Re: Thoughts on RTFM
On Sat, 2001-12-01 at 07:34, Tom Allison wrote:
> My point is this:
> If all you ever want is the step by step instructions, that is all you
> will ever know.
<diatribe>
This is more or less the key for me to understanding why other people
can't be bothered to read the manual. If it's not in a step by step
format for their exact problem they assume somewhere, someone else is to
blame for their problems.
The real solution is to understand that step by step instructions and
example config files are tools to properly comprehend the CONCEPTS and
their RELATIONSHIPS to the REQUIREMENTS to solve your PROBLEM. Once you
learn what goals need to be accomplished and the steps needed to take
them, you don't need step by step instructions anymore. You can map
your own route from point A to point B independent of a particular
howto. Learning how to absorb massive amounts of Documentation and
incorporate the concepts ino your knowledge base is critical to
understanding where a particular point A and point B are for undefined
problems. Sometimes some people get this very quickly, people like
Systems Analysts and Sysadmins usually, others often don't for a long
while. The secret is not to know everything, but where to go looking
for it.
If you can't be bothered to read Documentation, you shouldn't be given
control over your own systems. I'm really serious on this point, if you
don't want to learn how to fix it right you shouldn't ever try. To the
people that say "That's why Linux will never be a desktop": I agree,
the system is too complicated for most users, especially those who
expect and demand that a free product meet their expectations
immediately without trying to contribute anything but criticism. There
is no one solution or default config, default enabling of unused
services is why Red Worm and things spread like wildfire through
Windows. Linux can provide solutions to most tasks, you have to
understand what those are and why before you can implement them.
Of course those who do climb out of the newbie pit often look back and
see how obvious the solutions are to their old problems and figure
everyone should understand those now simple concepts, thats why I think
it's hard to write docs for newbies.
It doesn't help that most error messages are a tad bit cryptic to new
users and especially ones from Windows who only ever see a blue screen
and just shrug and reboot. They've been trained to ignore why the
problem happened and not to look for the solutions.
Onto the main point of the thread. The RTFM sayers aren't all lumped
into the same grouping. I haven't seen all that much of a RTFM one
liner to a question much here, we actually care about users here. The
other camp is trying to point someone in the right direction usually
after providing the solution or a large hint.
Self sufficiency as an admin is really the ultimate goal of helping list
questions here in my opinion. When I see short questions that are
actually answerable by RTFM and it's someone relatively new I quote the
FM for them and tell them where I found it, suggestions to use the
command apropos to provide clues to the FM etc.
On the other hand if it's technical questions by experienced users I
recognize I answer them succinctly because I know that the answer will
provide understanding to the recpient independent of a lecture.
But, if people keep asking the same question after being given an
answer, or sometimes two or three that will work, or the answer is
RTFMLA (MLA=Mailing List Archives). One ability that needs to be
learned is how to search for previous solutions from archives and
google. Most questions I have have already been answered somewhere
else. It gets annoying to see them same question over and over, and
over and over about 2 weeks later when the same issue hits testing from
unstable.
</diatribe>
--mike
Reply to: