Is LlazarusLlong Wrong?

[Sassy Romano]

Yay the thread title rhymes.

He's on a crusade and asks the question (regularly) "why did you post this here and not in <insert more suitable forum>?"

On the one hand he's seen as disruptive, maybe rude (though he has always been clear and to the point, not actually offensive, just that some people may consider the approach rude, possibly because they've never been challenged before?).

But on the other hand, he rather has a point!

If I join four groups [Blender, Scripting, Merchants, Dancing], I do question why someone will then start a group chat in say the Blender group with:-

"I know this is off topic but does anyone know where I can get/how I can script <insert thing they need>?"

If they know it's off topic, it's usually falsely justified with "Well I know there are smart people in this group!" but wait... we're smart people in the group yes and we've used the search facility to find the Blender group... AND the others that are equally relevant to the topic.  So much so that yes... they too could use the same search facility and have a go.

Usually, the same people do share many of the same groups and i've been known to suggest to someone to go to a particular group, then i'll answer it there.

It's a fascinating thing but Google ALSO works once logged into Second Life.  Radical I know.  Don't get me wrong, I enjoy some of the banter but it does stretch things a bit when a question is something like "Does anyone know of a tutorial for Blender?" and really nothing more specific.  Did the internet just suddenly lose all capability to be searched?  Did YouTube suddenly go offline?

So that's the genuine question, what goes wrong here?  Are these the same people that cut you up in a car and if challenged respond with "i'm in a hurry!" or something else?

Fascinated to know. :matte-motes-evil-invert:

[LlazarusLlong]

Never!

Although my wife disagrees.

[by the way, did you realise that it's against the ToS/CG to mention someone's name in a thread title?]

[Even if it rhymes.]

[Sassy Romano]

Yep, i'm a rebel, i'll expect my "notification of clueless moderation" shortly.

[Pamela Galli]

Let us not forget searching the forums themselves, rather than repeat a question that has probably been answered a dozen times.

 

Half the time when I ask someone who has reported that "SL ate" some object, what search term they are using, they have no idea what I am talking about. They have no idea they can search inventory!

 

Many simply are unaware that they can search out information themselves. Or, I suspect, they simply consider others' time less valuable than their own. How lovely to have minions to look up information for you!

[Caitlin Tobias]

Nah, he is not wrong. As you yourself experience, it happens and it doesn't only happens in (any) forum.

I have no answer on why people think it is 'normal' to just ask random, easily google-able (Heh, I think I invented a word!) questions.

I've been on some sort of crusade myself, not here..but inworld where it happens in groupchat. Blogger groups, where bloggers (!!) ask "anyone got the LM to Collabor88?''  or 'can someone give the LM to the Arcade?'.
For some these may seem legitimate questions, but believe me in fashion- and bloggergroups....Argh? They should be able to type the complete coordinates to those events by heart with their eyes closed! I gave up though, and by now I am not so supportive and quick with answers anymore, for some reason I lost the fun of helping them - after handing out the LM to FaMeshed for the 100000 th time..), and my : ' use search' wasn't appreciated, because: hey, gimme the LM!

Makes me wonder how some people manage to survive in their daily life.

Anyway, no...why this keeps happening? Is it laziness? Is it an attitude of expecting to be spoonfed, because there is too much to find, search etc?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Perrie Juran]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

Let us not forget searching the forums themselves, rather than repeat a question that has probably been answered a dozen times.

 

Half the time when I ask someone who has reported that "SL ate" some object, what search term they are using, they have no idea what I am talking about. They have no idea they can search inventory!

 

Many simply are unaware that they can search out information themselves. Or, I suspect, they simply consider others' time less valuable than their own. How lovely to have minions to look up information for you!

---

If we wanted to be pedantic we could say that all of us are capable of searching for answers for ourselves.

So where do we draw the line?

True, I've been known to say that I wonder how some people who post here mangage to get out of bed every morning with out hurting themselves. 

And we've had people who posted repeated questions without ever looking at the links we provided them.  Those people I find to be most annoying.

But my general attitude still has been it's not my job to police the Forums.

But then there is the question of how do we respond to these people which Sassy alludes to.  LL's (funny how his initials abbreviate) replies could be considered by some rude, and given the amount of them, he could even be accused of trolling, though staying within certain limits, carefully avoiding being banned.

So is there a right or wrong way to respond to them?

 

 

[Sassy Romano]

and there it is, i've been logged in less than 5 minutes and up pops a Blender group:-

"Hey! i know it's not related to modeling but... Does somebody has that multipose tool for sitting with no floating sphere? Smiles"

[Pamela Galli]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

Let us not forget searching the forums themselves, rather than repeat a question that has probably been answered a dozen times.

