Hi;
I agree with the journalist approach. Unfortunately it seems
journalists have such a poor reputation these days that the approach is
likely to be dismissed.
On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 20:13 -0600, Jeff Vian wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-04 at 17:27 +0000, James Wilkinson wrote:
> Charles Howse wrote:
> > However...the more things I've tried before posting leads to a
"wordier"
> > post when I finally do ask for help if I'm going to try and avoid a bunch
of
> > "I tried that, it didn't work."
> >
> > So how do we balance the amount of information we give vs. avoiding
> > verbosity vs. "Oh, I see the OP has already tried what I was going to
> > suggest." vs. getting the problem solved?
>
> I'd suggest newspaper-style reporting: include the important stuff
> first, and give less important stuff later.
[snip]
<rant>
If the "journalist" writer is being honest!!!
Too often nowdays the headline and the first few paragraphs give the
negative point of view and the bottom of the article contain the facts
that make it a 'so what' story.
</rant>
[snip]
> Headline (subject line): what's wrong
>
> First paragraph: repeat what's wrong in one or two sentences, including
> why you think something is wrong, and what you might expect to happen.
>
> Next paragraph or so: this is where you go into details about the
> problem. This is where it's appropriate to suggest theories. If you
> think your troubleshooting has closed off major lines of enquiry (e.g.
> "it works under Windows so it's not hardware"), you might mention
this
> here. If you have particular reasons for suspecting a particular area,
> you can say so here. You should also post what you consider to be the
> most relevant data.
>
> Rest of the e-mail: what else you've tried, package / hardware details
> (if appropriate).
>
I appreciate the help I have gotten from this mailing list and others
(particularly direct help from members of my local LUG). I have started
to -- and it seems to be working -- using mail in the manner suggested
above:
* a meaningful headline -- they seem to get more responses than
'sexy' or 'cute' or 'meaningless' subject lines -- I have
tried
all kinds;
* a short first paragraph that succinctly outlines the problem and
ends with a specific request for a defined type of help;
* a Post-amble. A Post-amble, to me, is what might logically go
into a preamble. I even label the last section as Post-amble to
warn the potential responder that he is entering a free flowing
description of what I see as the problem, how it seems to have
come about and what I have tried.
I believe by using the Post-amble format, I am striking a kind of deal
with a potential responder that says "I have started in a manner that
makes it easier for you to decide to help or not. Now, in the
Post-amble, I am proceeding in a way that makes it easier for me to
explain my situation." I think that's fair.
By the way, I think its only polite that if you don't want to respond,
don't respond. If its locatable in a manual, state the manual; if its
easy to google for, state or suggest some search criteria. In fact, as
a learning experience, suggested criteria can be more helpful in the
long run than a direct URL.
Regards Bill