RE: tlug: Updating the TLUG FAQ

["John De Hoog" <dehoog@example.com>]

Here is some wording you might want to think a bit more about. Listed as
inappropriate are the following:

--Random emotional complaints about Linux, or any operating system or
software system, used to vent a person's frustration.

This seems to be saying that people are not supposed to vent their
frustration about problems with Linux. Yet Linux, and other computer
platforms as well, can be intensely frustrating. What's wrong with emotion?
Isn't the real intention here to stifle complaints about Linux?

--...Complaining about the Linux software's lack of features would likely be
an inappropriate followup, unless you are proposing to implement them (note:
you don't need to volunteer to do the coding!) or requesting a workaround
for the missing feature.

This was really Chris's beef in a nutshell. It's an attitude that is open to
question, yet you want to codify it in your FAQ.

It suggests that Linux advocates are really thin-skinned about the
shortcomings of their platform, and about the inability of the free software
movement to produce a full range of outstanding, competitive software
solutions within a reasonable time frame. Chris demonstrated that in spades
when he walked out sulking after a couple of complaints were made about lack
of software and inadequate documentation.

The idea that if you can't implement something yourself you shouldn't be
expecting it seems to be unique to the Linux world. But those who advocate
such a position need to be prepared to defend it when others complain that
it has so far failed to produce a platform that meets their needs. There's
got to be a better way to deal with this than stifling honest criticism.

I've spent time on a large Windows NT mailing list, where people vented
frustration and voiced complaints about a lack of features all the time
(many of the complaints were from Unix users expecting to find the same
kinds of features in NT as they were used to; sound familiar?). Yet no one
ever suggested that they stop, or that the list be split up into real NT
devotees and the "others", and no one walked out angrily. In general, the
list continued to function as a useful place to ask questions and receive
advice. I don't see why TLUG can't continue in the same way. Just relax,
take a deep breath, and tell yourself it's really just a computer.

(My wife complained recently that I spend more time in front of the computer
than with her. It's true, and I'm trying to reform.)
--
John De Hoog, Tokyo
dehoog@example.com
http://dehoog.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-tlug@example.com [mailto:owner-tlug@example.com]On
> Behalf Of Jim Schweizer
> Sent: Sunday, October 25, 1998 2:38 PM
> To: tlug-admin@example.com
> Cc: tlug@example.com
> Subject: tlug: Updating the TLUG FAQ
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> After last week's 'trouble' I decided to update the FAQ in regards to
> appropriate and inappropriate posts to the main list. Comments
> are welcome:
>
http://tlug.linux.or.jp/guide/tlug_user-guide-8.html

---------------------------------------------------------------
Next Nomikai: 20 November, 19:30 Tengu TokyoEkiMae 03-3275-3691
Next Technical Meeting: January, 1999 (details TBA)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsor: PHT, makers of TurboLinux http://www.pht.co.jp