A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]

[Rob Weir]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Caesar <***@hiwaay.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 19:51:42 -0400, Stacie Jones
> <***@gmail.com> wrote Re Re: I Hate Your Product:
>
> >Is it a prerequisite that everyone on this list have absolutely no manners
> >whatsoever? I'm so sick of getting these nasty messages.
>
> I'm glad you brought this up. This list server seems to have the
> highest percentage of computer-clueless people I have seen anywhere.
> It's unbelievable. The top posters are the worst offenders.
>
>
A quick perspective from a list moderator.

The parent post was not sent by a list subscriber. Apache lists are
configured to allow anyone to post, including non-subscribers. If someone
is not a subscriber their posts are held for moderation. If they are not
spam, I let the post through. This is true, even if the post is rude.
(But if it included a lot of swearing I would not let it through).

Now, let's look at it from the user's perspective, and have some sympathy.
Their first choice was not to send a note to this list. Their post comes
at the end of a long chain of failures and frustrations, being bounced
around by Dell and Amazon, not figuring out OpenOffice, probably not
finding a good answer searching Google or on our website.

However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by sending
a note to this list.

A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
response.

B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
without assistance.

So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
place for users to raise such questions.

What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared to
the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both as
equal support avenues for users to raise problems. Is that what we should
be doing? In other words, what is the purpose of this list and how do we
make that clear to users?

-Rob

[M. Fioretti]

On Sat, March 31, 2012 3:57 pm, Rob Weir wrote:

> What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared
> to the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both
> as equal support avenues for users to raise problems.

Rob,

email vs forums is an almost religious issue. IMO, one if not THE purpose
of ooo mailing list is to provide users with support ALSO from those
volunteers who will never ever use forums because they like email better
and since they aren't paid they're free to say no to forums, period.

This is just my opinion, feel free to ignore it, it's no problem, but for
heaven's sake:

> However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by
> sending a note to this list.
> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
> response.

please do ban immediately from this list whoever tries to propose or
practice even here the "sending again to unsubscribed user" idiocy that
plagued the OOo lists for a decade, details here for those who ignore the
background:

http://stop.zona-m.net/2010/11/a-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-libreoffice/

The Apache foundation should have inside enough skills and/or money to
implement the autoresponder trick I've explained in that post and, many
times before that, on the OOo lists.

If nobody wants to provide support by email, and everybody wants to use
the forum, no problem, close the list and go for the forum. But if support
via mailing list is needed hire any decent programmer for a day or two to
implement the autoresponder I proposed, and then forget the whole issue.

HTH,
Marco

[Rob Weir]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM, M. Fioretti <***@nexaima.net> wrote:

>
> On Sat, March 31, 2012 3:57 pm, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> > What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared
> > to the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both
> > as equal support avenues for users to raise problems.
>
> Rob,
>
> email vs forums is an almost religious issue. IMO, one if not THE purpose
> of ooo mailing list is to provide users with support ALSO from those
> volunteers who will never ever use forums because they like email better
> and since they aren't paid they're free to say no to forums, period.
>
>
But for the people having problems, like with the previous thread, I don't
think it is a religious issue. They are not expressing a strong preference
for the list. They are just looking for help and for unknown reasons they
ended up here. But they could just as well have ended up elsewhere. For
example, we get user support questions to ooo-dev as quite a few to the
bugzilla admin address (!).


> This is just my opinion, feel free to ignore it, it's no problem, but for
> heaven's sake:
>
> > However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by
> > sending a note to this list.
> > A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> > not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on
> the
> > response.
>
> please do ban immediately from this list whoever tries to propose or
> practice even here the "sending again to unsubscribed user" idiocy that
> plagued the OOo lists for a decade, details here for those who ignore the
> background:
>
>
> http://stop.zona-m.net/2010/11/a-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-libreoffice/
>
> The Apache foundation should have inside enough skills and/or money to
> implement the autoresponder trick I've explained in that post and, many
> times before that, on the OOo lists.
>
>
The autoresponder thing sounds interesting. So you don't allow any
non-suscriber traffic. Any posts from non-susbcribers get an automatic
response that presumably outlines their support options, tells them they
would need to subscribe first if they want to post to the ooo-users list,
maybe gives some hints for writing useful support request posts, etc.

I think that would be an improvement. What do others think?

-Rob


> If nobody wants to provide support by email, and everybody wants to use
> the forum, no problem, close the list and go for the forum. But if support
> via mailing list is needed hire any decent programmer for a day or two to
> implement the autoresponder I proposed, and then forget the whole issue.
>
> HTH,
> Marco
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>
>

[M. Fioretti]

On Sat, March 31, 2012 5:28 pm, Rob Weir wrote:

> But for the people having problems, like with the previous thread, I don't
> think it is a religious issue.

of course it isn't. I agree! I was deliberately tackling a slightly
different issue: there are people who are willing to be support
volunteers, but only if they can work exclusively through email. Whether
AOO needs such people is another issue. My real point is not "ooo MUST do
support only/also via mailing lists". It is "IF support must be provided
(also) through mailing lists, please don't repeat certain errors".

> The autoresponder thing sounds interesting. So you don't allow any
> non-suscriber traffic. Any posts from non-susbcribers get an automatic
> response....

NO! Of course you can do that too, but: what I have been suggesting is
something else, much more flexible, without any manual reposting or
guesswork. I explained it several times since 2002 on the OOo lists, the
last one in this December 2011 thread (in which also Mike took part):

http://www.mail-archive.com/***@openoffice.org/msg126205.html

so I won't start from scratch now. Please take the time to read my
explanations in that short thread, and if after that there's some doubt,
don't hesitate to ask here for further clarifications.

HTH,
Marco

[Brian Barker]

At 11:28 31/03/2012 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>The autoresponder thing sounds interesting. So you don't allow any
>non-subscriber traffic. Any posts from non-subscribers get an
>automatic response that presumably outlines their support options,
>tells them they would need to subscribe first if they want to post
>to the ooo-users list, maybe gives some hints for writing useful
>support request posts, etc.
>
>I think that would be an improvement. What do others think?

Aaargh, no!

Users with problems send their request. The automatic response
doesn't answer their question, so they give up. Or they read it and
subscribe. They get no reply (the response has gone into their junk)
so they give up. Or they see that response but are still surprised
that its doesn't answer their query. They give up. Or they might
conceivably confirm their subscription and send their query yet
again. Then they see list messages and send many messages saying
"Why are you writing to me about this? Please stop" or "Sorry, I
can't help you: I'm just trying to ask a question." There then
follow messages from "experts" about how silly it was to shout or not
to quote version numbers or operating system. Oh, and a long
interaction (also shouted, of course) about how to get off this
<expletive deleted> list.

Once they are gone, it leaves the list to discuss more important
topics, such as top-posting, anti-Microsoft propaganda, how
non-subscribers should be dealt with ...

