Scheduled Maintenance: We are aware of an issue with Google, AOL, and Yahoo services as email providers which are blocking new registrations. We are trying to fix the issue and we have several internal and external support tickets in process to resolve the issue. Please see: viewtopic.php?t=158230

 

 

 

Quality of Forum Threads

Code of conduct, suggestions, and information on forums.debian.net.
Message
Author
spacex
Posts: 637
Joined: 2015-01-17 01:27

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#31 Post by spacex »

kedaha wrote:
steve_v wrote:The thing that's bugging me at the moment: Why are so many running Testing, when most of them appear to have no idea how to debug the inevitable problems?
Why? You can bet your bottom dollar that the lower the post count, the greater the chances are they're running testing. The route they've come by in a short time is likely to be from Windows -> Ubuntu -> Mint -> Debian Testing; it's likely that, with their little knowledge, most see testing as an "upgrade" from stable to newer and shinier software and are confident they can run it before they've learned to walk.
Yes, but the reason for this is that hardware is changed more frequently these days, and as newbies in general doesn't know about backports, they go directly to testing/unstable to get the hardware-support that they need. In the rich parts of the world, people are changing hardware every 2-3 years, some even more frequently. Debian Stable can not keep up with this pace.

User avatar
thanatos_incarnate
Posts: 717
Joined: 2012-11-04 20:36

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#32 Post by thanatos_incarnate »

spacex wrote:[A]nd as newbies in general doesn't know about backports, they go directly to testing/unstable to get the hardware-support that they need. In the rich parts of the world, people are changing hardware every 2-3 years, some even more frequently. Debian Stable can not keep up with this pace.
Debian Stable does not try to keep up with anything. The MO here is a stable system with somewhat conservative ideas about stability, reliability and security. Those do not go hand in hand with frequent hardware changes. Testing is rarely a good remedy for this issue. Unstable might be a bit better, as it gets bug fixes more quickly. Both have the disadvantage that they are geared primarily towards testing packages for a new Debian stable release and are not an equivalent to non-LTS Ubuntu or similar distros.

spacex
Posts: 637
Joined: 2015-01-17 01:27

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#33 Post by spacex »

thanatos_incarnate wrote:
spacex wrote:[A]nd as newbies in general doesn't know about backports, they go directly to testing/unstable to get the hardware-support that they need. In the rich parts of the world, people are changing hardware every 2-3 years, some even more frequently. Debian Stable can not keep up with this pace.
Debian Stable does not try to keep up with anything. The MO here is a stable system with somewhat conservative ideas about stability, reliability and security. Those do not go hand in hand with frequent hardware changes. Testing is rarely a good remedy for this issue. Unstable might be a bit better, as it gets bug fixes more quickly. Both have the disadvantage that they are geared primarily towards testing packages for a new Debian stable release and are not an equivalent to non-LTS Ubuntu or similar distros.
I know that. But how is a newbie arriving at Debian.org supposed to know that? I also know that unstable is better than testing, but how is a newbie supposed to know that? I also know that the best solution is to run stable with backports, but again, how is a newbie arriving at Debian.org supposed to know that? There is no where anything about the fact that Debian chooses stability at the expence of compability with new hardware. There is no where stated that if you have a laptop newer than a couple of years, then it's most likely not supported in Stable by default, and that you should use the non-free repos and backports to get the support you need.

But then you will say that Debian doesn't hold peoples hand, they need to know the basics, because Debian isn't a starter distro. But tell me, where can a newbie pick up that information at the main page of Debian.org, or at least get a clue about such information anywhere else. Put yourself in those users shoes. They come from Windows, have never tried Linux, but end up at the front page of Debian.org. Is there anything to warn them about probably not being quite ready for Debian yet? On the contrary, it boldly states "The Universal OS", which can be interpreted in many ways. One of them being that Debian is something anyone should be able to use. Why wouldn't a Windows user think just that?

User avatar
dilberts_left_nut
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 5346
Joined: 2009-10-05 07:54
Location: enzed
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 66 times

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#34 Post by dilberts_left_nut »

Maybe in the FAQ. https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debi ... tml#s3.1.1
Or the Installation Guide. https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/ ... 01.html.en
Or the forum.
Or IRC.
Or a websearch.
"...but newbies can't read..." 8)

It's not like it costs anything (apart from time) to just try it and see.
AdrianTM wrote:There's no hacker in my grandma...

User avatar
mor
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-08-28 15:16
Location: mor@debian

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#35 Post by mor »

@spacex
Let me first say that I reject your idea of people running development branches for hardware compatibility (as a main reason why, as you presented it).
It just doesn't go along with my experience of reading and dealing with issues on forums.
People do use Testing/Unstable (I mean when they'd better off), for two main reasons:
  • the feeling of prestige and self-importance they get from the misguided perception of Testing being more advanced than Stable and Unstable even more, like if running it makes one Master of Debian.
  • the desire/curiosity (and not need) for up-to-date software
Sure there are also users who try Testing/Unstable to go along with their newer hardware, but I think they are a tiny minority. Moreover, most hardware compatibility depends on the kernel (which is always available from backports and let's not forget the liquorix option, however third party) and the video drivers/firmware which I also believe can be found in backports quite easily.

But even if it was absolutely and always impossible to make new hardware work in Stable, there is the fundamental issue of Testing/Unstable not working under the same paradigm of Stable. If a user would be perfectly fine in Stable with his new hardware, moving to development branches for whatever reason would mean parting ways with that use paradigm, which is purposely that of having an unchanging and low maintenance system, while Testing/Unstable are the exact opposite.
A user that can't get his new hardware working in Stable (with backports or maybe even some MX stuff) should not be advised to move to Testing or Unstable, he/she should just be advised to change distro.

You have a point in asking "where do they learn?".
Well, they can learn in the same way they learn to venture in development territory, which is not something people do lightheartedly on their own.
They do it because they listen to those who advertise development branches as "stable enough" or "like Stable, but with new stuff" or "yeah, in Testing/Unstable you get the new hardware recognized, but don't worry, they are more stable than Ubuntu".
Do sentences like these ring a bell?

We only need to stop spreading those misguided notions and inform people of the fact that Stable, and Stable only, is Debian's idea of an operating system, the Universal Operating System, while Testing/Unstable are, despite their incidental dependability, completely different, and opposite and only supposed to be used as the testing ground for the official Stable release (yes, even if you and I use them as a daily systems!).

Bye :)

spacex
Posts: 637
Joined: 2015-01-17 01:27

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#36 Post by spacex »

dilberts_left_nut wrote:Maybe in the FAQ. https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debi ... tml#s3.1.1
Or the Installation Guide. https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/ ... 01.html.en
Or the forum.
Or IRC.
Or a websearch.
"...but newbies can't read..." 8)

It's not like it costs anything (apart from time) to just try it and see.
But newbies coming from Windows are spoiled. They don't read anything, especially not if they have to seek out the information themselves. Do you really expect that very many should read the installation guide? Get real... Wishful thinking doesn't get us anywhere :D

spacex
Posts: 637
Joined: 2015-01-17 01:27

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#37 Post by spacex »

mor wrote:@spacex

Sure there are also users who try Testing/Unstable to go along with their newer hardware, but I think they are a tiny minority. Moreover, most hardware compatibility depends on the kernel (which is always available from backports and let's not forget the liquorix option, however third party) and the video drivers/firmware which I also believe can be found in backports quite easily.
Sure. The problem is that a newbie doesn't know what backports are, besides being a word. It might just as well be lalalalala... What happens is that in the search for fixes to their issues, they read somewhere that they should upgrade to testing/unstable, or better yet, get a link to a unstable live image with a already configured Desktop, and there you go...
We only need to stop spreading those misguided notions and inform people of the fact that Stable, and Stable only, is Debian's idea of an operating system, the Universal Operating System, while Testing/Unstable are, despite their incidental dependability, completely different, and opposite and only supposed to be used as the testing ground for the official Stable release (yes, even if you and I use them as a daily systems!).
I can't see how we should be able to stop those notions. People get their information from everywhere, not only the official Debian Forums. In essence I do agree with everything you are saying, I just think it's a lost battle.

