Am I the only one that finds this amusing?

[Arkive]

People are so afraid that we're going to jump down their throats for not reading the FAQ or searching that they're even putting disclaimers it in the topics now...heh.

[Brem]

Originally Posted by Arkive People are so afraid that we're going to jump down their throats for not reading the FAQ or searching that they're even putting disclaimers it in the topics now...heh.

Read the FAQ

[Mazzlefizz]

Sadly, in the majority of cases, those posts ask questions whose answers are already posted in multiple threads.

[Blu_Haze]

Personally I find myself conflicted on my position about this kind of thing.

On the one hand I feel that people have an obligation to research the subject they have a question on to the best of their ability before expecting someone else to simply give them the answer. I'm the type of person who enjoys helping someone find the answer to a problem, but has little patience for those who simply want someone to hold their proverbial hand just because they're being lazy about it.

On the other hand however, I also feel that it's in bad taste for some people to get angry or condescending when someone asks a question that may have been repeated a couple times here and there. I can understand being frustrated when there's a very, very common subject being brought up repeatedly when it's well documented in many places (especially when it's a sticky on the same forum they're posting in), but some people simply take it too far. When you find yourself copy and pasting "Read the FAQ" in every other thread, then perhaps it's time to re-evaluate your priorities considering how much time you spend trying to demean others on a forum.

In short, I believe the ideal solution to this situation is a compromise. People in general need to be more self sufficient about fixing a problem, trying to research it themselves before bothering others about it. And the people in a position to answer those questions also need to be a bit more understanding when it comes to dealing with repetitive questions. If you don't want to answer something that's been said before, then simply avoid the topic altogether.

It's far easier to simply skip that topic and read something else that actually interests you than it is to bother replying to it. If you feel compelled to make a reply at least try to be constructive about it, offering useful advice related to the subject in addition to politely reminding them that this sort of thing has been discussed before, and that a search would have been more appropriate.

To me simply saying "Read the FAQ" is akin to the people who used to spam "RTFM NOOB" every time someone asked a question in an online game years ago.

[Mazzlefizz]

I was with you until you asserted that "Read the FAQ" is demeaning. When I have those kind of questions posted, I have the option of either ignoring it, telling them to read the faq where I have already posted a thorough response, or writing multiple, long-winded answers. I definitely don't have time to do the last option (nor do I think it's necessary), and I leave the first option for the particularly lazy or repetitive questions. I don't think it's the least bit demeaning to point people to the FAQ.

And I think it's absurd (and frankly insulting) to equate "Read the faq" with "RTFM NOOB" (read the fuc*ing manual noob) which is clearly meant to insult and show anger.

Finally, I don't think either your compromise (expecting the MMO masses to notice anything and change their behavior in the least) or your suggestion for me to ignore posts that are frustrating, is realistic in the least. As far as beta testers go, I have told them to ignore posts rather than make angry response, and I think the few that still post do a pretty good job at it. I have no problem with them pointing people to the faq as often as it is appropriate.

[Seerah]

I'm not sure if Blu was directing that at you, Mazz... More of an in general statement of all the other people that post that comment. You wrote the FAQ - you have a right to say it.

[brujer]

Originally Posted by Seerah I'm not sure if Blu was directing that at you, Mazz... More of an in general statement of all the other people that post that comment. You wrote the FAQ - you have a right to say it.

QFT

I agree with Blu

[Blu_Haze]

Originally Posted by Seerah I'm not sure if Blu was directing that at you, Mazz... More of an in general statement of all the other people that post that comment. You wrote the FAQ - you have a right to say it.

Exactly. My post wasn't directed at any one person or with this addon specifically, just my opinion on the subject in general as this is a growing trend I've noticed on many online discussion outlets. I also understand that there's a difference between the author reminding people that they have already written a response to their question in the FAQ, and random people overusing it every time someone asks a question.

To be honest though, if the roles were reversed and I were faced with people asking something which I had already detailed in a FAQ then I would simply choose to not bother myself with it. Simply because I know that other people would likely take care of it, and if not then I would know that I had already done my job in answering it in the FAQ. More often than not the motivation to become more self-sufficient stems from having no other alternative. Now, I'm not trying to criticize the way you handle things here, or that this is how you should be since whatever you choose to do is your prerogative. I'm simply explaining how I would view it.

