Overly brief answers (was Re: Terminal Server)

[Jerry McAllister]

> 
> Nico Meijer <nico.meijer at zonnet.nl> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Mike,
> > 
> > > Can FreeBSD act like Windows Terminal Server, i.e. remote access, multiple
> > > sessions?
> > 
> > Yes.
> 
> I wanted to start a brief discussion about these kinds of answers to 
> questions.
> 
> I've been seeing this quite a bit lately.  I don't know if it's just one 
> person,
> of if multiple folks have picked up on it.
> 
> <opinion>
> This is not an answer to the question.  It does not answer the question 
> and does
> not contribute to the OPs knowledge of FreeBSD, nor does it contribute to the
> list archives.  It's also a violation of the rule against "me too" answers as
> laid out in "How to Get the Best Results from FreeBSD-Questions".  It doesn't
> even serve to educate the OP on how to ask better questins.

on the issue of the _short_ answer;   In the case of this question, it is
probably obvious that the poster needed more useful information - at least
a pointer to some info.   Then, it looks bad to just give a smart alec yes
or whatever other less than useful reply.

But, some of these questions - is FreeBSD really free, etc get frustrating 
because it is obvious that the poster didn't even read the first page of 
the web site let alone try and look for an answer.  So, a few of the 
posted questions deserve a mere yes or no answer.
 - this from someone who could more often be accused of giving excessively
long answers to even simple questions...

////jerry

> 
> First off, there are actually two questions hidden in the post: "Can FreeBSD
> act as a WTS?", and "can FreeBSD provide the same services as WTS?"  Is "yes"
> your answer to both of them?  Because, if it is, I'd like to know which
> software allows it to function as a WTS, since my searches have not found any
> such software.
> 
> This leads to the implied question of "what software provides the capability"
> which (despite not being voice, directly) is pretty obvious.  You've totally
> ignored that question.  You could say that "technically, he didn't ask" but it
> boils down to just being rude.
> </opinion>
> 
> I'm curious as to whether this is only my opinion, or if others feel the same
> way.  I don't think answers like this reflect well on FreeBSD or the FreeBSD
> community.  Short answers like "see 'man foo'" are appropriate, as they impart
> some knowledge and tell the OP that his question is answered in the indicated
> documentation, but this doesn't follow that template.
> 
> I do feel that, althought Grog's document doesn't specifically chastise these
> types of answers, that they are _not_ in the "spirit" of that document, and do
> not serve the purpose of this mailing list.
> 
> -- 
> Bill Moran
> Potential Technologies
> http://www.potentialtech.com
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>