;^)

Brian Barker

[Mike Scott]

On 31/03/12 14:57, Rob Weir wrote:
...
> However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by sending
> a note to this list.
>
> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
> response.

Which brings us back the point I've just read on this list (sorry,
forget who) that it probably is a bad idea to routinely copy a poster
when emailing the list -- yet an unsubscribed poster will then miss his
answer(s). And I've not found a way on the new list of seeing who's
subscribed, and who not. It's squaring the circle, and can be resolved
(IMO) only by blocking unsubbed posters, or an automated system that
let's them know what's happening.

>
> B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
> unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
> without assistance.
>
> So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
> unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
> place for users to raise such questions.

But given that "clueless noobies" can find the list, how would they
instead be redirected to a forum, where I agree they might be better
served? Reading ability seems anything but a strong point for some, and
if people are in an emotional state /before/ they look for AOO support,
they're the more likely to miss advice on how best to get the help they
need.

That said, a ranting, raving and rude exposition of one's problem is
never a good way to garner support, in any arena. One might expect that
to be realized.

>
> What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared to
> the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both as
> equal support avenues for users to raise problems. Is that what we should
> be doing? In other words, what is the purpose of this list and how do we
> make that clear to users?

[deleted my fresh diatribe about forums. It's all been said before.]

More constructively, is there any way to arrange a gateway between list
and forum, as for usenet? Then you'd get the best of both worlds.



--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[Brian Barker]

At 16:15 31/03/2012 +0100, Mike Scott wrote:
>And I've not found a way on the new list of seeing who's subscribed,
>and who not.

Look for the header:
Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org

I trust this helps.

Brian Barker

[Mike Scott]

On 31/03/12 16:50, Brian Barker wrote:
> At 16:15 31/03/2012 +0100, Mike Scott wrote:
>> And I've not found a way on the new list of seeing who's subscribed,
>> and who not.
>
> Look for the header:
> Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
>
> I trust this helps.

OK, thanks.

BTW I think our ideas differ on usefulness of auto-responders. I've just
penned a response for up-thread, but saved it while I think more. For
one thing, I'm wondering if it's appropriate to continue a thread on a
subject that's been bashed about N times before with no clear outcome.


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[NoOp]

On 03/31/2012 08:50 AM, Brian Barker wrote:
> At 16:15 31/03/2012 +0100, Mike Scott wrote:
>>And I've not found a way on the new list of seeing who's subscribed,
>>and who not.
>
> Look for the header:
> Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
>
> I trust this helps.
>
> Brian Barker

Brian, there is an issue with Mozilla users (Thunderbird and SeaMonkey)
and duplicate header filters:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678322
[Filters not working for headers that can appear more than once (except
Received: header. if Received:, multiple headers are processed as
expected))]

The moderated messages on this list provide two 'Delivered-To:' headers:
Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org

So until that bug is resolved (or the list software puts the moderator
header before the mailing list header), the Mozilla users will need to
go back to examining each header individually.

Opera users have a similar issue: if you add the 'Delivered-To:' header,
only the first 'Delivered-To:' (Delivered-To: mailing list
ooo-***@incubator.apache.org) is displayed in the header view.

So we're back to asking each user (or at least those using Mozilla
and/or Opera) to examine each full header to determine if the poster is
subscribed or not.

A few years ago, on the OOo list I proposed having the list software (or
moderator) add a '[Moderated]' tag in the subject header. Pretty much
every newsreader and email client can filter by Subject. A adding the
'[Moderated]' tag would eliminate the need to examine (or filter)
headers. Unfortunately, that suggested ended up in the dev/null bucket:

https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=6286
https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=6286#c24

[Rob Weir]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 6:21 PM, NoOp <***@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> On 03/31/2012 08:50 AM, Brian Barker wrote:
> > At 16:15 31/03/2012 +0100, Mike Scott wrote:
> >>And I've not found a way on the new list of seeing who's subscribed,
> >>and who not.
> >
> > Look for the header:
> > Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
> >
> > I trust this helps.
> >
> > Brian Barker
>
> Brian, there is an issue with Mozilla users (Thunderbird and SeaMonkey)
> and duplicate header filters:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678322
> [Filters not working for headers that can appear more than once (except
> Received: header. if Received:, multiple headers are processed as
> expected))]
>
> The moderated messages on this list provide two 'Delivered-To:' headers:
> Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
> Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
>
> So until that bug is resolved (or the list software puts the moderator
> header before the mailing list header), the Mozilla users will need to
> go back to examining each header individually.
>
> Opera users have a similar issue: if you add the 'Delivered-To:' header,
> only the first 'Delivered-To:' (Delivered-To: mailing list
> ooo-***@incubator.apache.org) is displayed in the header view.
>
>
Gmail has a similar issue. It can only filter on the first Delivered-To
header.


> So we're back to asking each user (or at least those using Mozilla
> and/or Opera) to examine each full header to determine if the poster is
> subscribed or not.
>
> A few years ago, on the OOo list I proposed having the list software (or
> moderator) add a '[Moderated]' tag in the subject header. Pretty much
> every newsreader and email client can filter by Subject. A adding the
> '[Moderated]' tag would eliminate the need to examine (or filter)
> headers. Unfortunately, that suggested ended up in the dev/null bucket:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=6286
> https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=6286#c24
>
>
>
Well, we have different software now. The old infrastructure was SYMPA
mailing list server. At Apache we're using ezmlm. I'm not sure if the
capabilities include doing what you describe, but it is worth checking.

-Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>
>

[Mike Scott]

On 31/03/12 23:21, NoOp wrote:
> On 03/31/2012 08:50 AM, Brian Barker wrote:
>> At 16:15 31/03/2012 +0100, Mike Scott wrote:
>>> And I've not found a way on the new list of seeing who's subscribed,
>>> and who not.
>>
>> Look for the header:
>> Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
>>
>> I trust this helps.
>>
>> Brian Barker
>
> Brian, there is an issue with Mozilla users (Thunderbird and SeaMonkey)
> and duplicate header filters:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678322
> [Filters not working for headers that can appear more than once (except
> Received: header. if Received:, multiple headers are processed as
> expected))]
>
> The moderated messages on this list provide two 'Delivered-To:' headers:
> Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
> Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
>
> So until that bug is resolved (or the list software puts the moderator
> header before the mailing list header), the Mozilla users will need to
> go back to examining each header individually.

So /that's/ why the filter didn't work. Thought it was my usual finger
trouble.

Nice idea while it lasted :-) Maybe it's time to move on from TB.



--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[Regina Henschel]

Hi,
NoOp schrieb:
> On 03/31/2012 08:50 AM, Brian Barker wrote:
>> At 16:15 31/03/2012 +0100, Mike Scott wrote:
>>> And I've not found a way on the new list of seeing who's subscribed,
>>> and who not.
>>
>> Look for the header:
>> Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
>>
>> I trust this helps.
>>
>> Brian Barker
>
> Brian, there is an issue with Mozilla users (Thunderbird and SeaMonkey)
> and duplicate header filters:
>
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=678322
> [Filters not working for headers that can appear more than once (except
> Received: header. if Received:, multiple headers are processed as
> expected))]
>
> The moderated messages on this list provide two 'Delivered-To:' headers:
> Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
> Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
>
> So until that bug is resolved (or the list software puts the moderator
> header before the mailing list header), the Mozilla users will need to
> go back to examining each header individually.