User avatar
thanatos_incarnate
Posts: 717
Joined: 2012-11-04 20:36

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#38 Post by thanatos_incarnate »

spacex wrote:I just think it's a lost battle.
I don't think it is. Sure, it's a never ending battle you can't win, but I do think it has an effect if you constantly remind people of our expectations. That's when usually some of the behaviour goes down a bit.

User avatar
mor
Posts: 970
Joined: 2010-08-28 15:16
Location: mor@debian

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#39 Post by mor »

spacex wrote:Sure. The problem is that a newbie doesn't know what backports are
Yes, but they shouldn't be as comfortable venturing in development territory either.
If they do, as you duly noted, it is because way too many, even among those who should know better, miserably fail in explaining the nature of Debian branches and carelessly inspire, or outright tell, clueless user to go Testing/Unstable.
spacex wrote:I can't see how we should be able to stop those notions. People get their information from everywhere, not only the official Debian Forums. In essence I do agree with everything you are saying, I just think it's a lost battle.
True, and documentation, even on the official channels, is absolutely bad.
Is it a lost battle?
If it is, then even this discussion has no point. What are we arguing about? Why don't we just go home? ;)

See, my position is that of a user who believes that we should discuss and understand this matter better ourselves, and that in doing so we can be able to create an environment here where some good information, at least on this subject, can be found, that can also be spread by all those who hang elsewhere.

The problem with what has been done so far (I mean everywhere, not just here), in terms of "spreading information", is that it has been mostly done just to counter those who recklessly advertise and advise for the use of development branches, but with a somewhat dogmatic approach, warning people against the use of Testing/Unstable but without really understanding how and why, and explaining what's what.

Let's not tell people that if they use Testing or Unstable the sky will fall on their head, let's explain to them what Debian is (aka what Stable is), how it works, how it differs from Testing/Unstable.
Instead of telling them that they need to get some experience before they can run Testing and then, after some more, Unstable, let's explain to them that if Stable doesn't fit their needs, in all likelihood Debian is just the wrong distribution, and that development branches are simply the misguided expectation that Debian could be something that Debian is not.

In order to do this though, we need to understand the matter better ourselves. Too many experienced Debian users, here and elsewhere, do not possess a deep understanding of the nature of Debian's branches and the difference between Stable and developmental versions, and while they are wise in acting conservatively and not playing with fire and warning others of the potential dangers, I feel they do so with the same kind of naïveté showed by those who instead tread carefree into development territory for the most misguided reasons.

Bye

User avatar
dasein
Posts: 7680
Joined: 2011-03-04 01:06
Location: Terra Incantationum

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#40 Post by dasein »

I've said this elsewhere, but am too lazy to look it up, so I'll just repeat it briefly.

The whole notion of Testing/Unstable as a "learning experience" for newbies is, IMO, a crock. By definition, what newbies need to learn is how Linux "should" work. And for that goal there is simply no better platform than Debian Stable. If newbies attempt to "learn" on the development releases, much/most of what they learn is "development releases are subject to random breakage," which is neither helpful nor particularly useful. It burdens them with an unnecessary second-order learning task, one that directly interferes with the task of, well, learning Linux.

"Learn on Stable" is the best advice any newbie can receive.

spacex
Posts: 637
Joined: 2015-01-17 01:27

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#41 Post by spacex »

dasein wrote:I've said this elsewhere, but am too lazy to look it up, so I'll just repeat it briefly.

