getting rid of rude/obscene members
 

Over the last couple of days, I have noticed that the number of rude and obscene comments in posts by some members (to fellow members) seems to have increased. I am not going to mention names, but this is very disheartening and I think the moderators need to clamp down on this, so that we get back to the business of helping people instead of seeing threads full of swear words and personal attacks. If the people who are not playing along nicely with everybody else and have been warned about their behaviour by the moderators , do not comply with the LQ rules then I think they should be excluded from posting on the site. What do others think?

I would note 2 things:
1. If members aren't reported, we often don't notice. I have noticed that reports are increasing, but I think that a part of the problem is that members try to deal with it themselves. This leads to flame wars and potential bannings for all involved.

2. We are fairly lenient at LQ and don't ban people on a first offence generally. I can think of a few productive members who had a rocky start.

All I would say to all members is that if you have a problem with another member or think they are breaking the rules, report them.

reddazz, just to reiterate what XavierP said, if you see something you think is questionable please do make sure to report it.

--jeremy

I agree
 

Ban the people who have no respect for others

Re: I agree
 

WE don't just ban anyone for breaking a rule. Repeat offenders who are warned usually get banned. This is not like other forums, we do give chances on legitimate members. Only under certain circumstances do members get banned after 3 or less verbal warnings, either in the forums or private thru email.

I agree that people should not be banned for first time violations of the rules, its the repeat offenders that I was mainly concerned about. Anyway if more people are reporting such issues and they are getting resolved then thats fine. :)

Hi redazz,

I totally agree that there are a small number of members who really relish in personal attacks or who insult people (even without using swear words).

Somewhere the line has to be drawn between a positive criticism and a blatant insult. More often than not, I think that many people get away insulting others because they don't use foul language, but their intent is to denigrate and insult.

I think that we need more moderators who are exclusive to the General Forum because currently the current moderators are very hard-pressed to manage several different forums etc.

We also need to put an end to the neverending cycle of Windows vs. Linux or Linux-bashing threads. Ok, we welcome opinions here, but sometimes we can have too many topics covering the same subject over and over again and that is frustrating for the regular forum users to see the same old threads coming to the top of the forum all the time.

We need a clear policy for this, I believe to prevent this kind of neverending Linux vs. Windows trolling.

You can't do that much about some irritated people. Everything can't be moderated either. I have seen worse on a linux forum who had to close for a while.

Please remain calm :) there is not much too see or to think about...

A person who has no respect for others, has no respect for itself.
M. Cheeks , Facts of life, 01/06/2005,

Is the consensus that we need more mods in General?

--jeremy

Personally I don't think we do. There is always going to be the small amount of people that indirectly make fun of others without using harsh words and such, but to me, if we cracked down on every single incident in which it occurs, we're only going to be the police to others and not the members who help others find solutions/answers, etc.
Sure we have more privileges than regular members to try and keep the forums sane but I don't think the moderators should be looked upon to nit pick every single incident, that would get very tiresome and most likely burned out. And its hard to say at times if someone is truly joking or serious. I think at times when a member is a little more harsh to someone who's asked the same question that could have been found by searching posts within the hour is sometimes called for.. ;)

Just all depends on the situation really. But no, I don't think we seriously need more moderators in General. I see more reported posts elsewhere in the forums than in General nowadays.

Well it wouldn't hurt anyhow. Of course, I'm not blaming the current mods or anything, but everyone doesn't have time to spend at LQ.org and monitor the forums (which are getting busier by the day) and of course a lot of the mods have to do a lot of forums (including sub-forums).

More mods can help, but of course, it's your call ultimately whether you feel that it's all right as it is.

There are periods of "disturbance" if you can catch my meaning, but then I did notice sometimes it does take a lot of time for mods to respond to threads that spiral out of control (of course it happens) and of course some members take it upon themselves to "back-seat moderate" which inflames situations even more.

Admittedly a rare event, but it does happen from time to time. We also have a lot of useless Linux v Windows threads that refuse to keep dying in General (you know what I mean ;)) and these threads also need to be monitored more or simply closed keeping just a couple of topics for each open.

Not just the Linux vs. Foo threads, but the "my distribution can beat up your distribution" threads need to die a painful death as well.

As a moderator and a member of this forum, I would love to see the "versus" type threads or "which is better" or "which one should I use" type threads all dissappear as well, but that's in a perfect world.
Even with a team of moderators twice the size of what we have now, why keep wasted time trying to prevent what is always going to occur? To me, the obvious one's should get the occasional closing or relinked or merged to another existing thread, but trying to nab them all would be valuable time wasted to me.
Technically I became a member here to help others and answer questions and not spend my whole time trying to prevent the repeated questions. Sure I grab a few here and there but I see it being pointless to try and get all of them, its just not going to happen and members are always going to ask such questions or start such threads. And most of the time a majority of them either die off and are harmless, why bother, they aren't hurting anything, so its better to just let them be most of the time. Members who have been around long enough know to avoid them or even point the members to the existing threads, etc.

Yes. Although I've not really seen too many of these turn nasty. Yes there is one incident that I recall recently, but then I guess we Linux brothers and sisters generally tend to stick together :D

You're right. It's not the genuine repeat questions that I'm targetting but the trolls. You know, the one who starts off all the rants and not asks a question. It's amazing to see how much members still continue to feed these oft-repeated, totally useless threads...

And also, I don't think its that we need more moderators, we just need more members to report such threads when they get out of hand.. to help us out. We have over 1,000 new posts a day here.. sometimes it reaches 2,000.. even doubling or tripling our mods, things would get missed, that' why we created the report this post so members can help out as well..

Then as a member, educate other members. Some just can't help themself and they take things on a personal level just because someone who wants to get a rise out of others doesn't like the OS they use..

All members who use this site should see themselves as citizens of LQ.org.. leave the confrontations to us but feel free to post in any thread that broke a rule to simply state our rules and that you've reported to post to a moderator to take action and that's all you have to do and then move on, don't get caught up in the flame or whatever it turns into, the mods will take care of it from there.

Yes. But asking people to report is like the same old story:

The other thread which discussed thread status and so on: open, closed, stalled, solved etc. which many say is a great idea but hard in practice.

Members will not be proactive in stopping trolls and flamers. The first temptation is to react (and I can say this based personal experience, now learnt my lessons) violently before thinking. I believe that the moderators should be proactive in this regard.

My firm belief is that in some situations, excessive moderation is a good thing rather than no moderation at all.

It's hard to control a flame war except when you're a moderator. And I am guessing that a lot of threads go unreported but flame wars continue. This is especially so I believe in really out-of-control threads. I can understand members reporting the advert spams etc. - that comes naturally. But I don't think too many members are proactive in reporting flaming and trolling.

As an aside, I used to think that excessive moderation is bad, but believe me personal experience on really strictly moderated boards tells me that I much rather prefer a moderator who is very strict about implementing the rules than a member who gets away with blatant trolling, flaming or spamming.

The forum experience is more pleasant that way. You know exactly where you stand as a member with regard to the rules of the site and that every rule breaker is dealt with in the same manner.

Even in this fallen imperfect less-than-ideal world, do we really need NEW threads of Win vs. Linux and Distro X vs. Distro Y threads every single day? Couldn't we have a sticky in each forum for those threads so the REAL threads don't get lost in the bickerfests that invariably keep getting bumped up for months on end?

If its a flamefest and troll a member doesn't want to get involved with or they think their own personal emotions are going to get involved to make it more of a personal matter, then just report it and move on and ignore the supposed troll.
At times a moderator might not respond as quickly, but you have to think, we all do this in our free spare time as do all other members come here to help others. Even if it does get out of hand for a few hours or so, its still harmless if its going to be a thread that gets closed. It's not like members are dying, etc.. ;)

If you see a member or thread getting out of hand with no responses or actions taken within a day or so, contact Jeremy in such cases. If its just a double post or a "versus" type thread, that's not an emergency situation.

But I like to say that I think all the other mods do an excellent job moderating, it's very rare that I've ever seen a troll or member go on a rampage for more than a few hours, it's usually a quick response from most of our moderators to jump on the ball..

Stickies are worthless in my own opinion.. sure everyone reads them at first, but it seems most ignore them. I have a sticky in Linux - General that covers more indepth rules.. 90% of the time members still ignore it. I can't recall how many times someone's posted a link and started a thread to the www.mslinux.org site after I put my sticky up explaining the site is fake, its been posted a million times.. etc..

