On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 02:30:52AM -0500, Richard Owlett wrote: > On 7/27/25 7:53 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: > > Hi Richard,
[...] > > The confused reactions should be a giveaway to you that something might > > need adjustments on your part: > > Agreed. That prompted my post. The one specific idea I'd propose to you is to "blur your focus" a bit. Conveying information is as much about content as it is about presentation. If you go down your rabbit hole ("to make A I have to make B, for this I have to make C ...") and then come here and ask "how do I make Z"? you are facing many difficulties: - in that long path above, you may have selected one alternative, whereas people have selected others and know about Z'' or Z''' but not Z. You reduce your solution set - there might be a flaw in your path - people will have a hard time understanding why you want to "make Z". Humans, as we are, and the cognitive process as it is, if we can't "feel" your problem's shape, we'll have a hard time keeping all the facts you provided straight > > it is an iterative process. Be as patient > > with others as you wish them to be with you, then it'll eventually work > > out. > > > > A (cursory) description of your "whole" problem sometimes helps others > > to visualize what you're trying to do (and creates opportunities to > > find "lateral" solutions, a.k.a. stave off X-Y problems). > > I've also seen skew answers prompt a multi-sub-thread response in which a > reply explicitly answers my question ;} This is one weakness of those free-form mailing lists, but it makes them richer, too: that's why I try to change the Subject: line when going off a tangent. Mailing lists take some discipline to work well. Cheers -- t
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature