On being rude ...
 

Please be aware that the forum moderators have been paying attention to rude posts for the last few days. As always, we monitor threads that have the potential to blow up into flame wars - fortunately they are few and far between here.

As one mod mentioned, it's not a violation of the forum rules to be insufferable (actually, he used a little stronger word).

That doesn't mean we encourage inconsiderate behavior, be it of other users, sponsors or FIRST. But we will not automatically delete posts or ban users who are rude.

Thank you to everyone for your continued good efforts to keep CD a valuable resource for teams.

And we will continue to delete all those annoying sports streaming posts that somehow get past the forum filters ... sigh.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Being someone that writes direct posts, and since I had one in the last 24 hours, I'm going to go on a slight rant here. I'm willing to trade 6 years and a big handfull of dots in for this.

I see CD posters in cycles.

Hi, I'm Elizabeth Jane from 8081 and as a freshman roboteer (my grandfather always uses that word) I'm excited to be on Chief Delphi.

-- I seldom comment, I sometimes put a Hi, welcome to CD oh and this is how you search to find stuff you might find interesting.

I'm Colin and our team wants to know if when we mount the lasers on the sharks, do they need to point forward.
-- I assume that they have read the rules so will put out a "Colin, when you skipped over reading rule R.3.5.6.4.2, you'll see that it says, no sharks, only groupers and the lasers must point forward. (Clearly a water game year). My response is a little strong, and pushes the edge. But, if Colin had read the rules he wouldn't be posting this.

I'm Richard and want to know if we can solder connectors. (Simple tech question)
-- Yes you can, but there are about a dozen people that will say no. Use the search function to find out why.

As I look at all these, questions, I look at the year and their position. As "long time" CD members in "Teacher/Mentor" roles, I start assuming that they have been present for discussions. I also assume that Mentors are clueful and above average intelligence.

So I assume they know how FIRST works. How events are run, how finances work, where the money goes, etc. I assume that teams in the ~1000 range and less remember Dewalt Drill motors and Fisher Price Motors and Small Parts. And they explain now that we have Andy and Mark giving up lives to ship parts and how Paul uses cattle prods to get JVN and Aren to design parts in Texas and a guy with just initials for a name on the west coast is doing drives. And while I give time to this to spread to the #4000 teams and higher that this is the Golden Age", I expect the elders to know this and spread this.

So when I post:
It's to pass this history on, making sure that people remember you really don't get much for your $5K. You actually get zero, it all goes to FIRST.

This is an early message in the annual cycle. You can use the search function to see that I post this reminder on a regular basis.

But yet we see this from a 8 year mentor

Sigh, so much wrong here. So I responded

People have send me notes about this along with red dots and green dots.

Red dot's have said I should be nicer. I was, the original note was much harsher, send me a pnote to see the exact text. I'm not trying to scare new roboteers off. But this isn't RobotBook were you can post anything. It's Chief Delphi where smart roboteers post questions that other smart roboteers and mentors take time to answer.

I got green dot's and emails saying thanks. One said they'd like to see a spotlight of "do some research before you post and look like an idiot." /sigh

TL;DR (Too long, didn't read.) That. Is. A. Problem. We write posts, with details, thoughts and backgrounds. Necessary Nuances for Later. While the big transit bus running over you is an issue, the nuances are what makes your life run better.

Back to Gary's post. Sorry that I was rude, but I'm not going to stop. I'll still will be nice to people that are new, but people that know better will collect pointed remarks. (Actually people that know better never post stupid stuff to start).

Bottom line, if you are new, I'll help you. If you ask something you should know, I'll teach you. Sometimes the lesson is "Wax on / Wax off". Other times it "Ouch, that ruler really stings".

Re: On being rude ...
 

Yes and yes. I could not agree more

Re: On being rude ...
 

Is anyone concerned that rude, sarcastic, or otherwise off-putting responses may drive students away from CD? I know I've had students tell me they avoid CD because "everyone is mean" after they've lurked for a bit...

Re: On being rude ...
 

But Gary, the newest one is movie streaming posts. :rolleyes:

Foster, I agree that older mentors on older teams generally have a long history with FIRST. Though, I may remember the Fisher-Prices, but I don't remember drill motors and Small Parts. (But heck, current team members barely recognize the name "Overdrive")

There was a satirical video by Tom Scott (on YouTube) I liked that talked about "the speed of outrage", and how the Internet makes it easy to become very passionate one way or the other very quickly. Maybe we should all relax a little on some things.

Re: On being rude ...
 

That is true.

One thing that I try to do--no matter how hot under the collar I'm getting--is to maintain a neutral tone, possibly a little bit "icy" if the situation actually warrants it. It's possible to convey that you're annoyed without sounding really angry--but it takes some thought and some careful word choice, which can calm you down.

That's not to say that I'm always successful.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I'm a student, and I've found CD to be helpful and relatively nice compared to the rest of the internet :p. It's a learning experience; If I've made a mistake, I want to know. If justified rudeness will make CD run more efficiently, I'm all for it. If people do happen to be mean, it's also a learning experience to grow a thick skin and see beyond the rudeness to understand what they're trying to convey.

Besides, what do you mean "everyone is mean"? I don't see it.

Re: On being rude ...
 

On the one hand, Yes, definitely.
On the other hand, No, not so much.

Welcome to Earth.

Everyone on CD is not mean. It's not even close.

