Why is it often hard to post smart question about a new subject matter?
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.
Why is it often hard to post smart question about a new subject matter?
About 2 months ago, in my first post to this forum, I posted a question about Apache2 server that I was having problem with.
At that time I had very little knowledge of Apache2. So when I posted my question didn't know what type of info I had to include in my question for viewers, so that they can answer.
Again I posted a question about Samba not working, I was teased about it. about the title of my thread and what info I contained in it.
Of course as I read the different replies, I learned what I should have included in my question the first time.
I am not new to linux, but I am new to apache2 and samba. That's why I posted in server section and not the newbie section.
So my point is that, viewers who reply to a post such as mine, in my opinion, should be a bit more tolerant of these types of posts. After all, they always have the option of just ignoring it and not responding at all.
I solved the Apache2 problem by a friend's help who came to my home and saw the problem first hand, and it is working beautifully now. But I am not always so lucky, haven't solved the samba problem yet.
Regarding this thread, I don't agree that I teased you. I clearly and politely stated that you had not, in fact, asked a question, and suggested some additional information to include. Your question boiled down to "It's not working, here's my config file" which is quite difficult to answer without wild speculation on our part or more information on your part. It's no insult to you to ask for more information, and if the tone of my first sentence came off as impolite: try to understand many of us are nerds and/or engineers who value efficiency highly. It's not efficient to, for example, ask how your day was when you just want to learn about Samba. I was there - and am here - stating facts, not belittling you.
The link in my sig will probably help you to ask smart questions.
As for your question here, it's hard to post a smart question when you don't know anything about the subject because you don't know what's important or not. It is, however, possible to post a smart question while not knowing much. Even if you have to ask "what do you need to know to help?". Clearly stating what you are doing, what is happening, and what you are expecting to see instead, is a great first step.
Last edited by AlucardZero; 12-18-2010 at 12:12 PM.
I was referring to your signature that no longer is there, but was there for quite sometime. Actually no longer in my thread, but is still here. This isn't quite a welcome message to those who are trying to learn their way into sever world.
I rest my case here.
"Eternity is wasted upon the likes of you"
The rest of your reply was polite, I agree and logical feedback which I appreciated.
About 2 months ago, in my first post to this forum, I posted a question about Apache2 server that I was having problem with...
Again I posted a question about Samba not working, I was teased about it. about the title of my thread and what info I contained in it
I can see two threads entitled 'Samba not Working', but I can't see any thread about Apache; could you provide a link, please?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mansour
Of course as I read the different replies, I learned what I should have included in my question the first time.I am not new to linux, but I am new to apache2 and samba. That's why I posted in server section and not the newbie section.
This issue of what information to include does seem to be a difficult one for many posters; my position is that I try not to get irritated, except for posters who do not seem to have given any thought whatsoever to what information should be included to aid those who have volunteered to help; it shouldn't be like pulling teeth to get the basic details, which it sometimes is.
Of course, this position does allow me plenty of freedom to get annoyed at people who just post 'it don't work' without an error message, a distribution, how they got/installed it, how they launched it, versions or, basically, any detail at all. Even if the OP doesn't immediately get the idea that all of those are relevant and could be helpful, surely they should have thought of at least one or two of the items?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mansour
I was referring to your signature that no longer is there...
Signature lines like this are a feature of many forums and are often an attempt at general amusement, although some people use them to include useful links. Being so widwly used across so many forums, this convention and is usually assumed to be understood without further explanation. As you will have seen, someone sets a sig line and it is dynamically tagged on to their posts, irrespective of the thread's content or to whom the reply is directed.
Of course it is difficult to ask questions about a new subject matter when we have a limited understanding of the matter and are not fluent with any specialist terms. It helps to say so when posting; generally answerers will advise about misunderstandings and specialist terms.
A long time ago, when I joined the first BBS I ever joined (for those of you old enough to remember BBS's), I was advised to sample several days worth of posts before I ventured to open my big mouth.
I have found this to be good advice that has saved me lots of foot-in-mouth disease over the years (and I still sometimes stick foot-in-mouth).
