Flaming People

[+bons]

I had edited it in and out as I was composing the post but decided to leave it in because it illustrated a good point. At no point in time were you being deliberately insulting or rude. But it was still possible for your statements to be taken that way.

 

I think a lot of the people accussed of flaming newbies fall in the same category. The main difference is that they don't get the benefit of the doubt, instead they get flamed for not given someone else the benefit of the doubt.

 

I think the classic case for me and this forums was one of the first set of e-mails I got from someone here. They proceeded to call me an idiot, a moron, and a number of other things all while bragging how they had never gotten a warning and were in constant communication with a moderator who was handing out warnings to others. To this day I don't think the person who sent me those e-mails has any clue how they were actually behaving. I'm convinced they still see me as the cause of it all.

[+clearpath]

I'm not asking folks to be all prissy and pussy foot around the boards. 

Please be careful what words you use ... you might get Criminal excited.

[+woodsters]

Didn't read it all but I do agree with the initial posting of this subject.

[+TotemLake]

Particularly in times where a similar thread would be on the same page below the new one they just created.

Geez can I prophesize or what?

 

Here's the original topic which has stayed on the top level page the entire time.

 

Repeated cuz the newbie just couldn't scroll down the page far enough when he started this topic.

 

Then you get this yahoo who can't seem to see the two topics on the same level and s/he claimed to look first!!! (yah right)

 

Now that's worth flaming.

Edited March 2, 2004 by TotemLake

[+Bloencustoms]

This is the first online forum I had ever participated in. I have learned a lot about how things work by that very participation. Now, when I need to search for answers in other forum about other topics, I know to try as many logical keyword searches before posting my question.

 

However, I don't think flaming someone for asking an old question is going to help them. Imagine how many teachers and professors would lose their jobs if they responded to student's questions in the manner some of these posters do.

 

Experience has also taught me that even if you post an old question and get flamed, there will also be several kind, helpful people who will answer your question as if it were the first time they ever saw it. I say post away, and let the "old timers" blood pressure go up another notch. Some helpful cacher is bound to answer your question with tact and respect.

 

It is a courtesy to do a search before asking a question, but how can a complete newcomer know that? Rather than put the burden on them, why not take it upon yourself and educate them without all the flaming?

 

Lastly, the act of complaining about repetitive forum threads strikes me the same as complaining about cache types. And the response ought to be the same. If you don't like it, don't read it. Nobody is forcing you to.

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

So do you think the users posting links to a dozen past threads on a subject are being helpful or not?

[+Sparky-Watts]

So do you think the users posting links to a dozen past threads on a subject are being helpful or not?

I think it's helpful if you also instruct them on how to find those threads themselves.

[+Zartimus]

How come nobody mentioned Markwell yet? Nothing gets the 'It's all been said before here' point across like a good ole' Markwell. Curt, polite, and to the point.

 

(and besides, I like the Calvin and Hobbs avatar)

[ashoofack]

Ah, Bons, now I get your point, I think, and if I do I have to agree. some posters, including newbies are deliberatly lazy in so far as they know that there are some very helpfull people who use this forum. They therefore post a query without any prior search. Someone points this out and is taken as being short or offensive. The poster always appears to be given the benifit of doubt. Whereas the flamer (poor choice of word) never gets the benifit.

 

This is true, however, I think that most folk feel that it would better to just ignore the initial post, lazy or otherwise, rather than post a negative reply.

 

I think that we should all remember that this is not a general chat forum but one dedicated (please shout at me if I'm wrong (I frequently am)) to Geocaching. And as such we should encourage as many potential cachers to participate as possible. Many will spend weeks lurking just plucking up the courage to make their initial post. Every time they see an offhand or less than helpfull remark they could be put off.

 

So in short being patient with lazy posters is not at all fair to those who may be just as rude in their manner of reply. However, lifes like that.

[+woodsters]

So do you think the users posting links to a dozen past threads on a subject are being helpful or not?

I do think it is helpful. Especially if you point to where it's located in the thread. Some threads are pages and pages long with no answers really and a bunch of garbage. When one does a search they either have to search on the exact keywords, which they might not do. They might know the words that are used for certain things and call it something else and not find an answer. Then if they do find some things that match, they have to sift through everything to try and find an answer. Then what they read, might be old and the rules have changed on that aspect, leading to improper out of date knowledge.

