of "genetic superiority"? I thought I was the only one who noticed... It was you who brought that term up. Felix
List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
I may be out of line here. However, this is not the first time I've seen snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help. I am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent. Sure, some of the postings for help may not contain all the information that a more experienced person would have. But to respond to them with a statement to the effect of "send all necessary information" is crazy. There is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or may not be needed to diagnose a problem. As many of the people posting without this level of information are new to either Linux or qmail (or both) there needs to be some understanding on everyone's behalf. And telling someone to RTFM is normally of little to no help. I've been told several times to RTFM without any indication as to which manual. This is of little to no help to anyone. As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate. I tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the source twice, with no luck. Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck. It wasn't until I purchased "Running qmail." that I actually got the thing to work. I'm sure that if I went back to either set of instructions (source or LWQ) that both would be adequate for the installation now that I've done it before. However herein lies the problem. The documentation that currently exists is really only helpful to someone that has already installed the software once before. But, I've digressed. IMHO, everyone that is offering help via a list such as this should be courteous to those asking for help. If you can't be courteous, I ask that you please refrain from posting. Snapping at a user asking for help will accomplish nothing more than making the user angry and hesitant from posting in the future. IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other support list. I realize, as do most of the user's posting, that support here is provided by individuals donating their time of their own free will. All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help. Jamin W. Collins -Original Message- From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 3:11 AM To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Newbie question Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 15:11 schrieb suresh: Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help off list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it is no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should -have read the docs at least twice -checked if you fulfilled the requirements for qmail-ldap, both on you installation and youself (yes, the wonderfull sentence "you should have fairly good knowledge of qmail and ldap..." and so on in bold letters aside to the dowload link on the wepages -if you ask a question, provide all necessary information, in general as much as possible. At least OS, versions (including patch version), _complete_ logs, configuration -checked all logs yourself, including ldap logs, set loglevel to highest possible value - helps a lot PLEASE DO NOT READ NEWBIE QUESTION IF WANT TO USE THOSE DEROGATORY STATEMENTS .YU DONT EVEN HELP EITHER .I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO WOULD LIKE TO HELP! -Original Message- From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 6:55 AM To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch Subject: Re: Newbie question Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 13:24 schrieb suresh: You are giving us much to less infos to help you. Check if the file mentioned in the error message exists and is world readable. If not, RTFM before asking here. Hi I have installed qmail-ldap patch,whenever i start the qmail ,i get this info I have made a file in the control folder and i tried by entering the ip address as well as by the dns name i am not able start the debug process even after i set the env variable ,Is there any particular syntax i should be calling qmail-start for this? bash-2.03# Nov 29 11:11:21 qmailjol qmail: [ID 748625 mail.alert] 975467481.7424 69 alert: cannot start qmail-lspawn or it had an error! Check if ~control/ldapse rver exists Suresh Mithi.com Pvt. Ltd. -- Send and receive mail in Indian languages Register free at http://www.mailjol.com -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de| Germany -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de| Germany
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
I absolutely agree with this. I have never seen so many rude and useless responses to pleas for help on any other list that I subscribe to. Yes, there are times when the answer is documented somewhere but the documentation available is poorly organized making it very difficult for someone who is new to their operating system and/or qmail to find the answer. For me, I was able to get qmail working with the INSTALL files for at least my simple test system. I have not tried to install using LWQ but I couldn't help but notice some differences in the way things are installed using LWQ versus the INSTALL files. Now which is right? One of the reasons I am trying qmail is that I heard it was far more efficient than using sendmail especially when handling large volumes of mail. This fact, at least, seems to be true for the tests I have run. My next goal was to migrate all of our domains from sendmail to qmail but considering the documentation and some of the support that has been forthcoming from this list, I have my doubts about reccommending that course of action. Don't get me wrong, I have seen and received useful help from this list. Hopefully, we can all learn to be tolerent of people who ask questions that have "obvious" answers. I think we have all been there before. Warren Small Jamin Collins wrote: I may be out of line here. However, this is not the first time I've seen snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help. I am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent. Sure, some of the postings for help may not contain all the information that a more experienced person would have. But to respond to them with a statement to the effect of "send all necessary information" is crazy. There is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or may not be needed to diagnose a problem. As many of the people posting without this level of information are new to either Linux or qmail (or both) there needs to be some understanding on everyone's behalf. And telling someone to RTFM is normally of little to no help. I've been told several times to RTFM without any indication as to which manual. This is of little to no help to anyone. As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate. I tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the source twice, with no luck. Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck. It wasn't until I purchased "Running qmail." that I actually got the thing to work. I'm sure that if I went back to either set of instructions (source or LWQ) that both would be adequate for the installation now that I've done it before. However herein lies the problem. The documentation that currently exists is really only helpful to someone that has already installed the software once before. But, I've digressed. IMHO, everyone that is offering help via a list such as this should be courteous to those asking for help. If you can't be courteous, I ask that you please refrain from posting. Snapping at a user asking for help will accomplish nothing more than making the user angry and hesitant from posting in the future. IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other support list. I realize, as do most of the user's posting, that support here is provided by individuals donating their time of their own free will. All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help. Jamin W. Collins -Original Message- From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 3:11 AM To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Newbie question Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 15:11 schrieb suresh: Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help off list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it is no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should -have read the docs at least twice -checked if you fulfilled the requirements for qmail-ldap, both on you installation and youself (yes, the wonderfull sentence "you should have fairly good knowledge of qmail and ldap..." and so on in bold letters aside to the dowload link on the wepages -if you ask a question, provide all necessary information, in general as much as possible. At least OS, versions (including patch version), _complete_ logs, configuration -checked all logs yourself, including ldap logs, set loglevel to highest possible value - helps a lot PLEASE DO NOT READ NEWBIE QUESTION IF WANT TO USE THOSE DEROGATORY STATEMENTS .YU DONT EVEN HELP EITHER .I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO WOULD LIKE TO HELP! -Original Message- From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 6:55 AM To: suresh;
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
I don't see your problem. he was on the wrong list as this is qmail-ldap specific. he posted to the qmail-ldap list too, so nobody can tell me he didn't know about this list. I answered anyway. I asked him if the file mentioned in the error msg exists. if so, i requested more info than one line of log. if not this had proven that he didn't read a single line of documentation. in general everybody posting questions here should have a thought who's answering, and that these people are no paid support staff. so i can expect that the poster has -read the docs -spent some thoughts one what he's writing -spent some thoughts on what information would be needed for support -provided full logs somewhere for download If he only posts a single line from the log without even mentioning the file exists and it is readable, without telling us os, qmail version, patch version, ldap server and version, it's somehow sure that he hasn't spent any thought on that. Dan used a subject of "How to discourage free software support" on a mail regarding this on the dns list. that's exactly the point IMHO. btw, i did my first qmail installation (long tome ago...) within one hour and without any third party documentation aside from a problem with daemontools, i solved this with a short look to lwq. i don't know why you did not succeed, but telling us "the docs are all so bad because i couldn't install qmail with them" is an inadequate statement. Greetings Henning -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de| Germany
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
