[Rd] No RTFM?

[Michael Dewey]

At 01:08 20/08/2010, Spencer Graves wrote:
>  What do you think about adding a "No RTFM" 
> policy to the R mailing lists? Per, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM":

Spencer,
You raise an interesting point but the responses 
to your post remind us that people (and indeed 
whole cultures) are not all situated at the same 
point on the continuum of directness between 
"It's a cow, stupid" and "From this side it looks 
not unlike a cow". The issue of what is offensive 
is even more complex, I remember being taken to 
task on another list for referring to a "rule of thumb".

The thing I find most rude on the list is not the 
occasional abrupt postings by people who are 
obviously having a bad day but the number of 
fairly long exchanges which end unresolved as the 
OP never bothers to post a conclusion and we 
never know whether we solved his/her problem.
I am not asking for thanks but we would all 
benefit from knowing how it all turned out.


>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
>
>

Michael Dewey
http://www.aghmed.fsnet.co.uk