 

Let the people ask their questions. Of course it's going to get repetitive. Just skip over them if you don't want to help them out with an answer. Markwelling is great, just be sure you markwell a current and correct answer to their question.

[+ironman114]

How come nobody mentioned Markwell yet? Nothing gets the 'It's all been said before here' point across like a good ole' Markwell. Curt, polite, and to the point.

 

(and besides, I like the Calvin and Hobbs avatar)

Because then they will start a "new" thread on what is a markwell.

[+TotemLake]

Lastly, the act of complaining about repetitive forum threads strikes me the same as complaining about cache types. And the response ought to be the same. If you don't like it, don't read it. Nobody is forcing you to.

I do believe you completely missed my point.

 

In general, newbies choose to ask before reading or searching because it is easier to elicit an answer from somebody else rather than doing the footwork themselves. In this case, the repetitive posting of the found skeleton was a perfect example of posting before reading to see if it has already been subjected to the masses.

 

It isn't a matter of don't read nobody's forcing me to do blah blah blah...

 

Generally speaking, it is a matter that newbies choose to take the easy way out.

Edited March 3, 2004 by TotemLake

[+SeventhSon]

I never search. Not because I'm too lazy. Not because I'm a nube. By my post count, most would consider me one, but by the many hours I spend reading here, I'm less of one. So, I'm a nube at typing, but experienced at reading Either way, I don't search, I just ask. I know somewhere out there someone is just itching to add to their post count, and whether it's a flame, or a markwell, or an actual answer to my question, I've helped them get what they wanted. Go me!

 

7

[+woodsters]

Totem, are you speaking of repetative posting of different threads on the skeleton bit? If not then I don't follow you on that example. I came in to post the story the other morning after receiving an email from my father about it. But when I logged on, someone had already posted it. It was at the very top of the page. If I saw no thread about it somewhere on the first page, then I probably would of started a new one. I very rarely ever go past the first page of the threads on here. Not because I'm lazy, but because if it gets past that point, then it's normally "dead" discussion.

 

Why some people may be lazy and don't want to search, I see no problem with asking questions. I would much rather have them ask a question pertaining to it, than say well it didn't say it, I didn't see it, or I didn't understand. Even if it's been talked about before. Now if you look around on the first page or so and don't see a similar thread or topic, then ask. Unfortunately searching through the system will not answer questions. At least not directly. It's not effective here as we use everyday common words. If I want to see what was said about an aim-a-flame on here and type those keywords in, I would probably only get discussions (and endless at that) about flaming each other. The search function can be used effectively, but not as well here as in other forums that pretty much remain civil. Take a medical coding website that I run for my wife. Medical codes or a set of numbers and they each mean something. IF a member of the messageboard there wanted to find out about a certain medical code, then they could type in that number in the search part of the message board and would get discussions pertaining to that code. Same as well as medical terms which normally aren't common everyday terms unless you are Doc Dean. They may still not find an answer, but the search is more effective there than it would be here. One reason is because we don't have the bickering or flaming going on. Everyone is on topic in the discussions and we have a off topic area where they can discuss other things. In other words people are on there because of their employement and not for fun like here. They take it a little more seriously.

[IronMaiden]

I just ask my husband questions and then I don't get flamed. But if he's not around. I USE THE @#$#%$%&^&^** SEARCH BUTTON Simple as that.

Edited March 3, 2004 by IronMaiden

[+Lazyboy & Mitey Mite]

 

Generally speaking, it is a matter that newbies choose to take the easy way out.

So what? Big deal. And as it's been mentioned several times an old question quite often brings about a new response.

[+woodsters]

So what? Big deal. And as it's been mentioned several times an old question quite often brings about a new response.

It has? I guess I should of searched on it...