How exactly is my MUA broken? I've included the original text of the message I've responded to. I've simply chosen not to add anything to the beginning of each line of the original message. Now, you've resorted to name calling? Quite the original. How does a request for common courtesy indicate a need for professional help? Telling someone to RTFM would be helpful, if the manual being referenced as indicated. As there are several files in the qmail distribution that all refer to other documents, it is possible that some may not locate the correct manual. When exactly did I call Dave Sill an asshole? I simply made meantion that his HOWTO did not assist in my configuration of qmail. This is not a derogatory statement in any fashion. Simply a statement of fact. As for providing clarifications to the document, I very well may once I have qmail configured the way I would like it. If you see the questions of users on this list as bothersome, I'm sorry. However, as membership to the list is voluntary, you are not being forced to read them. In short, if you don't like them, don't read them. What brings me to post? Simple, I like to help people learn more about computing. I also like to learn what I can where I can. Again, I'm sorry this doesn't fight your perception of the computer industry. Jamin W. Collins -Original Message- From: Robin S. Socha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 9:19 AM To: qmail mailing list Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question) * Jamin Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] whines: I may be out of line here. However, this is not the first time I've seen snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help. I am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent. *sigh* Is it September again? Just for completeness' sake: not only is your MUA broken to the degree of utter braindeadness, you've also included 60 linux of *un*quoted quotes. Has anyone called you a clueless luser lately? There is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or may not be needed to diagnose a problem. As many of the people posting without this level of information are new to either Linux or qmail (or both) there needs to be some understanding on everyone's behalf. Like what? If you need professional support, there are links galore on http://qmail.org/. If you want to be spoonfed, you're simply looking in the wrong place. And telling someone to RTFM is normally of little to no help. The qmail docs are terse but exhaustive. We're not talking about running $PORNO_VIEWER.exe but about a mail server - if you're too stupid to manage even the initial setup, you *just* *don't* *need* *one*. As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate. Not quite. They're just not idiot-proof. But you've found that our yourself already. I tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the source twice, with no luck. See, that's your problem: contrary to popular superstition (fed by the New Cultural Imperialism from Redmond) it does not take /luck/ to install software. It takes /knowledge/. You appear to have neither. Well, tough luck. Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck. Yeah, right, Dave Sill really *is* an asshole: charging breathtaking amounts of money for his crappy docs and not even dumbing them down so that an amoeba^W^Wyou can understand them. It's free software, lackwit: contribute nothing, expect nothing. Why didn't you fix the passages that were "inadequate" and send Dave the patches, Jamin? [...] The documentation that currently exists is really only helpful to someone that has already installed the software once before. U... nope. [...] Snapping at a user asking for help will accomplish nothing more than making the user angry and hesitant from posting in the future. Do I care about angry lusers? I don't think so. Is it a Good Thing if they don't bother people trying to get some work done? Sure is. So there. IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other support list. It might come as a suprise to you and your likes, but this is /not/ a support list. It's a discussion list. If you want support, you can find the links to comm... All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help. Sure. Now, be a kind luser and do your reading. When you're done and have reached the minimum level of cluefullness required for running an internet service, come back and ask informed questions. Sometimes I wonder what brings people like you to posting this whining luser shit over and over and over again? This is not your new-age pink treehuggers society - this is a technical discussion list. IT-Darwinism, y'know? Survival of the brightest and, like, stuff. Huh-huh. -- Robin S. Socha Enhanced for MSIE 5.5: http://socha.net/
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
on 11/29/00 9:47 AM, Jamin Collins at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help. The people who often provide help simply expect the same sort of courtesy. Remember who's doing whom the favor, and that this list is about qmail, not Unix. If you want to learn Unix, either find a Unix (list|book|shell) and use it, or cleverly couch your Unix difficulties to appear as politely framed qmail questions. - Amitai
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
on 11/29/00 11:10 AM, Jamin Collins at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you see the questions of users on this list as bothersome, I'm sorry. However, as membership to the list is voluntary, you are not being forced to read them. In short, if you don't like them, don't read them. Sure. And if you don't like the responses you get, you're also free to ignore them, or to unsubscribe. - Amitai
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Since you've asked, my problem with your posting specifically is as follows: Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help off list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it is no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should There is no need to refer to his posting as "such nonsense". Additionally, there is no call/need for the statement about "busy people". I believe it is well known that people read this list on their time and any answer is essentially a donation from their time. However, conversely, no one is forced to read or answer these postings. Everyone (to my knowledge) does this of their own free will. As such, asking for help (whether on the right list or not) is in no way wrong. Berating someone for doing so is rude. I'm glad your installation went so smoothly. However, many other's do not. I'm sure that many of these come down to simply syntax errors. I will admit that I had a few in my first installations. These would have been easily corrected by another set of eyes. However, due to the repeatedly rude and snappy reply's from this list, I did not post concerning my initial problems. As for the statement you claim I made "the docs are all so bad because i couldn't install qmail with them", I did not say this. I simply stated that I was unsuccessfull in my attempts to install qmail using them. I did not state they were bad, I even stated that I was sure they would be of help if I were to use them at my current point. In short, I believe they may be a little lacking when it comes to helping someone completely new to qmail. This may not be the case of all new users, but it is the case for at least a few. Jamin W. Collins -Original Message- From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 9:35 AM To: Jamin Collins; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question) I don't see your problem. he was on the wrong list as this is qmail-ldap specific. he posted to the qmail-ldap list too, so nobody can tell me he didn't know about this list. I answered anyway. I asked him if the file mentioned in the error msg exists. if so, i requested more info than one line of log. if not this had proven that he didn't read a single line of documentation. in general everybody posting questions here should have a thought who's answering, and that these people are no paid support staff. so i can expect that the poster has -read the docs -spent some thoughts one what he's writing -spent some thoughts on what information would be needed for support -provided full logs somewhere for download If he only posts a single line from the log without even mentioning the file exists and it is readable, without telling us os, qmail version, patch version, ldap server and version, it's somehow sure that he hasn't spent any thought on that. Dan used a subject of "How to discourage free software support" on a mail regarding this on the dns list. that's exactly the point IMHO. btw, i did my first qmail installation (long tome ago...) within one hour and without any third party documentation aside from a problem with daemontools, i solved this with a short look to lwq. i don't know why you did not succeed, but telling us "the docs are all so bad because i couldn't install qmail with them" is an inadequate statement. Greetings Henning -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de| Germany
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
How exactly is my MUA broken? It isn't, the user is broken. The user incorrectly decided that everyone would just love to see the full text of the original message (perhaps in case they inexplicably missed it the first time!), and that it needed no marking to make it clear to readers that it isn't new material. -- gowen -- Greg Owen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Sometimes I wonder what brings people like you to posting this whining luser shit over and over and over again? This is not your new-age pink treehuggers society - this is a technical discussion list. IT-Darwinism, y'know? Survival of the brightest and, like, stuff. Huh-huh. -- Robin S. Socha If this list were, as it seems you, sir/ma'am (sorry, your name is gender-neutral), would prefer, populated exclusively by people who already know all there is to know about qmail; about what (I'm curious) would you discuss? Perhaps we should ask someone to start a qmail-newbies list so that A) the newbies can go somewhere where they know they stand a chance of at least having their issues addressed by other more knowledgeable individuals who don't MIND helping the "clueless" because they were "there" too one day; and B) the elitists won't be bothered anymore and can commence to posting messages in binary and stop catering to us idiots who are still hung up on the inefficiencies of English as a language. :-| ...ROMeyn -- signat-url: http://www2.potsdam.edu/dctm/prescor/signat-url.htm cubiclecam: http://digirom.potsdam.edu/~prescor/cubiclecam.html ^^^ --- Off-line unless someone knows how to get camserv to compile under RedHat 7... *sigh* :-(
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
* Jamin Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How exactly is my MUA broken? * Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" * No reference headers (*GREAT* for breaking archives) * 6 attribution lines * No citation leader * Trailing blank line I've included the original text of the message I've responded to. How very useful. I've simply chosen not to add anything to the beginning of each line of the original message. Rather "I'm too fscking stupid to even find it among 2001 menues in Outlook", eh? How does a request for common courtesy indicate a need for professional help? In general or in your particular case? What brings me to post? Simple, I like to help people learn more about computing. The blind leading... C'mon, Jamin, you've had your 264 lines of fame. Now go away, will you? You're about to start a war you'll never understand. -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
on 11/29/00 11:22 AM, Jamin Collins at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As such, asking for help (whether on the right list or not) is in no way wrong. Berating someone for doing so is rude. It might also be considered rude to post to the wrong list, or to ask for help without providing useful information. However, due to the repeatedly rude and snappy reply's from this list, I did not post concerning my initial problems. You most definitely won't get help that way! In short, I believe [the docs] may be a little lacking when it comes to helping someone completely new to qmail. s/qmail/Unix/, and I'd agree. But I wouldn't call that a shortcoming of the documentation. - Amitai
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
