From david.kirkby at onetel.net  Sat Aug 21 02:15:12 2010
From: david.kirkby at onetel.net (Dr. David Kirkby)
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 01:15:12 +0100
Subject: [Rd] No RTFM?
In-Reply-To: <4C6DC76B.7000303@structuremonitoring.com>
References: <4C6DC76B.7000303@structuremonitoring.com>
Message-ID: <4C6F1A90.60609@onetel.net>

On 08/20/10 01:08 AM, Spencer Graves wrote:
> What do you think about adding a "No RTFM" policy to the R mailing
> lists? Per, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RTFM":
>
>
> The Ubuntu Forums and LinuxQuestions.org, for instance, have instituted
> "no RTFM" policies to promote a welcoming atmosphere.[8][9].
>
> RTFM [and] "Go look on google" are two inappropriate responses to a
> question. If you don't know the answer or don't wish to help, please say
> nothing instead of brushing off someone's question. Politely showing
> someone how you searched or obtained the answer to a question is
> acceptable, even encouraged.
> ...
>
> If you wish to remind a user to use search tools or other resources when
> they have asked a question you feel is basic or common, please be very
> polite. Any replies for help that contain language disrespectful towards
> the user asking the question, i.e. "STFU" or "RTFM" are unacceptable and
> will not be tolerated. ?Ubuntu Forums
>
>
> Gavin Simpson and I recently provided examples answering a question from
> "r.ookie" that had previously elicited responses, ""You want us to read
> the help page to you?" and "It yet again appears that you are asking us
> to read the help pages for you."
>
>
> I can appreciate the sentiment in fortunes('rtfm'). In this case,
> however, "r.ookie" had RTFM (and said so), but evidently the manual was
> not sufficiently clear.
>
>
> Best Wishes,
> Spencer Graves

I've personally found the R community somewhat unhelpful at times. In fact, of 
all the resources I use:

  * Newsgroups like comp.unix.shell, sci.math.symbolic, comp.unix.aix, 
comp.unix.solaris
  * Mailing lists for autoconf, automake, gcc, sage maths, ecl, time-nuts.
  * Forums for OpenSolaris

I've found the r-devel about the least helpful of the lot.

My most recent example was when I created a bug report about a version of R that 
was about 4 months old. The bug was that the configure test failed to detect the 
version of libicu was unsuitable on Solaris. (Since it was the version of the 
library shipped with Solaris, I would personally have thought the configure 
script should detect its too old if it is).

When submitting the bug, I selected the particular R version from the pull-down 
menu, as it was listed.

Then I got some snotty reply about reading the FAQ and not submitting bug 
reports for old versions of R. At the time I submitted it, I suspect the version 
I had was about 4 months old. Ask on a Solaris mailing list about a 5 year old 
version of Solaris and you will get civil replies. Likewise, the gcc lists don't 
expect everyone to be running very recent versions.

I would have like to have responded on the technical content of the message, as 
I believe the autoconf test is flawed if it can't detect that a version of a 
library installed by Sun is unsuitable. But I decided that such responses were 
best ignored.

There's quite a bit in the R manual about Solaris that is just plain wrong, but 
although I've reported some of the problems, these were ignored, so I can't even 
be bothered to report the rest.

I must admit, I do sometimes give people links to

http://justfuckinggoogleit.com/

when I think they are being particularly dumb in not using Google, so I do 
appreciate it can get annoying when people ask questions they should be able to 
get answered themselves.

But it seems to me that arrogance is more normal on r-devel than on other lists 
I use.

Thankfully, I don't have to use r-devel much.

Flames to /dev/null.

Dave



[Rd] No RTFM?
Dr. David Kirkby