Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 01:37:14 +0000 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: sue@welearn.com.au Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: RTFN (was: What to do next?) Message-ID: <199803080137.BAA19914@awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 08 Mar 1998 10:47:37 %2B1100." <19980308104737.05529@welearn.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > >> dial ok!
> > >> login ok!
> > >> ppp on anthony> packet mode
> > >> ppp on anthony>
> > >> PPP on anthony>
> > >>
> > >> Now my question is what do I do next to have access to the Internet?
>
> > >Nothing.
>
> > Exactly.
> > If you'd read up on PPP (ahem ahem), you'd have learned that you switch to
> > another vty and do whatever internet stuff you want to do.
>
> OK, a dummy-spit is overdue and this is as good an excuse as any.
>
> Where in what document is that stage explained? I spent 20 minutes looking
> just now and couldn't find it in any of the places I looked. The only thing
> worse than finding something not documented is trying to work it out from
> the wrong document and giving up. So often we see elaborate instructions on
> configuring bells and whistles while basic usage instructions are either
> hidden deep in all those words or simply overlooked because hackers don't
> need them and newbies don't get far enough to advertise their stupidity.
Eh ?
You're asking "where is it documented that I must start up a shell
and run an application in order to connect to the internet" ? Am I
reading this correctly ?
I think it's extremely reasonable to expect people to be able to
figure out that the ppp program makes the ppp connection and nothing
else.
If you wish to be pedantic, "using another window" is documented in
the man page at the end of the MANUAL DIALING section :-)
> As an example, I reinstalled FreeBSD several times because when it got to
> the part where it asked "myhostname" no matter what I put in there it
> got stuck and wouldn't proceed to the next installation question.
> I'd read everything available six times through and nothing had informed me
> that this is what you see when the installation has successfully completed.
> I went back to OS/2 and read this mailing list and didn't understand the
> answers and didn't want to be one of the "RTFM" rejects so I had a fully
> working FreeBSD system sitting there for ages before finding someone open
> minded enough to help me work out what hadn't gone wrong. Was my decision
> not to ask here the right one? I'd like to think not.
You're being paranoid. I am always loathe to answer the simple
questions because it normally implies that the asker hasn't done
their homework. This isn't always the case, and if someone
retaliates to my answer, I'll explain this, usually apologise
(because they explain their question a bit more and prove they've
tried to figure whatever it is out), and then answer the question
properly (unless they haven't actually done their homework).
> Everyone: If you want someone to stop asking for help it'd be kinder to
> just say so or shut up. Nobody forces you to answer questions you don't like.
> Once you criticise people who ask questions you open yourself to criticism
> of your answers. Whether that's deemed heresy or fair play, it will happen.
On the flip-side, people should be aware that documentation exists
for a reason. There's nothing worse than spending hours on a
document describing how CHAP works, then getting someone posting a
question saying "CHAP doesn't work in ppp, has anyone else seen
this ?" (this is a bit extreme, but not impossible).
Ppp suffers hugely in this respect because it had an almost infinite
number of bugs about a year ago. Although most of these bugs have
been fixed, people still post dumb "I haven't bothered reading usenet
or any of the mailing lists before posting this question" questions.
I've documented everything I think warrants documenting, and in the
end, sometimes RTFM is the only answer you can really give.
> A little tolerance and understanding can save someone an awful lot more
> trouble than your slight inconvenience of dreaming up a witty or cryptic
> answer to a boring email without bothering to do a little of the same
> research you demand of those less well equipped to do it.
>
> Reading documentation is essential, but it does not guarantee understanding,
> even if the relevant manual is identified and found. "RTFM" has its place
> when full RTFM details are given, but abuse of "RTFM" reduces its validity.
> In some cases a useful retort might be RTFN (Remember the f***ing newbie).
> Their numbers are increasing and so will their use of this mailing list.
Then so must their use of the list search facilities. Helping people
that don't attempt to help themselves first is a waste of time. The
knowledge will be forgotten unless you have to work to obtain it in
the first place (IMHO).
> Some people here cannot always remember what it feels like to be earnest but
> ignorant and I wish they'd leave the screen clear for the ones who can.
I don't agree.
Almost all of the RTFM-type responses here and on usenet are
warranted. The ones that are not are usually heavily accosted by the
likes of Jordan et al.
The remaining ones that aren't warranted are simply badly worded
questions, and the poster really has to be assertive (and brave)
enough to try again.
The newbie that's not only ignorant about FreeBSD but is ignorant of
the best way to ask a question suffers.... but they eventually learn
if they read the group/list long enough 'cos they see this sort of
``attitude'' mail now and again (read: discussion on why RTFM
responses are given).
It's not always fair.
> --
>
> Regards,
> -*Sue*-
>
> find / -name "*.conf" |more
--
Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org>, <brian@FreeBSD.org>, <brian@OpenBSD.org>
<http://www.Awfulhak.org>;
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour....
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199803080137.BAA19914>