I've seen this over and over and over. Someone joins the list, probably because they are having problems (the same reason I joined), posts a question, and then has to wade through the wave of crap thrown back at them by a bunch of rude jerks with nothing better to do with their time that to berate you and tell you they are too busy to be bothered. The mind boggles at how important their work is that they are unable to help, yet they have plenty of time to post novella's about how busy they are and how lazy you are for not solving the problem without their help. I gotta hint, don't wanna bother with a person's question? DON'T ANSWER IT! There, wasn't that easy? On a side note, I've tried to unsubscribe from the list because of exactly this kind of crap from self-important jerks who seem to get a charge out of kicking people when they are down, but the damn server tells me I'm not subscribed so it can't unsubscribe me. Go figure. -Original Message- From: Jamin Collins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 10:22 AM To: 'Henning Brauer'; Jamin Collins; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question) Since you've asked, my problem with your posting specifically is as follows: Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help off list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it is no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should There is no need to refer to his posting as "such nonsense". Additionally, there is no call/need for the statement about "busy people". I believe it is well known that people read this list on their time and any answer is essentially a donation from their time. However, conversely, no one is forced to read or answer these postings. Everyone (to my knowledge) does this of their own free will. As such, asking for help (whether on the right list or not) is in no way wrong. Berating someone for doing so is rude. I'm glad your installation went so smoothly. However, many other's do not. I'm sure that many of these come down to simply syntax errors. I will admit that I had a few in my first installations. These would have been easily corrected by another set of eyes. However, due to the repeatedly rude and snappy reply's from this list, I did not post concerning my initial problems. As for the statement you claim I made "the docs are all so bad because i couldn't install qmail with them", I did not say this. I simply stated that I was unsuccessfull in my attempts to install qmail using them. I did not state they were bad, I even stated that I was sure they would be of help if I were to use them at my current point. In short, I believe they may be a little lacking when it comes to helping someone completely new to qmail. This may not be the case of all new users, but it is the case for at least a few. Jamin W. Collins -Original Message- From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 9:35 AM To: Jamin Collins; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question) I don't see your problem. he was on the wrong list as this is qmail-ldap specific. he posted to the qmail-ldap list too, so nobody can tell me he didn't know about this list. I answered anyway. I asked him if the file mentioned in the error msg exists. if so, i requested more info than one line of log. if not this had proven that he didn't read a single line of documentation. in general everybody posting questions here should have a thought who's answering, and that these people are no paid support staff. so i can expect that the poster has -read the docs -spent some thoughts one what he's writing -spent some thoughts on what information would be needed for support -provided full logs somewhere for download If he only posts a single line from the log without even mentioning the file exists and it is readable, without telling us os, qmail version, patch version, ldap server and version, it's somehow sure that he hasn't spent any thought on that. Dan used a subject of "How to discourage free software support" on a mail regarding this on the dns list. that's exactly the point IMHO. btw, i did my first qmail installation (long tome ago...) within one hour and without any third party documentation aside from a problem with daemontools, i solved this with a short look to lwq. i don't know why you did not succeed, but telling us "the docs are all so bad because i couldn't install qmail with them" is an inadequate statement. Greetings Henning -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de| Germany
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Jamin Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How exactly is my MUA broken? I've included the original text of the message I've responded to. I've simply chosen not to add anything to the beginning of each line of the original message. Hence the breakage. Netiquette dictates that replies be identified by prefacing each line with ' ' or '' -- many peoples' MUAs highlight text by looking for these markers. It makes reading your mail much more difficult for the rest of us. If you see the questions of users on this list as bothersome, I'm sorry. Most of us don't mind users asking questions, after they have made a reasonable effort to understand the problem themselves, by doing _all_ of the following: -read all the documentation that comes with qmail, preferably at least twice. This includes the man pages and other text documentation. -especially read Dan's FAQs (the one included with the source, and the one at cr.yp.to) -read the various hints tips at www.qmail.org, and the various user-contributed documentation that are referenced there -read "Life with qmail" by Dave Sill -read through the archives of this list for people with similar problems in the past. We've seen all of these questions. Anyone who posts one of the most-commonly asked questions to the list, without having done all the above, is (in effect) saying "My time is more valuable than the time of the people I am asking for help". Some people tend to get a little annoyed at this type of attitude. Charles -- --- Charles Cazabon[EMAIL PROTECTED] GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.sk.ca/~charlesc/software/ Any opinions expressed are just that -- my opinions. ---
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
I don't disagree with anything you said. My mail wasn't aimed at the people who politely say RTFM and provide pointers to said FM. It was aimed at the jack asses that spend their time berating newbies and clogging the group with diatribes about how important their time is, rather than providing constructive input. If they don't believe the person "deserves" their input, why spend all that time belittling them? I don't see how I misunderstood anything. -Original Message- From: Matt Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 11:34 AM To: John W. Lemons III Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question) "John W. Lemons III" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The mind boggles at how important their work is that they are unable to help, yet they have plenty of time to post novella's about how busy they are and how lazy you are for not solving the problem without their help. This shows just how much you misunderstand. The people who know qmail are not mad at you and the people you're defending because they're too busy, or anything like that. It's the attitude that mailing lists like this are free resources that can be exploited. Places you can take from without giving. Get this through your head: NOTHING IS FREE. Nobody is obligated to help you for free. Whining because nobody is willing to do your work for you for no recompense is NOT appreciated. Sure, nobody gets paid for giving advice here, but it doesn't mean that it's for free. The cost of being helped is that YOU have to do most of the work. If you don't like that fee structure, then go to somebody you pay dollars for. People will willingly volunteer their expertise, their knowledge; they will NOT volunteer to do all the hard work for you. Why do you expect them to?
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Jamin Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I may be out of line here. However, this is not the first time I've seen snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help. I am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent. I'm not a big fan of newbie smackdowns, though a repeat offendor might warrant one. I think newbies generally respond better to reward than punishment. E.g., instead of: Your mailer is broken. I'd say something like: Please don't include messages you're replying to as appendages to your own messages. It's a waste of bytes, and it annoys many people--most of whom are too polite and/or busy to bother complaining. Instead, quote small passages, prefixing each line with "". This puts the relevant information right where it's needed, and makes it easy for people to tell who said what. The former approach *might* work, but is more likely to offend the newbie. The latter is polite and informative. An educated, unoffended newbie is much more likely to want to change his ways. As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate. Ouch. "... LWQ ... [is] ... highly inadequate." In a way, of course, I completely agree. I've tried to make it newbie friendly, but nobody knows better than I that it still leaves some newbies behind. However, I have to ask why you didn't complain to me when you were having problems with it. Without such feedback, there's not much chance of it getting fixed. -Dave
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
"John W. Lemons III" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The mind boggles at how important their work is that they are unable to help, yet they have plenty of time to post novella's about how busy they are and how lazy you are for not solving the problem without their help. This shows just how much you misunderstand. The people who know qmail are not mad at you and the people you're defending because they're too busy, or anything like that. It's the attitude that mailing lists like this are free resources that can be exploited. Places you can take from without giving. Get this through your head: NOTHING IS FREE. Nobody is obligated to help you for free. Whining because nobody is willing to do your work for you for no recompense is NOT appreciated. Sure, nobody gets paid for giving advice here, but it doesn't mean that it's for free. The cost of being helped is that YOU have to do most of the work. If you don't like that fee structure, then go to somebody you pay dollars for. People will willingly volunteer their expertise, their knowledge; they will NOT volunteer to do all the hard work for you. Why do you expect them to? -Matt -- | Matthew J. Brown - Senior Network Administrator - NBCi Shopping | | 1983 W. 190th St, Suite 100, Torrance CA 90504 | | Phone: (310) 538-7122| Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Cell: (714) 457-1854| Personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Warren Small [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have not tried to install using LWQ but I couldn't help but notice some differences in the way things are installed using LWQ versus the INSTALL files. Now which is right? Question: Which of the following is the right way to remove a file in the current directory named "-i": A. rm ./-i B. rm `pwd`/-i C. rm -i foo -i D. rm -- -i E. all of the above Answer: E -Dave
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
The blind leading... C'mon, Jamin, you've had your 264 lines of fame. Now go away, will you? You're about to start a war you'll never understand. -- Man, this Robin character is nuts. Coder-superiority syndrome big time. Why is it that tech geeks are so sure that their field of knowledge is the only one that indicates general intelligence? If Robin is anything like his/her mailing list personality in real life, I'm sure few people would consider him/her nearly as intelligent as he/she considers him/herself. True intelligence is indicated by a broader understanding of things, and the contributions that many different people have to offer. You mentioned Darwinism in a former post, Robin. How exactly is an angry geek who knows a whole lot about electronic boxes, but less than nothing about interacting successfully with the 5 billion other real-live people on the planet suited for survival in a Darwinian sense? Something tells me if you and I were dropped in the wilderness together, I'd be the one coming out alive, if only because I had you skewered on a spit over a fire within the first day. In fact it's hard to envision a role for you at all in any world that wasn't utterly computer-dependant. Try to remember that there are a lot of fields of knowledge and that your sweeping name-calling, that people are "too fscking stupid" etc is utterly absurd. For all you know the people you call "stupid" because they don't know about qmail just invented the cure for cancer, or the 100 mpg car. The carpenter who built your house. Your doctor. Your grandmother. Are they all stupid too because they don't know about qmail? Now why don't you go answer some questions instead of flaming me back. Show us all how clever you are, Robin. Gregg Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
How exactly is my MUA broken? It isn't, the user is broken. The user incorrectly decided that everyone would just love to see the full text of the original message (perhaps in case they inexplicably missed it the first time!), and that it needed no marking to make it clear to readers that it isn't new material. Heh-heh, well, there's that, but there's also at least one technical gaffe in the MUA he uses. The same gaffe is in your MUA also, Mr. Owen. While the RFCs don't say specifically one way or the other, the general rule is that the subject in a reply should be prepended with "Re: " (case sensitive), not "RE: ". The latest IETF draft for message formats (http://www.imc.org/draft-ietf-drums-msg-fmt) defines the rule a bit more explicitly, saying that the subject MAY start with "Re: ". Some versions of Outlook and Outlook Express prepend "RE: ". While I don't worry so much about aesthetics, I believe that past discussion in this list indicated that many MUA's that use "RE: " also don't supply the message history information necessary to properly organize discussion threads in the qmail mailing list archives. As you have noticed, that makes some list subscribers quite livid. Corrections welcome. ---Kris Kelley
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Jamin Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As for the statement you claim I made "the docs are all so bad because i couldn't install qmail with them", I did not say this. I simply stated that I was unsuccessfull in my attempts to install qmail using them. I did not state they were bad, I even stated that I was sure they would be of help if I were to use them at my current point. In short, I believe they may be a little lacking when it comes to helping someone completely new to qmail. This may not be the case of all new users, but it is the case for at least a few. You called the docs "highly inadequate", not "a little lacking when it comes to helping someone completely new to qmail". In my book, calling something highly inadequate *is* calling it bad. -Dave
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 08:47:25AM -0600, Jamin Collins wrote: I realize, as do most of the user's posting, that support here is provided by individuals donating their time of their own free will. All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help. This suresh guy routinely (for the last few months or so) has been posting newbie questions to the list, and providing no information whatsoever. From what I've seen, people have been ignoring him for the most part. I suppose someone just got tired of it. --Adam
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] writes: I'm not a big fan of newbie smackdowns, though a repeat offendor might warrant one. I think newbies generally respond better to reward than punishment. E.g., instead of: Your mailer is broken. I'd say something like: Please don't include messages you're replying to as appendages to your own messages. It's a waste of bytes, and it annoys many people--most of whom are too polite and/or busy to bother complaining. Instead, quote small passages, prefixing each line with "". This puts the relevant information right where it's needed, and makes it easy for people to tell who said what. The former approach *might* work, but is more likely to offend the newbie. The latter is polite and informative. An educated, unoffended newbie is much more likely to want to change his ways. Thank you, and yes, the later would have been much better. As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate. Ouch. "... LWQ ... [is] ... highly inadequate." In a way, of course, I completely agree. I've tried to make it newbie friendly, but nobody knows better than I that it still leaves some newbies behind. Again thank you. However, I have to ask why you didn't complain to me when you were having problems with it. Without such feedback, there's not much chance of it getting fixed. I have every intention on supply statements to you once I have a completed my installation. As for why I didn't complain to you, I figured I would look elsewhere for the information, rather than pestering the author with questions. Jamin W. Collins
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Robin S. Socha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: * Jamin Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: How exactly is my MUA broken? * Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" And which RFC does this violate? * No reference headers (*GREAT* for breaking archives) I've checked RFC 822 and it would appear that this is an optional item. Thus, an MUA is not "broken" for not having it. Granted it might be nice for the MUA to have this, but you can't have everything can you. * 6 attribution lines Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC. If it is, which one? * No citation leader Once again. Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC. If it is, which one? * Trailing blank line And yet again. Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC. If it is, which one? Unless I'm wrong it would appear that your complaints are all optional or preferential items. This being the case, the MUA is not broken. I've included the original text of the message I've responded to. How very useful. Some would see it as such. I've simply chosen not to add anything to the beginning of each line of the original message. Rather "I'm too fscking stupid to even find it among 2001 menues in Outlook", eh? And I see that we are back to name calling. Again, how original. I can see that you don't like Outlook. I don't much either, but there are reasons for it (which have nothing to do with qmail so I won't bother listing them). How does a request for common courtesy indicate a need for professional help? In general or in your particular case? Since you asked, in general. What brings me to post? Simple, I like to help people learn more about computing. The blind leading... C'mon, Jamin, you've had your 264 lines of fame. Now go away, will you? You're about to start a war you'll never understand. And I see that once again you have resorted to name calling. Just because you may have more expertise (for whatever reason) on a topic than someone else does not in any way mean that the other person is blind. Additionally, it does not ensure that the other person does not know more about some other topic than you. Jamin W. Collins
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
* Greg Owen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: * Some other luser: How exactly is my MUA broken? It isn't, the user is broken. Indeed. Tell me, Jamin, does your inflatable sheep talk? If so, do you wait for it to ask you for a fag, then repeat everything it said during intercourse (including the funny noises your mother and the new neighbour were making as well as the TV) and then ask if you were /really/ good? More to the point: why do you not repeat everything that /your/ sheep said but rather Suresh's (two weeks ago, while thumbing the Sear's catalogue)? You don't? Then why do you behave this way on mailing lists, i.e. full quote including signature and everything below your text? The user incorrectly decided that everyone would just love to see the full text of the original message (perhaps in case they inexplicably missed it the first time!), and that it needed no marking to make it clear to readers that it isn't new material. The archives, man, the archives... No reference headers means no threads means no archives. *sigh* Can we make this end? -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Robin, you are decidedly an asshole. I can't believe how abusive you feel the need to be. Must stem from some geek-angst I don't understand. You feel like you're so bloody smart because you spend most of your waking hours in front of a computer and can make people who don't feel stupid. Well, some people would say you are a "luser" (and it's loser, loser), and more importantly sad for only being able to feel good about yourself by trashing on others. IT-Darwinism? What a moron. You figured everything out on your own did you? Born using bash? Never took a single lesson. I've never wanted to email a punch in the face to someone more than to you. Your ego astounds me. I know a LOT of people that would make you look REALLY stupid were you to have a conversation with them. Try to remember that you aren't nearly as cool as your qmail setup would indicate. I can't believe the level to which this list has sunk. It's like the angry neo-nazi geeks list now. And it used to be quite helpful. There are many of us, newbies to qmail ourselves, who don't mind answering basic questions within our ability. I try to do so when I know an answer. There's just no point in being such an asshole. Post an answer or not at all, Robin. There has to be a newsgroup whenre you and your geek friends can talk about how stupid the rest of us are, but it isn't the qmail list. And learn to spell, dipshit. Sometimes I wonder what brings people like you to posting this whining luser shit over and over and over again? This is not your new-age pink treehuggers society - this is a technical discussion list. IT-Darwinism, y'know? Survival of the brightest and, like, stuff. Huh-huh. -- Robin S. Socha Enhanced for MSIE 5.5: http://socha.net/
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
I want to second what was said here. The manuals are often inadequate for newbies. I never would have gotten qmail set up without the patient and generous help of those on this list. Thanks to everyone who helped me! I'm sure glad I wasn't raked over the coals like some of the recent posters. To Mr. Brauer, who seems on a quest to post nothing but flames here, we realize that no one is paid staff here. But you flaming everyone who posts doesn't help a thing. No one is getting paid to sift through your angry posts, either. If you don't have something helpful to say, don't say a damn thing. Even if the original poster WAS wasting list bandwidth, you only waste more telling him not to, and then we all waste bandwidth on threads like this. It has been a real bummer to watch you trashing on newbies, as I am sure you will trash on me for this. Remember that these people you insult are probably a LOT better at some stuff than you are, and don't need to be treated like imbeciles because they don't know about qmail. Typical angry geek syndrome. No one is smart unless they know what you know. I'll remember to flame the hell out of you if you ever post questions in my fields of expertise on other newsgroups. Gregg I may be out of line here. However, this is not the first time I've seen snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help. I am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent. Sure, some of the postings for help may not contain all the information that a more experienced person would have. But to respond to them with a statement to the effect of "send all necessary information" is crazy. There is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or may not be needed to diagnose a problem. As many of the people posting without this level of information are new to either Linux or qmail (or both) there needs to be some understanding on everyone's behalf. And telling someone to RTFM is normally of little to no help. I've been told several times to RTFM without any indication as to which manual. This is of little to no help to anyone. As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate. I tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the source twice, with no luck. Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck. It wasn't until I purchased "Running qmail." that I actually got the thing to work. I'm sure that if I went back to either set of instructions (source or LWQ) that both would be adequate for the installation now that I've done it before. However herein lies the problem. The documentation that currently exists is really only helpful to someone that has already installed the software once before. But, I've digressed. IMHO, everyone that is offering help via a list such as this should be courteous to those asking for help. If you can't be courteous, I ask that you please refrain from posting. Snapping at a user asking for help will accomplish nothing more than making the user angry and hesitant from posting in the future. IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other support list. I realize, as do most of the user's posting, that support here is provided by individuals donating their time of their own free will. All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help. Jamin W. Collins -Original Message- From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 3:11 AM To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Newbie question Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 15:11 schrieb suresh: Suresh, for first writing such nonsens to the list and asking me for help off list does not fit together. before asking other busy people for help (it is no paid support staff here, we all have our work to do!), you should -have read the docs at least twice -checked if you fulfilled the requirements for qmail-ldap, both on you installation and youself (yes, the wonderfull sentence "you should have fairly good knowledge of qmail and ldap..." and so on in bold letters aside to the dowload link on the wepages -if you ask a question, provide all necessary information, in general as much as possible. At least OS, versions (including patch version), _complete_ logs, configuration -checked all logs yourself, including ldap logs, set loglevel to highest possible value - helps a lot PLEASE DO NOT READ NEWBIE QUESTION IF WANT TO USE THOSE DEROGATORY STATEMENTS .YU DONT EVEN HELP EITHER .I AM SURE THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE WHO WOULD LIKE TO HELP! -Original Message- From: Henning Brauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 6:55 AM To: suresh; Qmail-Ldap@Argus. Pipeline. Ch Subject: Re: Newbie question Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 13:24 schrieb