Those students need to learn that they are mistaken; and need to learn how to use a resource like CD effectively and efficiently. When I get an opportunity to teach those skills, I try to use it. I'm guessing that you also do that.

Blake

Re: On being rude ...
 

I'm a student, and I've found CD to be pretty okay. But I think any comments you'll get from students on here are going to be pretty biased... My general opinion is that I know I'm not perfect, and I'd rather people tell me to my face when I've messed up than try to pretend I didn't.

For me, the intimidating thing about CD is not the tone of posters, but the fact that there are literally people here who've done FRC longer than I've been alive. For me, and I think for most of my friends, the main reason we don't post or only semi-actively post is because we just don't feel like we have that much to contribute.

I'd argue it's not the pure language of "attackers"--there are many, many places on the internet where people have no qualms about blatantly insulting you, but CD isn't once of them--but rather how personal attacks can seem. Here, members respond to you, not to some anonymous account. This can be great or terrible depending on your experience.

I try to post the same way I'd talk in person. It's not that I don't say how I feel; I just consider how I'm phrasing it. If I wouldn't say it to your face, I'm not going to post it online. There are people who are way more direct than me, and their posts reflect that. That's fine with me. Everyone is different.

I think it's just important to remember that behind the text are people.

All that said, CD can still be a scary place to start posting in. While they might be "just dots," your and your team's reputation is affected by what you say on here. When I encourage rookies (and veterans) to read/post on CD, I accompany it with a list of things to watch out for. Then I tell them to learn as they go...as I've been doing.

Re: On being rude ...
 

The only problem as a student posting here is I find people are really quick to throw red dots at you if they disagree. I even had someone red me for a quote because they didn't like it...

It does stop me from posting responses with the fear that it could hurt my reputation furthermore hurting my teams.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I find that people are quick to ignore red dots if you post constructive things.

Re: On being rude ...
 

In my experience, the Robotics Team tends to attract a ... special kind of human. Both students and mentors tend to be outliers on the social spectrum, in many ways, myself certainly included.

In some posts I have seen over the years, the authors seem to be individuals who, shall we say, lack social grace.

Whether this is by nature or nurture, I am not qualified to comment.

But it seems to me these are the ones who are most often 'attacked'.

If you as a reader feel somebody is being unnecessarily rude, it may be for different reasons. It may be because
1)the individual is, in fact, a jerk;
2)the individual is full of anonymous Internet bravado;
3)the individual is operating off faulty premise or bias;
4)the individual is very passionate about the subject;
5)the individual doesn't realize s/he is being rude and does not know any better;
6)the individual doesn't realize s/he is being rude and can't help it.

While any of these six may be true, they all should be treated differently. And as it is difficult to tell through black text on a white background, I would counsel my colleagues to not jump directly to conclusion 1).

Re: On being rude ...
 

Ohh, it's true. That being said, "they're just dots". I got a few for my story about 900 last season, not because they didn't like me, nor because they had a problem with my post, but because they didn't like how far we took the whole cheesecaking business. I mean, I guess that's their prerogative but it was just silly to me.

I will say that it's not obvious how to report abusive behavior... granted, it's not a secret either (warning button on the far right of most posts). I'm still not sure how to report a user for a PM though.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I just hope you never figure out how to report someone for bullying...

I'll admit, I'm one to give neg rep for someone getting personal or pushing the acceptable limits. Sometimes things can come off harsher than they were intended and a reminder to check what we write can be helpful. I've edited many a post after clicking Submit Reply that I realized were a bit tougher than they should be.

Re: On being rude ...
 

While I would agree that usually someone on teams with numbers lower than 1000 would remember this stuff, we only have one mentor on the team who remembers Dewalts. Even though we have a relatively low number, most of our mentors have joined in the past few years and don't know as much about the way FIRST works now or used to work. It is important to look at how long they have been around, not how long the team has been around. That being said, I completely agree with everything else you said.

Re: On being rude ...
 

The problem here is that ChiefDelphi is a valuable place for some information and sometimes people know more about ChiefDelphi than they know about FIRST's own forums.

However with sheer traffic alone there comes risk. I have some Internet forums and whenever you run a forum you have to cut a careful path between: mild intolerance (not legal protected class intolerance), bad timing, misunderstood context, confusion and actual malicious intent.

There have been a number of times over my 20 or so years with FIRST when I think a very small number of posters on ChiefDelphi had malicious intent. They didn't just want to shut down the idea - they wanted to shut a person down and sometimes were not very subtle about it.

I applaud the effort to try to stop rudeness but a good test for malicious intent is whether the goal is to massively humiliate and then isolate (as in discourage any future contribution to either ChiefDelphi or FIRST). If something becomes clearly about those 2 outcomes it's gone too far. It is not a crime to be wrong, misunderstood, or out of context. We would all prefer it not happen but ineffective communication is actually a core part of the human experience. Like any part of the human experience you can work on the behavior in a positive way or you can hurt someone with it.

Oh and by the way - if you are reaching out to someone's team suggesting they shut up or be removed from FIRST. You're probably going way too far. I can forgive that because I am an adult - to a point.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Just because your rookie year was a ways back doesn't mean that you know about everything. If a business side mentor were to ask about gear ratios, or a mechanical mentor asked about programming they should get good answers, even though they've been involved with FRC for many years. I"m presuming that the question would not be something like and even if it is, the best response is to ask the basic questions needed to figure this out, and provide a link to the JVN calculator spreadsheet. And maybe report that you think an account was hacked.

