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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to