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Greg, he's not calling people stupid for what they don't know, but for what they couldn't be bothered to try, for the effort they couldn't be bothered to expend when it's just so easy to try and get someone else to do the hard work. -Matt -- | Matthew J. Brown - Senior Network Administrator - NBCi Shopping | | 1983 W. 190th St, Suite 100, Torrance CA 90504 | | Phone: (310) 538-7122| Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Cell: (714) 457-1854| Personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Greg, he's not calling people stupid for what they don't know, but for what they couldn't be bothered to try, for the effort they couldn't be bothered to expend when it's just so easy to try and get someone else to do the hard work. -Matt Matt, I dig. You folks who have done a lot of hard work and are knowledgable should not have to do the work for newbies who can't be bothered. But the easiest way to avoid exerting any effort on their behalf seems to me to be to ignore them. This Robin person just seems to need to take out his/her dissatisfaction with life on newbies on this list, some of whom seem to have made efforts to solve problems themselves. I must say that my personal experience with this list has always been extremely helpful and I can't say enough how much I value those of you who have helped me. I certainly do my best to read the docs and solve problems myself before posting, so maybe that's all it is. I just think it's crappy to have to read full-on verbal abuse, personal attacks, and sweeping name-calling. This Robin person has NO IDEA who he/she is really talking to, only that they don't know as much about qmail. This is no reason to call someone "too fscking stupid". I wish people would simply choose not to reply to questions they consider a waste of their time. Gregg
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
(excuse my outlook 2000) -Original Message- From: Jamin Collins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 9:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: List Courtesy (was Newbie question) I may be out of line here. However, this is not the first time I've seen snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help. I am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent. I will agree that there are snappy rude responses on this list, many other lists too that are only around to provide free support of a product that is wonderful in many aspects. Sure, some of the postings for help may not contain all the information that a more experienced person would have. But to respond to them with a statement to the effect of "send all necessary information" is crazy. There is a certain level of experience necessary to know what may or may not be needed to diagnose a problem. As many of the people posting without this level of information are new to either Linux or qmail (or both) there needs to be some understanding on everyone's behalf. And telling someone to RTFM is normally of little to no help. I've been told several times to RTFM without any indication as to which manual. This is of little to no help to anyone. A good start would be the documentation included or www.qmail.org/top.html or the FAQs there. Commonly we point people to LWQ or something similar. As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate. I tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the source twice, with no luck. Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck. It wasn't until I purchased "Running qmail." that I actually got the thing to work. I'm sure that if I went back to either set of instructions (source or LWQ) that both would be adequate for the installation now that I've done it before. However herein lies the problem. The documentation that currently exists is really only helpful to someone that has already installed the software once before. But, I've digressed. First time I installed qmail was over 3 years ago, no LWQ and only the install instructions, I was a fairly unix newbie with no professional experience and only 1 year personal experience. I installed it perfectly even with procmail and fastforward to keep sendmail aliases and delivery. I eventually read LWQ and completely reworked my install, I have since pointed this source to many newbie friends who want to setup a mailserver and have hardly needed to answer questions, much less trivial questions. Some of the questions to this list could be solved with google.com and are very typical of the new linux generation. IMHO, everyone that is offering help via a list such as this should be courteous to those asking for help. If you can't be courteous, I ask that you please refrain from posting. Snapping at a user asking for help will accomplish nothing more than making the user angry and hesitant from posting in the future. IIRC, these are not the goals of this list or any other support list. The goals of this list IMHO is not to answer FAQ's or help with learning common unix tasks, there are far to many resources to cover here. Snapping at a user should make them hesitant to post, maybe then will they at least attempt to search for the correct information. I realize, as do most of the user's posting, that support here is provided by individuals donating their time of their own free will. All I ask is that common courtesy be extended to those asking for help. We ask the same, I have over 100 messages just from this list, I consider about 1/3 of them actually attempted to make efforts to find out from their own accord what they needed. How much time do you think people on this list need to allocate to read 60+ unnecessary emails? Jamin W. Collins -Original Message- snipped for uselessness -- Tim Hunter
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Ok, I have read the whole thread now. We had that before and we will have that in the future. As for the experience needed to set up qmail: I have recommended qmail to some 5-10 people with different experiences. Some never set up a mail server but have some Unix experience, some were new to Unix. I told them where to get qmail and LWQ, read the INSTALL and LWQ and they all managed to set up qmail without any bigger problems, some even without ANY problems. Some of them run qmail with 10-50 virtual domains and and some 100 POP accounts. So I don't think it is too complicated to set up and run qmail if one really seriously tries. As for the hostility of this list: It's now about three years that I've posted my "Xmas story" to this list. I'd written it in a similar thread and I think it's still true. You can read either at http://www.lamer.de/maex/creative/articles/xmasstory/ or in the list archive http://www.ornl.gov/its/archives/mailing-lists/qmail/1997/12/msg00816.html \Maex -- SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake Research Development| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0| realize you haven't D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 10:10:56AM -0600, Jamin Collins wrote: If you see the questions of users on this list as bothersome, I'm sorry. However, as membership to the list is voluntary, you are not being forced to read them. In short, if you don't like them, don't read them. Sure, or don't answer them and get 10 eMails followed shortly after like "I still have the problem and no one helps me. This list is sooo unpolite" \Maex -- SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake Research Development| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0| realize you haven't D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 29 November 2000 at 13:32:36 -0500 Jamin Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I may be out of line here. However, this is not the first time I've seen snappy rude responses from people in response to others asking for help. I am simply quoting this message as it is the most recent. I'm not a big fan of newbie smackdowns, though a repeat offendor might warrant one. I think newbies generally respond better to reward than punishment. I think this has been pretty well established in animal training, child psychology, and behavioral psych circles for some time now, for essentially all animals, not just newbies. -- David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED] SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/ Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Jamin Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 29 November 2000 at 10:10:56 -0600 How exactly is my MUA broken? I've included the original text of the message I've responded to. I've simply chosen not to add anything to the beginning of each line of the original message. Well, you're sending in a system-specific character set that I can only access with some difficulty (saving to a file and then treating as straight ASCII, which loses me any unusual characters in the text). And not following standard quoting conventions is a big problem; lots of us use software that depends on those conventions to properly present your message, and to properly manipulate it. Finally, I do sometimes find people overly snappish responding here. I try to avoid doing so myself, despite feeling the urge sometimes. It seems to me that we often encounter people who aren't knowledgable enough to be doing a Unix sysadmin's job, who are trying to set up their own mail server. Some of us resent doing sysadmin 101 training more than others of us. As to the qmail documentation; I'm *not* a professional Unix sysadmin, though I've been in charge of a SunOS system or two in my professional life. Most of my admin experience is on my own Linux boxes. But I installed early versions of qmail and got them working from the instructions Dan sent with them (the various external documentation hadn't appeared yet) with very little trouble. You just have to read what they say, and pay attention. There isn't a lot of redundancy, and they're written for people who understand Unix. But I'd say they're reasonably good; not "inadequate". Add in the external sources such as LWQ, and I'd say the doc is better than any other Unix package I've installed. As to "which is right" when the various docs differ -- guess what? There isn't an official "right" handed down from on high. Qmail conforms to the Unix philosophy, and should be best regarded as a mail transfer toolkit. You get to use that toolkit to set up the mail transfer you want to happen. -- David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED] SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/ Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 10:36:32AM -0800, Barley wrote: True intelligence is indicated by a broader understanding of things, and the contributions that many different people have to offer. So ... this says that all those that cannot describe their problems properly are idiots, because they are lacking the broader understanding of the problems they have and thus are unable to ask the right questions. Where's the difference between what Robin said and what you say? \Maex -- SpaceNet GmbH | http://www.Space.Net/ | Stress is when you wake Research Development| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | up screaming and you Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 | Tel: +49 (89) 32356-0| realize you haven't D-80807 Muenchen | Fax: +49 (89) 32356-299 | fallen asleep yet.