Here's a sixteen second movie clip to summarize.

Re: On being rude ...
 

This is by far the best advice you'll find regarding online etiquette. It's something everyone should be mindful when interacting with others online; this goes for message boards like this one, social media, and even texting/IM. It goes a long way towards effective and mature communication. Don't use distance/anonymity as a shield.

Re: On being rude ...
 

As a student I can attest to the notion that chiefdelphi and be scary. With so many mentors that all seem to have been around "forever" it can be intimidating to ask question, even ones of a complex technical aspect, due to the fear that you will get negative rep because of your ignorance. Even after being in FRC for four years it is still a worry.

Some say that they are "just dots" and that is true from a pure factual perspective. However they are also a nice thing to have. For newer members of the community it is an affirmations going in the right direction with the green dots, but a slap in the face with red. Haven gotten both I can tell you that with red dots it would have been nice if they PMed me first and gave me a chance to fix something before dropping those dots.

Re: On being rude ...
 

People flat-out shouldn't post answers or feedback to technical things rudely or give negative rep for ignorance... There's just no need for it and it's counter-productive to a great environment for learning and inspiring.

When other people make strongly-worded posts that insult or defame other teams, individuals, companies, etc., a response should productive and can be firm and direct, but still shouldn't be demeaning or rude. A PM and perhaps some negative rep may be in order, but everything you do should be full of Gracious Professionalism. Sugar-coating and coddling is not GP, but on the other hand, demeaning someone for holding an opinion or being unaware/ignorant also is not GP...

Since I think it's a good case study/benchmark...

I think Foster's post here is right on the edge between an altogether great rebuke and something demeaning. I certainly wouldn't give negative rep for it (as some very good information is given) and I probably wouldn't give positive rep, as I do think the 3rd line and particularly the last line are crossing over into the realm of 'demeaning' when they'd probably be more productive if they were softened slightly.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I have always viewed CD as a place to get real, honest answers. If you ask a "bad" question, whether it be something that offends people or that has been asked a million times before, yes, you will probably get some "mean" responses, but that is to be expected. You would probably get the same type of responses from people on your team if you asked them the same question in person, so don't expect it to be any different just because you ask it online. As a general rule of thumb, on my team, we talk about the questions we may have with each other before asking on CD, just to make sure that it is a valid question and that we have done a quick google search and checked our other resources first. Once you have posted something, you have to realize that it is now public for everyone to see, and even though you may get some "bad" or "rude" responses, if you ask a legitimate questions, you will get mainly legitimate responses in return.

Re: On being rude ...
 

This is my feeling on the subject also. Well said Nathan.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I red dotted Foster's post, and I'd do it again to another individual who posted in the same fashion.

Was there useful information in there? Sure (though some of it was only half-true).
Was it also condescending and needlessly hostile? Absolutely.

Nothing in the post he was responded to warranted him insulting that poster. There are very seldom reasons to call someone an idiot on Chief Delphi (or imply they are an idiot, as Foster did). Certainly not expressing a viewpoint in the reasonable fashion the poster he was responding to did. It's fine to lay out the difference in perspective, it's not fine to attack someone for it.

To expand upon the wisdom of [paraphrasing] not saying stuff on Chief Delphi you wouldn't say to their face, you have to be even more selective on internet than you would be in person. I try to avoid posting anything here I wouldn't be comfortable e-mailing to my coworkers or boss. Any non-verbal cues you may give in person to convey the message you want are lost over the internet. You have to assume anything you write will be interpreted in the worst way possible. Even if you didn't mean to offend, if there's a possibility that your post can offend, it likely will. The rapport you have with another poster will not carry over to the general public, and considering you're posting on a public forum, think twice about leaning on that rapport to send the message you want. There are those out there who may take the wrong message away from your post.

I have a real problem with the groupthink and shutdown posts that get lobbed about here. "FIRST lifers" often likes to pile on to people espousing a particular viewpoint. In some cases (such as when a poster is bullying another team), it's warranted. However, it frequently isn't. It's not only applicable to Chief Delphi (it's worse on Facebook and elsewhere), but it's very present here. Instead of fostering a discussion to illuminate the misguided, people simply shutdown conversation and belittle those they disagree with. Posting a dead horse emoticon is not a sufficient answer to a question. Snidely saying another poster needs to use the search function or read the manual is not an inclusive approach.

Re: On being rude ...
 

remember when communicating through text online, you no longer have other clues like visual hints, tone of voice, body language, etc... and neither does the other person get those clues from you (emoticons don't cut it).

In other ways it is easier to communicate via text online as you have time to craft and edit a good response.

Bottom line, it is more difficult to communicate via text online than face to face. Be aware of what you are posting and a lot of frustration can be avoided.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Not to counter, but to amplify: when posting online, especially on a site such as CD where your post is likely to be read by third parties, and not just this week, but as a result of a search, it is helpful to provide context with your post, especially if it is not already in the thread. For example:
So here, you have told both the OP and readers in 2020 why you thought 100 pounds was a good design lift. This is necessary in order to make intelligent use of the information; perhaps OP was only making three-stacks, or perhaps was planning to build and lift two stacks at the same time. For the next game requiring a lift, the load may be less than one pound (an inner tube, pool noodle, or small ball) or rather heavier (a mobile goal or a robot). OBTW, it is far easier to read rudeness into the second post than the first.