It gives one the chance to learn about the netiquette and customs of that particular place and to get familiar with the old heads and what they expect.
LQ is one of the most patient-with-newbies sites that I have ever visited and has a remarkable signal to noise ratio, but LQ, like every other group, has its customs and norms.
I have found that, at a volunteer support site such as LQ, there is no such thing as providing too much information. The folks who want to help 1) don't know my situation and 2) will disregard the irrelevant stuff, but stuff which I think might be irrelevant, as a newbie, may give them vital clues.
Location: Portsmouth, VA (AKA Hampton Roads, or The Region Formerly KNown as Tidewater. Any Magnum P.I. fans out there?)
Distribution: Slackware 13.1
Posts: 9
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankbell
A long time ago, when I joined the first BBS I ever joined (for those of you old enough to remember BBS's), I was advised to sample several days worth of posts before I ventured to open my big mouth.
I have found this to be good advice that has saved me lots of foot-in-mouth disease over the years (and I still sometimes stick foot-in-mouth).
I remember those! The same advice is (or was, haven't visited Usenet for quite a while) was generally regularly reposted on most Usenet forums as well. Also, taking time to read some of the 'stickies' at the heads of the forums here will generally give you a good idea of what to include in a question.
I can see two threads entitled 'Samba not Working', but I can't see any thread about Apache; could you provide a link, please?
This issue of what information to include does seem to be a difficult one for many posters; my position is that I try not to get irritated, except for posters who do not seem to have given any thought whatsoever to what information should be included to aid those who have volunteered to help; it shouldn't be like pulling teeth to get the basic details, which it sometimes is.
Of course, this position does allow me plenty of freedom to get annoyed at people who just post 'it don't work' without an error message, a distribution, how they got/installed it, how they launched it, versions or, basically, any detail at all. Even if the OP doesn't immediately get the idea that all of those are relevant and could be helpful, surely they should have thought of at least one or two of the items?
Signature lines like this are a feature of many forums and are often an attempt at general amusement, although some people use them to include useful links. Being so widwly used across so many forums, this convention and is usually assumed to be understood without further explanation. As you will have seen, someone sets a sig line and it is dynamically tagged on to their posts, irrespective of the thread's content or to whom the reply is directed.
Hello salasi:
Actually I am sorry about my mistake. apache question was on another forum, not here.
But about my samba thread, as you can see, I tried at my first post to include all the important info, and then I added to that. Now I can see that, the title wasn't carefully chosen, I agree.
Should have written, need help troubleshooting samba, or windows browser can't see share folder in samba, ....
But of course I was a beginner in samba, or I wouldn't even post a question here.
Of course it is difficult to ask questions about a new subject matter when we have a limited understanding of the matter and are not fluent with any specialist terms. It helps to say so when posting; generally answerers will advise about misunderstandings and specialist terms.
Failing to answer questions asked by people who reply in the thread does not encourage further attempts to help.
Hello:
Yes, I agree, that link (how to ask questions) is useful, but still the poster is always limited by the scope of his/her knowledge of the subject matter.
A long time ago, when I joined the first BBS I ever joined (for those of you old enough to remember BBS's), I was advised to sample several days worth of posts before I ventured to open my big mouth.
I have found this to be good advice that has saved me lots of foot-in-mouth disease over the years (and I still sometimes stick foot-in-mouth).
It gives one the chance to learn about the netiquette and customs of that particular place and to get familiar with the old heads and what they expect.
LQ is one of the most patient-with-newbies sites that I have ever visited and has a remarkable signal to noise ratio, but LQ, like every other group, has its customs and norms.
I have found that, at a volunteer support site such as LQ, there is no such thing as providing too much information. The folks who want to help 1) don't know my situation and 2) will disregard the irrelevant stuff, but stuff which I think might be irrelevant, as a newbie, may give them vital clues.
Hello frankbell:
Ya, I agree to provide more info in my future posts. But there is always the possibility that, of too much info on a post, would overwhelm the volunteer helper, who then would just ignore the thread/question altogether.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