I also claim to not post Microsoft threads in Linux - General.. yesterday I moved 3 from Linux - General to General.. :rolleyes:

Oh and a link to my Sticky in Linux - General: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...hreadid=103564

I just reread the whole thing, I can bet that 90% of those rules I stated in that thread were broken within the past week.. ;)

(a) My philosophy is "proactive moderation" (trying to prevent rather than cure). The key word is trying.

(b) I guess trickykid is more an advocate of "reactive moderation" (based on member reports/feedback and waiting/watching)

Both types can be mixed and matched. I just think that we need a bit more of (a). And if this requires more moderators, then so be it.

I rest my case ;)

How can you say I'm more of an advocate.. waiting for members to report posts. Just the other day I followed a new member from his very first post to noticing his posted 5 posts within minutes so he could post a URL and then on to double posting two different threads he started.. I kept warning him throughtout his posts and was ignored until he finally saw one of my posts.

This morning, I moved almost 5 posts and cleaned up our reported posts to reflect the correct posts that should be closed since members at times report a post to be closed in one forum but it should be closed in the other forum it resides in cause it might be more suitable in the forum the reported it in.

I sometimes work 60 hour weeks.. along with having a life with my wife and still find the time to come here, help people and moderate. I'm not superman and neither are the other mods who are probably in the same situations. I think we do a damn good job moderating this site where it rarely ever gets out of hand. We have less than 30 moderators and have over 174k members.. and at any given time, I always see 3 to 4 moderators browsing this forum, if you don't think that is proactive moderating, I'm not sure what you think should be.

Precisely. I understand that. What I cannot understand is that you say you feel overworked and yet you say the number of moderators presently are enough. I see a contradiction there.

That's why, if one person cannot do it, then more people should do it. As I said before I'm not being critical of the current moderation. I think that you misread my idea.

All I said was that since moderators aren't Gods and everpresent, we need more moderators who can share the burden.

Sorry if my post came out as excessively critical. I never meant to criticize any moderators here at present. All my suggestions are targetting at discussing different moderation techniques and how the present site rules can be fine-tuned to be more specific against rule-breakers.

< 30 moderators for 170,000+ members is a very low ratio and no wonder you all feel burnt out. Why not allow others to share your burden.

Why not see my post as being more of a constructive thing rather than a critical examination of the current moderation?

I don't think adding more moderators will be effective, but perhaps it always helps if a moderator has privileges in more than one forum.. adding existing moderators to other forums might help resolve some issues that come about. I do see your point, I just don't think adding actual more moderators is going to help. Spreading them about the forums to cover more will though with the current setup.
To me, moderators are rare. That's why Jeremy has to be choosy when picking them. You have to take into consideration of how long they've been around, are they going to stick around longer, their knowledge level and expertise, etc.

To me, just adding moderators isn't a simple task when you want to choose the right one for the job. It would be easier to me since we have mods from around the world to spread them throughout the forums, to have more coverage.. when its sleepy time here in the USA, the other mods on the other side of the world are browsing the forums.. and vice versa.. ;)

I don't ever say I'm overworked.. if I'm tired, its not because of LQ.org.. ;)
Honestly, moderating LQ.org is simple.. it only takes a second to reply or close a thread at times.. but 24/7 moderating even if we do have more mods, not all is going to be catched.
We can't all be around to watch LQ all day everyday.. LQ.org has even gone down to the point where Jeremy was notified via pager and or cell phone.. and it still took him a few hours to respond.. so what I'm trying to say is.. adding more moderators isn't going to solve the problems when things get out of hand. And currently, I don't know of one thread where its "getting out of hand".. and when they do, we do react in a timely manner to resolve the problem. It's not like all issues that come about have to be resolved within minutes.. its not going to hurt anything or people are dying cause some troll thinks Microsoft is the supreme OS..

Some sites organizes moderators into Teams which then take control of different areas of the site.

I think such an idea would help jeremy also appoint moderators without having to worry excessively about which area the moderator should be appointed to.

Just make moderation teams, choose team leaders for each team and allow the team leaders to choose moderators for their particular team.

Would lessen the admin's burden in choosing team members. Once the teams are set up and are the teams given moderation access to their own forums, then it's the team leaders who can control who are their team members.

Team leaders can be trusted moderators, chosen from the current set of moderators.

Would this be a feasible idea?