And also, back to the main topic:
This is one of the nice things about posting on line. If you are in doubt, use the Preview Post button. Walk away. Come back and re-read it. Edit it. Remember that the reader cannot hear the inflection in your voice (though you may be able to simulate it with an emoji). Repeat until you either delete it or decide that it's worthy to post.

I'll confess here that I'm the one who proposed a highlight post:
Note that Foster did not say that the poster was an idiot, but that by making uninformed inflammatory statements, poster looked like an idiot. While that particular sentence would have been more appropriate in a PM than a post, it was spot-on. I recommended it as a spotlight post not to call out the poster, but because it is a bit of wisdom that people should see every once in a while.

I do not give rep very often (12 times so far, all positive), but if I were giving negative rep for that exchange, it would be for ignorantly defaming our generous sponsors rather than correcting the score with a bit of stern advice calling Foster, Kate Pilotte, and by extension, the good folks at AndyMark a pack of liars. (If #2 means anything else, it's poorly written, indeed!) IMO, calling someone a liar (especially without evidence) is far ruder than anything Foster did in defense.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Folks,

Along with paying attention to LL's advice, let's not go overboard and label any/all short simple replies that tell people to search first, or to read the manual as "snide". I wouldn't want anyone to take away from LL's post that all replies of that ilk are automatically snide.

Searching (multiple places, including the manuals) before wasting others' time is a valuable STEM skill people need to use.

Wasting the time of a large number of readers, plus distracting the few who reply from topics containing non-trivial questions, is definitely rude.

Posters who rudely do make the mistake of assuming CD is a replacement for doing their own fundamental preparation before they interject, do need to be steered (with civility) onto a better path. That better path will accelerate converting their STEM inspiration into STEM results.

While I realize that this form of rudeness is often the result of bad habits picked up elsewhere, and is (IMO) almost never a form of intentional selfishness, that doesn't mean it isn't both rude, and worthy of feedback/corection.

Blake

Re: On being rude ...
 

[quote=gblake;1504737]If you post anything about there being a search function or reading the manual without attempting to answer the question you are being rude.

The correct way to answer is to provide them the information and where you found it and remind them to check the manual or use the search function.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Thank you for pointing out several reasons why *readers* should not assume rudeness when they read a post that could easily be interpreted as the friendly ribbing that occurs all the time in STEM and other conversations.

Readers have a duty to hold up their end of the online-communication-can-be-difficult bargain too.

I sometimes worry that an over-emphasis on the writer side of the equation is a form of bullying by folks who are intolerant of diversity. Remembering the points you made can help us all avoid falling into that trap. Thanks again for pointing out the pitfalls writers, and *readers*, can fall into.

Blake

Re: On being rude ...
 

I believe you are mistaken, and that your blanket assertion is wrong.

YMMV.

I think our disagreement is a form of respectful diversity that should not be suppressed.

Blake

Re: On being rude ...
 

You will never have to worry about me being rude on Chief Delphi ever again because my head just exploded from reading some posts on this thread, I have died, and this was a prerecorded message.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Agreed. Communication through writing is a difficult skill and is definitely not my forte. To me, it's not simply a matter of being rude or polite - it's a matter of being professional.

Before you respond, would you answer your client's questions that way?

Before asking for technical advice, have you properly worded your request?

David

Re: On being rude ...
 

I agree that posting "use the search" or "read the manual" by itself is rude. And I also think it is lazy to ask questions without doing the slightest bit of research. It's possible to believe both of those things simultaneously if you think it makes sense to be considerate to other people.

I think the bullying comes in when somebody ends up on the "wrong" end of hot button issues, even if they are constructive about it. Don't be "wrong" about one of those topics around here, or a bunch of people are gonna get crabby in a hurry.

Re: On being rude ...
 

My thoughts on the subject:

1. I think rudeness and snappy comebacks are becoming the norm in society. Ever watch a TV sitcom from 20, 30, 40 years ago and think "this is boring" or when someone says a line that, at the time was considered snappy, you think "... that's not funny"?

Shows like the Simpsons were one time seen as edgy and subversive but that brought along a host of copycats and as those speech patterns became the norm in our schoolyards and workplaces, along came a host of new shows that stepped it up a notch to be edgier and funnier. Repeat over and over.

Now we have a generation of people who think this is just the way everyone talks. And, they're right.

2. In this age of social media, people REALLY like their likes. I had a teenager I know come up to me and complain "you comment on my Instagram posts... but you never like them." He was serious! To me it's just a "like" or a dot or fave but for this connected generation it is an important piece of validation, for better or for worse.

I heard that now that Twitter has switched from "favourite" to "like" the usage of the new button has already increased 6%. People like their hearts.

3. Writing a clever post that subtly puts someone down can be fun, but like others have mentioned, these posts will be here "forever". I regularly Google for questions and read CD threads from years back. Your future potential sponsor may be doing the same. Your future students may be too! (To anyone from 2706 that sees this - hi :D ) Always ask "is this how I want the world to forever remember me?"

If you know what to search for you can find things I posted to Usenet 20+ years ago. Posts that make me cringe.

4. Foster's post was very good, very informative, and contained the historical information needed to add perspective to the discussion. Our team is new so I'm learning about FIRST Choice and AndyMark's contribution to FRC as we go, so I appreciated his post (and that whole thread, really). I think it was that last line, that closing "zinger", that everyone got up in arms about. Take away that last line and everything would have been just fine.