[+Bloencustoms]

I think a big hurdle to new forum users who do wish to use the search function could be choosing the correct keywords to yield the results they desire. Regular forum users might forget that all the geo-jargon we are so familiar with might not make any sense to a newbie. So, a thread could be started about a topic that didn't show up in a search because they had no idea what the term is for that which they wish to understand better. Also, someone who reads the forums daily will know what topics have been recently discussed without having to do a search at all. To categorize newbies as "lazy" is unfair, given the advantage a daily user has in knowing what has been discussed recently. I don't blame someone for giving up and posting a topic after fooling around with the incorrect keywords for an hour or so, only to be chastised for just coming out and asking a question. What about that new cacher who just wants some help understanding how to use their new receiver so they can go get a cache before it gets dark? Would you have them waste the rest of the evening in front of the computer searching the forums, or help them out with a quick answer so they can go get that first cache?

[+TotemLake]

Totem, are you speaking of repetative posting of different threads on the skeleton bit? If not then I don't follow you on that example.

Woodsters, Yes. Three posts all on the same page, all on the same subject. All the newbs had to do was to scroll maybe 3 or 4 inches to see it.

 

Lazyboy & Mitey Mite Posted on Mar 3 2004, 06:48 AM

(TotemLake @ Mar 2 2004, 06:17 PM)

 

Generally speaking, it is a matter that newbies choose to take the easy way out. 

 

So what? Big deal. And as it's been mentioned several times an old question quite often brings about a new response.

 

First - It wasn't a question, it was an announcement. That's just for clarity of what I complained about.

Second - It was all on the same page to be read by all who has the finger strength to scroll. And if they had the strength to type, they had the ability to scroll.

Third - And this is the biggie... do you just jump in the middle and blabber or do you consider that just bad manners? Without knowing you, I'll give some credit to you and say you probably exercise some form of good manners. But that's what these newbs did. It was a lack of etiquette in general conversational terms, and a lack of netiquette in more specific terms... all of which could have been easily handled by reading the FAQ in the Getting Started Forum - which all newbs are encouraged to read to prevent those kind of dumbass foopahs.

 

Big deal? To you perhaps not, but when you don't say something about bad manners, it is just as bad as not practicing good manners. Be part of the solution and don't encourage the problem by ignoring it. It is a responsibility of all seasoned posters and sometimes, the remarks can be taken as a flame by someone of less stature even when it was not intended to be so. I say tough. Push through the pain and learn. I'll go back to my previous post and say again:

 

Not all disagreements and discussion are going to be nicey nicey. If you can't stand even the moderate heat of a discussion, you shouldn't become involved in it.

 

I dare you to name any real time discussion that doesn't have the potential of having some emotional response. That in and of itself is considered a flame... and yet, folks seem to survive that pretty well. Why should it be any different here?

 

Being flamed is a learning process by itself. A newbie learns what not to do in a forum when being flamed but they also learn what they can do at the same time. If they're too sensitive, then they also have real life issues to deal with and I won't accept the responisibility to coddled them here. 

 

Bloencustoms Posted on Mar 3 2004, 03:54 PM

  I think a big hurdle to new forum users who do wish to use the search function could be choosing the correct keywords to yield the results they desire. Regular forum users might forget that all the geo-jargon we are so familiar with might not make any sense to a newbie. So, a thread could be started about a topic that didn't show up in a search because they had no idea what the term is for that which they wish to understand better. Also, someone who reads the forums daily will know what topics have been recently discussed without having to do a search at all. To categorize newbies as "lazy" is unfair...  (edited only for brevity in an already long post - TL)

 

I agree with you in content. I only use the concept of lazy when the problem is very apparent. I don't blame anybody for not going to the 2nd or further page. However, going back to my above - the subject was repeated within inches (read that as mere lines) of each other on the same level page. And to repeat - it wasn't even a question!

 

Now folks, let's get my remarks back in perspective. I didn't flame - it was a gripe about a generality that holds true with most newbs. If you'll notice, I merely smirked with a to emphasize my statement which was proven in a timely manner by the newbs themselves. Btw - I did note at the time the newbs' post counts were below a dozen each. This is very typical. By the time they reach mid digits, they've learned to read the page of posts before posting. Why? Because someone had the cojones to point it out to them. (Imagine my surprise. )

 

One last point to make, if it wasn't a big deal, then the mods wouldn't be locking them down with the announcement that there is already an active thread on it. They'd let it go.

 

==edited for clarity==

Edited March 4, 2004 by TotemLake

[+woodsters]

Ok totem on the skeleton bit. I do agree about postings of the same othing that do show up on the same page.