This would be up to Jeremy to implement but personally, I wouldn't want to have such a setup.
Admin > Leaders > Moderators > Members is just too many in the chain.. Having Jeremy as the admin and owner and then moderators under him is feasible. I'd rather just report to Jeremy for advice or solutions rather than having two or three in a chain of command.. gets ugly to me that way and just reminds me of my actual job that pays me..
And personally, the mods usually give Jeremy advice of who they think would make a good moderator when that times comes about, but I myself would not want that responsibility to appoint moderators.
In the end, this site belongs to Jeremy. Any say in anyone having any special privileges is his choice and I don't think giving a Leader that choice is currently something he'd want or even myself would want.

I would hate to think XavierP was a Leader with mods under him and then I was as well and he appointed a member I thought was not going to make a good moderator only to end up butting heads against each other, etc.. I like how we all agree on who's appointed currently in the setup Jeremy has done.

people usually do not like to enjoy the freedom of "voicing" their opposition towards something that irritates they , even if they are given that Rights in full , i think it got something to do with differences between Real World and the Virtual World , so i guess LQ is the place where people can feel that they are Free , eg. to voice whatever the hell they really feel they need to voice without any responsibilities attached ........ what i mean is it's someting social and too hectic to discuss in this thread .......

there was one musician ever said something like " .... if those people never comes to my concert , they will take on the street and go riot ..... " and that is no no good for everybody ........
infact they are harmless and more like acrobatics play , it really nice to see them happy after visiting LQ leaving whatever the hell they had left behind , and this is very very good for everybody ...........

as for that weird ingrained bureaucratic board game , try inviting Stallman for a bureaucratic "chess competition" and he will sing his equally weird Free Sofware Song for all of us ........something like this ------> :o

lastly i believe those mods are Superman and WonderWoman ;) , really , they are just trying to be nice and humble to everybody , a personal style not everybody like us had learned ........

i love them .......

and i better get out of this thread fast !![ehr ... i can't find bsd-like smiley!!??]
maybe i will start a new thread in this forum , hmmm!!:mad:

Actually, Trickykid is just worried that I would take my squad of moderators on a rampage, annexing his forums.... bwahahahaha ;)

But seriously folks, I don't think that having more moderators is the answer. All of us browse the boards regularly, reading the threads. Often a thread, especially in General, will be allowed to run - this isn't always because we haven't seen it but because we take a 'laid back' approach to see what develops. One of the greatest things, i my opinion, about LQ is that it is largely self-cleaning. I have seen a number of threads go from a discussion to an argument and back to a discussion within a single page or so. If we had leapt in and either closed the thread or moderated with extreme prejudice we could have killed a perfectly valid discussion.

Also, the moderator team does contact each other off line through email and other means and we do alert each other to threads that need to be watched. I am also happy that the number of reported posts has increased - it used to be someting that moderatprs did the most, now we see members doing it. I hate to keep repeating myself, but it has to be said again, it's all down to education - point out that a post has been reported (with an explanation as to why), report posts with a clear explanation as to the problem and just lead by example.

There will always be 'problem posters' but I think that we are pretty well on top of the situation.

Stickies can and do work; if used properly.

There are a number of things you can do:

Serious suggestions:
* Implement a warning system (can you enable admin -> user PMs without enabling user->user PMs on this vBulletin variant?)
* As warnings increased, throttle user activities based on customizable thresholds; this would include search, read, AND post throttling
* Automatic banning of write privileges when certain thresholds are reached, with the thresholds being lower and the timeout longer for repeat offenders
* Automatic IP banning for severe repeat offenders so they lose even READ privileges for a time

Now on this one, I'm only half joking:
* Restricting the users to a single forum where their posts are moved to - a hall of shame, and let everyone else belittle them unchecked (I'm a fan of corporal punishment because GOD knows some people need a slap in the face)

We do have a number of stickies around, it's just that no one reads them - see the Security forum with it's stickies an then read the questions asked that are answered by the stickies
Are you talking about a Public Warning System? This is not the sort of thing I am in favour of, I think that warnings should always be kept private. Also, we tend to take things like that off-line as it just distracts from our primary purpose and we don't really want to invite discussion from people not involved.
My problem with this is that we are a help site and are reluctant to turn anyone away. Restricting usage would end up losing us users.
I am, tentatively, in favour of this.
Again, I don't think this would be right - as I said, we are a help forum and that would be a little too much.
I think you should rethink and say "entirely joking" :) Although, some nights, ........... ;)

Hello,
I've been keeping up with this post and I'd like to share my opinion, what weight it holds, I'm not sure.

