Sure is easy for a thread to get sidetracked, greatly reducing the chances of useful posts on the original topic!

The first post was sort of about the problem of a thread getting side by the very first reply and never getting a useful answer (we didn't do nearly that badly here).

That leads to examples of general classes of posts and their "bad" first replies.

Which of course leads to disagreement, because in some of those cases some of us think the bad first reply is really a good first reply (answering "how do I" with "why do you want to").

And then suddenly we're talking about the dangers of doing things as root.

Now that we're hopelessly sidetracked, let me back up one layer of topic shift and comment on:

That is meaningful for the minority of the "how do I something_stupid" posts in which the something_stupid is fairly easy for an expert to do and stupid only because it is dangerous.

The far more common case is that the something_stupid is incredibly difficult and complicated as well as probably useless. Then it is a total waste to write a giant answer to "how" with a minor "but you shouldn't" warning thrown in. The only constructive reply is to try to find the real objective behind the probably wrong intermediate goal.

I guess that the root (no pun intended) of my (again small...TINY c) complaint...

Like if someone wants to know how to block SSH for certain IPs...I don't want a discussion on hosts.deny vs. IPTables vs. ssh keys...

Just answer the question to the best of your ability...

HOWEVER...if the question is SPECIFICALLY "Which is better"...THEN I can see, and like, the pro/con lecture thing...

FWIW I learned a LOT about pam by trying to figure out how to login as root in gdm...

Is logging in as root to the GUI stupid? Yes...no one is denying that...but I guess it's just me and my curious mind

-C

johnsfine for President...

Seriously, though. When I first read the original post, it was still on zero-reply status, and I didn't want to reply lest my response be considered frivolous. But then after thinking that so many posts simply deserve a terse answer-a-question-with-a-question response, I felt conflicted. My therapist says no permanent harm has been done. Now that the thread is fully 30+ posts deep, I feel convinced that I cannot damage the thread with an illegitimate response. I will cancel my next appointment...

If the OP truly wants to get the attention he thinks his question deserves, shouldn't he simply reply to the initial response, adding whatever information the question was trying to dig out? Very often, the best way to solve a person's problem, is to coerce them to give it more serious thought. Sometimes the question is based on the questioner's preconceived genesis of a solution, even though the 'solution' is completely without merit. The quick reply that seeks to get at the real basis for the question can save a great deal of effort on the part of both sides, by targeting a truly useful solution.

A thoughtfully composed title/subject-line will go very far toward attracting thoughtfully composed answers. If the question and subject line invite good responses, the responses will generally happen. Losing zero-reply status is not like having the question fall off the universe.

If someone posts a question, it is virtually by definition that they have some reduced understanding of the subject. It seems a bit presumptuous to assume that the quality of a reply is judged solely by its brevity, or by its form being another question. Since someone actually took the time to reply, doesn't it make sense to consider it as a starting point toward a solution? I guess I will wait until there are at least one or two replies to any thread before I respond. But, what if everyone did that? Hey, I know; what about a forum category for 'only-terse-replies'?

This is the last time I get sucked into replying to one of these kinds of threads. Really.

--- rod.

[QUOTE=XavierP;3902387][QUOTE=CoderMan;3902364]OP: How do I do such and such in Emacs?
A1: I don't like Emacs. Use Vim.Thank you for comparing my suggestion to espousing murder in the work place. I don't think anyone here wants to "legislate against smugness and unhelpfulness." I was just discussing how to deal with the present reality that any person can rob a thread of its zero-reply status with an off-hand, insincere, or ignorant first reply. As you know (probably better than I do) that zero reply status can mean a lot, especially when the question is a deep or complex one that quickly gets buried under other threads. I wouldn't ever suggest allowing regular users to delete other users' posts. It would just be neat if there was some way to extend that zero-reply status.

Disclaimer to most of my responses - I enjoy hyperbole and facile humour and pepper my responses with them.

To those complaining of my response regarding running as root. That would be an example, not a sidetrack.

The best way to avoid getting porr responses to a post is for the OP to regularly update it. It's no good posting on Monday, returning on Saturday and then complaining that we're all being unhelpful. While we are not IRC and don't have the response times, LQ is a very fast response board and it's important for an OP to regularly check back and to let us know what's happening. I suspect that many posters have an unrealistic view that if they post a question and return after a week there will be a lovely step by step and very specific answer waiting for them. The OP needs to give the board the information we need to work with and to respond to requests and answers fairly promptly.

Well, I'm gonna jump in and say I understand the OP's grievance to some degree. I have noticed a few occasions where a responder obviously didn't read the thread, and in some cases, the original question, as their only suggestion was something that's already been tried and didn't work.

Of course, I'm not one to start cluttering the forums with "Read the question" type replies.

It seems to me there are people here who regard being in the zero replies list as desirable.

There are currently between 300 and 350 unanswered replies - zero answers.
Some of those posts are undecipherable, some are unintelligible, and some are just wish lists or howtos.

Is it too much too ask that somebody actually responds to these posts ? The zero replies is not where you want to be. Unanswered questions benefit nobody.