The whole notion of Testing/Unstable as a "learning experience" for newbies is, IMO, a crock. By definition, what newbies need to learn is how Linux "should" work. And for that goal there is simply no better platform than Debian Stable. If newbies attempt to "learn" on the development releases, much/most of what they learn is "development releases are subject to random breakage," which is neither helpful nor particularly useful. It burdens them with an unnecessary second-order learning task, one that directly interferes with the task of, well, learning Linux.

"Learn on Stable" is the best advice any newbie can receive.
For the average user and newbie, yes, you are correct. Probably also correct for most users and most newbies. But you are forgetting the fact that most people are attracted to whatever is perceived as a little dangerous. That's just how a great percentage of us humans are. The ones that play it safe in Linux, are probably also the same that plays it safe elsewhere in life. A minority.

User avatar
thanatos_incarnate
Posts: 717
Joined: 2012-11-04 20:36

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#42 Post by thanatos_incarnate »

dasein wrote:[W]hat newbies need to learn is how Linux "should" work. And for that goal there is simply no better platform than Debian Stable. If newbies attempt to "learn" on the development releases, much/most of what they learn is "development releases are subject to random breakage," which is neither helpful nor particularly useful.
Exactly. On certain websites I'd very often read things like "KDE is terribly unusable" or "Mate is a piece of dodo because it crashes all the time." Guess what those people are using: Arch or non-LTS *buntu. These are also the sort of not-quite-noobies, who think they're advanced users because they installed Windows for grandma a couple of times, that go out and spread the word how "Linux isn't ready yet".

spacex
Posts: 637
Joined: 2015-01-17 01:27

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#43 Post by spacex »

thanatos_incarnate wrote:
dasein wrote:[W]hat newbies need to learn is how Linux "should" work. And for that goal there is simply no better platform than Debian Stable. If newbies attempt to "learn" on the development releases, much/most of what they learn is "development releases are subject to random breakage," which is neither helpful nor particularly useful.
Exactly. On certain websites I'd very often read things like "KDE is terribly unusable" or "Mate is a piece of dodo because it crashes all the time." Guess what those people are using: Arch or non-LTS *buntu. These are also the sort of not-quite-noobies, who think they're advanced users because they installed Windows for grandma a couple of times, that go out and spread the word how "Linux isn't ready yet".
Yes, but that's just how it is. Status is important no matter what environment and which camp you belong to. A computer isn't just a tool for tasks, just as a car isn't just a mean of transportation. It's much much more than just that. We send a signal of who we are, or at least, who we wanna be, by what we are using and how we act.

arochester
Emeritus
Emeritus
Posts: 2435
Joined: 2010-12-07 19:55
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#44 Post by arochester »

A computer isn't just a tool for tasks, just as a car isn't just a mean of transportation. It's much much more than just that.
But for some people it is.

I am reminded of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance." The central figure is not adversed to using a piece of a tin can to make a shim for his motorcycle. Another figure, when his motorcycle breaks down, will just take send it to a garage. The first could be referred to as a motorcycle geek and the second as a non-geek.

Some people are interested in computers/computing. Computer geeks for want of a better expression. It may be appropriate to provide then with"tools". Others just want to use their computer for tasks. Non-geeks. They don't want "tools", they don't want to read about things that may not be relevant - they just want answers.

Should we say to people that Debian/Linux is for geeks only and simple users should just go away?

User avatar
thanatos_incarnate
Posts: 717
Joined: 2012-11-04 20:36

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#45 Post by thanatos_incarnate »

arochester wrote: Should we say to people that Debian/Linux is for geeks only and simple users should just go away?
The answer lies in your analogy:
arochester wrote: Another figure, when his motorcycle breaks down, will just take send it to a garage.
I wouldn't say Debian isn't for beginners. But it's not for beginners who intend to use their computer as an appliance (at least not unless they have someone supervising the experience).

spacex
Posts: 637
Joined: 2015-01-17 01:27

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#46 Post by spacex »

arochester wrote:
A computer isn't just a tool for tasks, just as a car isn't just a mean of transportation. It's much much more than just that.
But for some people it is.

