Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 15:28:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: Eduardo Chappa <chappa AT math DOT washington DOT edu>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Moving cygwin discussions to Usenet? (e.g., alt.os.cygwin)
In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.5.2.20020930172951.00a6b8a8@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.49.99.0209301515380.20407-100000@goedel3.math.washington.edu>
References: <an9vjf$hhj$1 AT main DOT gmane DOT org> <200209301154 DOT g8UBssX27530 AT mailgate5 DOT cinetic DOT de>
 <20020930131716 DOT GD23881 AT redhat DOT com> <an9vjf$hhj$1 AT main DOT gmane DOT org>
 <5 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 5 DOT 2 DOT 20020930172951 DOT 00a6b8a8 AT mail DOT earthlink DOT net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

*** Jeremy Hetzler (jeremyhetzler AT earthlink DOT net) wrote today:

:) A group that does all the work to answer anyone's question, no matter
:) how obvious the answer or easy to find it is elsewhere, no matter that
:) it is the hundredth time it has been asked that week? Yes, that sounds
:) like a wonderful thing...for the people who are asking the questions.
:) But who's going to do all that work? Where you are going to find these
:) angels who want to spend their free time explaining "What's bash" over
:) and over and over to people who are too lazy to even try Google?

Dear Jeremy,

  I agree in some of the stuff you say. Answering the same question over
and over is tiresome. Right.

  However, you are making the assumption that the only type of questions
that people can ask in such a list is a basic question asked millions of
times before. I will have to disagree with you, there's no proof of that,
just an assumption from your part.

  Let me tell you how I see this. When I've supported Pine, I haven't
looked at the content of the question as much as I've looked at the value
of the answer. Just to give you an example, someone once asked me if Pine
supported justification of several levels of quotes. The answer at the
time was "no". If that person had not asked that question, I would have
never written a patch for Pine that implements such a feature. Same thing
about fancy thread interface in Pine4.44. If you believe that everything
is about the question, I believe that you are missing a lot. It's never
been about the question, but the answer, no matter how many times the
question has been asked before.

-- 
Eduardo
http://www.math.washington.edu/~chappa/pine/

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/