[Fwd: Re: [TAG] Linux for Dummies]

[Jimmy O'Regan]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [TAG] Linux for Dummies
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:53:25 -0500
From: Melanie Hill <melanie at netdirect.ca>
To: TAG <tag at lists.linuxgazette.net>
To: Jimmy O'Regan <jimregan at o2.ie>
References: <1100715450.19998.41.camel at dhcp111.office.netdirect.ca> 
<20041118030138.GE2278 at callahans.org> 
<1100787564.22615.16.camel at dhcp111.office.netdirect.ca> 
<20041119032823.GB2811 at callahans.org> <419D77D5.5030306 at o2.ie>

Dear Jimmy


I appreciate your analogy's, and the fact that you volunteer to write to
people like myself.  I unfortunately will have no more communication
with Ben.  I don't think I can help you, help me, because all I have
received from this community, is completely mixed messages.  I can
honestly say I am much to sensitive for this type of forum.  My
Question, which I really don't expect a response to, isn't a specific
question, and that may be why I am having so much trouble.

I am trying to understand the Linux World, and all of its
characteristics.

You guys have taught me that I am much further off then what I thought I
was. I have a lot of "construction" to do.


Thanks for your time.


Melanie
On Fri, 2004-11-19 at 04:34 +0000, Jimmy O'Regan wrote:
> Benjamin A. Okopnik wrote:
> > [cc'd to TAG ]
> > 
> > On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 09:19:24AM -0500, Melanie Hill wrote:
> > 
> >>Dear Mr. Richard Bach
> > 
> >  
> > That would be "Dear Mr. Ben Okopnik", Melanie; the signature of the
> > person sending the email is usually at the bottom. The name following a
> > quote is usually called an attribution, and refers to the person being
> > quoted.
> > 
> > 
> >>To answer your first "smart" question, I was simply "probing" your
> >>website, to see what kind of response Id get.
> > 
> > 
> > And in response to your poor phrasing and your nearly-unparseable
> > "request", you got "probed" back. I note, from your appended comment,
> > that you didn't enjoy it; if so, I can only suggest that you correct
> > your behavior if you want different results. "Probing" is not a polite
> > communication technique in any form of etiquette of which I'm aware.
> 
> Melanie, "How to ask Smart Questions" is the title of an essay that Ben
> suggested you read. I'm willing to take this extra step of hand-holding
> because a) you were quite polite to me, and b) I /really/ think you
> misunderstood Ben's original reply.
> 
> Please also bear in mind that you wrote asking for "Linux for
> Dummies"-type articles; I don't think that an article named "How to Ask
> Smart Questions" is too much of a stretch from that view point.
> 
> > 
> > Your attitude has also caused you to read something into my response
> > which wasn't there when I wrote it: you assumed that you were being put 
> > down when in fact you were being given the best advice for the
> > situation. [shrug] Your choice; your problem. You're welcome to keep
> > your ignorance, and you'll receive no further help from me.
> 
> As I said in an uncharacteristically private email[1], and bearing in
> mind that you mentioned 'marketing': you came expecting a product,
> instead you found a community. Smileys, or 'emoticons', are an
> *extremely* common device used in email (the most common method of
> communication of this community, and of similar communities) -- when
> someone adds a smiley (':)' or similar) to a sentence, that sentence
> should be taken as that smiley implies; in the case of Ben's original
> email, that means 'I expect you to smile here'.
> 
> > 
> > 
> >>I know how to "use"
> >>Linux.  If that were the problem, I wouldn't be writing to the Answer
> >>Gang.  As a sales and marketing associate at Net Direct
> >>(www.netdirect.ca) I was wondering if anyone at the Linux Gazette would
> >>be kind enough to point me in the direction of a jargon-less article I
> >>could possibly peruse.
> > 
> > 
> > Since a) you failed to get your meaning across and b) the sender of the
> > communication is responsible for clarity, I invite you to consider your
> > own responsibility in the process.
> 
> Also, please bear in mind that several of us get paid quite significant 
> amounts of money to answer this sort of question; we do this as a labour 
> of love, but the least we expect is a clear question. I hope that, after 
> the points I made in the last email you received from me, you understand 
> that we *are* "normal" people, just people with a lot of experience in 
> this particular area, and that it's unreasonable to expect to be able to 
> grok (understand) any field after a single exchange of emails.
> 
> To attempt to be perfectly clear: we are ready, willing, and able to 
> answer most questions, but we need to have a clear question to answer. 
> We can't transmit years of experience and knowledge through email. If 
> you can provide us with specific questions, by all means do, but please 
> don't expect to be able to know what we know after one conversation -- 
> *we* don't know (none of us, individually, know) what we (we, as a 
> group) know.
> 
> > 
> > 
> >>That then is my Question, "Are there any
> >>articles on Linux, existing in your database, that I, a normal being,
> >>could read?, and if there aren't, yes I am suggesting its something you
> >>could write about.  
> > 
> > 
> > Your definition of yourself as a "normal being" could also benefit from
> > clarification. If by "normal" you mean "unfamiliar with Linux" or
> > "unfamiliar with computers", this would make people who do have some
> > familiarity with these abnormal. This is not likely to be a useful
> > method of asking for help.
> 
> Again, you're not limited to one question: what do you need help with? 
> You may ask us now, you may ask us at any later date, though I am afraid 
> that, without a sufficient apology, you will be dealing without Ben's 
> help; trust me, this *is* your loss.
> 
> > 
> > 
> >>Sincerely, 
> >>
> >>Melanie Hill, and may I suggest you change your "How to ask smart
> >>Questions" to "I feel the need to put people down when I cant understand
> >>their Questions."  
> > 
> > 
> > You're welcome to get your back up in whatever way you like, and imagine
> > any slights you want. What you're not welcome to any longer is my
> > participation in the process.
> > 
> 
> Melanie, have you seen "Jerry Maguire"? If so, you'll remember the
> phrase "Help me help you"; that's what Ben was asking originally, and if 
> I know him at all, is asking still.
> 
> I can't say this enough: though we have gained our knowledge through the 
> shedding of blood, sweat, and tears, and though several of us maintain 
> quite a high standard of living through the possession of this 
> knowledge, we all choose to freely distribute it. I don't say this to 
> inspire awe, I simply hope that you will understand that we will try to 
> help, provided that you help us to help you.
> 
> [1] We are all volunteers here; we do this with the understanding that 
> we are allowed to publish the results, in the hope that we can help more 
> than just the person who originally asked the question. We don't even 
> expect gratitude, but we *do* frown on ingratitude. I am making 
> allowances because I see only misunderstanding on your part. Feel free 
> to skip to the next step, where you have reason to feel gratitude.