I believe that in order to moderate these forums, we need to work smarter, not harder.

Adding moderators, whether it be double or triple, will still leave some stones unturned. Using post reporting is working smart because the members are acting as a passive moderator, simply flagging posts for moderators to look at.

I'm sure we all understand how post reporting works. I just wanted to give the example to show that this is working smarter (and thus, more efficient) vs the brute force approach of adding more moderators to out muscle the trouble post/ers. Obviously, the brute force approach would be a futile one.

I appreciate everyones time spent here and I have _no_ complaints about the current moderators, also I have not seen any rude or obscene members, but I'm sure they exist.
Good Job Guys!
-Jason

EDIT: In regards to stickies, they're great for posting information. I "bumped" a post of mine in the past, out of ignorance. I was quickly informed that bumps are not permitted or needed. I went back into linux-general and read the rules. So the info is there, but like everyone's said, no one reads it.

Not at all.
What I propose is enabling admin <-> user communication via private messaging, which would keep it private and would also inform the user via popup when they receive a warning. I'm wondering if PMs can be enabled selectively - e.g., if a non-contributing member such as myself (I'll contribute eventually - probably buy buying a banner ad, actually) commits a sanctionable offense, the admins/mods ought to be able to private message me.

Agreed, and what I proposed is in line with that. Use the tools built-in to vBulletin to deal with a board problem.


Well that is why I suggested thresholds. Throttling a user with a message displaying for 3 to 7 to whatever seconds between each click advising them of the virtues of reading the stickies, not creating waves, or the availability of the search button isn't really restricting them - just slowing them down AND helping them to use the resources better.

Not only that, if weighted sanctions are implemented, trolls could receive a higher-weighted sanction which could cause him or her to be throttled back to much, much longer wait times. If someone is constantly starting the "Slackware sucks" or "Windows rules" threads on here just to be a jerk, doesn't that user deserve to look at a "time out" message for 30 seconds or even longer after clicking? It will teach trolls to either not be trolls and become productive participants on the board, or encourage them to go to another board to troll and cause problems. 99% of users would never, ever, ever see these screens.

Don't try to read between the lines - I'm just suggesting ways to institute modest, small delays with helpful messages for the newbies who don't quite know netiquette, and a good way to spank the severe offenders who are just posting to cause bickerfests. It is the same mechanism at work, only each sanction could have a classification and a weighting on it to determine what message and any delay would be.

Not only that, if someone like the Longhorn "beta tester" (read: pirate who pulled a leaked build off of a russian web site) evangelist comes back, you wouldn't want to put him in the corner for a while? Slow down his actions so he can't troll the various forums (fora, for those who care about dead languages ;)), and honest, productive users are totally unaffected, aside from avoiding being baited by slackers like him.

I wasn't entirely joking. Take the dillweed Microsoft Longhorn "beta tester" (pirate) evangelist we had here some months ago as an example; that kind of loon deserves to be belittled. Granted those types are in the extreme minority, but to have an account closed and then create more accounts in effort to create problems on a board like this? Have some fun with them! Yes, I know that is unrealistic, but it's still fun to suggest something that won't see the light of day. But aside from the extreme nutjobs who go to extremes to cause problems on the board, I was joking. I've only seen. . . well, only two users who would fit that description.

(edit: some glaring typos corrected)

My 2 cents - after reading through all these comments (many of them pretty interesting BTW) it would be easy to come away with the idea that LQ was a completely out of control, Wild West, free-for-all. Which it just isn't, by any stretch. While many of the proposed ideas sound good in theory, at least to my eyes this appears to be a solution in search of a problem. Yes, there are occasional instances where individuals don't observe the LQ Rules, but overall those numbers are very, very small, and it just seems to me like it would be an overreaction to restructure how LQ operates, or to build a complicated system to punish people and/or restrict access to the site.

Speaking as an ordinary LQ'er, I very seldom see offensive posts but in event that I do, I report them. Speaking as a mod, when posts are reported they frequently can be dealt with by reminding the user of the LQ Rules. If someone seems to be deliberately provocative or inflammatory, other steps can be taken, but those instances represent a miniscule number of posts as well as a miniscule number of members. I'd agree with XavierP that LQ is pretty good about self-regulating itself, and while there is no way to eliminate "problem posts" forever, their impact can be minimized by promptly reporting those threads so that any necessary actions can be taken. Overall, I think we'd be better off trying to help people with Linux rather than devising ways to crack down on a couple of bad apples. Again, just my 2 cents -- J.W.