I use Seamonkey, which is related to Thunderbird. I look for the text
"For additional commands, e-mail" in the body. That catches moderated
posts, because those have no footer. ( I'm not sure about it, but I
notice it in that way.) Some others are caught too, but you need not
examine _each_ header.

Kind regards
Regina

[NoOp]

On 04/01/2012 05:22 AM, Regina Henschel wrote:
> Hi,
> NoOp schrieb:
...
>> The moderated messages on this list provide two 'Delivered-To:' headers:
>> Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
>> Delivered-To: moderator for ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
>>
>> So until that bug is resolved (or the list software puts the moderator
>> header before the mailing list header), the Mozilla users will need to
>> go back to examining each header individually.
>
> I use Seamonkey, which is related to Thunderbird. I look for the text
> "For additional commands, e-mail" in the body. That catches moderated
> posts, because those have no footer. ( I'm not sure about it, but I
> notice it in that way.) Some others are caught too, but you need not
> examine _each_ header.
>
> Kind regards
> Regina

Hi Regina,

I use SeaMonkey as well:
Build identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312
Firefox/11.0 SeaMonkey/2.8
- the code is the same code Thunderbird uses.

If you are referring to the signature from the OOo user list:
> To unsubscribe send email to users-***@openoffice.org
> For additional commands send email to ***@openoffice.org
> with Subject: help
note that that this list doesn't use the same/similar. Also, the OOo
lists were 'hit-and-miss'; some posts didn't have the sig (unsubscribed
user or not), others did. So (IMO) that was/is an unreliable filter/flag.

Example: one of my posts to a moderated email (I responded because it
had '[moderated]' in the subject:

<http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.openoffice.questions/206621>
[School District - Licencing] was Re: [moderated]

There was no 'For additional commands send email' added to that post,
and I was very much subscribed. I also found that adding the following
(or similar) to any message that I cc'ed to an unsubscriber seemed to
help the poster understand that they had posted to a public mailing list:

====
Note: you have been cc'd on this response as you posted to an
OpenOffice.org mailing list. Please reply only to users <at> openoffice.org
Additional information regarding this public mailing list is available
here: http://www.openoffice.org/mail_list.html
====
another:
You have been cc'd on this reply as you have posted
to an open OpenOffice.org (OOo) mailng list. For further information
regarding OOo mailing lists, please see:
http://www.openoffice.org/mail_list.html
Please reply *only* to the list at ***@openoffice.org
====

There were a few added variations that included how to read reponses on
the list archive, or gmane.org. I've lost my reponse template, so I
can't find added examples just now. The info was added to encourage the
unsub to reply back to the list rather than to me personally. That way
others could continue assisting if my reponse didn't work.

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

Fioretti's auto-replier idea is more interesting than a bounce with instructions to non-subscribers. It in effect makes a moderated-in non-subscriber an automatic subscriber to the thread which they have initiated, and to only that thread. I think that such a mechanism should notify the OP that is happening and provide other information as well.

It is an intriguing proposal. I am not so sure about the edge cases, but they can't be as messy as what happens now in reality.

- Dennis

PS: Readers should not presume that there are unlimited resources available to others. The extent to which ASF is operated by volunteers with a wide range of different skills (collectively, not necessarily individually) is quite remarkable.

[From one moderator to another, here]

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:***@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 08:28
To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM, M. Fioretti <***@nexaima.net> wrote:

>
> On Sat, March 31, 2012 3:57 pm, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> > What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared
> > to the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both
> > as equal support avenues for users to raise problems.
>
> Rob,
>
> email vs forums is an almost religious issue. IMO, one if not THE purpose
> of ooo mailing list is to provide users with support ALSO from those
> volunteers who will never ever use forums because they like email better
> and since they aren't paid they're free to say no to forums, period.
>
>
But for the people having problems, like with the previous thread, I don't
think it is a religious issue. They are not expressing a strong preference
for the list. They are just looking for help and for unknown reasons they
ended up here. But they could just as well have ended up elsewhere. For
example, we get user support questions to ooo-dev as quite a few to the
bugzilla admin address (!).


> This is just my opinion, feel free to ignore it, it's no problem, but for
> heaven's sake:
>
> > However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by
> > sending a note to this list.
> > A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> > not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on
> the
> > response.
>
> please do ban immediately from this list whoever tries to propose or
> practice even here the "sending again to unsubscribed user" idiocy that
> plagued the OOo lists for a decade, details here for those who ignore the
> background:
>
>
> http://stop.zona-m.net/2010/11/a-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-libreoffice/
>
> The Apache foundation should have inside enough skills and/or money to
> implement the autoresponder trick I've explained in that post and, many
> times before that, on the OOo lists.
>
>
The autoresponder thing sounds interesting. So you don't allow any
non-suscriber traffic. Any posts from non-susbcribers get an automatic
response that presumably outlines their support options, tells them they
would need to subscribe first if they want to post to the ooo-users list,
maybe gives some hints for writing useful support request posts, etc.

I think that would be an improvement. What do others think?

-Rob


> If nobody wants to provide support by email, and everybody wants to use
> the forum, no problem, close the list and go for the forum. But if support
> via mailing list is needed hire any decent programmer for a day or two to
> implement the autoresponder I proposed, and then forget the whole issue.
>
> HTH,
> Marco
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>
>

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

Oh, I have also seen lists that will ensure only a single copy is sent when one of the addressee e-mail addresses matches one of a list subscriber.

I haven't noticed that recently. I suppose the use-case conflict is when there are those who file material differently depending on whether a message was sent directly to them. My e-mail client will still allow me to sort incoming by a rule that recognizes when I am directly mentioned as an addressee, even if it is from a list I follow.

[So there are more workflow cases here and one size still does not fit all.]

- Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:***@acm.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 09:07
To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]

Fioretti's auto-replier idea is more interesting than a bounce with instructions to non-subscribers. It in effect makes a moderated-in non-subscriber an automatic subscriber to the thread which they have initiated, and to only that thread. I think that such a mechanism should notify the OP that is happening and provide other information as well.

It is an intriguing proposal. I am not so sure about the edge cases, but they can't be as messy as what happens now in reality.

- Dennis

PS: Readers should not presume that there are unlimited resources available to others. The extent to which ASF is operated by volunteers with a wide range of different skills (collectively, not necessarily individually) is quite remarkable.