But apparently you can't say anything unless it answers the question or say something constructive. So any posts with "How do I get linux to read my mind ?" just sit in the list for weeks with nobody saying "don't be ridiculous".

I have a problem in that I treat people in the same way as I would expect to be treated - honestly. I assume them to have the same level of intelligence, and so answer questions with that in mind. If I assumed they were complete idiots then they would complain about that too.

Is this a drive toward the lowest common denominator or is learning about linux something where the participant has to raise their game ?

I come here to try and help people, I don't care about guru status, number of thanks, looking cool. It seems some others feel threatened by that.

So, is zero reply status good or bad ?

I've been trying to stop the list of pages growing, while others seem content with them being full of junk.
This is not an encyclopedia, the answers don't have to be perfect when the questions are vague.

Jeremy's quoted post appears to ask for help in clearing the backlog, which seems to have turned into the "cult of the zero replies list" where anybody who takes a message out of that list is a heretic. And the amusing thing is, every time I've been the first respondent and been criticized for it, the post is very quickly flooded with people making their own responses.

So much for the famed zero reply status ...

It's worse than having a good reply, but it is a lot better than having only bad replies.

If you start with a difficult but legitimate question and next get a stupid reply, you have greatly reduced the chances of ever getting a useful reply.

If a question is just stupid, I don't think it is likely to sit around for a long time with zero replies.

If a question is legitimate and you don't know the answer, I don't think it is responsible to post the first reply.

Maybe I've misunderstood the purpose of the zero reply list. But I thought it was intended to help legitimate questions that have not yet been looked at by anyone who knows the answer.

What the hell are Windows users doing here in LinuxQuestions asking about Win, I'd like to know. Even regardless most of us know a little (or a lot) about it.

0 members found this post helpful.

Because LQ is a helpful forum and many of still work with Windows. The General forum is where those questions go so it is legitimate to post there.

[QUOTE=DavidMcCann;3902124]I'm sure a lot of people must check the zero-reply threads to see if they can help. It's really annoying, therefore, when someone rushes in and gives a useless reply, making a thread look answered. You get people who advise you to do exactly what you said didn't work, or who even start by saying "I've never done this..." and proceeded to prove it.


If the question is unanswered it SHOULD be BLANK. I don't see the point of closing a thread when you could aways receive more information. I personally believe that a little haughtiness inspires people to join in the thread and it does get the point across. We can also mix it with humor.You could be very descriptive and let everyone know the type of responses you don't welcome.For instance if you have a question about GCC state that you think Stallman is an acid freak and they won't suggest his "bird cage liner" of a book to you. You can also join another forum. Some people like to try to help even though they cant. I know there a lot of smart people in the forums but they are not always available to help out.Computers are a source of self esteem. I work with people who claim that they can program and say that an (argument) is when the computer does not agree with the data in the program. I had an expert build my computer that didn't know what a non ribbon type hard drive cable was. They thought that I could only have one drive.Most people think you get a virus from dirty browsing habits. If you make them look stupid you may feel better and they will be less inclined to give you an answer that they just pulled from their ass. My own belief is that a forum is a discussion and that it can go a little side to side and not always forward on the particular subject.This adds context which is as important as the question it's self. I don't think that being direct should discourage someone from not replying to a thread.If it dose the hell with them. If you write a very descriptive question you will receive less replies because you will be weeding the useless answers out. If you don't want to spend the time on your question accept the answers for what ever they are , self esteem or answers. As long as you don't bait people; asks a question that you are really and expert at in a vague way so you can rip them a new one, no real harm can be done. People are quite sensitive about being accused of pulling information from their butts though." Look Honey! Informaiton!"

It actually seems like you get signifcantly more replies after the first reply as members like to see what the answer was and reply in the processes.
This thread seems useless and full of made up facts.

No, it's not useless. It's becoming a bit far-reaching, but the discussion itself is useful.

hi

since this appears to be a discussion on relevance in answering zero replies.....let me make some observations....pleading guilty only on nights of the full moon......yelp

1) If OP says any suggestions....and I can think can offer...I do

2) if to reply OP says "anyone" got a better suggestion....even if I do I now keep quiet.

3) I have seen questions like...guru please help....or only persons with X.....for some strange reason....I do not attempt to help

4) If OP "bumps" post to top of sub-forum AFAIK they disappear off zero replies......which now reduces their target repliers.

5) Asking questions is often needed.....not always....to help clarify the question

6) Asking have they tried x and y is a question but it meant to clarify or shortcut replies that might have attempted to suggest the same thing.

7) WE are guilty at some stage in being selfish, focussing on one issue and not realising it may be the other issue. I don't think we need the OP to have the power to delete the reply so they can remain on the zero reply list do we?

I wouldn't call that selfish-- "stuck on stupid" maybe, but selfish would be to not bother replying when you think you might have a solution.

Absolutely not. Yes, people do make mistakes. But then again, nobody pays $300 for Ubuntu or Slackware, and no one here gets paid for their effort.

Fixing someone else's problem would be easy if I were sitting at their computer. It would still help a lot if the OP realized I'm not.