I also originally forgot to add searching along with people saying "Read the FAQ" as in my opinion that's actually the larger of the two offenders. As I said earlier there are very valid and acceptable times to use such statements, but often it's simply overused to the extent that it actually discourages discussion and new threads in general since some people tend to expect that kind of response regardless of what they're posting about. Ironically I find myself getting frustrated when I'm using a forum search to find information, only to have to wade through over a half dozen threads filled with simple "use the search" answers instead of what I was searching for in the first place. This is most likely the leading reason of why I have such an opinionated view of the situation.

The simple fact is that tools like online searches and Frequently Asked Questions are great resources, but they aren't perfect. Searches for example have a common fault in that they aren't all exactly the same. Using the same exact search string in one particular engine can provide you with accurate results and quickly lead you to what you were looking for, but in a different engine with a looser algorithm and fewer advanced options you would be given 50 pages of results that aren't even close to what you wanted. A lot of forum search engines also like to disable short word searches, and any word 3 letters or less is simply ignored.

While this does save a lot of database processing time, it also makes for a frustrating experience when the one thing you want to find is best described with short words and little other obvious alternatives. This can lead people to become discouraged with the idea of using a search to find what they want and simply make a new thread about it. Although this is the lazier and often inconsiderate way of getting things done, I can understand why some people feel it's the easier route to take since you can write a few sentences and then forget about it for a few hours until you're ready to check for replies.

A list of Frequently Asked Questions are a great resource as well, but they too are not without their faults (not necessarily yours in particular, just FAQs in general). The most notorious problem with a FAQ is that unlike something such as a Wiki, they often quickly become out of date and obsolete unless the original author is willing to dedicate time to constantly checking it for old entries and updating it accordingly. Another is that while they're effective in covering broad solutions to common problems, they can't realistically be expected to cover every specific question out there. The real complication with that is people tend to believe that all of their questions are special, and since it happened to them it couldn't possibly be common enough to have been included in a FAQ.

As far as your FAQ is concerned (and this isn't meant to be insulting, just my own personal experiences with it) the only problem I ran into was the way it's formatted. The long, whimsical questions are nice to read the first time if you're simply browsing through the FAQ to familiarize yourself with it and maybe find out things you didn't know, however it tends to complicate things when it comes to trying to find one specific question you might have.

I remember a while back when I first started using the mod I had a specific question about the way something was working, and remembered reading something about it in the FAQ. Only when I returned to it to find what I was looking for, it took a while to locate it since I basically had to go through and read most of the individual questions all over again to find it. A structure that provided short, concise (yeah, I know I'm not one to talk about keeping it short ) questions and answers would have been easier to skim through and quickly find what I needed.

This isn't to say that you've done something wrong, or that I think you should change the way you operate, everything I say is simply an opinion and the way I see things from my perspective. For all I know there could be plenty of people out there who appreciate all the things that I dislike, after all. I wouldn't be foolish enough to outright condone people not researching things for themselves, or condemn people who simply respond with "Read the FAQ" or "Search more" since it isn't that cut and dry. My whole point is to simply provide some insight on why I believe people do these kinds of things, in the hope that some people might be a little more understanding of each other in the future.

You know it's funny, for all of the long-winded posts that I tend to make, I can actually sum this up pretty easily. A lot of people are too lazy to search or read a FAQ, and a lot of people overreact at a comment they may have occasionally seen before. That's why I still stand by my earlier statement that a compromise for all involved would be the best course of action.

For example, if someone posted a new thread and asked "That little clock in the lower right corner doesn't have the right time, it's a couple hours off. How do I change it?" then I could reply with something like this:

Originally Posted by Blu_Haze Please be sure to read the stickies at the top of the forum, as this is already covered in the FAQ. I need to adjust the time zone of the clock. How can I do that? The add-on is called Status Windows. Access its options via MazzleOptions and select 'Time' from the Module Config menu. It will present you with a window to enter your time zone adjustment. Gnomeregan has modified StatusWindows to store these values per character, so you can set different values for different servers. As a result, though, you'll need to adjust every character individually.

Something like that wouldn't take me more than 30 seconds to post, since I would have already known where to find the information and would simply copy and paste it as a response along with a brief message encouraging them to check the FAQ in the future.

It would be a compromise in that I got my point across, pointing them to the FAQ that's already in place as well as providing helpful information. Who knows, perhaps doing that could effectively answer their question, and lead them to be more resourceful in the future before starting a new thread.

[Mazzlefizz]

I'll take your rambling and raise you a long-winded response!