[From one moderator to another, here]

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:***@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 08:28
To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM, M. Fioretti <***@nexaima.net> wrote:

>
> On Sat, March 31, 2012 3:57 pm, Rob Weir wrote:
>
> > What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared
> > to the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both
> > as equal support avenues for users to raise problems.
>
> Rob,
>
> email vs forums is an almost religious issue. IMO, one if not THE purpose
> of ooo mailing list is to provide users with support ALSO from those
> volunteers who will never ever use forums because they like email better
> and since they aren't paid they're free to say no to forums, period.
>
>
But for the people having problems, like with the previous thread, I don't
think it is a religious issue. They are not expressing a strong preference
for the list. They are just looking for help and for unknown reasons they
ended up here. But they could just as well have ended up elsewhere. For
example, we get user support questions to ooo-dev as quite a few to the
bugzilla admin address (!).


> This is just my opinion, feel free to ignore it, it's no problem, but for
> heaven's sake:
>
> > However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by
> > sending a note to this list.
> > A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> > not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on
> the
> > response.
>
> please do ban immediately from this list whoever tries to propose or
> practice even here the "sending again to unsubscribed user" idiocy that
> plagued the OOo lists for a decade, details here for those who ignore the
> background:
>
>
> http://stop.zona-m.net/2010/11/a-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-libreoffice/
>
> The Apache foundation should have inside enough skills and/or money to
> implement the autoresponder trick I've explained in that post and, many
> times before that, on the OOo lists.
>
>
The autoresponder thing sounds interesting. So you don't allow any
non-suscriber traffic. Any posts from non-susbcribers get an automatic
response that presumably outlines their support options, tells them they
would need to subscribe first if they want to post to the ooo-users list,
maybe gives some hints for writing useful support request posts, etc.

I think that would be an improvement. What do others think?

-Rob


> If nobody wants to provide support by email, and everybody wants to use
> the forum, no problem, close the list and go for the forum. But if support
> via mailing list is needed hire any decent programmer for a day or two to
> implement the autoresponder I proposed, and then forget the whole issue.
>
> HTH,
> Marco
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org

[Rob Weir]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
***@acm.org> wrote:

> Fioretti's auto-replier idea is more interesting than a bounce with
> instructions to non-subscribers. It in effect makes a moderated-in
> non-subscriber an automatic subscriber to the thread which they have
> initiated, and to only that thread. I think that such a mechanism should
> notify the OP that is happening and provide other information as well.
>
> It is an intriguing proposal. I am not so sure about the edge cases, but
> they can't be as messy as what happens now in reality.
>
>

Can anyone thing of an end user product with a user base the size of
OpenOffice that is successful doing user support via an email list?

The all-to-all paradigm seems doomed to suffer from information scaling
problems, as well as the obvious signal/noise problems and the
disproportionate impact of a handful of novice users without list skills.

Marco's ideas sound like a different list paradigm that might work, but
would require some custom coding.

Another option is to consider that there are more off-tue-shelf tools
available for support than just forums and mailing lists. Collaborative
Q&A sites like StackExchange give a lot more ability for the community to
police itself, rating question and answers up or down, tagging questions,
a better search interface, cross linking of questions, etc.

-Rob




> - Dennis
>
> PS: Readers should not presume that there are unlimited resources
> available to others. The extent to which ASF is operated by volunteers
> with a wide range of different skills (collectively, not necessarily
> individually) is quite remarkable.
>
> [From one moderator to another, here]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:***@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 08:28
> To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]
>
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM, M. Fioretti <***@nexaima.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sat, March 31, 2012 3:57 pm, Rob Weir wrote:
> >
> > > What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared
> > > to the support forums? On some project communications we advertise
> both
> > > as equal support avenues for users to raise problems.
> >
> > Rob,
> >
> > email vs forums is an almost religious issue. IMO, one if not THE purpose
> > of ooo mailing list is to provide users with support ALSO from those
> > volunteers who will never ever use forums because they like email better
> > and since they aren't paid they're free to say no to forums, period.
> >
> >
> But for the people having problems, like with the previous thread, I don't
> think it is a religious issue. They are not expressing a strong preference
> for the list. They are just looking for help and for unknown reasons they
> ended up here. But they could just as well have ended up elsewhere. For
> example, we get user support questions to ooo-dev as quite a few to the
> bugzilla admin address (!).
>
>
> > This is just my opinion, feel free to ignore it, it's no problem, but for
> > heaven's sake:
> >
> > > However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by
> > > sending a note to this list.
> > > A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he
> is
> > > not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on
> > the
> > > response.
> >
> > please do ban immediately from this list whoever tries to propose or
> > practice even here the "sending again to unsubscribed user" idiocy that
> > plagued the OOo lists for a decade, details here for those who ignore the
> > background:
> >
> >
> >
> http://stop.zona-m.net/2010/11/a-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-libreoffice/
> >
> > The Apache foundation should have inside enough skills and/or money to
> > implement the autoresponder trick I've explained in that post and, many
> > times before that, on the OOo lists.
> >
> >
> The autoresponder thing sounds interesting. So you don't allow any
> non-suscriber traffic. Any posts from non-susbcribers get an automatic
> response that presumably outlines their support options, tells them they
> would need to subscribe first if they want to post to the ooo-users list,
> maybe gives some hints for writing useful support request posts, etc.
>
> I think that would be an improvement. What do others think?
>
> -Rob
>
>
> > If nobody wants to provide support by email, and everybody wants to use
> > the forum, no problem, close the list and go for the forum. But if
> support
> > via mailing list is needed hire any decent programmer for a day or two to
> > implement the autoresponder I proposed, and then forget the whole issue.
> >
> > HTH,
> > Marco
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>
>

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

I agree with Rob that there is something about how the use cases don't seem to fit. Alternatives would be valuable.

I am not clear how the StackExchange sites are appealing for novices though. It strikes me that those venues are definitely oriented toward power users and enthusiasts, at least: <http://stackexchange.com/sites?view=list#questionsperday>. I have a standing query for StackExchange posts that mention OpenOffice and there are 1-2 per day, tops. These are usually not beginner questions. Some could be answered on the Community Forums but I would not ever expect to see most of those on this list, for example.

If there were an OpenOffice exchange for the OpenOffice.org-lineage products, I am not certain that the StackExchange requirements for a sustaining site would be satisfied, although I see a large number of low-activity StackExchange sites on the end of that list.

I think there is another factor too. My sense is that many users do not want to bring their problems to a public setting. That may well be without ever using a public list. The "fear of embarrassment" threshold appears to be very low. I suppose that is an invariant, but it is probably a good reason for us to be very careful with newcomers who have shown the courage, perhaps the anger, to bring themselves here or to a forum.

I think that ways to provide assistance via the product is also important to consider, although it is known that help systems are under-used.

I support consideration of all the avenues that may improve the success of users who stumble in their installation and use of the software and/or their use of support resources.

Meanwhile, I also think there is significant room for improvement of list operation and removal of some of the friction that appears to be a barrier to so many.

- Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:***@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 09:43
To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
***@acm.org> wrote:

> Fioretti's auto-replier idea is more interesting than a bounce with
> instructions to non-subscribers. It in effect makes a moderated-in
> non-subscriber an automatic subscriber to the thread which they have
> initiated, and to only that thread. I think that such a mechanism should
> notify the OP that is happening and provide other information as well.
>
> It is an intriguing proposal. I am not so sure about the edge cases, but
> they can't be as messy as what happens now in reality.
>
>

Can anyone thing of an end user product with a user base the size of
OpenOffice that is successful doing user support via an email list?

The all-to-all paradigm seems doomed to suffer from information scaling
problems, as well as the obvious signal/noise problems and the
disproportionate impact of a handful of novice users without list skills.

Marco's ideas sound like a different list paradigm that might work, but
would require some custom coding.

Another option is to consider that there are more off-tue-shelf tools
available for support than just forums and mailing lists. Collaborative
Q&A sites like StackExchange give a lot more ability for the community to
police itself, rating question and answers up or down, tagging questions,
a better search interface, cross linking of questions, etc.

-Rob




> - Dennis
>
> PS: Readers should not presume that there are unlimited resources
> available to others. The extent to which ASF is operated by volunteers
> with a wide range of different skills (collectively, not necessarily
> individually) is quite remarkable.
>
> [From one moderator to another, here]
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:***@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 08:28
> To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]
>
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM, M. Fioretti <***@nexaima.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Sat, March 31, 2012 3:57 pm, Rob Weir wrote:
> >
> > > What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared
> > > to the support forums? On some project communications we advertise
> both
> > > as equal support avenues for users to raise problems.
> >
> > Rob,
> >
> > email vs forums is an almost religious issue. IMO, one if not THE purpose
> > of ooo mailing list is to provide users with support ALSO from those
> > volunteers who will never ever use forums because they like email better
> > and since they aren't paid they're free to say no to forums, period.
> >
> >
> But for the people having problems, like with the previous thread, I don't
> think it is a religious issue. They are not expressing a strong preference
> for the list. They are just looking for help and for unknown reasons they
> ended up here. But they could just as well have ended up elsewhere. For
> example, we get user support questions to ooo-dev as quite a few to the
> bugzilla admin address (!).
>
>
> > This is just my opinion, feel free to ignore it, it's no problem, but for
> > heaven's sake:
> >
> > > However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by
> > > sending a note to this list.
> > > A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he
> is
> > > not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on
> > the
> > > response.
> >
> > please do ban immediately from this list whoever tries to propose or
> > practice even here the "sending again to unsubscribed user" idiocy that
> > plagued the OOo lists for a decade, details here for those who ignore the
> > background:
> >
> >
> >
> http://stop.zona-m.net/2010/11/a-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-libreoffice/
> >
> > The Apache foundation should have inside enough skills and/or money to
> > implement the autoresponder trick I've explained in that post and, many
> > times before that, on the OOo lists.
> >
> >
> The autoresponder thing sounds interesting. So you don't allow any
> non-suscriber traffic. Any posts from non-susbcribers get an automatic
> response that presumably outlines their support options, tells them they
> would need to subscribe first if they want to post to the ooo-users list,
> maybe gives some hints for writing useful support request posts, etc.
>
> I think that would be an improvement. What do others think?
>
> -Rob
>
>
> > If nobody wants to provide support by email, and everybody wants to use
> > the forum, no problem, close the list and go for the forum. But if
> support
> > via mailing list is needed hire any decent programmer for a day or two to
> > implement the autoresponder I proposed, and then forget the whole issue.
> >
> > HTH,
> > Marco
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>
>

[Rob Weir]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 1:46 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <***@acm.org
> wrote:

> I agree with Rob that there is something about how the use cases don't
> seem to fit. Alternatives would be valuable.
>
> I am not clear how the StackExchange sites are appealing for novices
> though. It strikes me that those venues are definitely oriented toward
> power users and enthusiasts, at least: <
> http://stackexchange.com/sites?view=list#questionsperday>. I have a
> standing query for StackExchange posts that mention OpenOffice and there
> are 1-2 per day, tops. These are usually not beginner questions. Some
> could be answered on the Community Forums but I would not ever expect to
> see most of those on this list, for example.
>
>
You are correct, that would be more for power users and enthusiasts. But
let's be honest with us, do we really have the ability, through this list,
to support "average" users? I don't think so. I've done technical
support, early in my career, for Lotus 1-2-3. The problem with
novice-to-average users is they don't have enough of a mental model for how
their system works, let alone the application, to help you understand what
their problem is. Supporting users at that level is like playing a game of
"20 questions". It is hard enough over the phone, but via an email list is
is nearly impossible, especially if the user is not subscribed to the list
in the first place.

Personally, I think this list could be good for power users, and in general
for "2nd line" or "2nd tier" support, i.e., where issues on the support
forums can can escalated if things cannot be resolved there. This list
could also be a fine place for subscribers who are supporting other users
with OpenOffice, in their companies or among their friends or family.

But I just don't see how we can help users who are unable to use a mailing
list effectively. How would you do telephone technical support for someone
who did not know how to use a telephone properly?


> If there were an OpenOffice exchange for the OpenOffice.org-lineage
> products, I am not certain that the StackExchange requirements for a
> sustaining site would be satisfied, although I see a large number of
> low-activity StackExchange sites on the end of that list.
>
> I think there is another factor too. My sense is that many users do not
> want to bring their problems to a public setting. That may well be without
> ever using a public list. The "fear of embarrassment" threshold appears to
> be very low. I suppose that is an invariant, but it is probably a good
> reason for us to be very careful with newcomers who have shown the courage,
> perhaps the anger, to bring themselves here or to a forum.
>
>
We're someone insulated from that since most users who post without
subscribing probably do not realize their posts are publicly archived. But
this could bite us in the future. As moderator, I've tried to be sensitive
to this, and if a post comes through that seems to be sharing too much
personal information I reject it and contact the author directly. But this
approach won't scale.


