problem getting the right permissions

Bill Maltby LFS Related lfsbill at wlmcs.com
Wed Sep 11 14:40:08 PDT 2002


On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Timothy Bauscher wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 02:35:43PM -0400, Bill Maltby LFS Related wrote:
> > For some, as we have seen in the past, the additional links are
> > worthless. They will not even carefully read and understand what is
> > already there. So the added workload on the editors of more links may
> > not be offset by re-duced help requests, especially from the *very*
> > few we have seen that cause this suggestion in the first place.
> > 
> > Sounds like a no-win situation to me.
> 
> I'm not trying to insult anyone, I'm simply offering my opinion :)
> 
> 1. The LFS book should be targeted towards medium to advanced
>    linux users.
> 2. The purpose of this book is to educate. Education is
>    not worthless, even if the opportunity to learn is ignored
>    by the receiving party.

Tsk, tsk. It is like gold or diamonds. If they are not mined, they are
worthless. Education offered but ignored also produces no value. But I
think the majority *do* get some education from the books - it is only a
few who do not.

> 3. I have seen the education level of our "readers" drop during
>    the short time I've been here. I believe this is due to
>    hand-holding, which is leading to a copy+paste audience whom
>    ask for help before attempting to solve a problem for
>    themselves.

It sometimes seems that way to me also. OTOH, I take some pride in being
part of a list that is so "forgiving" and receives the occasional
compliment about being "most helpful". I would hate to lose that attitude
just because some very *small* percentage are (apparently) not doing even
minimal "homework".

Like Chris, I too recall when I first started *IX. ... Wow! Man pages
online! I didn't know that! <cmd> --help - didn't exist when I started.
But the point is that is it can be quite daunting and we, as graduates of
that learning process, ought to have a little more tolerance for some of
the abberations we see in noobs.

But where is the line to be drawn? And who draws it? And how do you assure
the line does not penalize one who is only having difficulty getting
started?

> 
> Those who do not wish to be educated should not be able to
> finish the book.

Nicely put. Now all we need is a fool-proof method of distinguishing
between those who do not wish to be educated and those who are only
(initially) clueless.

I think this ends up being a lot like real life. Sometimes it just takes a
while for some to get headed in the right direction. And sometimes it
takes a while for us to tell which type a given user is going to be.

In the long run, I tend to lean towards the side of increased tolerance to
be sure that no deserving soul gets short-changed.

My compromise is that whenever possible I sneak in a line about
"man <some-cmd>" or "see the FAQ" or somesuch as a gentle reminder.

And someday this will bite my buns because someone will be aware of some
document that is right in front of my face and I will not be able to
recognize it. And I will then be offered a (hopefully) gracious reminder
on some doc. 

> -- timothy(at)linuxfromscratch.org


Bill Maltby
billm at wlmcs.com

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list