 

Now on to what Bloen was saying. That is exactly what I was saying. It also made me think that some people may be accessing the forums from work and can't sit there and read alot and put a lot into it. It may be be a quick scan and if not see the answer then post it and return back later to see if anyone has answered it. Or they may not be at work and still do not spend a lot of time on it. It is much easier and quicker to ask a question than to search through a lot of clutter.

[+bons]

Her answer? It was easier to come and ask me for the answer rather than look it up herself.

It is much easier and quicker to ask a question than to search through a lot of clutter.

I've always depended on the kindness of suckers.

[+TotemLake]

It is much easier and quicker to ask a question than to search through a lot of clutter.

But you see... that merely adds to the clutter thereby making it worse. It is a downward spiral that can be curtailed if people (new and seasoned) just take a few moments more to learn how to use the search feature or just simply look through the first couple pages of topics. If it isn't there then by all means float the inquiry and gain a different perspective. It doesn't take long. Using the excuse they don't have much time to look through is pretty pathetic when you figure it only takes a couple of minutes to scan the topics on the first two pages. Time it, you will surprise yourself.

[+TotemLake]

Her answer? It was easier to come and ask me for the answer rather than look it up herself.

It is much easier and quicker to ask a question than to search through a lot of clutter.

I've always depended on the kindness of suckers.

Yah - I saw all that. It's simple human nature to go the easy route when people let them. They would rather tie up somebody else's time rather than theirs.

Edited March 5, 2004 by TotemLake

[+woodsters]

Totem, but the thing is, that you have to read endless and endless threads that are included in the search results. Imagine if is showed up in the Abject Silliness thread! And even then, the the question might not be answered there. And as I stated before, many of the new people will or may not be familiar with our jargon or terminology that we use. For instance I typed in "Metal Army Can" and "Metal Can" and came up with no results. I was looking for ammo can. When I typed in "metal box" I got listed 5 different threads. One was titled ammo can. But that was because I switched from can to box. Some may not do that. And with those 5 threads, I would of had a couple hundred posts to read. Would I of found my answer? Maybe...maybe not.

 

The search is a great feature. Don't get me worng on that. It's only effective though when every posting is completely on that topic. That's not going to happen here, just as in this thread. If it was a business and people were dealing with specific things and were "serious", then it would be ok. And as long as the lingo, jargon, and terminology was known. Whether if people have time to search for stuff or not, is not an issue really. We can't determine if someone has the time or not.

 

i haven't checked lately, but there used to be a few pages of information on the site. Some of them repeated the same thing, some had different stuff. And they were all located in different areas. If they already haven't done it, there needs to be one location with reference to it. Things need to be added and removed as things continuosly change. A lot of the questions that are repeated over and over, normally don't change. Perhaps they need to be in an area. Then when a question is asked that is covered in that area, a moderator can post a link to the area nad close the thread. This is a forum and it's for discussion. We are pretty much limited to talking about geocaching in general and there is only so much that can be said. Imagine that if they started deleting and closing threads with a simple this has already been discussed or that has already been said. Basically say or talk about something differently, but that has to do with geocaching.

[+TotemLake]

As with all search engines including the great (sarcasm for those that miss it) Google and Yahoo - the first few topics are all that are really relevant and yet, people survive that problem. I guess my question really comes down to why are people having such an issue here? This isn't spoon-fed AOL.

[+Bloencustoms]

Which is better, Garmin or Magellan?

[+woodsters]

Which is better, Garmin or Magellan?

Lowrance....lmao just kidding

[Lesbaru]

I'm one of the evil newbies. (I asked the dreaded "GPSr and airport security" question last Fall. Score one for me!) Quite frankly, I am so inept that I simply didn't know there WAS a search function here. I got so boggled by the pretty lights and the exciting topics list that the tool bar thingy never even registered in my brain.

 

Luckily, some kind soul on another message board took the time to tell me how to use a search button. My usual cluelessness kept me from noticing where the search button was on this board until I read a post explaining it to someone else.

 

I'm not lazy, I'm just oblivious!

[+TotemLake]

And that's why I say it is okay to come out and tell the newbies about the search functions instead of hiding behind the reasoning you might offend their sensitivies. They'll survive and learn.

 

As for which GPSr is better... the one that fits your needs the best.

 

Cheers!

TL