[RANT] Give the Man a FRESH Fish or a *STALE* Fish?

[TakeTheActive]

Yep, that's right - that "Crazy Old Fart (

Techie/Nerd

)/ Whiner" is back again!

With a SUB-Poll on the original GIVE a Man a Fish vs TEACH a Man to Fish... topic, currently at:

• GIVE: 9
• TEACH: 45

...questioning the QUALITY of the TEACH.

Do you:

1. Sit down and COMPLETELY answer the poster's question.
   .
2. Reply with an 'abbreviated' answer due to limited time.
   .
3. Reply with an 'abbreviated' answer due to lack of general interest / concern.
   .
4. Reply with what you *THINK* is the correct answer.
   .
5. Reply with some BS (just to increase your POST COUNT).
   .
6. Reply with something OT.
   .
7. etc...

*PLEASE*, if you VOTE, *ALSO* post your reasons why.

Thanks!

Personally, on the threads that I view daily (~99.9% in 'Batteries Included') regarding ANSWERING QUESTIONS, I feel that there is TOO MUCH of #2-7 and not enough of #1. Whenever I reply to a post, I dedicate my FULL EFFORT (yeah, I'm disabled / semi-retired :shakehead / BROKE ) providing LINKs, REFERENCEs, EXPLANATIONs, etc...!!! :twothumbs

And I feel that is it a DISSERVICE to the OP when any CPF member replies with anything less their *BEST*.:scowl:

SURPRISE ME and show me (with LINKs) that it's different in the other CPF Forums.

P.S. Yeah, I realize ANSWERING a (possibly) complex question (from possibly a Newbie) takes time, but is an INCOMPLETE and/or INCORRECT answer more appropriate than the COMPLETE *AND* CORRECT answer? Couldn't an INCOMPLETE and/or INCORRECT answer lead the 'unsuspecting' Newbie down the *WRONG* PATH , leading to even *MORE* QUESTIONS?!? :huh: :shakehead

MAYBE you'd be better off NOT ANSWERING AT ALL?!? :thinking:​

Example:

How much is 4 + 4?

Possible Answers:

1. Greater than 5
   .
2. Less than 9
   .
3. Somewhere between 5 and 9
   .
4. 8

What's the result of ANSWERS #1-3? :thinking:

MORE QUESTIONS! ​

P.P.S. It took me over an hour to create, type and proofread this post. I'm VERY sincere about the topics I post (despite all the smiles and formatting that I enjoy utilizing). When other CPF members reply with sarcasm and BS, I don't understand WHY and I truly feel HURT.

P.P.P.S. Yeah, they already informed me about "Herding Cats" and "Pushing a Rope". *PLEASE* try to limit your replies to something "at least close to" On Topic.

NOTE: To any newcomers to this forum, I *ENJOY* periodically going *HOG WILD* with formatting commands, simply to change my text from MONOTONE (ala Stephen Hawking's Synthesizer) to REAL LIFE IN PERSON expression!

 

[Patriot]

I always want to give as much information as possible.

 

[Th232]

I chose the last option, since it really depends, and I'm not sure what your definition of "complete" is.

Let's take an example that might be a bit exaggerated. If someone asks if they can use battery charger XYZ (a Li-Ion charger) to charge their NiMHs, I will completely answer the question by saying "NO!", but at the same time I tell them that it's because of the voltage differences.

On that note, how much do you think is too much information? E.g. if I need to explain why I'm saying "NO!" in the above example, should I talk about:
a) The voltage range that the battery needs and what the charger puts out
b) Explain the chemistry differences that mean we need a different voltage
c) Explain the ion exchanges in the chemistry, citing the relevant equations where needed and how they cause the different voltage ranges
d) Start at the very basics of where my knowledge starts, i.e. what an electron is, what an ion is and so on?
e) Don't explain, after all, I've already answered his question, which is really a yes/no question and didn't ask for any explanation whatsoever.

The reason I'm asking this is because I don't want the reader to go into information overload, neither do I want to come across as condescending, or potentially pull the thread OT.

Second side note: Should we assume that every new person knows nothing about the chosen area, or should we assume some base level of knowledge (and if so, what level?)?

Also note that if I don't know the answer, I will state that I think it's ABC, and that I could also be wrong on it. And if I'm wrong about it and don't know it, well, what can I do.:shrug:

 

[LuxLuthor]

Since you obviously spent quite a bit of time with all the colors, font styles, font sizes, indentation, bold, italics, etc. etc., and labeled this as a rant seeking almost perfect responses, I was immediately struck by the paradoxical fact that you put all the periods to get the line spacing you wanted in sections like this:

1. Sit down and COMPLETELY answer the poster's question.
   .
2. Reply with an 'abbreviated' answer due to limited time.
   .
3. Reply with an 'abbreviated' answer due to lack of general interest / concern.
   .
4. Reply with what you *THINK* is the correct answer.
   .

However I will now give you a precise way that you can achieve your spacing without adding the periods which is distracting from what you are asking from others. I am replying with my *BEST* and hope you are surprised, but I'm not sure what other CPF forums you mean, since this is the only CPF forum I'm aware of.