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Barley wrote: The blind leading... C'mon, Jamin, you've had your 264 lines of fame. Now go away, will you? You're about to start a war you'll never understand. -- Man, this Robin character is nuts. Coder-superiority syndrome big time. Why Damn, I forgot to bring any marshmellows with me today! Hmmm, marshmellows. Bill Carlson -- Systems Programmer[EMAIL PROTECTED]| Opinions are mine, Virtual Hospital http://www.vh.org/| not my employer's. University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics|
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: You called the docs "highly inadequate", not "a little lacking when it comes to helping someone completely new to qmail". In my book, calling something highly inadequate *is* calling it bad. Now, we are getting into a matter of semantics. It was not my intention to say the documentation was bad. I would say that your documentation is actually, better than what comes with qmail. However, I do still see it as lacking where a new user is concerned. Jamin W. Collins
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
* Dave Sill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Jamin Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think newbies generally respond better to reward than punishment. E.g., instead of: Your mailer is broken. I'd say something like: Please don't include messages you're replying to as appendages to your own messages. It's a waste of bytes, and it annoys many people--most of whom are too polite and/or busy to bother complaining. Instead, quote small passages, prefixing each line with "". This puts the relevant information right where it's needed, and makes it easy for people to tell who said what. 1. This is the most basic netiquette. Last time I checked, this list was not news:microsoft.we.give.a.toss.about.standards? 2. Been there, done that. I still don't like the "fuck off, geek" t-shirt I got. 3. If this is a technical discussion list, clean and easily accessible archival of information is paramount. Want me to count the "possible followup"s and broken threads caused by missing reference headers? The former approach *might* work, but is more likely to offend the newbie. The latter is polite and informative. An educated, unoffended newbie is much more likely to want to change his ways. That might have been true in 1994 (when I trimmed by beautifully crafted 2-screen signature back to 4 lines after being flamed by 99% of that mailinglist). But this is the 00's. You cannot tell people to "fix their MIME settings" or use another MUA because they are so damned dense they believe that the internet comes with their Windos-CD and Outlook is configured correctly out-of-the-box. I don't mind helping, but I also don't mind giving back to the net what the net gave to me: rough justice. We're talking about an MTA, a tool which, if used by lackwits, is quite likely to wreak havoc on unsuspecting admins. Maybe a "qmail-newbies"-list might be warranted? -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Barley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes on 29 November 2000 at 10:36:32 -0800 Try to remember that there are a lot of fields of knowledge and that your sweeping name-calling, that people are "too fscking stupid" etc is utterly absurd. For all you know the people you call "stupid" because they don't know about qmail just invented the cure for cancer, or the 100 mpg car. The carpenter who built your house. Your doctor. Your grandmother. Are they all stupid too because they don't know about qmail? Then again, it's also true that a lot of doctors, and often good doctors, kill themselves flying airplanes. It's widely believed that the reason so many do it is the combination of 1) being able to afford higher-performance airplanes than most private pilots, and 2) being unable to conceive of being as ignorant about anything as they, in fact, are about flying. I'd have to say that when a doctor kills himself in an airplane that's really more than he can handle, in conditions he's really not up to flying in, that it's a stupid mistake. It could have been avoided by a more realistic assessment of his own capabilities. Now, luckily, even our most aggressive flamers are not good enough that anybody's life is at stake here. (And I hope there aren't many places where email systems are life-critical, either). But some of the principle remains. When you're in so far over your head that you not only can't see daylight, but can't even tell which way the surface is, you've probably done something stupid to get yourself there. No matter how "smart" you may seem to be in other contexts. Not many people actually need to run their own MTAs. Setting up qmail, in particular (the only one I know well), requires making a lot of decisions about how you want to do things, and then implementing them. Both parts of that are difficult or impossible if you don't know anything about being a Unix sysadmin. The same flexibility that makes it adaptable to so many different situations also makes it hard to write a cookbook for. My impression here is that people are very willing to help people who don't understand qmail well, and even people who make the occasional stupid mistake (as we all do), so long as they show a minimal competence in the Unix environment (including configuration debugging) and some ability and willingness to do their research. And sometimes will help even without those things. At the same time, we have our share of people who are so frustrated at the continual string of people needing really basic help, stuff any vaguely competent sysadmin should be able to figure out for themselves 95% of the time, parading through here that they sometimes lash out. A number of people on the net, some of them here, seem to have decided that the disparity of numbers is so large that only full frontal assault gives them a chance to survive. I don't happen to agree with them; on the other hand, I'll be a lot of newbies come to understand the situation much better through reading threads like this one, which wouldn't happen without all three groups present. -- David Dyer-Bennet / Welcome to the future! / [EMAIL PROTECTED] SF: http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/ Minicon: http://www.mnstf.org/minicon/ Photos: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Markus Stumpf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: Sure, or don't answer them and get 10 eMails followed shortly after like "I still have the problem and no one helps me. This list is sooo unpolite" I'm not saying that some of the user's are rude, or that they do not post statements like the above. Does this however mean that because there are some people out there that it is alright to berate newbies before they have done so? IMHO no. Jamin W. Collins
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
* Barley [EMAIL PROTECTED] [001129 15:14]: Well, some people would say you are a "luser" (and it's loser, loser) Um, no. ``luser'' stands for ``local user'' originally. Of course, it's taken on something of a double entendre to describe the more clue-deprived of the bunch. IT-Darwinism? What a moron. You figured everything out on your own did you? Probably not. However, the questions I've been Robin ask on mailing lists (and there have been some pretty stupid oversights! ;) have been fairly full of description, log entries, command lines he tried, c. And lo and behold! he got a helpful, polite response every single time! (BTW, I just assume Robin is a guy. (Sorry if I offend, Robin.) In my little sheltered world, I like to think women aren't as foul-mouthed as he is. ;) Born using bash? Never took a single lesson. I've never wanted to email a punch in the face to someone more than to you. Your ego astounds me. I know a LOT of people that would make you look REALLY stupid were you to have a conversation with them. Try to remember that you aren't nearly as cool as your qmail setup would indicate. Incidentally, I have seen Robin ask questions re: qmail and addons on other mailing lists. He isn't perfect (horrors!). However, he is always fairly thorough in his question-asking. I think therein lies his (and others') frustration: people frequently come in *demanding* (not asking for) help, not posting any real details about their environment, and get all freaky when someone tells them, basically, ``We can't help you if you don't post details.'' Yeah, that's what it boils down to. I can't believe the level to which this list has sunk. It's like the angry neo-nazi geeks list now. And it used to be quite helpful. There are many of us, newbies to qmail ourselves, who don't mind answering basic questions within our ability. I try to do so when I know an answer. I'm being dead serious here: unsubscribe. Or create your own list. I don't find Robin obnoxious (well, not *overly* so). Y'know why? Because I don't give a crap what he writes. *They're* *just* *words*. There are plenty of people on the list who help (of which Robin is one), but neither this list *nor* *qmail* is for the faint-hearted. About the ``neo-nazi'' [sic] attitude toward things like quoting text, line wrapping, and whatnot, it's probably a reaction toward people using tools they have no idea how to use (i.e., mail clients). Yeah it's a little elitest, but some of us (apparently yourself included, mostly) have invested a good deal of time in understanding netiquette (forget RFCs). We appreciate when people follow commonly-accepted standards and get upset (at one level or another) when people knowingly or unknowingly break those ``standards''. It's really not that big of a deal to me...however, to be the best ``net neighbor'' (gag!) people should really do a better job of trying to adhere to those long-standing practices. Or not. Whatever. /pg -- Peter Green : Gospel Communications Network, SysAdmin : [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-) (Seen somewhere on the net.)
