M. Fioretti wrote: > > Try to calculate, instead, the _effectiveness_ of support, that is the > ratio between the time one spends answering on this list and the > amount of actually useful (=found quickly through online searches, > minimizes the amount of future duplicate questions, etc...) > information he or she produces. > > If you scan the archives you'll also find that most of the answers > come exactly from people who like to "work harder, not smarter". The > others (cfr what I wrote about Byfield, Haugland, Weber, plus many > others almost equally competent who don't come back after seeing what > passes for "support" here) have always left. > > Marco > >
Please step back and take a look at the thread to see where the problem is. 1) Your "solution" is a band aid, that does nothing to fix the original cause of the problem. 2) You seem to feel it's your place to tell everyone else how to act on this list. This is by far the bigger problem and why I mentioned the post numbers. One thing you have to learn in life, is you get better cooperation from others, if you don't rub people the wrong way. There have been a few posts from others, that indicate that's precisely what you are doing. Whether you changed demand to ask is irrelevant, as it's the first impressions that count. Then there's the imaginary poll, where everyone supposedly agreed with you or the reference to "OFFICIAL guidelines" that apparently have noting to do with this list. Take a look at how you've been trying to control others here and you'll find out why you got those messages about your conduct on this list. -- Use OpenOffice.org <http://www.openoffice.org> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