Don't use the

numerical ordered list button if you want extra blank line spacing.

Rather, take the extra time to manually number your items, then use the "Increase Indent"

button. Use a carriage return to make a blank line, then manually go to the next number in order, as in this example:

1. blah

2. blah

3. blah
​

 

[TooManyGizmos]

TTA ... you have just convinced me .......

I will refrain from posting inadequate replies in the battery forum .

You have just created yourself an extra degree of job security .............. it's all yours .

"901-Memphis" is in need of your services in his most recent repeat post ............
"RCR123 Charge Current? 250mA or 450mA? "



I could answer it in less than 4 sentences ................. but I won't .

 

[Greta]

Ok... first... LuxLuthor, I must refer you to this thread created by TTA. :tsk:

Second... TTA... I would also like to refer you back to the thread I referenced for LL... particularly this line:

Disclaimer: I've been around computers since the days of 88K 5¼" and 241K 8" floppies and I personally value / worry about how disk space is utilized (and NOT wasted!).

Um... do I really need to point out the obvious here? :ironic:

 

[Billy Ram]

I came here to learn and if I can give something back I do. That's what CPF's all about. Isn't it?
Billy

 

[Marduke]

You left out an obvious choice.

Reply with loaded questions.

This gives the OP just enough information to go out and learn the information ON HIS OWN without being spoon fed. If they are capable of learning it on their own and just needed a "leg up", they will learn the information better than just being told the how's and why's.

If they come back with more questions, great, it means they actually want to learn and making progress.

If they come back and were too lazy to look it up, they look like an idiot and everyone gets a good laugh behind the scenes.

It always annoys me when I lay out a good intro for the OP to go look up his question and find his own answer, and a few minutes later someone else comes along and just lays it out on the table in front of them. Sure, his question is answered for the moment, but the OP didn't really learn what he needed to, and did not gain any additional knowledge that he would have had he taken the "educational bait" and found the answer by himself with the little push in the right direction.

They just gained information, but not knowledge.

People think I'm too short and to the point in many of my posts, but it's done with a specific purpose in mind and not because I'm too lazy to just copy/paste a paragraph out of the Welcome Mat (for example).

 

[copperfox]

TaketheActive,

Your original post is so full of different font sizes, weights, colors, special punctuation (are asterisks really that necessary?), smilies, and CAPITALIZATIONS that I'm having a hard time reading it. You may believe you are doing it to emphasize certain parts or to bring attention to critical elements, however you should be aware that its overall effect is distracting and diminishes readability. Let your words speak for themselves.

To answer the question, I think responding to a question should be concise and accurate. No need to repeat easily found information. When I make a flashlight recommendation I don't list all the light's specs as those can be found easily elsewhere. What I will tell the person is how it may fit his or her criteria and add any personal anecdotes that I think may be helpful.

 

[carrot]

I am always annoyed when I write a thoughtful, insightful post and the OP
goes and completely ignores everything I say. So, the quality of my posts will reflect how I feel towards the OP and how he has presented himself and his questions. Ask a stupid question like "what's the best" and I will almost always write an answer that fulfills few of his requirements but could certainly be considered best. I truly enjoy helping people and often will answer questions by PM with lengthy thoughtful answers, but some OP's clearly do not care what you think and are only looking for validation.

 

[carrot]

By the way, I enjoyed the festive look of your post.

 

[RAGE CAGE]

I usually spend an excessive amount of time attempting to understand the intelligence and mindset of the OP and attempt to craft a reply that will be of optimum use to them. I do enjoy the high level of civility and respect that is demonstrated by most CPF members.

 

[baterija]

...questioning the QUALITY of the TEACH.

Is going out, completing the posters research, and coming back with a highly detailed answer really always teaching or is it going fishing for them? Sometimes a couple quick statements and a source to go to complete answering their own question is teaching. Sometimes I don't know the complete answer merely good places to look. (The can't do but can teach theory. :laughing: ) I know nothing about flyfishing but I do know people who are very involved in it. Using them as a reference is more useful than simply not answering.

Do you:

1. Sit down and COMPLETELY answer the poster's question.

Does it have to be complete to be on topic, accurate and useful to the poster learning?

2. Reply with an 'abbreviated' answer due to limited time.

3. Reply with an 'abbreviated' answer due to lack of general interest / concern.

Time is a real constraint. Lack of interest or concern is just another time issue. (The poster assessed their time can be better spent on something else.) Which is more useful no answer or an abbreviated one that points the way?

4. Reply with what you *THINK* is the correct answer.

If properly qualified,as opposed to being stated as a certainty, it's at least a place for the poster to start looking. Confirming a possible answer is easier than developing one from scratch.