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jamin Collins) writes: As for qmail, I will be the first to tell you that LWQ and the installation instructions with qmail itself are for the most part highly inadequate. I tried setting qmail up just from the instructions included with the source twice, with no luck. Additionally, I tried LWQ twice, with no luck. It wasn't until I purchased "Running qmail." that I actually got the thing to work. I'm sure that if I went back to either set of instructions (source or LWQ) that both would be adequate for the installation now that I've done it before. However herein lies the problem. The documentation that currently exists is really only helpful to someone that has already installed the software once before. But, I've digressed. Really? Is this a digression because you've already contacted LWQ's author with suggestions? Have you posted anything to this list about the specific problems you had with INSTALL? If you think that new users aren't well served by the available documentation, then you should contribute. Somebody else wrote qmail for you. Somebody else wrote LWQ for you. You've even gotten help from the qmail list. Complaining about other posters won't help any new users. If that's what you actually care about, try fixing the ``inadequate'' instructions. ^L
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
At 10:01 AM -0800 11/29/00, Barley wrote: I want to second what was said here. The manuals are often inadequate for newbies. I never would have gotten qmail set up without the patient and generous help of those on this list. Thanks to everyone who helped me! I'm sure glad I wasn't raked over the coals like some of the recent posters. At the risk of seeming to be on the side of the geek-elitist ilk on this list, I would like to say that while they don't go out of their way to say as such, the docs (both provided and those by other parties as listed on qmail.org) DO assume a certain level of knowledge about Linux/Unix as a whole, without which you undoubtedly will get lost. I'm not exactly a Linux newbie, but I'm far from an expert/administrator. I'm in that "knows enough to be dangerous" category. :-) In my self-studies of Linux I have come across lots of reading material. Not a lot of it sticks with me, but I do so love the following quote and I think it says rather nicely what some of the dinks here don't seem to be able to articulate: -- Any system reference will require you to read it at least three times before you get a reasonable picture of what to do. If you need to read it more than three times, then there is probably some other information that you really should be reading first. If you are only reading a document once, then you are being too impatient with yourself. It is very important to identify the exact terms that you fail to understand in a document. Always try to back-trace to the precise word before you continue. It is usually cheaper and faster to read a document three times than to pay someone to train you. Don't be lazy. Don't learn new things according to deadlines. Your Unix knowledge is going to evolve by grace and fascination, not by pressure. -- I really love that. (It's from RUTE User Tutorial and Exposition, available somewhere at linuxdoc.org.) It is good advice that a good friend of mine is constantly drilling me with. You won't learn anything if other people are always giving you the answers. I installed qmail myself. Without help from this list or anyone else. But it was NOT easy (for me). I read the docs. All of them. Then I read them again. Then I started. And I STILL made mistakes. I read again. I gradually found and corrected all my mistakes. Now it works. Yay for me. But it was a lot of WORK. But given that this was a scant two weeks ago, I'm deeply sympathetic to others experiencing the problems I had. Maybe in a few weeks/months after tweaking and sitting on a happy system I'll turn into yet another callous asshole with better things to do with my life. If I do, someone smack me. Don't hate me for using the word "dink," :-D ...ROMeyn -- signat-url: http://www2.potsdam.edu/dctm/prescor/signat-url.htm cubiclecam: http://digirom.potsdam.edu/~prescor/cubiclecam.html ^^^ --- Off-line unless someone knows how to get camserv to compile under RedHat 7... *sigh* :-(
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Markus Stumpf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 10:36:32AM -0800, Barley wrote: True intelligence is indicated by a broader understanding of things, and the contributions that many different people have to offer. So ... this says that all those that cannot describe their problems properly are idiots, because they are lacking the broader understanding of the problems they have and thus are unable to ask the right questions. Where's the difference between what Robin said and what you say? The difference is that Robin seems to take the stance that if you are not a Linux or Unix GOD then you are an idiot. Barley on the other hand indicates that one can be intelligent and yet not know anyone about a given area. Jamin W. Collins
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
"lusers" is a derogatory way to refer to system users by system administrators. Isn't it great the way English expands in this flexible way? ;) OK, so the people Robin likes to flame ARE "lusers"...my bad... whereas Robin him or herself is actually still a "loser" in the conventional sense. Homonyms...what fun. It really is spelled that way in common usage, though I doubt you will find it in a dictionary.
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 01:53:40PM -0600, Jamin Collins wrote: Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: You called the docs "highly inadequate", not "a little lacking when it comes to helping someone completely new to qmail". In my book, calling something highly inadequate *is* calling it bad. Now, we are getting into a matter of semantics. It was not my intention to say the documentation was bad. I would say that your documentation is actually, better than what comes with qmail. However, I do still see it as lacking where a new user is concerned. So what did Dave think of your feedback and suggestions? You did contacted Dave with suggested material to fill the "lacking" parts as soon as you could, right? This list hears a lot of people suggest that documentation doesn't support new users sufficiently, but when the list suggests that the complainant is absolutely the best person to provide feedback to the document authors (as their experience is fresh and relevant), the response to the above question is near universal silence or a lame excuse as to why they haven't yet but will do so Real Soon Now. In short, most complainants complaint, few do anything to fix it for the next new user who comes along. Complaints have much better credibility if they act to fix things where they can. Regards.
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 11:15:04AM -0800, Barley wrote: Greg, he's not calling people stupid for what they don't know, but for what they couldn't be bothered to try, for the effort they couldn't be bothered to expend when it's just so easy to try and get someone else to do the hard work. Matt, I dig. You folks who have done a lot of hard work and are knowledgable should not have to do the work for newbies who can't be bothered. But the easiest way to avoid exerting any effort on their behalf seems to me to be to ignore them. This Robin person just seems to need to take out his/her dissatisfaction with life on newbies on this list, some of whom seem to have made efforts to solve problems themselves. While I agree that Robin is overly caustic at some times, I do for the most part find his posts pretty funny, and I think (or hope) that that is what he intends. That being said, there are also some situations where overt abuse is the only way to get something across to someone , and I'm happy that Robin is here to provide it. --Adam -- Adam McKenna [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "No matter how much it changes, http://flounder.net/publickey.html | technology's just a bunch of wires GPG: 17A4 11F7 5E7E C2E7 08AA| connected to a bunch of other wires." 38B0 05D0 8BF7 2C6D 110A| Joe Rogan, _NewsRadio_ 4:58pm up 172 days, 15:15, 10 users, load average: 0.08, 0.03, 0.01
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Maybe a "qmail-newbies"-list might be warranted? Here here. Then those who don't mind newbie level questions can answer those and others can ignore the list entirely. I think qmail-newbies list is a great idea. -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
From: Barley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Robin, you are decidedly an asshole. I can't believe how abusive you feel the need to be. Must stem from some geek-angst I don't understand. You feel like you're so bloody smart because Robin's no geek. He's just a kid, and fairly ignorant at that. For example, nobody told him that there is no such thing as HTML "programming", as he is proud to include in his http://socha.net/professional.english.html page. Or that XEmacs is not an operating system. For that matter, he doesn't even know that there is no operating system named Dos, nor Dos95 nor Dos NT. For someone with such a doubtfull sense of humour as he shows to have welcoming IE users the way he does at http://socha.net/, he seems to be inordinately proud of listing among his "computer skills" Microsoft Office. Therefore, I sugest you just ignore him. All he "contributes" is background noise. Armando Santos
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
I am sure everyone can agree on this. Constructive criticism works best, makes it much easier to fix how it lacks if told how it lacks. If you think the documentation sucks, PLEASE tell Dave (or Dan, or whatever else documentation you are reading) that it sucks and why it sucks, and if your really feeling useful fix it for them or give them some pointers. That's why free software and support are good. -- Tim -Original Message- From: Jamin Collins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 2:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question) Dave Sill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: You called the docs "highly inadequate", not "a little lacking when it comes to helping someone completely new to qmail". In my book, calling something highly inadequate *is* calling it bad. Now, we are getting into a matter of semantics. It was not my intention to say the documentation was bad. I would say that your documentation is actually, better than what comes with qmail. However, I do still see it as lacking where a new user is concerned. Jamin W. Collins
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
We old timers used to consider it rude to discuss anything but technical issues on a technical mailing list. If someone had a problem with someones manner of expression, or personality, they took it off list. Please do so in the future. sdb -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Such a list would pobably be ignored by the people that can really help. And sometimes the stupid questions aren't from newbies, they are from genuinely stupid lackwits like me. Anyway RTFM is usually good advice. Sometimes we really are lazy or busy setting up all kinds of crap on our systems and just hoping that someone with a qmail-capacity brain will be kind enough to spew out some ready tips. Maybe a "qmail-newbies"-list might be warranted? Here here. Then those who don't mind newbie level questions can answer those and others can ignore the list entirely. I think qmail-newbies list is a great idea. -- Robin S. Socha http://socha.net/
