Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
Perl-Sensitive Sunglasses

Re: I think Casey West is right

by Masem (Monsignor)
on Jun 14, 2001 at 15:30 UTC ( #88364=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to I think Casey West is right

I think another reason this got reaped away is that this really is a question that showed no attempt to do any bit of research, and was only looking for the quick and easy answer. (FWIW a quick search gives me 273,000 hits, with the first page of hits being very relevent). It's hard not to call it elitism, but when the good ol' days of the net were here, this person would possibly have gotten flamed for not doing a good amount of background research, including FAQs and the like, before posting. Add to the fact that it was posted as AM without very other many details and somewhat poorly worded, and it's hard to take the question seriously.
Dr. Michael K. Neylon - || "You've left the lens cap of your mind on again, Pinky" - The Brain

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re (tilly) 2: I think Casey West is right
by tilly (Archbishop) on Jun 14, 2001 at 17:20 UTC
    There was a time when this community prided itself on handling FAQ questions with answers like the following:
    Google is your friend. If you have a general question the first thing you should try is a quick search.
    As for it being hard to not call it elitism, I agree. I also find it stupid. Consider the merits of reaping vs the above short post. Reaping takes more work. The person whose post was reaped gets no feedback, their post just disappears, so you are liable to get a post along the lines of, "I already asked this but PerlMonks seems to have eaten my question..." By contrast a short post pointing at how to use a search engine will encourage the person who asked to use a search engine next time. Better yet, other random people who happen to browse PerlMonks will see that people on PerlMonks would happily start with a search engine for vague, general questions and are more likely to do that rather than post themselves. Finally giving the friendly answer makes the site nicer for everyone.

    Why then would people reap? It makes no sense to me. It seems like a recipe to get frustrated and get even more opportunities to get frustrated down the road.

Re: Re: I think Casey West is right
by Sifmole (Chaplain) on Jun 14, 2001 at 17:01 UTC
    273,000 hits -- Now that is exactly why I WOULD go and start asking others. 273,000 hits, even if I could examine 1 hit a second that would take a little over three days to examine them all.

    Almost every question posted on this site can be answered with a "bit of research", so do we reap them all?

    Not everyone writes beautifully, could it be a second language issue? Maybe AM is used to chinese, and had some difficulty posting in english.

    I think what this person was looking for, and I think rightfully so, was a way to cut through the 273,000 pages of marketing and junk to find out what conclusions experienced developers had already made. Maybe AM was doing research, but decided to work in parallel. Ask the question, and while responses come in go out and start sifting through the 273,000 hits.

    I think the reaping has gotten a bit out of hand. If people don't feel like answering, or entertaining a question then ignore it. Just simply ignore it. They really go away that easily.

      Well, as someone that has had to do a lot of research (not net-wise), you learn that when you get thousands of hits, you have to learn how to prune, typically by going to the most relevent hits and deciding how to modify your search to reduce the number of hits. When I did that search, I saw at least 10 pages in the first page listing that were not ads but pointers to "web based software testing" resource pages and links. I'd use those to see if they answered my question, or otherwise use additional keywords to narrow the search. Yes, it's daunting, but that's how research works. If in that case that did not prove fruitful, I would then approach a forum, but adding that "searching on google gave me more hits that useful".

      And while most questions can be done by searching on the web, there are some times where you don't know the right terms that make the web search 'click'. For example, the question that I'm replying on about header() and redirect() functions of CGI; I don't think the original poster would have hit a solution just by web searching given his confusion. There are times that I'm trying to read up on a perl concept, and even if I know the terms, I don't know what portion of the perldocs that it is stored in; even searching at can be fruitless given the number of times that concept appears in the perl documentation, and then it just becomes a matter of reading anything that matches.

      I think in the case of the indicated post, there is absolutely no indication that the user has done any research. Maybe he had, maybe he hadn't. But because of that, there is a negative tendancy to disregard that question, particular in light of the developing trend of using the speed of replies on the internet to ask many smaller and not-thought-out questions instead of asking well-thought-out, thought-provoking questions. I took a look at how SoPW questions are handled with posting hints enabled, and there is no point where the user is giving a link on how to write good questions. (There's sections on where to post, and how to format the writeups, however). I know the site FAQ has this information in it, but I'd doubt an AM looking for the quick answer is going to read this. What I think we need to do is simply add "How to ask a good question" link in the various submit panes, so that we tell users to do:

      • Stay on topic, if possible
      • Provide as much details on the problem or question
      • Reduce any code to the basic problem code
      and other 'simple' things that, to me, would see to be obvious but not necessarily so obvious to newcomers. It may be just as easily ignored, but it could also be beneficial with very little change to the PM source or functionality.

      Dr. Michael K. Neylon - || "You've left the lens cap of your mind on again, Pinky" - The Brain

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://88364]
[1nickt]: Morning monks, howzit?
[ambrus]: AAAAAAARGH!
[ambrus]: something must be wrong here
[ambrus]: oh I see. I'm stupid
[marto]: hi 1nickt!

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others taking refuge in the Monastery: (8)
As of 2018-01-23 13:02 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How did you see in the new year?

    Results (246 votes). Check out past polls.