I don't think we need another mod(s) in General, but maybe one in "Linux-General" just to move all of the threads that are posted there by mistake.
All of the forums that I use has this same problem. Nobody has been able to come up with a sollution.
This is the best advice that has been suggested.
I have to agree again, stickies can get out of hand and actually detract from the forum.
This is being done now. It has been awhile, but I got involved in a thread that was going downhill, one of the mods. pm'ed me and made a suggestion that I should just drop it and not worry about the discussion. The mods are doing a great job, and I don't think they should have to jump through hoops to get the job done. Let them moderate and help people and let all of us help them.

On the mentioning of IP banning.. this is very touchy. Jeremy has mentioned that some Universities, companies and even ISP's might use proxies and such, one ban of one members IP could block a whole bunch of others that use the same network and so on. So it is more complicated than it seems and is very rare.

Just for the record, many of the suggestions made here are actually used here at LQ, but behind the scenes. Keep the feedback and good ideas coming. To reiterate what trickykid said, the collateral damage of IP blocking is way too high and it's way too easy to get a new IP (we do of course have the technical capability if the need does arise).

--jeremy

hi there,

just to ilustrate, i would bring an example.
acid_kewpie, as we all know is one if "our" gurus here, gave a polite answer about a rule.... now read the user answer.
some guys, like myself, surf on LQ looking for 0 posts trying to help others - it is incredible how much you learn doing that.
but then you come to a post where the guy write that is urgent and reiterate that being agressive with a respectable member.. oh man... this is really bad..
i don't think that we should have radical rules but somehow another way to deal with that... people come and think that LQ is a personal_24 hours_ solve_all_your_problems_company.
ok.. i was just really sad after reading that thread.. i don't see now a definitive solution for that..
hope you guys can think something..
my best regards
slackie1000
ps. sorry about the english. it is quite hard to write long posts... :)

That is sad and the type of responses mods have to deal with just for doing their assigned duties as a moderator.

You'd be suprised of the hate mail I get after closing a post or making a user aware of one of the simple rules they had broken. I'm just happy its not quite as often anymore.
I once even got a member that called me an a**hole in a thread he created just to call me that. The only interaction I ever had from him was in one post where he actually thanked me for the answer I provided to him.

Oh well.. I laugh most of the time when people respond in such ways, just proves to show they got some personal problems they need to work out. The members that take a moderation of one of their posts so personal, you have to realize they're probably just a**holes to begin with and only care for themself.

Cheers.

To be honest, I've been reading this forums for a while, but have been timid in terms of wanting to post and not wanting to be labled as a n00b. But I am, so I hope all of you Linux experts can help me out.

we all started out as noobs, some of us still are.

floppy

Xavierp, thanks for your post. It does clear the air somewhat and I believe that members should report not only abusive posts but also posts or topics that keep repeatedly cropping up for no reason or those that have no value whatsoever in being discussed further...

General rudeness / presumptuousness (sp? :)
 

This is just my 2 cents on the subject of rudeness IN GENERAL in reference to everything Linux-related on the internet.

My comments are not inspired by, nor directed at, any one person or entity, but until this moment I've had to bite my tongue on nearly every visit to any of many Linux help sites, blog sites, technical forums, user forums, etc, LQ included.

I've read the long rants about 'Posting rules' on <site A>, 'etiquette' on <site B>, 'how NOT to post questions' on <site C>, 'how not to get flamed' on <site D>, and on and on, and some things almost always become apparent after following a thread, however thinly or otherwise veiled: a 'clique' mentality which seems to grow with some peoples' experience and knowledge of Linux, and a disconcerting attitude of 'one-upmanship'..