Originally Posted by Blu_Haze To be honest though, if the roles were reversed and I were faced with people asking something which I had already detailed in a FAQ then I would simply choose to not bother myself with it. Simply because I know that other people would likely take care of it, and if not then I would know that I had already done my job in answering it in the FAQ. More often than not the motivation to become more self-sufficient stems from having no other alternative.

I appreciate your idealism, but I don't think that will happen. Usually, a forums in which the author takes that approach devolve into a fairly useless forum that is either complete inactive or filled with complaining and as much misinformation as information. And frankly, I do ignore quite a few posts either because they are so repetitive or so off-base.

Originally Posted by Blu_Haze I also originally forgot to add searching along with people saying "Read the FAQ" as in my opinion that's actually the larger of the two offenders. As I said earlier there are very valid and acceptable times to use such statements, but often it's simply overused to the extent that it actually discourages discussion and new threads in general since some people tend to expect that kind of response regardless of what they're posting about. Ironically I find myself getting frustrated when I'm using a forum search to find information, only to have to wade through over a half dozen threads filled with simple "use the search" answers instead of what I was searching for in the first place. This is most likely the leading reason of why I have such an opinionated view of the situation.

I agree. The forums are definitely a mess. I tried hard to keep things structured in the beginning (enforcing posting guidelines, deleting posts, etc.), and everyone called me and the beta testers forum nazis. I didn't get close to keeping up and eventually gave up.

But the reason it's a mess is not because there are to many "use the search" or "read the faq" posts. The reason it's a mess is because there are too many repeated questions, too many people who did not read the forums and just create more and more posts. That is the source of the mess, not the "read the faq" responses that come as a result.

Originally Posted by Blu_Haze The simple fact is that tools like online searches and Frequently Asked Questions are great resources, but they aren't perfect. Searches for example have a common fault in that they aren't all exactly the same. Using the same exact search string in one particular engine can provide you with accurate results and quickly lead you to what you were looking for, but in a different engine with a looser algorithm and fewer advanced options you would be given 50 pages of results that aren't even close to what you wanted. A lot of forum search engines also like to disable short word searches, and any word 3 letters or less is simply ignored. While this does save a lot of database processing time, it also makes for a frustrating experience when the one thing you want to find is best described with short words and little other obvious alternatives. This can lead people to become discouraged with the idea of using a search to find what they want and simply make a new thread about it. Although this is the lazier and often inconsiderate way of getting things done, I can understand why some people feel it's the easier route to take since you can write a few sentences and then forget about it for a few hours until you're ready to check for replies.

I agree, but there's little I can do about the quality of the search. And frankly, I don't think it plays as large a role as it may seem now. In the beginning, when the forum was far smaller, focused and organized, people were just as likely as they are now to post repetitive questions without doing any reading whatsoever.

Originally Posted by Blu_Haze A list of Frequently Asked Questions are a great resource as well, but they too are not without their faults (not necessarily yours in particular, just FAQs in general). The most notorious problem with a FAQ is that unlike something such as a Wiki, they often quickly become out of date and obsolete unless the original author is willing to dedicate time to constantly checking it for old entries and updating it accordingly.

Umm....ok. That may be a valid thing to say about the faq world in general, but I think you might be rambling here. I don't see how it applies here. I try to remove questions from the FAQ that are no longer applicable and put all new content in the known issues thread. I probably don't do a perfect job, but I don't think you can apply what you just said to it.

Originally Posted by Blu_Haze Another is that while they're effective in covering broad solutions to common problems, they can't realistically be expected to cover every specific question out there. The real complication with that is people tend to believe that all of their questions are special, and since it happened to them it couldn't possibly be common enough to have been included in a FAQ. p

I can understand that inclination, especially for the people less technically-inclined. And for those people who may think their question is unique in that way, I try to always give a "Read the FAQ" comment to, to let them now that their question is indeed frequently asked.

Originally Posted by Blu_Haze As far as your FAQ is concerned (and this isn't meant to be insulting, just my own personal experiences with it) the only problem I ran into was the way it's formatted. The long, whimsical questions are nice to read the first time if you're simply browsing through the FAQ to familiarize yourself with it and maybe find out things you didn't know, however it tends to complicate things when it comes to trying to find one specific question you might have. I remember a while back when I first started using the mod I had a specific question about the way something was working, and remembered reading something about it in the FAQ. Only when I returned to it to find what I was looking for, it took a while to locate it since I basically had to go through and read most of the individual questions all over again to find it. A structure that provided short, concise (yeah, I know I'm not one to talk about keeping it short ) questions and answers would have been easier to skim through and quickly find what I needed.

