On Friday, January 15, 2021, Christophe Pettus <
xof@thebuild.com> wrote:
> On Jan 15, 2021, at 22:19, Hemil Ruparel <hemilruparel2002@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have no problems if there are one or two questions which are exactly the same. I give them the benefit of doubt. What I won't tolerate are entitled people who think we work for them for free and that they are entitled to receive and answer.
I suppose it would be rude to point out that PostgreSQL list style is to not top-post? I have to say, if you are going to be firm with people about etiquette...
If someone gets abusive about not receiving help (and it does happen, sadly), that's exactly the kind of thing the Code of Conduct was designed for. If they are seriously spamming the list, likewise.
For a lot of people, though, they just aren't familiar with list etiquette, do not have English as their first language and are not clear what is being asked of them, or just don't know the resources out there.
I would assume they are acting in good faith. If you politely point out resources to them and they get snappish, then it can become a CoC issue. Otherwise, I think that being generous in what we receive and accurate in what we reply, as with any protocol, is the right answer.
Agreed on all counts. It should take more than innocent subjective inconsideration to get a ban or even a formal warning. With respect to this flare up while heated and probably not flattering it has value and not worthy of censure. For me the status quo fits into “good enough to keep my attention elsewhere”. The areas I’d focus on, though, is site layout and content, but in a positive manner, not rules listings and policies; and also guidance and resources for “community defenders” on how constructively engage when this kind of “meta” discussion arises. As I’m not volunteering for the work this is just idle complaining and ideation on my part.
Oh, and an auto-responder instead of an FAQ...
David J.