LQ Suggestions & FeedbackDo you have a suggestion for this site or an idea that will make the site better? This forum is for you.
PLEASE READ THIS FORUM - Information and status updates will also be posted here.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
2 ideas: ZRT before new 'UN...'; survey pre-1st-posters re: 'comfortable posting?'
(Sorry, I write horribly; hopefully my 3 example Thread links will show what I mean for #1)
1) Why not 'try/do' meaning answer oldest ZRT before NEWer 'UNdeserving'?
(Let the 'UN...' wait! That'll teach/punish them!)
(I thought of posting this in that thread, but it would be a 'OT'/non-useful violation)
Plus the idea of 'queue' (arrival order 'fairness')
Yes, I realize responders may not have interest/expertise/etc for some of the older ZRT.
2) An unrelated idea (might be extreme but just might uncover why some avoid posting):
Survey new members at signup, and/or members that haven't posted at all, yet:
Are they avoiding posting because they fear and thus want to avoid 'doing it wrong'(?)
This just-might uncover something that could be addressed, to 'grow' LQ.
p.s. my 2 above posts got the ZRT down to 1 page (of 50), the 1st time I've seen that low in the year I've been here
Yes you do write in a confusing manner. Besides understanding that you're talking about the zero reply list I have little idea what you are saying, and unfortunately I have similar feelings with a large number of your posts.
I've commented before that you need to be more clear and well organized. You seem to be ignoring the LQ Rules, specifically:
Quote:
we recommend you avoid sms/l33t speak in the technical fora. Avoiding sms/l33t speak will improve question clarity and increase the chance of receiving a helpful response.
Best suggestions are that the choice to use a list is fine, it helps with making clear, singular points, however the "interrupt" form of writing, which is highly similar to writing as you personally speak, is very confusing. Please realize that the same thoughts which are passing through your mind as you write information, are not the same thoughts others share. Couple that with the various abbreviations and it seems to become rather unreadable, sorry to say.
If I'm correctly interpreting your intentions here, you are proposing to sort or qualify new members in some manner. This topic has been discussed many times in the past, please search this forum for those threads.
I absolutely will not fault you for having the energy and desire to help and try some things. My two cents on this topic, providing I am reading your post correctly, is that LQ benefits best by being cordial, inviting, and having the default position that we intend to be helpful. There are always going to be various new members who either mis-behave, are spammers, or are the types of personalities whom should not be participating in a group forum, however it seems to be that there is a far larger number of new members who join, ask questions, offer answers, and do so effectively, as well as with minimal hostilities or confusion.
Thank you VERY much for volunteering to try to guide me here!
You may have just now helped me understand what a friend once said, that my writing sounds like a "stream of consciousness"!
I edited it a little, to just clean up some of my many "..."s; maybe it is a little clearer now.
My other topic in #2 was not to 'qualify'/filter, but to possibly discover about those who avoid posting.
And thanks for understanding that my -intent- is 'positive contribution'!
Are you sure that this is you, Jjanel, and not an imposter?
Only joking of course. I however, being a bit of an oldie, must admit that I've found it tough at times to follow your train of thought, but I've recognised the knowledge within your posts all the same.
With clarity like this, there will be no stopping you now!
The thing that I've noticed is that often a new member posts a question, receives several replies, but then doesn't come back onto the thread at all.
I've wondered why that could be? Do they find the solution on another forum (I'm aware that folk often post the same question on different forums at the same time)? Are they confused by techno-speak, particularly if asked to provide further information? Do they forget their password or even forget that they started a thread?
I'd certainly be interested to find out why this happens...
It certainly could be a very lengthy discussion, however I stand by my original last paragraph in post #2:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtmistler
LQ benefits best by being cordial, inviting, and having the default position that we intend to be helpful. There are always going to be various new members who either mis-behave, are spammers, or are the types of personalities whom should not be participating in a group forum, however it seems to be that there is a far larger number of new members who join, ask questions, offer answers, and do so effectively, as well as with minimal hostilities or confusion.
I fear that it's possible we would waste the same amount of effort which you're trying to conserve or redirect with trying to do something comprehensive.
I thought I had cited the thread which led to this blog entry, however I do not see a link to the discussion thread. Formerly there was a lot of discussion about the engagement of new users. It also repeated last year in a newer thread. Either case, Jeremy asked for volunteers where people would just use the canned response to new posters who had posted unclear posts. Seemed that a very small, almost non-existent percentage actually rose up to the occasion to revise their questions. Some felt that the impersonal canned message was exactly that, too impersonal. Meanwhile I can see Jeremy's point that we also should not go the other direction of antagonism, jokes, or any other negative forms of responses.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.