> I think that ways to provide assistance via the product is also important
> to consider, although it is known that help systems are under-used.
>
> I support consideration of all the avenues that may improve the success of
> users who stumble in their installation and use of the software and/or
> their use of support resources.
>
> Meanwhile, I also think there is significant room for improvement of list
> operation and removal of some of the friction that appears to be a barrier
> to so many.
>
> - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rob Weir [mailto:***@apache.org]
> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 09:43
> To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]
>
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
> ***@acm.org> wrote:
>
> > Fioretti's auto-replier idea is more interesting than a bounce with
> > instructions to non-subscribers. It in effect makes a moderated-in
> > non-subscriber an automatic subscriber to the thread which they have
> > initiated, and to only that thread. I think that such a mechanism should
> > notify the OP that is happening and provide other information as well.
> >
> > It is an intriguing proposal. I am not so sure about the edge cases, but
> > they can't be as messy as what happens now in reality.
> >
> >
>
> Can anyone thing of an end user product with a user base the size of
> OpenOffice that is successful doing user support via an email list?
>
> The all-to-all paradigm seems doomed to suffer from information scaling
> problems, as well as the obvious signal/noise problems and the
> disproportionate impact of a handful of novice users without list skills.
>
> Marco's ideas sound like a different list paradigm that might work, but
> would require some custom coding.
>
> Another option is to consider that there are more off-tue-shelf tools
> available for support than just forums and mailing lists. Collaborative
> Q&A sites like StackExchange give a lot more ability for the community to
> police itself, rating question and answers up or down, tagging questions,
> a better search interface, cross linking of questions, etc.
>
> -Rob
>
>
>
>
> > - Dennis
> >
> > PS: Readers should not presume that there are unlimited resources
> > available to others. The extent to which ASF is operated by volunteers
> > with a wide range of different skills (collectively, not necessarily
> > individually) is quite remarkable.
> >
> > [From one moderator to another, here]
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rob Weir [mailto:***@apache.org]
> > Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 08:28
> > To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your
> Product]
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 10:11 AM, M. Fioretti <***@nexaima.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Sat, March 31, 2012 3:57 pm, Rob Weir wrote:
> > >
> > > > What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list
> compared
> > > > to the support forums? On some project communications we advertise
> > both
> > > > as equal support avenues for users to raise problems.
> > >
> > > Rob,
> > >
> > > email vs forums is an almost religious issue. IMO, one if not THE
> purpose
> > > of ooo mailing list is to provide users with support ALSO from those
> > > volunteers who will never ever use forums because they like email
> better
> > > and since they aren't paid they're free to say no to forums, period.
> > >
> > >
> > But for the people having problems, like with the previous thread, I
> don't
> > think it is a religious issue. They are not expressing a strong
> preference
> > for the list. They are just looking for help and for unknown reasons
> they
> > ended up here. But they could just as well have ended up elsewhere. For
> > example, we get user support questions to ooo-dev as quite a few to the
> > bugzilla admin address (!).
> >
> >
> > > This is just my opinion, feel free to ignore it, it's no problem, but
> for
> > > heaven's sake:
> > >
> > > > However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by
> > > > sending a note to this list.
> > > > A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he
> > is
> > > > not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied
> on
> > > the
> > > > response.
> > >
> > > please do ban immediately from this list whoever tries to propose or
> > > practice even here the "sending again to unsubscribed user" idiocy that
> > > plagued the OOo lists for a decade, details here for those who ignore
> the
> > > background:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://stop.zona-m.net/2010/11/a-proposal-for-effective-volunteer-friendly-user-support-in-libreoffice/
> > >
> > > The Apache foundation should have inside enough skills and/or money to
> > > implement the autoresponder trick I've explained in that post and, many
> > > times before that, on the OOo lists.
> > >
> > >
> > The autoresponder thing sounds interesting. So you don't allow any
> > non-suscriber traffic. Any posts from non-susbcribers get an automatic
> > response that presumably outlines their support options, tells them they
> > would need to subscribe first if they want to post to the ooo-users list,
> > maybe gives some hints for writing useful support request posts, etc.
> >
> > I think that would be an improvement. What do others think?
> >
> > -Rob
> >
> >
> > > If nobody wants to provide support by email, and everybody wants to use
> > > the forum, no problem, close the list and go for the forum. But if
> > support
> > > via mailing list is needed hire any decent programmer for a day or two
> to
> > > implement the autoresponder I proposed, and then forget the whole
> issue.
> > >
> > > HTH,
> > > Marco
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>
>

[M. Fioretti]

On Sat, March 31, 2012 9:47 pm, Rob Weir wrote:
> do we really have the ability, through this list,
> to support "average" users? I don't think so.

that's why I've always said "IF" you want to use a mailing list, then do...

> The problem with novice-to-average users is they don't have enough of a
> mental model for how their system works, let alone the application, to
> help you understand what their problem is.

absolutely correct. I know people who say "to save the file, click on that
little TV drawing", or say that their operating system is "Intel Inside, I
think"

> But I just don't see how we can help users who are unable to use a mailing
> list effectively.

with the autoresponder they wouldn't need to know how to use a mailing
list. They would only need to know how to write and read email, and how to
click on a link.

> We're someone insulated from that since most users who post without
> subscribing probably do not realize their posts are publicly archived.
> But this could bite us in the future.

scratch "could". It will for sure, and for much less than "personal
information". The OOo list saw several cases a year of people throwing a
tantrum because their precious email address had "been put on the Internet
by the OOo people", maybe six months after the fact.

At the end of the day, maybe the real issue is "how much do you want/need
also the help of people who will only provide it through a mailing list"

Marco

[M. Fioretti]

On Sat, March 31, 2012 6:42 pm, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <
> ***@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> Fioretti's auto-replier idea is more interesting than a bounce with
>> instructions to non-subscribers. It in effect makes a moderated-in
>> non-subscriber an automatic subscriber to the thread which they have
>> initiated, and to only that thread.

correct. And the only custom coding required is:

1) shell script that writes to a text file that procmail can read name and
address of every list subscriber (only needed if the native subscribers
list, which the mailing list software must have anyway, isn't already in a
format that procmail may use)

2) set up fake email address which will receive email to process with
procmail

3) write procmail recipe

4) fire and forget

total effort may be as low as ~1 day of work of a competent shell/procmail
programmer

with respect to this:

> Can anyone thing of an end user product with a user base the size of
> OpenOffice that is successful doing user support via an email list?

if you browsed the many threads in which I've tried to promote this idea,
I've always pointed out myself that the problem with OOo-users was that
people wanted to implement a full blown online help-desk system with a
tool (mailing list) which is intrinsically born and made to do completely
different stuff.

I'm not saying that in this case THE way is mailing lists. I am saying
that if you want to do with a mailing list something that _looks_ like an
help desk to casual novices needing it maybe once in life, then my
autoresponder is many order of magnitudes better than anything else seen
around OOo/AOO so far.

> the disproportionate impact of a handful of novice users without list
> skills.

not sure what you mean with this sentence, but with the autoresponder only
people who know what a mailing list is, know how to use it properly and
want to do it would need to subscribe. Does this answer your concern?

Marco

[John Hart]

This is a test post to determine what replying to the list does.

I love your Product and know it's essential for the future growth of
computer technology.

I appreciate everything OO volunteers do and urge them to keep up the
good work.

jrh

[Mike Scott]

On 31/03/2012 23:21, John Hart wrote:
> This is a test post to determine what replying to the list does.

It produces a needed ray of sunshine in an otherwise rather gloomy
corner of the net.

Thanks for the positive message!

>
> I love your Product and know it's essential for the future growth of
> computer technology.
>
> I appreciate everything OO volunteers do and urge them to keep up the
> good work.


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[Alan Schaaf]

I second that thought. People who use computers and software have a
responsibility to learn how to use both. It's sort of like learning to
drive and then getting a drivers license. Before you take a car our by
yourself you passed a basic proficiency test.