I think that's a valid point. That said, my goal when writing it was to make it accessible to people and make them feel comfortable reading it all up front. As a result, it's definitely more conversational and full of extranneous jokes and so forth. There's definitely a trade-off. Nonetheless, it's still mostly content and is fairly well organized. I don't think it's that long or that hard for people to find stuff in it. At least, I don't think it poses such a challenge that I would rewrite it or not expect people to find things in it.

Originally Posted by Blu_Haze This isn't to say that you've done something wrong, or that I think you should change the way you operate, everything I say is simply an opinion and the way I see things from my perspective. For all I know there could be plenty of people out there who appreciate all the things that I dislike, after all. I wouldn't be foolish enough to outright condone people not researching things for themselves, or condemn people who simply respond with "Read the FAQ" or "Search more" since it isn't that cut and dry. My whole point is to simply provide some insight on why I believe people do these kinds of things, in the hope that some people might be a little more understanding of each other in the future. You know it's funny, for all of the long-winded posts that I tend to make, I can actually sum this up pretty easily. A lot of people are too lazy to search or read a FAQ, and a lot of people overreact at a comment they may have occasionally seen before. That's why I still stand by my earlier statement that a compromise for all involved would be the best course of action.

Again, I appreciate your idealism, but I don't think that could ever happen on both ends. 9/10 of the people on the other end will never read this posts, never read the posting guidelines or anything else for that matter. That's not a compromise. That's just me and other posters doing more. I wish it weren't true, but my attempts at encouraging people to follow certain conventions says otherwise.

Originally Posted by Blu_Haze For example, if someone posted a new thread and asked "That little clock in the lower right corner doesn't have the right time, it's a couple hours off. How do I change it?" then I could reply with something like this: Something like that wouldn't take me more than 30 seconds to post, since I would have already known where to find the information and would simply copy and paste it as a response along with a brief message encouraging them to check the FAQ in the future. It would be a compromise in that I got my point across, pointing them to the FAQ that's already in place as well as providing helpful information. Who knows, perhaps doing that could effectively answer their question, and lead them to be more resourceful in the future before starting a new thread.

That would indeed be nice. And if there were a customer support staff, then perhaps it would happen, even though, tbh, it doesn't seem to usually happen in many places that do have staffs. In any case, this forum isn't my job. I'm looking for ways to cut down the amount of time spent doing forum stuff, not increase it. I come here when I have a few spare minutes (bored, reloading the UI, waiting for wipe recover, etc.) and throw up a couple posts.

That said, you also don't get paid to come here and answer questions. Nor do you get paid to give suggestions, so I appreciate that. You seem to have a nice vision of how things could work better, so I highly encourage you to spend some time and make it happen. More power to you! I'm sure everyone would appreciate your effort, and I'm not trying to be facetious by saying that.

[Brem]

Originally Posted by Blu_Haze random people overusing it every time someone asks a question.

If I'm the random person overusing this phrase, then I apologize. However, my response is clearly (at least to my rather feeble mind) a joke. I think I can count the times I've posed those 3 words by themselves (including this joke response) and come up with the number 1. I wrote what I considered a (moderately) funny response to what I thought the OP saw as funny (amusing actually looking at the title). Honestly I expected not this long winded response, but a couple of LOL's and a dead thread.

To wax more seriously, if it's that offensive I just won't post anymore.

[Arkive]

Originally Posted by Brem If I'm the random person overusing this phrase, then I apologize. However, my response is clearly (at least to my rather feeble mind) a joke. I think I can count the times I've posed those 3 words by themselves (including this joke response) and come up with the number 1. I wrote what I considered a (moderately) funny response to what I thought the OP saw as funny (amusing actually looking at the title). Honestly I expected not this long winded response, but a couple of LOL's and a dead thread. To wax more seriously, if it's that offensive I just won't post anymore.

I don't believe any of these responses were directed at you Brem. It was moreso a commentary on the support forums and it's users in general.

Also, unrelated to this, Blu talked about the search capabilities of sites. Persoanlly, I find this site to have one of the better search functions. Searching within a specific thread is simple, as is searching the entire forum. Also, I get a little more of a preview of the posts it found then I do on a lot of other forums too (nothing's worse then sorting through 20 search hits and trying to decipher which one you want based on the first 5 words of the post). All in all, not bad in my opinion.

[Mazzlefizz]

Brem, I think you're one of the most helpful posters here and doing a great job. I wouldn't change a thing. I'm sure everybody appreciates your continued efforts.