On Sat,  16 Jan  1993 17:16:00  CST Jim  Milles <[log in to unmask]>
said:
 
>The ability to  "ask someone who knows" is the  single greatest strength
>of  discussion lists.  The  discussion  list I  use  daily, law-lib,  is
>regularly used in this way, and  nobody worries about whether a question
>has been asked before; the answer may have changed.
>
>Discussion lists  give an  individual access to  a diverse  community of
>experts.  Why should  an  individual spend  days  searching through  ftp
>sites,  FAQs,   LISTSERV  archives,  and   who  knows  how   many  other
>miscellaneous  sources, when  they  could  ask a  single  question on  a
>discussion list and receive answers that afternoon from people who know?
 
Nobody asked them  to spend *days* looking for the  answer before asking,
the point  is to overcome  human laziness and  do the volunteers  who are
going to help you the courtesy of  trying to save them time if it doesn't
cost you more  than a 3-minutes database search. One  thing I can't stand
is people who start their message with "I know the answer is in the book,
but I haven't got time to check books, so I'm asking you". Given that I'm
not paid to answer user questions  at all, I take considerable offense at
statements which imply that my time  is so obviously less worthy than the
asker's  that I  should spare  them  the excruciatingly  painful task  of
opening a  book, checking the  index, and then finding  the corresponding
page number(s) for an answer.
 
There is a big difference between  "asking someone who knows" and "asking
500 people, of  which at least 400  know and have something  else to do".
The difference  is that  you bother  500 people, and  then either  get no
answer (because everyone  assumed someone else would answer),  or a dozen
of answers, which further  bother the 80% of people on  the list who know
and don't care.  In more "anarchic" lists (like REXXLIST  before I signed
off many years ago), a number of incorrect answers will be provided. This
will irritate people who know, and  they will provide the correct answer.
On a lucky day these answers will  be contested by the idiot of the month
(they  sign off  after a  few weeks  but you  get a  new one  every month
unfortunately) who just combined two errors in the same program statement
because he types  while looking at the keyboard and  doesn't check on the
screen that what he  actually typed is what he thought  he typed, and who
got a different  result from everyone else  and saw this as  a proof that
all the knowledgeable  people out there are  wrong and he will  be made a
hero for revealing their mistake. Then  20 people point out that he would
be right if he  had written '+', but he wrote '-' by  mistake. Well I may
be exaggerating a bit, but not as  much as you'd think. When this sort of
things happen, knowledgeable people sign  off and the blind start leading
the blind.
 
Fortunately the  lists tend to be  self-policing, as most of  the "abuse"
comes from the same people. I've seen  a question asked on monday by Joe,
get a comprehensive  answer, and then the exact same  question on tuesday
from Jack, who's been on the list for months. If Jack starts developing a
pattern, people start ignoring him and  little by little reality sinks in
:-)
 
  Eric