Signature Help

Tue Sep 18 09:38:37 PDT 2007

I actually have no problem with the way Jose has been answering questions.

WRT referring to any existing reference, that is simply efficient. And in 
this cas really is the best answer. He gave a substantive answer by merely 
saying "mkpcl" at all, regardless of anything else he said or didn't say. 
That right there is the most important clue that all the rest derives from.

WRT referring to his own site, I've been doing somewhat the same for years 
when answering unix questions on comp.unix.sco.misc. Often I do give quite 
long and detailed and specific and on-the-spot tested answers directly, but 
even those may often include references to my page of sco binaries as 
required steps in the solution. In my case I'm not trying to drum up traffic 
to my site at all, there is nothing there to see, it's just a minimalist 
bare functional place to hold some binary packages and the barest minimum of 
instructions or reference required to install them. But the point is I often 
answer a question with nothing more than a link to a stanza on that page. 
Not even one word of dialog, just a link. That is simply the most succinct 
answer to the question sometimes. Why should I waste my time writing what's 
already been written and conducting some weeks long back & forth to go over 
ground that's been all worked out forever ago? Even if Jose is writing up 
his answers on the spot on his site specifically in response to the 
question, and then referring to it, that is still OK. In fact it's smart and 
admirable and thinking ahead etc... Because most questions that are worth 
answering, are worth documenting. And even the very first time you answer a 
question, it's still more efficient to write up the answer in a wiki and 
then refer to it there, than to answer it directly, then copy it. When 
people later find the answer via mining the mail list archives, it might be 
better for those people if the question was answered directly. Then at least 
that info is always available even if the site goes away later. Then again, 
if the answer was a reference to the site, the site may have a far better 
answer later than the original answer that would have been in a direct post.

I said I didn't have much use for a new fp site, but I never had any problem 
with someone doing it. And I see no reason to beat up on him for this. It's 
not hurting anything. It is helping actually, because in this case, more IS 
better. More copies of given info, or more interpreteations or more 
representations of it, is always good. 5 people could say essentially the 
same thing, and yet a person may only really understand one of them, and 
someone else may only really understand a different one. Aside from that, if 
he wants to put in the work and keep improving his site and collecting 
content and improving the useability etc.. eventually it may become an 
actually superior resource to the hodge-podge of things we have now. Nothing 
wrong with that. So it's absolutely fine what he's doing as far as I'm 
concerned, as long as he's not plain wrong or giving advice that may be 
technically correct as far as it goes, but naive/unwise.

-bkw

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Fairlight" <fairlite at fairlite.com>
To: <filepro-list at lists.celestial.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: Signature Help

> When asked his whereabouts on Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 06:24:03AM -0700,
> fp at casabellagallery.com took the fifth, drank it, and then slurred:
>>
>> > I have a signature in a jpeg file and would like to place it on a form.
>> > My printer is an Okidata b6200 (hplaser) and I am currently running 
>> > Unix
>> > filepro.  Thank you in advance.
>>
>> You can go to  http://www.fpgroups.com/index.php?Target=akb
>> and read the article about MKPCL or can you can go directly to the source
>> and learn that and more (and of course, buy MKPCL from Jim Asman)
>>
>> http://www.spectracolorservices.com/contact_information.htm
>>
>> After reading through this you should be able to get your project done.
>> Should you need additional assistance, come back here and let us know!
>>
>> Good luck!
>
> Jose, I'm starting to have a personal problem with your methodology.
> Please let me try to politely explain what (and why) that is.
>
> When someone asks a question, they're asking it of the audience they are
> addressing directly.  Let's take an example that hits very close to what I
> see your attempts emulating, and why I really dislike it.
>
> I play World of Warcraft, and have for a long time now.  There's a site,
> thottbot.com, that has pretty much every know snippet of information about
> the game.
>
> When I ask a question of other players in-game, it is not because I do not
> know where thottbot is or how to use it.  It is a matter of convenience,
> and in some cases, socialisation in the way you might get someone's extra
> perspective or take on something than you currently got.  It also ***does
> NOT remove you from the moment***.
>
> When anyone (not just me, anyone I see asking a question) is answered 
> with,
> "Thottbot it," I get rather miffed.  I find it an exexplicably lazy
> interaction with their fellow players, and a near complete lack of
> willingness to help their fellow person.  It's not that the reference 
> isn't
> there, it's not that I don't know how to use it.  It's that I turn to
> someone specifically for help and I'm fobbed off.  If I wanted to look it
> up, that option is available to me.  Same as a dictionary is to anyone.
> How often do people just ask how to spell something or what something
> means, rather than look it up?  But it's too much hassle to give a 
> straight
> answer...some people have to redirect you to some site somewhere where the
> magic information is laying, rather than just relating what they know of
> the matter.
>
> That is annoying in and of itself.  It would be far more annoying to me if
> I knew, for example, that the person replying thus also had an interest in
> thottbot, and thus any revenue that stemmed from its use, if that were the
> case.  In your case, the 'revenue' is simply more traffic.
>
> If you're going to insist on referring to fpgroups.com, which obviously 
> has
> been a point of contention, I would personally ask that you at least
> provide a -real, substantive- answer in your message, and then also 
> mention
> that some information is archived at a particular location.  There are
> times when a reference is enough--especially for OT things (ie., SCO TA
> #'s, etc.).  There are also times to just answer the damned question as it
> was asked, without ulterior motive.
>
> I personally feel you're on the edge of a slippery slope in that regard.
> And it's starting to grate, quite honestly.  We know it exists.  Nobody
> could have missed it, after all the discussion in the last month.  If
> someone wanted to check it, they would have.  They either didn't, or 
> didn't
> want to.  They wanted a real reply from someone -here-.
>
> I don't have a problem with your project.  I have a problem with how 
> you're
> twisting things to suit your project's aims/goals...what have you. 
> Please,
> let it live or die on the work you're doing with it, with maybe a note in
> your .sig pointing to it; but please stop shoving it down people's 
> throats,
> either out of laziness or a desire to self-promote.  I suspect it's the
> latter.  There's such a thing as pushing your luck, ya know?
>
> Please reconsider your tactics.
>
> Bests,
>
> mark->
> -- 
> The latest synth mixdown...
> http://media.fairlite.com/Isolation_Voiceless_Cry_Mix.mp3
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> 