Jeremy McAnally
12/19/2006 1:52:00 PM
I think it's also important that we all realize that we use mailing
lists for different things. Newbies use it to get help; many of them
are programming for the first time and don't understand a lot of the
concepts (and Ruby has some that are mind-boggling if you aren't used
to thinking like an OO programmer).
Many of us want to use the list to discuss interesting things, things
that are "advanced," or bounce ideas off of another experienced
Rubyist.
This is why many times there will be "xxx-talk" (or "xxx-users") and
"xxx-newbie" lists. I think perhaps Ruby has reached that "critical
mass" point where this split is in order (even though i'm sure this
has been discussed a number of times and decided against). If it
means getting some of our best and brightest back on the list, then I
see it as necessary.
Though, many would probably argue that "no experienced programmer
would visit the newbie list." Who wants an answer from another
newbie, right? Perhaps we should setup a "n00b taskforce" to monitor
that list and answer questions; just a few people to check in every
day. I would be willing to do it, if a few others would help me out.
To make this whole thing effective, though, the residents of this list
would have to be stringent about telling people to "take it to the
newbies" if their question is something that belongs there.
Just a thought.
--Jeremy
P.S. - It would also be mildly entertaining to have an auto-answer FAQ
bot that parsed the language of a message and if it could decently
figure out what they're saying, post an answer pointing to a
(currently non-existent) Ruby FAQ...
On 12/19/06, Robert Dober <robert.dober@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/19/06, Jeremy Wells <jwells@servalsystems.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > Eric Hodel wrote:
> > > On Dec 18, 2006, at 18:50, Trans wrote:
> > >
> > >> seems like there's been a steady drop off in experienced ruby users on
> > >> the list. is it me or has there really been some sort of migration
> > >> away?
> > >
> > > In the back-channels I've heard the following reasons for why
> > > long-time readers of ruby-talk cut back:
> > >
> > > a) signal:noise ratio too low.
> > > b) belligerent newbies.
> > >
> > I think that it's not just newbies, but newbies asking insensible
> > questions, normally involving excel. There's also a lot of postings
> > along the lines of "I've written this code, can you write it better for
> > me" which is fair enough for an interesting bit of code, but normally
> > the response should be, without sounding rude, "read the documentation
> > or buy a ruby book". Newbies want answers often before working out what
> > the question should be. And I'd consider myself a newbie on the way to
> > intermedion, but I'd never post a question like "ruby.exe doesn't work
> > on my windows xp! tell me what to do!?", or from a couple of pages down
> > the list "I need to save an Excel Spreadsheet with Ruby. I used the Save
> > AND SaveAs methods..." (What is it with excel? I've got no particular
> > problem with it, but it seems to be a magnet for the ignorant).
> >
> > Jeremy
> >
> >
> Yup while whining I forgot to talk about the real reasons.
> You do have a good point, and maybe I am completely off but I still think a
> FAQ would get rid of some of the noise, there would be the classic themes
> * IDE
> * Slow or not slow
> * splash and some other very Rubyesque things
> * Meaning of #==, #equal? (yessss I am whining again)
> * What is true and what is not?
> * Receivers of messages as in x > 5
> NoMethodError: undefined method `>' for nil:NilClass,
> Q? But 5 is not nil, surely
> * Upcoming changes or at least links
> * Pitfalls like proc vs lambda
> * goto Rails, without being impolite, it should be a pointer not a "get out
> of here" ;)
>
> I do not have too much time and I do not think that I am qualified but
> maybe be just starting a FAQ somebody will hit it until it is a good one ( I
> know *some* stuff about Ruby after all), another idea is to include some
> really useful links, like where to look first in case of certain specific
> error categories and AGF, the Golden Rule for posting of course - like the
> old RTFM but politically correct ;)
> Ask Google First
>
> Just the same thoughts again.
>
> Robert
> --
> "The real romance is out ahead and yet to come. The computer revolution
> hasn't started yet. Don't be misled by the enormous flow of money into bad
> defacto standards for unsophisticated buyers using poor adaptations of
> incomplete ideas."
>
> - Alan Kay
>
>