[Rd] No RTFM?

[Ravi Varadhan]

I completely agree with you, John.  In my view, there is no need for
explicit RTFM or GLOG statements.  

Best,
Ravi.

-----Original Message-----
From: r-devel-bounces at r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-bounces at r-project.org]
On Behalf Of P J JAYNES
Sent: Friday, August 20, 2010 4:40 PM
To: kw.stat at gmail.com; spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com
Cc: r-devel at r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] No RTFM?


Hello,
 
 I have found the people associated with this list to be VERY helpful over
the years. This is especially appreciated as, some of my answers have come
from the same people who are busy improving R: a fascinating, potent set of
software tools, excellently supported. In my humble opinion, the anti-thesis
of a commercial for profit software analogue.
 
Good Luck to you,
 
John
 
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 13:06:05 -0500
From: kw.stat at gmail.com
To: spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com
CC: r-devel at r-project.org
Subject: Re: [Rd] No RTFM?

Recently I was visiting with people about why commercial support is needed
for some people using R.  One person observed:
 
With commercial support, you have a person that you can call with questions
and yell at.
With R mailing lists, you can ask questions and have people yell at YOU.
 
The atmosphere of the R-help and R-devel mailing lists is infamous.  Is this
a good reputation to have?  I'm doubtful that it is.
 
So, I support Spencer's suggestion for more civility.
 
Kevin Wright
 
 
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Spencer Graves <
spencer.graves at structuremonitoring.com> wrote:
 
>  What do you think about adding a "No RTFM" policy to the R mailing lists?
> Per, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM":
>
>
> The Ubuntu Forums and LinuxQuestions.org, for instance, have 
> instituted "no RTFM" policies to promote a welcoming atmosphere.[8][9].
>
> RTFM [and] "Go look on google" are two inappropriate responses to a 
> question. If you don't know the answer or don't wish to help, please 
> say nothing instead of brushing off someone's question. Politely 
> showing someone how you searched or obtained the answer to a question 
> is acceptable, even encouraged.
> ...
>
> If you wish to remind a user to use search tools or other resources 
> when they have asked a question you feel is basic or common, please be 
> very polite. Any replies for help that contain language disrespectful 
> towards the user asking the question, i.e. "STFU" or "RTFM" are 
> unacceptable and will not be tolerated. Ubuntu Forums
>
>
> Gavin Simpson and I recently provided examples answering a question 
> from "r.ookie" that had previously elicited responses, ""You want us 
> to read the help page to you?" and "It yet again appears that you are 
> asking us to read the help pages for you."
>
>
> I can appreciate the sentiment in fortunes('rtfm'). In this case, 
> however, "r.ookie" had RTFM (and said so), but evidently the manual 
> was not sufficiently clear.
>
>
> Best Wishes,
> Spencer Graves
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>
 
 
 
--
Kevin Wright
 
	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
 

______________________________________________ R-devel at r-project.org mailing
list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]