Support » Everything else WordPress » How to ask questions

  • NuclearMoose

    (@nuclearmoose)


    The definitive place to find out all you need about getting the best answers possible by asking the best possible questions.
    Not fancy, just straightforward information. Scroll to the bottom of the page to read.
    You can find it here.
    Enjoy!

Viewing 15 replies - 16 through 30 (of 55 total)
  • Anonymous

    Anonymous, I don’t know if this is or isn’t the right dialogue for this forum or if you are the one to say whether it’s so. What I do know is that I am prone to looking at things within their contexts, which includes a pretty big picture. Thinking about things in that way, with awareness or in terms of hypertext consciousness (<http://www.grammatron.com/htc1.0/intention.html&gt;; <http://www.grammatron.com/&gt;; <http://www.markamerika.com/&gt;) may or may not bore others and may or may not be worth discussion in this forum. (If not here, then where?) It might be seen that by you determining that this is not the venue for it is antithetical to your point of view on social responsibility and consequence: the express opposite of the “truth.” If you want to talk IA then don’t you have to indeed talk it? That is, you brought up the topic but then say discussion of it is not to be had — are you now not obligated to provide a venue other than the forum where it can be discussed? Who determines the range of how far reaching or how much can actually be covered and accomodated? WordPress — its very name! (and not to mention “code is poetry”) — very compelling for the poet, the writer, [the thinker] … how does that figure into things? Blogging, the blogger [“cyborg” narrator] — is there an obligation inherent in the selection of WP in terms of name/description? What is the express intent or implicit intention? Is it worth considering? If what you say is true about obligation and consequence, it’s not just worth discussing it’s absolutely mandatory. Boring? None of this is boring to me. Just the opposite — it’s fascinating but then I’m incredibly taken with those like string theorist Bryan Greene <http://www.themorningnews.org/archives/personalities/birnbaum_v_brian_greene.php&gt; who value decompartmentalization or know, perhaps, that the intersections are from where the breakthroughs and new understandings, creative solutions, et al arise. Anyhow, I hope that this bit will be taken in the spirit I mean it, which is not adversarial in nature nor a need to be right. Quite often I’m not right at any given pt within the discussion of something or other but I am always interested in the questions and in learning enough so as to ask the next questions, and while some can experience such interest and questioning as threatening, you don’t have to and I hope you won’t.

    Anonymous

    Of course it is the appropriate forum. ‘Miscellaneous’, to state the obvious, means ‘variety’ or ‘that which does not fit elsewhere within a predefined set of compartments’, making this the obvious and logical place for this thread.

    Oops, THAT anonymous was me. 🙂

    willm

    (@willm)

    But it would make sense for a forum moderator – if such a thing exists – to split this thread from the original – if that ability exists in this software – because I think most people would agree it has gone significantly OT and that may be what anon was getting at, rather than some desire to censor other people’s opinions.

    Anonymous

    TY WillM. The ethics, morality duties and obligations of web site proprietors (if any) are way off all reasonable definitions of this topic which was about first the protocols of posting and later about useability. It is further a pit for long winded posts. It has no bearing on Word Press. The subject is boring because the battle for web standards has already been won. We have assumed moral obligations voluntarily. Our dialogue presumes that as a starting point. I do not what to debate the issue from first principles. I can’t be bothered. And it’s off topic. Plus many people here may not share that commitment. And some folks might not understand it. Or we might explain it badly. @peg: With your obvious communication skills have you considered writing a book?

    The problem is that there are no moderators other than Matt (I believe), who has somewhat live-and-let-live attitude about the forums. So if you’re concerned about a post being OT, or too long (and why you’ve chosen to single out this particular thread as for exihibiting those qualities is a mystery to me, when there are many other much worse offenders out there ;)) start a new thread yourself and reference this one.

    Anonymous

    Oh and by the way. Both the two sites kindly posted by peg must rank among the worst examples of design on the internet. Nice choice.