I am reminded of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance." The central figure is not adversed to using a piece of a tin can to make a shim for his motorcycle. Another figure, when his motorcycle breaks down, will just take send it to a garage. The first could be referred to as a motorcycle geek and the second as a non-geek.

Some people are interested in computers/computing. Computer geeks for want of a better expression. It may be appropriate to provide then with"tools". Others just want to use their computer for tasks. Non-geeks. They don't want "tools", they don't want to read about things that may not be relevant - they just want answers.

Should we say to people that Debian/Linux is for geeks only and simple users should just go away?
OK, but then we agree. The difficult thing is of course to balance the needs of both groups, in one and the same distro. Some act like only the needs of one of the groups are valid, and that's my problem. I have no problem advising the average user to stick with stable, but when the most conservative people in this community do that, they go completely overboard. Describing Testing/Unstable as a disaster area which should be avoided at all cost. We both know that this is not true. What's even worse, is that by providing that impression, they are actually making it even more appealing to the people we do not want to be using Testing/unstable.

It would be a much better approach just to simply explain what the difference between the branches are, and the purpose of each branch, and leave it at that. But that isn't what some people are doing in here, it's more like some kind of failed scare tactics. That doesn't work. It just makes Testing/Unstable all that more "cool".

Instead explain that it isn't cooler. It looks and is just the same, with a increased number of bugs, and a slightly increased risk of breakage. Some things may have improved, others may have regressed. But for all practical purposes, it's impossible to tell if you are running Stable or Unstable just by looking at it. Yes, you have newer versions of software, but in most cases this can only be noticed by the version number, not by the software itself. Testing/Unstable is useful for any kind of devs that need look ahead of the current release, or anyone that feels qualified to test for Debian, but not for normal users. There is no scenario where a normal user should ever have the need to upgrade to Testing/Unstable, as most things can be backported. Which is a much better way to do it.

But just because Unstable isn't cooler or better, and there isn't any other good reason to use it, it doesn't mean that people should be told not to use it. It's nnot anyones business what other people use. Want to support them, fine. Don't want to, then that's fine too. But spare us for the lections. They do not work. It only makes people more curious about Testing/Unstable. Surely you all must have realized this by now?

This infamous disclaimer is actually what got me into CrunchBang:
CrunchBang Linux is not recommended for anyone needing a stable system or anyone who is not comfortable running into occasional, even frequent breakage. CrunchBang Linux could possibly make your computer go CRUNCH! BANG! Therefore CrunchBang Linux comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by applicable law.
So you see, that disclaimer made me itch to try it. It should tell anyone something. That doesn't scare anyone of. It's actually great advertizing :)

cgmcgm
Posts: 52
Joined: 2016-01-28 01:05

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#47 Post by cgmcgm »

Reading most of this thread made me really sad.

If you have knowledge to share and enough time to spend on a helping forum just share it, as much as shocking it could appear to some of you I don't always understand what I read in the wiki for example, and google does not always gives the right answer either and you know that. I mean what do you expect, people coming from windows to suddenly understand the whole logic of how things work with linux in a glance?
It is my second year with linux and I am totally lost in so many areas, and if it weren't for the help I got from some people I would have probably dropped it. But I am happy I hadn't, because we all know what Microsoft and Apple are doing in the market is just wrong. They are the bad guys, not the noobs, ffs.

I honestly think Linux should be taught at school, so that everybody could learn it from young age, but we all know this isn't possible so please, do help people willing to learn if you can, if you have the time to reply "google it" you also have the time to give the answer.
System: Host: debian Kernel: 3.16.0-4-amd64 x86_64 (64 bit) Desktop: MATE 1.8.1 Distro: Debian GNU/Linux 8
Machine: Mobo: Acer model: Aspire VN7-571G v: V1.14 Bios: Insyde v: V1.14 date: 01/08/2015

