|Keep It Simple, Stupid|
To Answer, Or Not To Answer....by koolgirl (Hermit)
|on Jul 29, 2011 at 19:19 UTC||Need Help??|
Greetings monks, very happy to be back after a two year long absence :D.
So, now that I've been at this a bit longer, expanded my knowledge a bit and widened my skill set, I've returned to find it seems that even though there are a handful of questions I can answer confidently, I still feel completely unqualified to answer about 80 - 85% of the questions I see posted.
Of course there have been several discussions about the best way to thank the monastery for such wonderful insight and instructional answers, and most veteran monks agree that the best way to do that is to give back to the community by donating your time to answer questions as others have done for you.
OK, so here's my point, I see lots of posts that I maybe could give a half way decent answer to, but I usually refrain, because I don't want to cause more confusion and because I know there are about a million monks more qualified to answer the post than me. Lately I'm wondering if I should go ahead and learn a little bit more, give a little back to the monastery and try my best, or if I should refrain unless I'm pretty sure I know what the $#!& I'm talking about? What do ya'll think? Is it a waste of time to try and answer posts you're not extremely well suited to be answering, or, in the spirit of trial & error and supportive contributions, would you recommend that I just cowgirl up and get to answerin'?
Wow, terrific responses, monks, thanks. See, this is why I love the monastery so much that I over-dose on all my latest O.C.D. tendencies worrying about things like whether or not to answer posts, because the amount of dedication, time and effort given so freely is absolutely INVALUABLE.
Also, ironically enough, there was a typo on "trial & error", which I remedied.
/me is so happy to see responses she closes eyes and momentarily enters an imaginary "koolgirl and the Perl factory" world, envisioning herself afloat a river of syntax, with choclate-covered scalars floating by...