 

Half the time when I ask someone who has reported that "SL ate" some object, what search term they are using, they have no idea what I am talking about. They have no idea they can search inventory!

 

Many simply are unaware that they can search out information themselves. Or, I suspect, they simply consider others' time less valuable than their own. How lovely to have minions to look up information for you!

---

If we wanted to be pedantic we could say that all of us are capable of searching for answers for ourselves.

So where do we draw the line?

True, I've been known to say that I wonder how some people who post here mangage to get out of bed every morning with out hurting themselves. 

And we've had people who posted repeated questions without ever looking at the links we provided them.  Those people I find to be most annoying.

But my general attitude still has been it's not my job to police the Forums.

But then there is the question of how do we respond to these people which Sassy alludes to.  LL's (funny how his initials abbreviate) replies could be considered by some rude, and given the amount of them, he could even be accused of trolling, though staying within certain limits, carefully avoiding being banned.

So is there a right or wrong way to respond to them?

 

 

---

I usually don't respond.* I respond to those who ask a reasonable question, but not those who simply consider their time too valuable to waste doing a search.

 

*I spend enough time already directing customers to various help resources or explaining SL basics.

[Pamela Galli]

And it continues because if someone suggests the poster post in the right group, or as Caitlin says, look a location up -- that someone is excoriated for being mean.

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

And it continues because if someone suggests the poster post in the right group, or as Caitlin says, look a location up -- that someone is

excoriated

for being mean.

---

Ooh, Pam, I love it when you talk dirty!

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

Let us not forget searching the forums themselves, rather than repeat a question that has probably been answered a dozen times.

 

Half the time when I ask someone who has reported that "SL ate" some object, what search term they are using, they have no idea what I am talking about. They have no idea they can search inventory!

 

Many simply are unaware that they can search out information themselves. Or, I suspect, they simply consider others' time less valuable than their own. How lovely to have minions to look up information for you!

---

If we wanted to be pedantic we could say that all of us are capable of searching for answers for ourselves.

So where do we draw the line?

True, I've been known to say that I wonder how some people who post here mangage to get out of bed every morning with out hurting themselves. 

And we've had people who posted repeated questions without ever looking at the links we provided them.  Those people I find to be most annoying.

But my general attitude still has been it's not my job to police the Forums.

But then there is the question of how do we respond to these people which Sassy alludes to.  LL's (funny how his initials abbreviate) replies could be considered by some rude, and given the amount of them, he could even be accused of trolling, though staying within certain limits, carefully avoiding being banned.

So is there a right or wrong way to respond to them?

---

If we're gonna be pedantic, I'll have to wonder why Sassy is expecting a note from the moderators for doing something (mentioning someone's name in a thread title) which is not against the ToS/CG. Yes we're all capable of searching for answers ourselves. We're also all capable of believing nonsense because it's easier than paying attention.

;-).

[Perrie Juran]

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

Let us not forget searching the forums themselves, rather than repeat a question that has probably been answered a dozen times.

 

Half the time when I ask someone who has reported that "SL ate" some object, what search term they are using, they have no idea what I am talking about. They have no idea they can search inventory!

 

Many simply are unaware that they can search out information themselves. Or, I suspect, they simply consider others' time less valuable than their own. How lovely to have minions to look up information for you!

---

If we wanted to be pedantic we could say that all of us are capable of searching for answers for ourselves.

So where do we draw the line?

True, I've been known to say that I wonder how some people who post here mangage to get out of bed every morning with out hurting themselves. 

And we've had people who posted repeated questions without ever looking at the links we provided them.  Those people I find to be most annoying.

But my general attitude still has been it's not my job to police the Forums.

But then there is the question of how do we respond to these people which Sassy alludes to.  LL's (funny how his initials abbreviate) replies could be considered by some rude, and given the amount of them, he could even be accused of trolling, though staying within certain limits, carefully avoiding being banned.

So is there a right or wrong way to respond to them?

 

 

---

I usually don't respond.* I respond to those who ask a reasonable question, but not those who simply consider their time too valuable to waste doing a search.

 

*I spend enough time already directing customers to various help resources or explaining SL basics.

---

I don't respond a lot either.

And with all the time you spend doing customer support can easily understand you not wanting to waste your time here with it also.

In World I get people referred to me by friends all the time.  Usually I reply with a link to the answer(s) and a comment about how easy it is to find answers using Google. 

It would be nice if SL was 'dummy proof.' But it's not.