Between the person and their computer there is no testing agency...you have
to be responsible and learn by whatever method you can.

To the developers and testers please don't let one irresponsible driver
ruin your day. Drive on past the wreck...it's obvious this driver is not
badly injured...we've all seen the emails....

Thanks for all your creativity, hard work and results.

Alan

On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Mike Scott <***@scottsonline.org.uk> wrote:

> On 31/03/2012 23:21, John Hart wrote:
>
>> This is a test post to determine what replying to the list does.
>>
>
> It produces a needed ray of sunshine in an otherwise rather gloomy corner
> of the net.
>
> Thanks for the positive message!
>
>
>> I love your Product and know it's essential for the future growth of
>> computer technology.
>>
>> I appreciate everything OO volunteers do and urge them to keep up the
>> good work.
>>
>
>
> --
> Mike Scott
> Harlow, Essex, England
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@**incubator.apache.org<ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.**apache.org<ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org>
>
>

[David B Teague sr]

On 3/31/2012 6:21 PM, John Hart wrote:
> This is a test post to determine what replying to the list does.
>
> I love your Product and know it's essential for the future growth of
> computer technology.
>
> I appreciate everything OO volunteers do and urge them to keep up the
> good work.
>
> jrh
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>


Me too! Thanks everyone who has contributed.

David B Teague
User of OO.o since 1.1, and of free and paid Star Office in the years
previous.


--
nil significat nisi oscillat

[Stacie Jones]

I won't apologize for not sympathizing with someone that starts out by
being defensive! This list has as many purposes(is that a word?) are there
are subscribers. I personally will not vote for enabling flamers! In an
ideal world, netiquette is unnecessary, old-fashioned manners are enough.
Thanks All,
Stacie
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Rob Weir <***@apache.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Caesar <***@hiwaay.net> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 19:51:42 -0400, Stacie Jones
> > <***@gmail.com> wrote Re Re: I Hate Your Product:
> >
> > >Is it a prerequisite that everyone on this list have absolutely no
> manners
> > >whatsoever? I'm so sick of getting these nasty messages.
> >
> > I'm glad you brought this up. This list server seems to have the
> > highest percentage of computer-clueless people I have seen anywhere.
> > It's unbelievable. The top posters are the worst offenders.
> >
> >
> A quick perspective from a list moderator.
>
> The parent post was not sent by a list subscriber. Apache lists are
> configured to allow anyone to post, including non-subscribers. If someone
> is not a subscriber their posts are held for moderation. If they are not
> spam, I let the post through. This is true, even if the post is rude.
> (But if it included a lot of swearing I would not let it through).
>
> Now, let's look at it from the user's perspective, and have some sympathy.
> Their first choice was not to send a note to this list. Their post comes
> at the end of a long chain of failures and frustrations, being bounced
> around by Dell and Amazon, not figuring out OpenOffice, probably not
> finding a good answer searching Google or on our website.
>
> However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by sending
> a note to this list.
>
> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
> response.
>
> B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
> unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
> without assistance.
>
> So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
> unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
> place for users to raise such questions.
>
> What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared to
> the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both as
> equal support avenues for users to raise problems. Is that what we should
> be doing? In other words, what is the purpose of this list and how do we
> make that clear to users?
>
> -Rob
>



--
Peace,
Stacie M. Jones
~"Lokaa samastaa sukhino bhavantu,"~
"May all worlds be happy."

[Hagar Delest]

Le Sat, 31 Mar 2012 09:57:48 -0400, Rob Weir <***@apache.org> a écrit :
> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
> response.

Well, it's part of the channel. There are ways to spot unsubscribed posters (there are some bugs in TB preventing that, I agree) So up to the list power users to handle such posters.
On the former OOo mailing list, users were quite used to CC OP when not subscribed IIRC (and at this time TB was doing a good job at spotting the headers, ok I'll stop here no TB devs here).


> B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
> unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
> without assistance.
>
> So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
> unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
> place for users to raise such questions.
>
> What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared to
> the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both as
> equal support avenues for users to raise problems. Is that what we should
> be doing? In other words, what is the purpose of this list and how do we
> make that clear to users?

Basically, I'm not sure that redirecting a user to another place (forum for example) would help, it doesn't answer the question and it adds frustration (he has to register the forum whereas he was expecting a direct answer from the list).

What would be the list then? A place for somehow advanced users only? ... Just saw your post in the mean time, so yes, that's what you want.
Then, the solution is quite simple: forbid any non subscribed user.
But is it really the kind of support the community wants? Some users don't want to use forums, does it means that they are on their own?
You're dealing with a low level user base with OOo. The public is not made of developers used to mailing lists here, they are standard or low knowledge users. The former list was full of duplicates, the same questions come again and again, but that's the job.
We have this kind of eternal September in the forum too. We could just reply "RTFM" or "Google is your friend". But we know that if the user asked the question, that's because he hasn't RTFM or searched the web or the forum. So we give the reply and that's all, that's part of the job (it doesn't prevent to add a note inviting to search the next time).

Perhaps there are good reasons from our side to be bored with such users but their situation is special: they got frustrated about the application (from their point of view) and first they are not in their normal state and second any reply that doesn't help will be seen as proof that the product is not user oriented.

Hagar

[Ian]

Sent from my iPhone

On 31 Mar 2012, at 21:40, Hagar Delest <***@laposte.net> wrote:

> Le Sat, 31 Mar 2012 09:57:48 -0400, Rob Weir <***@apache.org> a écrit :
>> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
>> not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
>> response.
>
> Well, it's part of the channel. There are ways to spot unsubscribed posters (there are some bugs in TB preventing that, I agree) So up to the list power users to handle such posters.
> On the former OOo mailing list, users were quite used to CC OP when not subscribed IIRC (and at this time TB was doing a good job at spotting the headers, ok I'll stop here no TB devs here).
>
>
>> B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
>> unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
>> without assistance.
>>
>> So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
>> unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
>> place for users to raise such questions.
>>
>> What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared to
>> the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both as
>> equal support avenues for users to raise problems. Is that what we should
>> be doing? In other words, what is the purpose of this list and how do we
>> make that clear to users?
>
> Basically, I'm not sure that redirecting a user to another place (forum for example) would help, it doesn't answer the question and it adds frustration (he has to register the forum whereas he was expecting a direct answer from the list).
>
> What would be the list then? A place for somehow advanced users only? ... Just saw your post in the mean time, so yes, that's what you want.
> Then, the solution is quite simple: forbid any non subscribed user.
> But is it really the kind of support the community wants? Some users don't want to use forums, does it means that they are on their own?
> You're dealing with a low level user base with OOo. The public is not made of developers used to mailing lists here, they are standard or low knowledge users. The former list was full of duplicates, the same questions come again and again, but that's the job.
> We have this kind of eternal September in the forum too. We could just reply "RTFM" or "Google is your friend". But we know that if the user asked the question, that's because he hasn't RTFM or searched the web or the forum. So we give the reply and that's all, that's part of the job (it doesn't prevent to add a note inviting to search the next time).
>
> Perhaps there are good reasons from our side to be bored with such users but their situation is special: they got frustrated about the application (from their point of view) and first they are not in their normal state and second any reply that doesn't help will be seen as proof that the product is not user oriented.
>
> Hagar
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>

[Ian]

I downloaded Open Office at about 3 pm today and can't believe the deluge of bad-tempered emails, largely unintelligible to me, which have landed on me since then. Is there any reason why I should go on subscribing to this or does that question answer itself?

