discuss: VirtualWebhosting howto for ur review
Subject:
Re: VirtualWebhosting howto for ur review
From:
Paul Hendricksen ####@####.####
Date:
17 Jul 2013 05:44:56 +0100
Message-Id: <-6797932700547748628@unknownmsgid>
David,
Your knowledge and stolid responses come off as harsh. Perhaps it is
also the emotions of the reader that effects te thread? :) We have all
experienced the "David!"
As for the Wiki, knowledge is power. Despite the errors, better
information will come and correct it. There are so many distributions,
no true "vanilla" Linux distribution exist, so it is hard to make any
howto for just any one reader. It is just a guide after all - a
starting point.
I agree with JD, the thread should live on.
V/R,
Paul Hendricksen
Excuse all typos and spelling errors, this is sent from my mobile.
On Jul 16, 2013, at 1:10, David Lawyer ####@####.#### wrote:
> 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
>
> ______________________
> http://lists.tldp.org/
>