Re: On being rude ...
 

A) All readers should remember that I wrote (pertaining to this subtopic) that posters should be steered civilly onto a better path.

B) I'm sincerely curious why you chose to label the hypothetical OP as "lazy" and the hypothetical responder as "rude". Aren't they both lazy? Or both rude? What justifies painting them with different brushes?

Blake

Re: On being rude ...
 

That is a problem with any online community. Over time, unwritten rules of behavior develop and when new members arrive, they are held to standards that they don't understand.

It is easy to be blindsided by a terse response to a question that you thought was pertinent but within the community has been answered many times over.

It's easy as a long time community member to forget what it's like to not know the community's rules. CD does a pretty good job informing new users with the sticky posts but as an "older user" it's my responsibility to be gentle with anyone who has a post count under 10 and it's important for the new members to understand that lurking an learning the community before posting is a smart idea.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Asking for an answer to a question without searching or consulting the manual before hand can be rude or lazy. But a rude/lazy post doesn't mean you have to give them a rude/lazy reply.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Sometimes we forget that we belong to a particular culture that other people aren't familiar with yet. That can be a good thing or a bad thing. I used Windows PCs for years before I bought my first Mac. I found a large Mac forum and posted a question that went something like "In Windows I could do ___ and that was really handy, how do I do this on a Mac?" EVERY answer I got was a condescending variation of "we don't do that around here". Multiple people tried to tell me why I was doing it wrong, and if I would only adapt my ways to Apple's ways and see the light, I would be happier. At least one person said "if that's what you want then go back to Windows". Not a friendly community at all -- until you conform to their culture. But I think we all sometimes send that kind of message, whether we intend to or not.

Re: On being rude ...
 

There's a difference between being direct and being unpleasant. I know that I certainly have learned a lot about where the line between the two falls over the past few years, and I certainly have lots more to learn (as do most people, I think).

The key, I think, is to remember that no matter how much you disagree with someone else, they likely are posting in good faith and share many of the values you do. One can disagree strongly without being alienating if they keep this in mind. The purpose of a forum is for honest discourse for the betterment of all involved - if we all agreed about everything, there would be nothing to discuss. The exchange of ideas can only remain productive if both sides maintain the willingness to critically evaluate their own views in light of what other people say - when someone feels attacked, that willingness tends to evaporate, and the discussion ceases to be useful (and, often, enjoyable).

One habit I have tried to get into is intentionally softening my posts before I click "submit." Remove superlatives, qualify opinions, and the like. It can go a long way towards keeping a discussion productive.

Re: On being rude ...
 

QFT!

Re: On being rude ...
 

For the record, I don't consider replies "Read the manual, the answer you want is in there, along with related important information."; or even the occasional "Read the manual." to be rude or lazy.

And, unless a close-enough-for-it-to-be-OK relationship between the two people exists outside of the topic at hand, I do consider "Read the manual, dipstick." to be rude.

With this in mind, I 100% agree with LL.

YMMV

Blake

Re: On being rude ...
 

If someone asked you how to spell a common word would you respond with "Read the dictionary!"?

Anything to help with where in the manual the information might be is better than nothing. I you can't provide any help then don't respond.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Unabashedly toss them into the relatively-tepid boiling cauldron of CD debate - it will help melt the 26,000 layers of bubble wrap applied by others to "protect" them from processing opposing viewpoints and interacting with the "scary" world at large. :)

Re: On being rude ...
 

Yes, I'd prefer an answer like "Have a look at [R18], that should give you the answer you're looking for."

Bonus points for forum members who can quote what rule it is without looking it up :D

Re: On being rude ...
 

+1

Re: On being rude ...
 

A) Yes, I have. Some people need to learn to use a dictionary, or other methods, when those are handy. Other times I have helped them spell the word (or at least helped them guess).

Often the difference is how much time I have to devote to their problem. When I say "Look it up." I'm letting them know, I am under some sort of deadline pressure, and I am efficiently pointing them in the direction of success. Other times I welcome a chat. The recipient (or the reader) needs to remember that both circumstances are possibilities, and not automatically get in a huff if they receive the short answer.

B) Step one is to read, and/or search the/a manual; and telling a person the answer they want *is* in the manual, and not in Q&A, or Frank's Blog, or ... is supplying help. Once you, as a questioner learn/accept that you have an obligation (as the person who wants the favor) to accomplish step one, then step two can be asking for help with search terms to use, or with narrowing down what section(s) to read, or ...

A short "Read the XYZ manual." reply is telling the person asking the question exactly what step one of the solution is, and allows them to return to ask more questions after they have accomplished step one.

If someone else posts a more complete answer (because they like doing other people's homework, or happen to have memorized a section/rule that is pertinent, or simply because they have spare time that they want to use in that way); good for them! But, I disagree that the shorter answer is rude. And, IMO many of the longer answers (often) reinforce a bad habit.

YMMV

Blake

Re: On being rude ...
 

Blake,

If someone shot you an e-mail or PM with such a question, sure, respond in a short fashion according to your own time limits.

However, this is a public forum. If you don't have time to post more than "read the manual," you should probably simply let someone else respond to the question.

Re: On being rude ...
 