User avatar
thanatos_incarnate
Posts: 717
Joined: 2012-11-04 20:36

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#48 Post by thanatos_incarnate »

cgmcgm wrote:I don't always understand what I read in the wiki for example, and google does not always gives the right answer either and you know that.
This is a perfectly legitimate occasion to start a thread and I've rarely seen people being bashed because they didn't understand a cryptic manpage after reading it. It's not even about that in this topic, it's actually about people who don't even make the effort to do research.
cgmcgm wrote: I mean what do you expect, people coming from windows to suddenly understand the whole logic of how things work with linux in a glance?
If they can read (and they all can if they're here), then I can and do expect them to follow the forum guidelines and customs of the community for lack of a better word.
cgmcgm wrote: It is my second year with linux and I am totally lost in so many areas, and if it weren't for the help I got from some people I would have probably dropped it. But I am happy I hadn't, because we all know what Microsoft and Apple are doing in the market is just wrong. They are the bad guys, not the noobs, ffs.
No one said the noobs are bad. This thread is about (or at least I intended it to be about) behaviour and habits of certain novice users.
cgmcgm wrote: I honestly think Linux should be taught at school, so that everybody could learn it from young age, but we all know this isn't possible so please, do help people willing to learn if you can, if you have the time to reply "google it" you also have the time to give the answer.
If I say "google it", I'm possibly preventing them from asking similar questions again before googling themselves. If that works in 1 of 10 cases, we're already a bit better off. This saves more of mine and their time than answering every minute question of theirs in the forums.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think they are doing this because they are evil or intentionally lazy. It's a service mentality instilled in many of us by companies which see operating systems as products or services.

User avatar
dasein
Posts: 7680
Joined: 2011-03-04 01:06
Location: Terra Incantationum

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#49 Post by dasein »

cgmcgm wrote:I don't always understand what I read in the wiki for example, and google does not always gives the right answer either and you know that. I mean what do you expect, people coming from windows to suddenly understand the whole logic of how things work with linux in a glance?
Straw man, pure and simple.

Learning Linux, like learning tap-dancing or anything else, requires a certain level of engagement and effort. If someone consults the Wiki and is unclear on certain points, no one here is going to complain if s/he posts a question asking for clarification. But when someone shows up asking to have Yet Another Tutorial on some aspect of Linux written-from-scratch just for them, or to be spoonfed rather than having to do some (*gasp*) research :shock:, then that's a fundamentally different thing.

It takes exactly the same amount of time and effort to read an existing answer as it does to read a custom-written answer, and the two answers are going to be more or less identical. So asking a stranger to spend an hour to help solve a problem that could be solved with 10 minutes' of self-directed effort is nonsensical. And rude. And self-important. And entitled. And, and, and...

No one expects a newbie to understand Linux from birth. But newbs who aren't willing or able to accept that there is indeed a "learning curve" (emphasis on learning) are not going to be successful Linux users.

cgmcgm
Posts: 52
Joined: 2016-01-28 01:05

Re: Quality of Forum Threads

#50 Post by cgmcgm »

dasein wrote:It takes exactly the same amount of time and effort to read an existing answer as it does to read a custom-written answer, and the two answers are going to be more or less identical. So asking a stranger to spend an hour to help solve a problem that could be solved with 10 minutes' of self-directed effort is nonsensical. And rude. And self-important. And entitled. And, and, and...
I don't know about that, in example I'm currently struggling with my wifi connection which keeps dropping and I've been browsing and trying various fixes found on the already countless existing threads on the net about this apparently very common issue with some even redirecting to this very forum, editing my NM conf file time and again for the last FOUR HOURS but still haven't figured it out, but I guess now if I go and open a thread about it you will think I am a rude self-entitled brat? ...
System: Host: debian Kernel: 3.16.0-4-amd64 x86_64 (64 bit) Desktop: MATE 1.8.1 Distro: Debian GNU/Linux 8
Machine: Mobo: Acer model: Aspire VN7-571G v: V1.14 Bios: Insyde v: V1.14 date: 01/08/2015

Post Reply