    Anonymous

    Calm down, Anon! I know that my posts are long, which is entirely different from long-winded, and yet they barely scratch the surface of the impt issues at hand. One of the things ironically that contributes to their length is the desire to find a way to say things that might help you to understand that I am not coming from an adversarial place and establish a plane upon which we might meet. All the while I’m conscious of how really much lengthier my posts probably need to be to come close to accomplishing that. Nevertheless, it doesnt mean I ought not to try — which mirrors something you said earlier: “It won’t be perfect. But that is not an excuse not to start.” The sites I “kindly posted” I’d hoped would provide some of that info for you in lieu of more length [my posts]. Maybe they still can, at a later time. Hopefully, anyhow. It is hardly worth arguing the merits of their design for several reasons, not of which the least is that in fact MarkAmerika’s “GRAMMATRON project is a public domain narrative environment developed by virtual artist Mark Amerika in conjunction with the Brown University Graduate Creative Writing Program and the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Graphics and Visualization Center, “was one of the first works of Internet Art to ever be included in the prestigious Whitney Biennial (2000),” and “has been exhibited at international museums and festivals including Ars Electronica, The International Symposium for Electronic Art (ISEA), SIGGRAPH 98, The Telstra Adelaide Arts Festival (South Australia), Virtual Worlds 98 (Paris) and the International Biennial of Film and Architecture (Graz).” While it’s always true that it’s important that all of us not be taken in by value judgments of such entities as the National Science Foundation, the Whitney, Brown University, et al –that we do feel empowered to raise questions [euphemism for your proclamation “among the worst examples of design on the internet”] all of this completely misses the point, Anon. The point had to do not with design but with the information and thought expressed there within. Maybe this thread is or could be considered OT, but I think it’s impt to consider if first of all, that is in fact true, and second, if that is necessarily unwanted when it all comes down to it. At this point, once again, I wish that you might allow yourself to absorb a little of the site I shared or referenced for this reason that illuminates the fact that the internet/web mirrors our brains’ workings — the associative process — and rather than be dismissive of this reality, which in fact is responsible for WP’s genesis and why we are even gathered here talking. It seems to me that one of WP’s strengths — hallmarks — what it strives to be and/or what its developers/creators are striving for it to be as one exceptional factor that sets it apart, is its semantic nature. Is it really possible — is it desirable? — to imagine that the semantic nature is no more than lite fare, superficial, an afterthought, marketing hyperbole? I don’t take that approach, Anon; I refuse to see it that way. But in the interests of length, here’s how this thread has evolved (for the sake of clarification — out from under the revisionist historical perspective most recently given it):
    1. how to ask questions resource shared
    2. agreement on worthiness of the resource’s value along with reiteration that some will nevertheless not bother to read the reference (hmm… yes, that certainly bears out, come to think of it)
    3. poster who shared the resource agrees and says yet it’s still worth sharing
    4. next poster discusses personal experience in terms of dealing with questions posed in the forum, i.e. comments on one way of dealing with this issue [how to cope with questions in the forum that indicate the poster hasn’t referenced available materials] and also pts out that it may be difficult for such questioners to feel inspired to seek out the resources because they’re hard to locate easily and because the info questioners first meet with seems to suggest that they turn to the forum with their questions.
    5. next poster clarifies the “seems to suggest” part, stating what exactly is said. Also adds insight that some people will still disregard resources no matter what.
    6. next poster points out that things are better with the search resource but that the wiki resource, which could be helpful more than it is, isn’t getting accessed.
    7. next poster says knowledge of/making known it exists wiki figures in prominently from within the forum posts, but could be that a more prominent link would be useful, and that the wiki itself needs help, substantiating this with his own experience as someone who’s been in on it from the start.
    8.Anon says this is an issue of information architecture and poses questions to (it appeared, at first anyhow) to get people thinking about where and at what pt info be structured more effectively. It seems that anon wants others to think about the users who come here and how info might best be structured to meet the needs so far voiced from those who’ve come here and had difficulty.