One thing that IMO needs to be improved is the search itself on chief delphi. There is SO MUCH information that is already available here that's basically impossible for peoples with little experience on the site to access. The search is obtuse to use, the link to it is in a weird part of the page (nearly every other forum I've been on has a searchbar in the sidebar, if you don't know it's there you can easily overlook it) and even if you find and use it reasonably well it's still pretty unlikely to be that helpful. It doesn't help that there are differing opinions on various topics. The FAQ could also use an update/streamline.

Don't be too critical of peoples who can't find what they're looking for.

IMO lazy questions shouldn't have much effort put into answering them. Be relatively courteous but make sure that laziness isn't encouraged, point peoples to where they can find the info, don't just give it to them. I don't agree with the idea that we should be entirely professional. If peoples don't spend the effort to be professional with us I don't think they deserve it from us either.

A reminder: "Giving negative reputation because you don't agree with what was said is not an appropriate use of the reputation system." quoted from the FAQ.

Every forum I've been on has that policy and also has peoples who forget it (myself included). IMO, Lil' Lavery should not have red dotted foster for this reason (he's definitely not the only one).

Re: On being rude ...
 

This is exactly why we give all of our students the homework of reading the manual ASAP and definitely before the end of week 1. It reinforces a habit of doing what you can to find information out for yourself before asking for help.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I didn't neg rep Foster because I disagree with Foster. I neg repped Foster because of the tone of Fosters' response.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I actually disagree with you here. Sean used rep exactly how it should have been used. He didn't disagree with what was said, but how it was said.

An incorrect usage would be if I said 2363 was the best team in FRC and you gave me neg rep because I'm wrong.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Neg rep given for pompousness

Re: On being rude ...
 

Someone else likely will. Until they do, the person asking the question will know that the answer they want is in whatever manual is mentioned in the short answer.

That person asking the question can also assume that the person who wrote the short reply is either busy (but still wanted to help), or is teaching them what others have surely already tried to teach them about asking good questions, or is rude.

Why assume "rude"? What gives anyone the justification to apply a blanket label of "that came from someone rude." to a short reply?

Why tell people who are willing to take the time to supply a short, useful answer, that their attempt to help isn't needed/allowed?

Answering my own questions, I know that I get irritated by people who fail to do their own homework/prep, and whose sloppy questions waste other people's time. And, the more often it occurs the more irritated I get. And the more irritated I get, the greater the chance I will be rude.

But, that does not mean that a short "Read the XYZ manual." isn't the best help someone could offer at the moment, or that it doesn't explicitly and implicitly contain a valuable, practical lesson for someone learning how to ask good questions. Absent evidence, I believe it would be rude to think otherwise.

YMMV

Blake

Re: On being rude ...
 

Folks,

The "Read the manual" subtopic here, is one I'm going to try to pull out of.

If what I have written so far about avoiding placing an asymmetric burden on writers, and about applying "rudeness" yardsticks carefully and symmetrically, isn't persuasive, writing more probably won't change opinions.

I'm not trying to get in the "last word" on "RTM" (other folks may do that if they like), but I am curious if there is anything else related to this thread's original thesis that anyone wants to discuss? What are some other rabbit holes to dive down?

Blake

Re: On being rude ...
 

Here's one: Before we post a response, we should try evaluate why we are posting it.

In my experience, the intent of a (non-questioning) post can be (very loosely) generalized to one of three categories:

1) Discussion
2) Debate
3) Rant

I mean something fairly specific by each of these words, which I will explain here:

A "discussion" post in one made in good faith for the purpose of exchanging information with another participant in the thread. If there is disagreement, the goal is to present your view in a way that the party you disagree with can understand and might reflect on and change his own. By the same ticket, doing this requires that you be willing to read other people's posts and reflect honestly on your own position.

A "debate" post is one made where the goal is no longer to communicate with or persuade the person you are addressing, but rather to convince any other readers that you are correct and he is not. The difference between a discussion and a debate is largely one of audience - in a discussion, you are primarily speaking to the person with whom you are discussing. In a debate, you are speaking to convince an external audience. Usually, once you cross the threshold from discussion to debate, a lot of good faith is lost and honest exchange of ideas ceases. This is usually where people tend to wall off and get defensive, and the thread turns sour. Debates, by nature, tend to become rude - when convincing an external audience, it rates to discredit your opponent.

A "rant" is where you are no longer arguing with the other person, or even to convince an audience - the only audience left is yourself. Rants are posted purely for the author to read his own post and feel justified in his own belief. All possible productivity is gone, and the only real end of such posts is alienation of others.

In the vast majority of cases, I believe that the goal of posting on a forum should be discussion. Rarely, when a person both shows that they are not interested in honest exchange of ideas and is posting information that one considers harmful, debate can be warranted. Rants are always counterproductive.

A lot of rudeness (perceived or otherwise), I think, is the result of people posting in a manner appropriate for debate (or ranting) and not for discussion. I know for a fact that I've been guilty of my fair share of this.

Edit: Changed wording to avoid potential misunderstanding.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Every now and then, I find it necessary to be rude.

How's that for a rabbit hole?

Re: On being rude ...
 

It is really easy to think something is a rant if you merely assume the other person is that shallow and that they have no audience. Thing about it is this is also a dismissive. If one really thinks that something is a rant then it has no risk because anyone that follows it will not achieve anything. Realistically assuming out of billions of people who could read a public forum I seriously doubt you will find too many things with no audience or people that feel in some way similar.