I'm quite new to linux, not new to Windows, and not at all new to computers in general. So far my experience with my new operating system, Slackware, has been pleasurable, to use just one word. Thankfully I am innovative, experienced with computers, and willing and determined to figure things out for myself when I can.
My experiences getting help, personally, have been 'pretty good' as well, including my regular visits to LQ, during which I browse the areas where I have 'some' bit of knowledge (hardware/Slackware/same hardware as mine) and typically check out the unanswered new posts to see if I can be the first to offer a suggestion; or be the first to let a new user know that this really IS a friendly operating system community, and that if I can't help you, very likely someone else can and will, so be patient.
Contrary to the type of community which surrounds Windows, for example, I like the way that Linux users can relate to each other and help out here and there with issues involving more than simply how the prepackaged software runs out of the box on the computer it came installed in. It is precisely the fact that when it comes to Linux, every computer is different, and every Linux installation is different, that makes it all so interesting. With Linux, people can more often than not help each other develop solutions to system-specific quirks, rather than develop work-arounds by the dozen for manufacturer-specific bugs.
That said, being new to a system like Linux, with little prior computer experience or knowledge other than maybe the XP machine at the workplace with Word or Outlook etched into the screen, has the potential to be VERY daunting, even with what I, in my limited Linux experience, consider to be the simplest-to-deal-with-for-a-beginner Linux OS, Ubuntu. After having tried Ubuntu as the first Linux I installed (and soon uninstalled), I can honestly say that Windows is easier to use, for a beginner. NOTE: I didn't say Ubuntu is hard to use; it is not. But Windows is easier. It's familiar. It has a lot of users. And chances are, if you're new to Windows, you could phone up anyone you know and get basic Windows help.
Not so with Linux... Before researching Linux and installing it on my system, I too thought Linux was something used primarily (or maybe even ONLY) on servers, on mainframes, in research labs, or in big dark basements where the 'normal' computer user didn't venture.
While those are in fact places you can find Linux tirelessly working away, I am happy to now say it simply isn't all there is to linux.
But I am saddened when I come upon a post, however uninformed, usually from a new user, which has among its few replies or as its one single reply, something like "If you'd read blahblah, you would know that already", or "if you had searched blahblah properly, you would have seen blah", or "Where did you get that nonsense?", or even something like "...blah-blah-blah, I won't do your work you you!".
Frankly, even while some posts may seem stupid, inane, or redundant, and some posters may come across as lazy, dumb, dense, or whatever, to the more experienced users, the poster wouldn't be posting if they didn't need help with something, and the types of replies I just offered as examples do nothing but waste memory and make the replying user look equally stupid, and ignorant, supremacist, and know-it-all. It may be just text on a screen, but the attitude is often unmistakeable. Replies like these are un-warranted, un-welcome, and can easily be the first of many slaps in the face of the new user which will ultimately and in short order send them right back to Windows, with the unfortunate misconception that Linux sucks and it's users are assholes!
Like mom always said, "If you've nothing nice to say, then don't say anything at all," and members who prefer to reply with such excrement would do the community a service by leaving the unanswered post alone, and someone with a not-so-sharp tongue will sooner or later answer the question in a less distasteful way.

Sasha

I couldn't agree more, Sasha, and it does happen all too often. The only thing worse is that a lot of the ones (not all) who post such comments are newbies, themselves. But I don't give them the satisfaction of knowing I've even read their useless babble. I simply click "report" and type my opinion of that individual's attitude; usually I see quick, positive results from one of the mods.

As members of this community, I feel it is our responsibility to help watch over it and protect ourselves and each other from such unwarranted, unnecessary personal attacks.

And yes, Reddazz, repeat offenders should be removed. Even disagreements can be discussed in a decent, respectful manner.

Cheers
Bill

Hi,

Sasha(GrapefruiTgirl) well stated! I agree whole heartily that rude responses are un-warranted. We as a community do need to police and LQ is moderated so that this situation is limited.
So I suggest the use of the REPORT utility provided by LQ.

Of late I have seen some bait posts. I think this type of post is not needed. There are people out there who just want a good fight, be online or other ways. I come from academia and even there the problem exists with people wanting to respond rudely and unruly. We generally just ignore the situation but when someone is that bad then they are removed from the discussion or debate. But not always! We will patiently listen at times with good manners and demeanor. Respond only when necessary.

Open discussion is healthy, you will always have someone with an opinion of their own. Therefore wanting to state that the statement you just made is not correct. If you have established semantics along with syntax then you should be able to discuss anything in a intelligent manner. The language of the discussion will be the faulty factor here along with the demeanor of the individuals involved.

A lot of the problems are created by the original poster not knowing how to present or formalize the question/problem.

How To Ask a Question by XavierP is a good review for a new or experienced LQ poster.

Bill (dragonslayer48dx), I agree with your statement also.