    9. next poster muses about things coming from the vantage pt of wanting to drive home the pt that this is all irrelevant in what might be seen in terms of a personal agenda (bringing up some old bitterness about the appearance/design of the forum, e.g. which of course has nothing to do with the topic at hand but of course can be said to be meant as an illustrative example only of the pt he wishes to make) all of which again is about Matt as the beginning pt for all that’s ensued since; and more musing issues about the wiki with more personal agenda-like editorializing on how its “sidelined” or whether it shall be “embraced,” and in short, poster makes it difficult or at minimum discomfitting for anyone to care much about anything that might have some validity coming through the thinly veiled potshots at the originator — source and source of respect as well.
    10. anon poster next attempts to clarify, vaguely, that it’s all a call to info architecture for users apart from this site and remarks upon the fact that there is a wide range of ability and knowledge when it comes to users, and is careful and good about establishing the fact that Matt need not be disrespected — anon respects Matt for programming. ends on a note of how “this blog” (which blog?) “works will affect peoples[sic] build choices,” attempting to subtly raise the ante on or give weight to how important it is that info arch follow some predestined pattern that is not yet expressed or given but is again hinted at as a sort of agreed-upon standard that probably everyone knows and agrees upon but you, whether you be Matt or any reader elsewise who should then out of ignorance of what this so-called standard be, rather than question it and thereby risk exposing yourself as someone who doesn’t know [what everyone else knows] just go along with this thing for the good of WP and preventing the possibility of users otherwise not selecting it for their “build choice.”
    11. next poster (me) harkens back to original opening post — the resource “How to Ask Questions” — and attempts to say why this is a good resource to have in view of the vast range of experience and knowledge that new users drawn to WP will have. Adds agreement that nonetheless there will still remain people who will not partake of it. But that doesn’t mean not making it and other such helpful resources available. Has the thought that it’s hard to know where to draw the line with this sort of thing — how far to go in meeting the user; what does the developer think? within the purvey — how reasonable it is or how completely deconstructed the info arch should be has to be something the creator of the thing speaks best to as that’s who has the key insight in so far as its design goes. what’s the intention?
    12.Anon admits to not having read the resource that is in fact the subject of this thread. “Assuming for a moment that the URI to which NM refers is useful and appropriate my point …”
    Is this where things go off-topic?
    I posted in terms of having read the thing — the substance of the topic? You, Anon, did not. As you admit. Or, in fact, should we really hold you over the barrel and say you went off-topic before that, even, with switching to IA?
    I say that no, we should not — because as you no doubt believe, it is [ASSOCIATIVELY] organic to the actual topic or subject of the thread. I’d like to say that my post previous to yours in fact attempted to kindly and respectfully bridge between all that had come before including your [OT?] remark.
    Clearly, I could continue to outline the very organic and germane progression of the discussion and its the issues involved, without the sort of fallacies, illogic fallen to mistakenly support the preceding error of labeling discussion “boring” nor resorting to backhanded remarks about what potential skill your posts might indicate (yes, I do also have an imagination from which to draw) — but, BUT, this is not about me and it is not about you or about anyone else who finds it an opportunity for giving voice to his personal bits of bitterness or grievances or agenda, what have you. I am already annoyed at myself for allowing myself to care enough about this whole thing so as to take this big chunk of time trying to sort it out, all the while understanding that likely it will not affect you enough so as to get you to see that we are on the same side and ought to best find a way to be better at that and steeling myself for more of not that. That doesn’t mean, though, that I shouldn’t hope and shouldn’t act upon that hope, right? And, look, if this is too much, really, goes too far beyond the concerns or interests or possibilities of WP, then it is. But I think, again, that it’s not for me to say as I didn’t create it and I don’t have insight into the creator(s)’ minds or visions or dreams for it.

    willm

    (@willm)

    Thanks Cena. On second thoughts, I think we’re better off just leaving the trolls to play in this one. 😉

    Sushubh

    (@sushubh)

    omg. what are we down to now! 🙁
    _____________
    The sig you hate!
    Why Opera? 1 2 3 4

    Thread Starter NuclearMoose

    (@nuclearmoose)

    Personally we should all just get naked and play beach volleyball and then sing some songs around a big fire.

    Anonymous

    And this is the weekend?

    Anonymous

    No wonder the net seems to have slowed down.

    Anonymous

    Here is a novel idea. Blogs are for blogging. Simple huh.

    willm

    (@willm)

    I guess some people haven’t got WordPress working yet so are using this forum as a substitute soapbox.
    *toasts marshmallows on the big fire*

Viewing 15 replies - 16 through 30 (of 55 total)
  • The topic ‘How to ask questions’ is closed to new replies.