5. Reply with some BS (just to increase your POST COUNT)

6. Reply with something OT.

Doesn't really add anything but to a meaningless post count number in answering that one question. Some of the OT BS is actually good for the health of the forum. A from someone who doesn't have an answer but is interested in the answer keeps the thread bumped maybe increasing the odds of getting an answer. Some of the side issue jokes make the place more enjoyable. People that are having a good time and feel connected are more likely to visit often and feel motivated to share information. We're social animals. Some of the fluff, while not strictly about learning, facilitates a community that can support that learning.

etc...

That's my answer and I'm sticking to it. I believe my questions above point the way to the answer. The rest is left as an exercise for the reader.


​

 

[Federal LG]

I am always annoyed when I write a thoughtful, insightful post and the OP
goes and completely ignores everything I say. So, the quality of my posts will reflect how I feel towards the OP and how he has presented himself and his questions. Ask a stupid question like "what's the best" and I will almost always write an answer that fulfills few of his requirements but could certainly be considered best. I truly enjoy helping people and often will answer questions by PM with lengthy thoughtful answers, but some OP's clearly do not care what you think and are only looking for validation.

Don´t be annoyed carrot. I always thought that your posts are very good, very informative. And most of times you are spreading information for all the readers, not just to the OP.

Users like you, Marduke, selfbuilt, Bernie (Kiessling), Chao, bondr006, EngrPaul, ernsanada, gunga, Unknown VT, Illum... (just to mention a few...) are always adding information to these awesome forums! Thank you all!

lovecpf

 

[smflorkey]

I voted "completely" but that should be slightly modified. Threads (or individual posts) often ask more than one question, sometimes many more. In those cases, when I believe I have something to offer, I answer the parts where I feel comfortable. The parts I don't have the knowledge or experience to answer I "ignore," waiting for a more knowledgeable member to answer. If those questions are in areas of personal interest I will usually watch the thread for replies that will improve my understanding. :thumbsup:

Edit: Marduke's comments about teaching research skills are well taken. The quick "Use the search function" responses posted by a few are not helpful. More thoughtful "Search for xxxxx or yyyyy" can help people learn the most common terms. Since this is an international community, picking the right words in a second or third language can be a significant challenge for some.

 

[smokelaw1]

Just buy both. Surefires >>> Fenix.

Wait, what was your question?

 

[bshanahan14rulz]

I generally answer the question half-way, and then start asking the OP questions that they need to clarify or that will help them think of what to search for. Why repeat what's already somewhere else on the forums (in 138 different threads)

 

[LuxLuthor]

Ok... first... LuxLuthor, I must refer you to this thread created by TTA. :tsk:

Second... TTA... I would also like to refer you back to the thread I referenced for LL... particularly this line:



Um... do I really need to point out the obvious here? :ironic:

Never good to show up on the Admin's radar.

I think I was befuddled by the internally conflicting dual [RANT] topics, and the need to post with hyper-uber-perfection, but in deference to the Honorable Madame Administrator, my previous post's requoting is removed, forthwith.

Oh, I also wanted to respond to one of the OP's posits. If a person does not know that 4 + 4 = 8, they should not be on this forum, and don't deserve a response. They should be off the computer, back in 2nd grade learning the basics.

 

[Greta]

If a person does not know that 4 + 4 = 8, they should not be on this forum, and don't deserve a response. They should be off the computer, back in 2nd grade learning the basics.

LMAO! Hear! Hear!!

 

[StarHalo]

What most frustrates vet CPFers is being asked the questions that have already been answered several times before. This is inevitable given the format of communication; an online computer forum with thousands of visitors a day, running the full gamut of technical expertise. Therefore some will not know how to search, others will barely be able to read the language, etc. The trick I use to get around this is the "cheat sheet response", a well thought out and thorough response to that particular question which has been copied and pasted each time it is asked, with subtle additions and refinements over time until the resulting answer is essentially the perfect researched and concise answer. A good example would be the subject of EMPs, which comes up once every few months; I just go copy my already-perfected form response and paste it (I've italicized it here for visibility):

We've covered this topic before (it just sounds like a CPF topic, doesn't it) and it turns out that it would be possible for a hypothetical ICBM-armed enemy to do an EMP-specific attack: Setting off a warhead ~120 miles above Los Angeles, for example, would be sufficient to blackout not just the West Coast, but *everything west of the Rockies*, with no blast, heat, or (nuclear) radiation damage at all.

The catch is the aforementioned ICBM - only the countries that can afford the most advanced defense systems have them, so this technique isn't possible for "terrorists" (who are more likely to use a dirty bomb) or even the North Koreans (would use a standard blast nuclear attack), though China could do it.

If you're truly distressed by remote possibility of an EMP attack, or you just want to try a fun project, you can build your own EMP-proof box. Just grab any container (Pelican case, cigar box, even a cardboard box) and some copper screening (available at your local crafts store) - coat the entire exterior of the container with the copper screening, ensuring the screening touches at the seams/openings and there's no bare spots. That's it. Place a small radio tuned to a strong local station inside the box, and if all it receives is static when the box is closed, it works - you now have a fully EMP-proof utility box.

I hit Ctrl-V and Submit, the OP gets exactly what they were looking for, and none of the other CPFers have to yet again type out a drawn out response to the same question.