I can certainly see how someone can devalue another person by accusing them of 'ranting'. In a real way it's an attack on the person not the point.

Re: On being rude ...
 

As I understand it, fosters' position was you are justified in being rude(to an extent) in certain situations. He gave examples of what he does. He gave an example of himself being quite rude.

His analysis and explanation was not rude, it was constructive and contributed to the discussion, it just presented a viewpoint that being rude is sometimes justified and used an example.

This is how I see it and at this point I'm probably being more pedantic than necessary.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I believe he is talking about Foster's original post from another thread. Not Foster's analysis of his own post.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I'm sorry, I may not have been sufficiently clear:

I posted that categorization because I think it is a useful tool for people to reflect on their own posting habits (it has certainly been for me), not so much to judge the posting habits of others. I would be lying if I said I had never ranted on Chief Delphi. I suspect it is the same for other people, which is why I posted that, but you are completely correct in that it would be very poor form to claim that someone else was ranting in lieu of an actual response, and it is not what I am advocating.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I believe a leadership skill does apply here and I mean absolutely no disrespect to Foster. So much of what as contributed was of value, but unfortunately, the thing getting the most attention is a small fraction of it.

I suspect that wasn't the goal and I know people fall into this communications trap all the time (I myself fall into it). I am not writing that the ends justify the means, but in this case this is turning the burden of the reader to not inflate this detail into the burden of the writer. The question is if we filter off the distraction are we hurting the value of the message for the writer?

I suppose the risk from this extra sensational detail is high because Foster is presumed to be arguing from authority. However everyone is human. Authority doesn't make anyone perfect. I do not think Foster intended any harm here. On the other hand the community has apparently decided on some improvement so Foster is caught in that shift.

Re: On being rude ...
 

As notmattlythgoe mentioned, I did not give Foster's post in this thread a red dot. I gave his post in another thread (the one that Foster quoted and that was brought up in the couple posts leading up to mine) the red dot.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Something tells me you read that sentence wrong... Or you're kidding and I have a terrible sense of humor

Anyway,

This entire thread just screams "welcome to the internet." The fact that there is a wall of pixels between you and the other people in the conversation makes it a lot easier to be rude in a situation where you normally wouldn't. I'd say there's definitely some toxic posters on CD, and I'm sure that some of the people who I think are toxic think I'm toxic. However, the level of toxicity on here is way better than almost any other social media I've seen. (It even stands out among FIRST social media, who else remembers FRC Confessions?)

Toxic posters aren't necessarily toxic people. It's the internet, don't get mad.

Re: On being rude ...
 

It was a joke.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I think it really depends on the consequences of people being toxic. If that targeted person is forced out of FIRST, or worse, then yes someone shouldn't be happy about it.

Luckily I think most people can handle some toxic behavior within limits.
Not sure we should encourage people to look for the limits but one could interpret the statement above in that way.

(I am going away from this topic for a while - I can respond on forums much more quickly than many other people and I
would rather let this topic develop in my absence than make it seem like people can't get post in edgewise.)

Re: On being rude ...
 

I think he was kidding. Neg rep given for terrible sense of humor (get it?)

You've summarized one of my life rules: the internet makes people jerks.

CD is still the internet.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Sometimes they just jump in the boat.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Re: On being rude ...
 

Agreed. No one should be forced out of FIRST or any other CD-related activity by someone toxic.

Agreed. If there is a malicious, misguided, or clueless situation that might cause someone to be forced out of ___, then someone (several someones, including me) shouldn't be happy about it.

And I'll add this opinion. Responses that focused exclusively on a "toxic" author would be dangerously incomplete. Step one for me is helping readers embrace that they should never cede that much authority to anyone else.

Blake

Re: On being rude ...
 

Many things on CD would be much better if everyone thought before they posted.

Think about who you're writing about. Why you're complaining. Why you're accusing them of something.
Think about who you're responding to. Why they think that way. What you could teach them.
Think about how your post is going to be interpreted.
Think if this something you'd be willing to say in person.
Think if this is how you want people to see you and your team.

Think, then post.


Disagreements are not bad. The way people disagree can be.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Ah, I was mistaken.

Re: On being rude ...
 

And ...
Read, then think.

I'm still beating my drum - It's not a one-way street.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Unfortunately it is a one-way street. You as the writer cannot control how your reader is going to interpret what you write. But you can do the best you can to not give them the option to interpret it as rude.

In my opinion it is rarely going to work to "hope for the best" from the reader.

Re: On being rude ...
 

Sure, I can see your point there. Of course, the hypothetical OP might also simply lack the requisite subject knowledge or searching proficiency to come up with decent search terms. I suspect that's pretty common in light of the fact that a lot of people are pretty impatient, and it's faster to use a search engine than to wait for a human to respond. So I shouldn't imply that being lazy/rude is the only explanation for people who post questions that would seem pretty easy to look up.

For anybody who wants to be a helpful forum poster but also doesn't want to see the place clogged up with the same easily answered questions all the time, I think it makes the most sense to answer the question and also point out that you can find it in a search in the same reply.

Anybody who doesn't have time to provide an answer to a question could save even more of their time by not replying with a "go look it up."

Re: On being rude ...
 

I think what you are saying can easily be turned on its head with a result of still being perfectly valid. I'll try.

The reader is the only one in control of how they react to what I write. Because the potential readers are so diverse, it's impractical, if not impossible to adjust my writing style, and the opinions I express, to satisfy them all. Some of them, "Yes". Many of them, "Hopefully Yes". All of them, "No".