When I got my first computer I was so scared of breaking things I was very shy about doing a lot of things.

Likewise when I started SL.  Was scared I could break things really easy.  But with a little help from friends I got over those fears quickly. 

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

 

 I'll have to wonder why Sassy is expecting a note from the moderators for doing something (mentioning someone's name in a thread title) which is not against the ToS/CG.

---

Maybe because you're not allowed to name names in the forums in a pejorative fashion, a well-established principle immaculately pursued by the moderators - except perhaps in Missing Persons, where it would be counter-productive!.

History has thrown up multiple examples of the use of avatar names in thread titles, even in a laudatory fashion, being provocation for their removal. I remember one particular period when an infamous avatar was taking a (voluntary) break and won a bet regarding the number of threads that would be created, despite his absence, with his name in them - and successfully had them all taken down.

I won't be RICking this thread, however, even though I might have preferred a non-rhyming version: "Is LlazarusLlong right?" because I believe that this is precisely the type of discussion which we should be having in General Discussions.

[Sassy Romano]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

If we're gonna be pedantic, I'll have to wonder why Sassy is expecting a note from the moderators for doing something (mentioning someone's name in a thread title) which is not against the ToS/CG.

---

Because I said "**bleep**" in a thread once and that got them all excited.

Funny, because "Hen" doesn't do it.

Or was it when I typed F**k, missing out the O and R in the middle?  Yep, that was another. 

[Caitlin Tobias]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

---

Pamela Galli wrote:

Let us not forget searching the forums themselves, rather than repeat a question that has probably been answered a dozen times.

 

Half the time when I ask someone who has reported that "SL ate" some object, what search term they are using, they have no idea what I am talking about. They have no idea they can search inventory!

 

Many simply are unaware that they can search out information themselves. Or, I suspect, they simply consider others' time less valuable than their own. How lovely to have minions to look up information for you!

---

If we wanted to be pedantic we could say that all of us are capable of searching for answers for ourselves.

So where do we draw the line?

True, I've been known to say that I wonder how some people who post here mangage to get out of bed every morning with out hurting themselves. 

And we've had people who posted repeated questions without ever looking at the links we provided them.  Those people I find to be most annoying.

But my general attitude still has been it's not my job to police the Forums.

But then there is the question of how do we respond to these people which Sassy alludes to.  LL's (funny how his initials abbreviate) replies could be considered by some rude, and given the amount of them, he could even be accused of trolling, though staying within certain limits, carefully avoiding being banned.

So is there a right or wrong way to respond to them?

 

 

---

Bolded part by me, just to ask..since when is it considered 'pedantic' to point people to 'how' and 'where' they can find the information they seek, rather than just be happy, or thankful if you will, you got an answer at all - and it is even an answer that will help you with future questions?

Isn't that the part of support that is needed? Guidance and pointing out on how to find the answers one seeks, rather than have it delivered in a ready made, foolproof package which does nothing for the learning process?

 

All the times I have given out LM's inworld to people asking for 'a nice snow sim' (on 15 december !!) or for all the popular current events did not at all learn them how to look them up by themselves, but made me (and many others) eyeroll till I saw the back of my skull and led me to just ignore them and it continues as long as people will indeed, for the sake of getting over those questions, give them what they ask in a non supportive way, like a pacifier: here is your LM, now be quiet!

[Bobbie Faulds]

I don't have a problem giving out the LM to a seasonal place. I do, however get tired of...in a group that has a sim...Could I get the landmark to that sim/store? ummm it's in past notices in the group info....and don't tell me you've not been there enough to have not landmarked it...or you don't have enough stuff from them in your inventory that you don't have a landmark, right?

Sometimes, people post in here where they think it is closest to what they want. Many times, especially when looking for someone to script/make something custom/etc, they don't realize there are other forums besides the people forum. Noting to the mod that they belong over in the commerce or help wanted, also helps the OP learn where things like that DO go.

[Darrius Gothly]

In my experience there are three general types of people that do as you describe. One type, decidedly in the minority, are those folks new to whatever method they are using to pose their question. They haven't learned enough yet to figure out how to find the right place, are intimidated by the whole thing, and in their moment of confusion and ineptitude post a Q in the wrong place. Often they can be taught easily how to work the tools, and often they do not repeat their initial mistake.

The second type are those for whom the usual methods have not met any success. They've probably asked friends, scanned the Forums, perused notices in relevant Groups and have probably posed their question in those groups already .. but with no luck. They know they're breaking format by asking, but they're out of options and have taken a "what can it hurt" attitude. This type is also massively in the minority, but thankfully isn't a routine repeat offender. More than likely their quest is a one-off and not indicative of their normal habits.

