discuss: VirtualWebhosting howto for ur review
Subject:
Re: VirtualWebhosting howto for ur review
From:
David Lawyer ####@####.####
Date:
16 Jul 2013 08:10:30 +0100
Message-Id: <20130716071016.GA27102@daveslinux>
On Wed, Jan 26, 2005 at 09:38:18AM -0600, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-01-23 at 19:48 -0800, David Lawyer wrote:
> > ur use of short words like ur, doesn't seem to exist in other LDP docs
> > and I don't think it should start now.
> >
> > I've just looked at the first couple of screens and realize that you
> > haven't explained it very well.
>
> Good Christ!
>
> And then people wonder why LDP is getting fewer authors and fewer
> documents?
>
> <flame>
>
> While the document submitted in this case clearly does need a great deal
> of work by its author, it's at least clear that this is a person with
> some knowledge and a lot of interest and enthusiasm, who has put in some
> time and effort to try to help others. So do we give him a useful
> critique? No, we tell him his work sucks and slam him hard. Note that
> the poor sod didn't even have the heart/guts to respond, or didn't feel
> it was worth his time.
>
> This kind of behavior is very sadly all-too-common around here. It
> *WILL* drive people away, both outside authors and internal volunteers
> and contributors. I, personally, am starting to question whether I
> should be devoting any time at all to this effort, there being so many
> other worthy efforts on this Earth who don't act like assholes.
>
> Of course I do not mean to criticize or insult the many people I've
> grown to respect and appreciate here. Tille, Emma, Guylhem, Martin are
> just a few of the names now permanently etched into my Good List.
> However, all their efforts will be for naught if LDP's success is
> sabotaged and undermined by the intolerant, arrogant, and abusive
> behavior of a few.
>
> Damn it.
>
> </flame>
>
> --
> Rodolfo J. Paiz ####@####.####
I wrote exactly what I thought and what was the truth. But I wrote this
8 years ago and didn't have time to follow the thread and never knew I
was "flamed" until now, 8 years later. I think that if one tries to be
tactful, then in some cases, the criticism may be even resented more than
if one just simply and frankly states what's wrong.
This thread continues with me being out of it, and concludes with the
new author agreeing to revise his doc per my critique and then finishes
with a long (and tactful) email by Paiz pointing out other flaws and how
to correct them. It seems that the new author never did get his work
fixed or published. What was wrong here was much ado about almost
nothing.
And another thing wrong is that I probably should have just let sleeping
dogs lie. But it does show the advantages of having individual authors
instead of a wiki: one knows to whom to direct complements and
criticisms. A wiki may have many mistakes and it takes some checking to
find out who made them.
David Lawyer