So, I should write what I mean; mean what I write; be happy to have my Grandmothers read what I write; be delighted to explain my meaning if a reader politely asks me for more information; and let the haters hate, if they want to spend their time that way.

In my opinion, it is rarely going to work to be blown about in the wind by the attitudes of everyone who might read what I write (Not that you were advocating that - However, it's the strong way to express one opposing viewpoint).

Blake

PS: I don't think of this as an an either-or topic. There are other useful perspectives/viewpoints. What I wrote above is simply an attempt to show that at least one valid counter-argument does exist.

PPS: I presume that this thread is evidence that I do care about the opinions of many/most people who read what I write, here and elsewhere; and that I try to express myself politely; even though I know it's very unlikely that every reader and I will land on the same page at the end of the discussion. What some consider polite, others will consider rude. No amount of finger wagging by me will change that, so instead I ask both readers and writers to search for charitable, middle-ground interpretations and responses.

PPPS: Some day when I cross someone's "line", I fully expect some or all of this post to come back to haunt me. :eek: Doh!

Re: On being rude ...
 

+1

Re: On being rude ...
 

The same could be said for posting +1 :)

Re: On being rude ...
 

+1:)

Re: On being rude ...
 

Suppose someone starts a question by saying, "I thought I read in the manual that you can't use unobtanium. But now I can't find it. Does anyone know?"

Suppose someone else asks, "I haven't had time to look it up in the manual, but can you use unobtanium?"

I'm much more inclined to answer the former than the latter. In fact, I might like to reply to the latter, "Who are we, to do research for you?" Most likely would not, but if I was in a bad mood that day ...

Else, I might say something like, "I put 'Unobtanium' in the CD search function and found 37 threads."

Sometimes it's good to lead a horse to water. It may be better to teach the horse how to find water.

Re: On being rude ...
 

One of the best quotes I've seen on this comes from Alan Anderson. For context, someone had asked a relatively simple question--starting position of the robot, which was covered pretty clearly in the manual that year. Said person was told by a couple people to read the manual, and given the rule number. After which, the particular OP in question said something to the effect of "Can you put it in your reply, like quote it?" Someone responded with (paraphrase) "take a few minutes and if you have trouble, I'll walk you through it, you have a rule to look up". Alan's response, however, was really, really good: "We are reluctant to deprive you of the opportunity to do your own research."


Personally, I'll only quote the rule or Q&A if someone has obviously tried to find it. Otherwise, I'll use the rule number, and let them look it up.

Re: On being rude ...
 

made me snicker

Anyway, my bad sense of humor aside, I didn't have much time to make my last post so I'd like to clarify a couple of things I mentioned. What amazes me is that someone could even think that toxicity (being rude, whatever you want to call it) is actually a problem here. Sure, it happens, and it isn't necessarily good, but in comparison to every other form of social media we have access too, it's really good. Seriously, compare CD to the "FRC Confessions" Facebook page or that pathetic excuse for an imageboard we know as /r/FRC. The kinds of things we see there, and in many other places where FRC is regularly discussed, is regularly a lot more toxic than what is posted around here. Sure, some posters can get a little heated, as Foster admitted earlier in the thread. I can get pretty annoyed too. Everyone gets a little mad at some point, and it's completely natural to direct that anger at its source.
I don't think I've ever seen any real, direct personal attack posted on here. On any other form of social media, regardless of the topic, that kind of behavior isn't just common, it's accepted. The fact that there is even a thread talking about toxic posters on CD should be an indicator that it isn't a problem, and won't be a problem in the foreseeable future. Yeah, people get annoyed and post aggressive things over the internet. It's just what people do. However, the fact that people keep that aggressive nature in check so well on CD is very impressive, and very unique. Having a forum devoid of any vaguely (or not-so-vaguely) aggressive posts is impossible, as aggressive posting is an inherent part of human nature; instead of trying to stop a problem that really doesn't exist here, we should appreciate the fact that this site is so much better than anywhere else.

Re: On being rude ...
 

I have enough Internet forums to know that people can be horrible to each other. I've been in enough war zones and personally around things like 9/11 to see the horrible results of what people can do to each other. That doesn't mean I want to continue the trend or be a part of anything that does because it was previously accepted. Make no mistake horrible things with real consequences can come out of horrible communications on the Internet.

People need to realize that the goal is to do better. You are not generally just better, you get there by trying and refusing to lower the bar. That's not to say ChiefDelphi is even close to the worst place, but I have been part of many conversations over the course of my lengthy involvement in FIRST where experienced people do not want anything to do with ChiefDelphi forums because of the risk and their experiences. I myself have experienced situations where I made a post on ChiefDelphi and contact was made to my team suggesting I shut up with the implication of - or else. I will say outright that when I occasionally think about withdrawing from FIRST entirely: a disproportionate number of times things directed at me from this forum come into play.

One might wonder why I come back to ChiefDelphi. Well the answer is because I care about FIRST and this place is better than many other options. However it is not perfect and neither am I. So for the sake of the people in my community who benefit from my continued interest I continue because letting a forum with people from the whole world work my last nerve would be a disservice to those who are local to me. I didn't help start Team 11 because of ChiefDelphi. I helped start it to make my community a better place. I am keeping my eye on the prize and I would expect nothing less from a forum seeking to be the best it can be.