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Louis Theran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: Really? Is this a digression because you've already contacted LWQ's author with suggestions? Have you posted anything to this list about the specific problems you had with INSTALL? No to both, because I have not yet completed my configuration. Once I have, I will rebuild it again, and possibly one more time. Just to be sure I have what I want and that I know exactly how I did it. Then, I will compare what I've done with what is in the instructions for LWQ and possibly INSTALL. Then I will submit my findings as appropriate. If you think that new users aren't well served by the available documentation, then you should contribute. Somebody else wrote qmail for you. Somebody else wrote LWQ for you. You've even gotten help from the qmail list. I absolutely agree, and fully plan to. Complaining about other posters won't help any new users. If that's what you actually care about, try fixing the ``inadequate'' instructions. Again, I absolutely agree. However, there is one thing missing here. None of this justifies beratting someone for asking for assistance. Jamin W. Collins
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Thus said "asantos" on Wed, 29 Nov 2000 22:13:18 -0100: For someone with such a doubtfull sense of humour as he shows to have welcoming IE users the way he does at http://socha.net/, he seems to be inordinately proud of listing among his "computer skills" Microsoft Office. Bah! That's a lot nicer than what I used to have on my webpage: http://www.xmission.com/~bradipo/fun.html Andy p.s. only works with 9x not NT [---[system uptime]] 5:35pm up 27 days, 19:55, 2 users, load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
"Robin S. Socha" wrote: snip Indeed. Tell me, Jamin, does your inflatable sheep talk? If so, do you wait for it to ask you for a fag, then repeat everything it said during intercourse (including the funny noises your mother and the new neighbour were making as well as the TV) and then ask if you were /really/ good? More to the point: why do you not repeat everything that /your/ sheep said but rather Suresh's (two weeks ago, while thumbing the Sear's catalogue)? You don't? Then why do you behave this way on mailing lists, i.e. full quote including signature and everything below your text? How does this post belong in a mature discussion/support/etc. list? It seems like it belongs in something like alt.sex.discussion.fill in the blank, or the like. This is just downright offensive, and tiring. I feel as though I'm in middle school listening to the jocks. Everyone has to get thier word in (hey, look, I'm guilty too). Pride is an evil, evil thing, and looks to be something most of you need to get over. Robin, a few questions: Did your parents berate/abuse you as a child (perhaps they called it rough justice to quote a post by you later)? Or perhaps you were spoiled monetarily, yet ignored. Did the other school children look down upon you? Do you need anti depressives? I only ask these questions because of my background of misguided schooling in mental issues (thank god I changed my major to CS, mental health is too depressing), and have seen many many a case study. snip I know this list gets quite a lot of mail, but perhaps it would be best moderated, with a few choice moderators that are kind, who believe in humility, not anger. This would also stop all of the childish talk of fornication with blow up creatures. Another side note, I'm not sure about the qmail-newbies idea. The issue is that it WOULD go ignored and who is to prevent "newbies" from posting to this list? Now please excuse me while I bow out. -- Eric Garff MyComputer.com System Admin Our Tools. Your Site. Just remember, if the world didn't suck, we'd all fall off. --
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 17:22 schrieb Jamin Collins: There is no need to refer to his posting as "such nonsense". Calling me an asshole on one hand (this weren't his words, it's just my conclusion) and asking me for help off-list does not fit. Additionally, there is no call/need for the statement about "busy people". I believe it is well known that people read this list on their time and any answer is essentially a donation from their time. Nice that you believe this is well known, obviously some people don't think about that. -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de| Germany
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Am Mittwoch, 29. November 2000 19:01 schrieb Barley: To Mr. Brauer, who seems on a quest to post nothing but flames here, we realize that no one is paid staff here. But you flaming everyone who posts doesn't help a thing. You should reread my mails. Then you would notice i gave somehow detailed instructions how to supply the needed information. Nonetheless he was on the false list, ans this was the main issue i addressed with my first mail. Gregg -- Henning Brauer | BS Web Services Hostmaster BSWS | Roedingsmarkt 14 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 20459 Hamburg www.bsws.de| Germany
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Thus said Jamin Collins on Wed, 29 Nov 2000 12:45:04 CST: * 6 attribution lines Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC. If it is, which one? * No citation leader Once again. Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC. If it is, which one? * Trailing blank line And yet again. Don't believe this is a requirement or violation of any RFC. If it is, which one? Ok, You need to spend more time in the books and less time flapping the jaw. Each one of those violates RFC 1855 to some extent. Here is the link to the RFC and just to make things easy on you, I will quote relevant parts of it here (you should still read it though): - Be brief without being overly terse. When replying to a message, include enough original material to be understood but no more. It is extremely bad form to simply reply to a message by including all the previous message: edit out all the irrelevant material. * Did you do this? - Do not include control characters or non-ASCII attachments in messages unless they are MIME attachments or unless your mailer encodes these. If you send encoded messages make sure the recipient can decode them. * Are you 100% certain that everyone on the list can read your goofy windows font/content-type - Wait overnight to send emotional responses to messages. If you have really strong feelings about a subject, indicate it via FLAME ON/OFF enclosures. For example: FLAME ON: This type of argument is not worth the bandwidth it takes to send it. It's illogical and poorly reasoned. The rest of the world agrees with me. FLAME OFF * Is not your original post based on emotional response to someone elses? Just because they respond emotionally, does that justify your ignorance of the same? - A good rule of thumb: Be conservative in what you send and liberal in what you receive. You should not send heated messages (we call these "flames") even if you are provoked. On the other hand, you shouldn't be surprised if you get flamed and it's prudent not to respond to flames. * No comment. Cheers, Andy p.s. BTW, this applies to anyone on the list---not that I am a netiquette cop by any means. ;-) -- [---[system uptime]] 7:58pm up 27 days, 22:18, 4 users, load average: 1.06, 1.21, 1.23
RE: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Andy Bradford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] writes: - Be brief without being overly terse. When replying to a message, include enough original material to be understood but no more. It is extremely bad form to simply reply to a message by including all the previous message: edit out all the irrelevant material. * Did you do this? Originally, no. Have I been since it was pointed out? Yes. Sorry for the error on my part there. However, that was not one of the items in the list you quoted. - Do not include control characters or non-ASCII attachments in messages unless they are MIME attachments or unless your mailer encodes these. If you send encoded messages make sure the recipient can decode them. * Are you 100% certain that everyone on the list can read your goofy windows font/content-type I must admit that I can not guarantee that everyone on this list can read it, but I dare say that you or anyone else out there would be hard pressed to be 100% certain that everyone could read their messages. As for the character set, it is a modified version of ISO-8859-1. I would be interested to know how many people on this list do have problems reading it (please e-mail me privately). - Wait overnight to send emotional responses to messages. If you have really strong feelings about a subject, indicate it via FLAME ON/OFF enclosures. For example: FLAME ON: This type of argument is not worth the bandwidth it takes to send it. It's illogical and poorly reasoned. The rest of the world agrees with me. FLAME OFF * Is not your original post based on emotional response to someone elses? Just because they respond emotionally, does that justify your ignorance of the same? My original posting could be consider emotional. However, it was not a spur of the moment response. I have watch the rude responses to questions on this list for quite some time. This is not the only list that I'm subscribed to, it does however have more rude responses than any of the others I'm subscribed to. - A good rule of thumb: Be conservative in what you send and liberal in what you receive. You should not send heated messages (we call these "flames") even if you are provoked. On the other hand, you shouldn't be surprised if you get flamed and it's prudent not to respond to flames. * No comment. Only one person here has been flaming IMHO, no need to mention names. Thank you for your kind and informative response. Jamin W. Collins
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000 22:13:18 -0100, "asantos" [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: A Robin's no geek. He's just ... Are you sure? This picture plus the signature makes me wonder... http://socha.net/Gnus/screenshots/mime.html -- Karl Vogel[EMAIL PROTECTED] When anyone asks me how I can best describe my experience in nearly forty years at sea, I merely say, uneventful... I never saw a wreck and never have been wrecked nor was I ever in any predicament that threatened to end in disaster of any sort. --E. J. Smith, 1907, Captain, RMS Titanic
Fw: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
- Original Message - From: "Andy KKS" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Jamin Collins" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 8:34 AM Subject: Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question) - Original Message - From: "Jamin Collins" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "'Andy Bradford'" [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Do not include control characters or non-ASCII attachments in messages unless they are MIME attachments or unless your mailer encodes these. If you send encoded messages make sure the recipient can decode them. * Are you 100% certain that everyone on the list can read your goofy windows font/content-type Actually problem is not in body of message, problem is that some poeple like to use "weird" characters in subject. Some mail servers (not mine) or relay stations, can't handle message and reject it then. A while ago I got 2 such mails every day, and it was quite anoyying. I talked to sysadmin of cable network I am part of, and he said that he can't do anything since, it's not his server, that rejects mails with "bad" subject. So this should be reminder, to *everyone*, not to post weird chars in subject or from addy. I am sure this should be written in one of your RFC's right? Andy
Re: List Courtesy (was Newbie question)
Doesn't Outlook have filtering capabilities? Perhaps you could figure out how to just filter mail from [EMAIL PROTECTED] into the bit bucket; that should basically take care of the problem, eh? But where would the *fun* be then. I haven't had so much to laugh, for a quite a while now. I am on several lists, few of them technical (like this one), but even when war brooke out on one of them I haven't seen so much flamming. Once upon a time I read document Netiquete, and as I can remember there was no word that computer geeks (Robin) can be abusive toward newbies. I myself am a programmer, and if somone politely asks me a question, I give answer, without making that person feel like an idiot. It's people like him (Robin), that give programers (and wizards) like us bad name. So far people from this list have been quite helpful on areas, I didn't know about, since I didn't use them, but if some newbies get here and are greated by Robin, they will probably decide against using software, for which this should be support list. Andy
