No, TobiSGD did not need to specifically say "this is not what you put as the answer," and here's why.

Let's say the OP does take the response as THE ANSWER. Then one of two things happen: he either fulfills his responsibility to figure out (or ask) why it's the correct answer, or he doesn't. If he does, then he learns something. If he doesn't, and just blindly pastes it, then he gets what he deserves. Neither scenario demonstrates anything wrong with TobiSGD's response.

The only way that TobiSGD's answer could "caused harm" (your stated reason for downrepping) is if the OP cheats. And it's not TobiSGD's fault if the OP cheats.

In YOUR opinion. However, in MY opinion, it DOES. People who come here for answers a lot of times are getting their first experience w/ Linux. If they "get what they deserve" because someone here didn't do everything they could to make sure they understood what was being told to them, then they have a bad feeling, not only of the responder, but also LQ, and Linux. I feel that the potential for preventing that lies on US, not them. But, I guess we should just say screw the newbies, they are stupid anyway and don't deserve quality responses as long as they get one and go away.

Hi,


I made no implications of that sort or any for that matter.

You are the one labeling as such, I clearly stated a case with the drama queen. And I still feel that you are exercising in that manner by continued overly emotional responses. Does no one any good and is not constructive.

As to the 'rep' part, I stated my position on that earlier. You have a right to rep in the manner that you wish if it's justified. To just rep someone for a minor point or misgiving of information without true meaning or definition is not right. Yet, your interpretation and mine may differ as to the understanding of use for the rep, which to me is nothing more than a tool to provide feedback. Not social, nor should it ever be. Just a tool. Take it or leave it, your choice.

You are continuing to build a mountain out of a mole hill here.

I will not continue with this discussion as it is going now where. You seem to be offended when someone tries to aid or point out a difference so I feel my continued participation will only incite more from you.

Your interpretation of things differ from mine so we won't meet half way with this. And this subject to me is not that important to continue to waste energy on.

Hopefully you will be able to continue to aid others in a manner that suits you and the members who participate with you about 'TobiSGD's response' example or any other similar problem.
Patience!

"Do what you love. Know your own bones; gnaw at it, bury it, unearth it, and gnaw it still." - Thoreau

onebuck, sorry if I wasn't clear. I was not intending to imply that YOU were labelling me in any way.

p.s. I THOUGHT there was a separation between the comment intended to you and the next paragraph. That was just a add-on for everyone. And I wasn't offended by what you said, thus the smiley.

No-one has said this.

Hi,

My misunderstanding of the composition.
But reverse thought or satire should be labeled not implied. I tend to be literal.

As I said before this mole hill is getting bigger!

By claiming that I should not down rep someone for something I believe to be potentially dangerous and a bad response, people are saying that we maintain that as the minimum quality of answer we allow. They are saying that I am somehow a sub-member of this group. Personally, I don't like responses that say "use 'man something' to figure it out". They come across as arrogant and unfriendly. I believe that our standards should be higher. I would much rather there not be an answer at all than to have one like that. At least then the questions will show up on the zero reply query and the rest of us will know which questions still need decent answers with a simple search. I should have down repped him for the "Go RTM" type response alone. But, at least those don't carry the potential to harm. This one (again IMO) did.

And, yes, I AM offended, but not by the negative reps I received from this whole fiasco. I could have a zero rep, and it wouldn't bother me as much as being told that the opinion of what I feel to not only be a below standard response but a response that I believe is bad enough that it should tarnish the reputation of the responder is misguided. I'm offended that the rest of you would rather defend the (IMO) horrible response than actually believe that we are better than this. I answer questions here because it is one way that I can give back to the community that has provided me with so much and hopefully encourage others to try it out and see how wonderful Linux is. I try to do so in a VERY caring manner and in a way to show those who have been here a short time that we are a great group of people. I find the "go RTM" responses counter to that goal.

All of that being said, this obviously isn't the place for THIS discussion, and I'm sorry for hijacking this thread. If you have any future responses, please make them here:

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...64#post4170164

Thanks and best wishes,

Forrest

Sorry, thought I copied things into the new thread.

Hi,

Too everyone!

I think this subject of rep is totally misunderstood and how, when or why it should be given. I look at this system to be a tool so everyone can see the status of someones reputation as rated by other members.

My main concern is that the information that is provided to the query is valid, informative and aids that individual. I have noticed members who tend to have a thin skin and sometimes jump before really discerning or interpreting queries. We all have to remember this is a world community with members that have many different social habits. The tone of the communication may cause indifference between members when there should be none. Not everyone will be able to communicate in the manner that a native speaker may understand.

Heck, I've seen some native English members that could not compose as well as some of the second language speakers attempt to present to us in a understandable composition. Now throw in the 'rep' system and things do get very interesting. Someone will look at this minor bantering and wonder what it's all about. Now that part bothers me. We are trying to convey information to people that find it difficult to interpret GNU/Linux then we start bantering about minor differences on a experimental rep system. How do you think those people look upon us?

I for one find the system useful as a feedback tool but not a social tool.

"Knowledge of mankind is a knowledge of their passions." - Disraeli

1 members found this post helpful.

I have not said this. I have said instead that you should not have believed it to be a potentially dangerous and bad response. There's a huge difference.

Wow - a little disagreement that has gotten a bit out of hand.

I'm pretty sure that's even worse.

p.s. check out the rep on this post:

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...9/#post4167467

And you will see that SOMEONE said this.

When enough people tell you you're wrong, then unless you are a complete idiot, you'll consider the possibility that maybe - just maybe - you're wrong.

By the way, I'll join the chorus, though I'm late to the party. IMNSHO, you're wrong. Original answer was fully acceptable. Your behavior at the time and subsequently wasn't.

0 members found this post helpful.

jiml8, when you are right, it doesn't matter how many people tell you you're wrong, you're still right. Just because you are not able to see my point doesn't make me wrong. Throughout history, individuals have been told they were wrong by the majority of the population and later it was found to be they were right. The sheer number of people who tell you you're wrong has no correlation on the actuality of your rightness or wrongness. Maybe not being able to see someone else's point makes YOU the idiot. Just because you consider the original answer "fully acceptable" doesn't mean that it is so for me. My opinion of the answer has already been stated. My opinion of the answer will not change. And, as a member of this forum, I have the right to voice the opinion that I don't think it is "fully acceptable". I also have the right to do so w/ the reputation system. And as far as my behavior goes, you can't understand that if you can't even understand that I'm right in the first place.

HTH

Forrest

1 members found this post helpful.

Such a big deal out of nothing. Come on now, back on topic.