I disagree with the premise of this article, since I think that it’s totally reasonable in many cases to tell somebody to RTFM (or some more polite variant). That said, it’s a neat reflection and the author does a really good job illustrating why they think we should stop doing it and also by setting up and arguing against some reasonable counterpoints.
I think it’s totally valid to say “you can find info on that in the blah section of the manual for foo; you can read it by typing “man foo” in your terminal.”
That sets the expectation that the user do their own work without assuming they were simply too lazy to do so.
Of course, if they have Read The Fine Manual… and are still confused.
I walk over to their desk and watch. Probably several things are going wrong and some base misconceptions are interfering with their understanding.ie. They could read that manual until they were blue, and still not understand.
Things to do then….
Watch their debugging strategy. Give handy hints on how to debug a situation like this. (eg. Introduce them to strace.)
Identify the misunderstanding, pass them TFM which will clear it up.
Watch for boiling point. A person who is too angry cannot learn anymore. Just solve their problem, which will teach them nothing but save their career for now, and save the teaching for another day.
The #1 recommendation in the article is silence, but for myself, learning that I should RTFM was a revelation, right up there with “code is to be read by humans” and “testing is a good thing to do”.
I’d be interested in hearing more stories and polite variants on RTFM. Giving and receiving feedback is hard (to the point that cursing when you do it is sometimes considered acceptable?)
Thinking that people are your personal google is even less “compassionate” tho; often I’ve seen this “either you have the exact answer I need or I don’t care about what you’re saying” attitude. Even if you’re trying to actually explain things instead of giving a crude answer.
I was calm enough to go through a few iterations of editing the tweet to end up with something only mildly sarcastic.
But it’s not only mildly sarcastic, by any reasonable stretch. And:
I avoid name-calling, personal attacks, and profanity
It’s not ad ad hominem attack, but is a personal attack - because it was responding to a post made by an individual, and it implied that that person was being vain and short-sighted (“self-congratulatory”); further, it posed a rhetorical question - a form of passive-aggressiveness, very much related to the “RTFM” response that is being (rightly) derided.
(And to be clear, I don’t think the complaint being made is against informing people that the answer to their question can be found in the documentation - it’s about the phrasing, etc, the way that this information is given. But I do not think this tweet that is now being defended is anything but an example of exactly the wrong way to make a comment onlilne).
I disagree with the premise of this article, since I think that it’s totally reasonable in many cases to tell somebody to RTFM (or some more polite variant). That said, it’s a neat reflection and the author does a really good job illustrating why they think we should stop doing it and also by setting up and arguing against some reasonable counterpoints.
I think it’s totally valid to say “you can find info on that in the blah section of the manual for foo; you can read it by typing “man foo” in your terminal.”
That sets the expectation that the user do their own work without assuming they were simply too lazy to do so.
Of course, if they have Read The Fine Manual… and are still confused.
I walk over to their desk and watch. Probably several things are going wrong and some base misconceptions are interfering with their understanding.ie. They could read that manual until they were blue, and still not understand.
Things to do then….
The #1 recommendation in the article is silence, but for myself, learning that I should RTFM was a revelation, right up there with “code is to be read by humans” and “testing is a good thing to do”.
I’d be interested in hearing more stories and polite variants on RTFM. Giving and receiving feedback is hard (to the point that cursing when you do it is sometimes considered acceptable?)
Thinking that people are your personal google is even less “compassionate” tho; often I’ve seen this “either you have the exact answer I need or I don’t care about what you’re saying” attitude. Even if you’re trying to actually explain things instead of giving a crude answer.
Hmm. The best mentor I had in computers (back in the day of Walls Full of Big Paper Manuals) did me a huge favour.
I think he liked me.
As the local guru (or Tohunga if you prefer the NZ term), for everybody else he would give the answer to their questions. Do this, or that.
They would do this, or that, and learn nothing.
Me? Nah. He would grab a manual (or a book) and say, “Read this one”.
I felt honoured that I was seen fit to follow him.
I try to do the same with those whom I feel capable of following me.
Take it as it is intended. A compliment. I see in you a capacity to learn. A lot.
I was calm enough to go through a few iterations of editing the tweet to end up with something only mildly sarcastic.
But it’s not only mildly sarcastic, by any reasonable stretch. And:
I avoid name-calling, personal attacks, and profanity
It’s not ad ad hominem attack, but is a personal attack - because it was responding to a post made by an individual, and it implied that that person was being vain and short-sighted (“self-congratulatory”); further, it posed a rhetorical question - a form of passive-aggressiveness, very much related to the “RTFM” response that is being (rightly) derided.
(And to be clear, I don’t think the complaint being made is against informing people that the answer to their question can be found in the documentation - it’s about the phrasing, etc, the way that this information is given. But I do not think this tweet that is now being defended is anything but an example of exactly the wrong way to make a comment onlilne).