The third type is the one that drives LlLl up the tree and around the bend, probably because there are so many of them. These are the types that do not believe they are doing anything wrong, and despite being told directly and incontrovertibly that they ARE wrong, will go on behaving as if it doesn't matter anyway because .. well .. it's THEM for pete's sake. And they have any number of excuses .. errr reasons .. why it's okay for them to post off-topic.

But here's the real bottom line. The first two types just need a gentle nudge and they will correct their behavior, thus they are not the problem. The last group though will NEVER change their behavior, no matter what the proof, incentive or pushback. They are the same type that park in Handicap spots because "I'll just be a minute" or some other excuse, they throw their trash on the ground at the base of the trash can, and they cut into lines then act surprised when others get upset with them.

Trying to "fix" these people, even with repeated berating responses, ample proof or even lessons taught by a Moderator-controlled boomstick, is an absolutely pointless waste of your own energy. Tis far easier to ignore them or, if you've a mind, just answer their question and get them outta your hair ASAP. But to fill up post after post, smacking and beating these types? It just annoys the rest of us and does nothing whatsoever to fix the behaviors of those breaking the rules.

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Darrius Gothly wrote:

 

The third type is the one that drives LlLl up the tree and around the bend

---

I don't think you understand, DG; I am not particularly concerned about the issues themselves, I just enjoy manipulating people.

The cause itself doesn't really matter; I have espoused many in my time in SL - some contradictory to each other.

It's the reason I like Second Life and its properties - there is a global population of diverse individuals whose motivations and fears range across the spectrum of human fallibility, so it's a great place to practise the art (or is that science?) of persuasion, made more difficult by their remoteness, which means that a normal element of my rl techniques, my potentially intimidating physical presence, is not available.

And of course there is the even more hazardous challenge of impelling those who actually have a degree of power here to change their behaviour, a tightrope that is made into a walkway by their inability to actually enforce discipline in any lasting manner.

So why do I bother? Well, I took the book advance . . .

 

[Marianne Little]

LlLl is not wrong. All his posts are based on the forum guidelines, or pointing out that the OP could have found out this on their own.

It is served with ease, composed in a few sentences designed to cause maximum damage.

To reply to his posts is pointless, as it is his greatest pleasure to spot any weakness, slice it up and reply so elegant and sarcastic that it leaves the poor soul more angry and confused. Engage him in a battle with words and you are in big trouble.

He does not contribute unless it serves his agenda, and wherever he posts, a newcomer leaves. We will never know if they had the potential to be more than lazy people who want to be spoon-fed the simplest thing. Thus, we continue to be a stagnant group here who either enjoys his play, or ignores it.

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Marianne Little wrote about:

lazy people who want to be spoon-fed the simplest thing. Thus, we continue to be a stagnant group here

---

 

Good point, Marianne. Perhaps what is needed is a couple more forums:

* For new users who should not be embarrassed about asking possibly naive questions that have been asked a hundred times before, and are addressed in the wiki, or can be accessed by searching the forums.

* For non-new users who are either too stupid or lazy to check for answers to their questions in the wiki, or by searching the forums.

Posters to these sections would not have to worry about being deterred from further participation because only generous souls who wanted to show off their expertise in cut-and-pasting would respond, very politely - unless the question asked was "How do I get a girlfriend?" or similar.

Perhap they could call both of these new forums Answers . . .

Or perhaps they could just be links to the current Answers section.

Either way, if it keeps them out of the General Discussion forum I would be pleased, as would, I believe, lots of others.

[Perrie Juran]

<redacted>

 

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

<redacted>

 

---

Don't you just hate it when peple do that!

[before you have seen the scurrilous gossip involved...]

[Perrie Juran]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

<redacted>

 

---

Don't you just hate it when peple do that!

[before you have seen the scurrilous gossip involved...]

---

I decided to make sure my brain was in gear before engaging "Post."

[LlazarusLlong]

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

I decided to make sure my brain was in gear before engaging "Post."

---

If only more people would follow your example . . .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. . . there would be a lot more space in the forums!

[KarenMichelle Lane]

---

LlazarusLlong wrote:

---

Perrie Juran wrote:

 

I decided to make sure my brain was in gear before engaging "Post."

---

If only more people would follow your example . . .

 

 Ohhhhh Look, Drawing Paper... Weeeeeeeeeeee

 

                        Room for quasi-heroes

                    ..and kitties

                       ...and fantasy 

. . . there would be a lot more space in the forums!

---

Thank you Llaz for the drawing paper.....