Cheers

Sent from my iPhone

On 31 Mar 2012, at 21:40, Hagar Delest <***@laposte.net> wrote:

> Le Sat, 31 Mar 2012 09:57:48 -0400, Rob Weir <***@apache.org> a écrit :
>> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
>> not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
>> response.
>
> Well, it's part of the channel. There are ways to spot unsubscribed posters (there are some bugs in TB preventing that, I agree) So up to the list power users to handle such posters.
> On the former OOo mailing list, users were quite used to CC OP when not subscribed IIRC (and at this time TB was doing a good job at spotting the headers, ok I'll stop here no TB devs here).
>
>
>> B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
>> unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
>> without assistance.
>>
>> So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
>> unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
>> place for users to raise such questions.
>>
>> What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared to
>> the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both as
>> equal support avenues for users to raise problems. Is that what we should
>> be doing? In other words, what is the purpose of this list and how do we
>> make that clear to users?
>
> Basically, I'm not sure that redirecting a user to another place (forum for example) would help, it doesn't answer the question and it adds frustration (he has to register the forum whereas he was expecting a direct answer from the list).
>
> What would be the list then? A place for somehow advanced users only? ... Just saw your post in the mean time, so yes, that's what you want.
> Then, the solution is quite simple: forbid any non subscribed user.
> But is it really the kind of support the community wants? Some users don't want to use forums, does it means that they are on their own?
> You're dealing with a low level user base with OOo. The public is not made of developers used to mailing lists here, they are standard or low knowledge users. The former list was full of duplicates, the same questions come again and again, but that's the job.
> We have this kind of eternal September in the forum too. We could just reply "RTFM" or "Google is your friend". But we know that if the user asked the question, that's because he hasn't RTFM or searched the web or the forum. So we give the reply and that's all, that's part of the job (it doesn't prevent to add a note inviting to search the next time).
>
> Perhaps there are good reasons from our side to be bored with such users but their situation is special: they got frustrated about the application (from their point of view) and first they are not in their normal state and second any reply that doesn't help will be seen as proof that the product is not user oriented.
>
> Hagar
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>

[Hagar Delest]

Let's hope it will change with an AOO release...

> I downloaded Open Office at about 3 pm today and can't believe the deluge of bad-tempered emails, largely unintelligible to me, which have landed on me since then. Is there any reason why I should go on subscribing to this or does that question answer itself?
>
> Cheers

[Terry]

That is a very good question.  Most of the debate relating to this subject is between Apache insiders.  I see no reason why 'users' should be involuntarily involved in the discussions.



----- Original Message -----
> From: Ian <***@gmail.com>
> To: "ooo-***@incubator.apache.org" <ooo-***@incubator.apache.org>
> Cc: "ooo-***@incubator.apache.org" <ooo-***@incubator.apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, 1 April 2012 6:57 AM
> Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]
>
> I downloaded Open Office at about 3 pm today and can't believe the deluge of
> bad-tempered emails, largely unintelligible to me, which have landed on me since
> then. Is there any reason why I should go on subscribing to this or does that
> question answer itself?
>
> Cheers
>
> Sent from  my iPhone
>
> On 31 Mar 2012, at 21:40, Hagar Delest <***@laposte.net> wrote:
>

[David Rivers]

On the other hand, there are those of us users who are not Apache
insiders, but nevertheless like to pick up tips from the chaff and help
out others when we can. :)
Terry wrote:
> That is a very good question. Most of the debate relating to this subject is between Apache insiders. I see no reason why 'users' should be involuntarily involved in the discussions.
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Ian<***@gmail.com>
>> To: "ooo-***@incubator.apache.org"<ooo-***@incubator.apache.org>
>> Cc: "ooo-***@incubator.apache.org"<ooo-***@incubator.apache.org>
>> Sent: Sunday, 1 April 2012 6:57 AM
>> Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]
>>
>> I downloaded Open Office at about 3 pm today and can't believe the deluge of
>> bad-tempered emails, largely unintelligible to me, which have landed on me since
>> then. Is there any reason why I should go on subscribing to this or does that
>> question answer itself?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 31 Mar 2012, at 21:40, Hagar Delest<***@laposte.net> wrote:
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org

[Rob Weir]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Hagar Delest <***@laposte.net>wrote:

> Le Sat, 31 Mar 2012 09:57:48 -0400, Rob Weir <***@apache.org> a écrit
> :
>
> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
>> not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
>> response.
>>
>
> Well, it's part of the channel. There are ways to spot unsubscribed
> posters (there are some bugs in TB preventing that, I agree) So up to the
> list power users to handle such posters.
> On the former OOo mailing list, users were quite used to CC OP when not
> subscribed IIRC (and at this time TB was doing a good job at spotting the
> headers, ok I'll stop here no TB devs here).
>
>
>
> B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
>> unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
>> without assistance.
>>
>> So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
>> unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
>> place for users to raise such questions.
>>
>> What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared
>> to
>> the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both as
>> equal support avenues for users to raise problems. Is that what we should
>> be doing? In other words, what is the purpose of this list and how do we
>> make that clear to users?
>>
>
> Basically, I'm not sure that redirecting a user to another place (forum
> for example) would help, it doesn't answer the question and it adds
> frustration (he has to register the forum whereas he was expecting a direct
> answer from the list).
>
>
Honestly, I think a large percentage of posts from non-subscribers don't
even realize that they are posting to a list. They think they are sending
an email to a private support list. In other words, they think it is
similar to how they get support for many other software products. Although
we say it is a "mailing list" and recently changed that to say "public
mailing list" on the website, I don't think that sinks in.

If they post to the forums, however, this is clear. The act of
registration, of seeing the other posts already there, this sets the
context and makes it clear what the user is dealing with. With the mailing
list the user starts with zero context. It is just an email address.


> What would be the list then? A place for somehow advanced users only? ...
> Just saw your post in the mean time, so yes, that's what you want.
> Then, the solution is quite simple: forbid any non subscribed user.
> But is it really the kind of support the community wants? Some users don't
> want to use forums, does it means that they are on their own?
>

I think the users want to send to a private support address where they will
receive a personal response with no extraneous emails.

Of course, we don't have that.

So what is better for that kind of user? Fool them into thinking that
ooo-users is what they want? Or direct them to the forums? Neither is
what they really their preference. But I'm not sure we're really helping
the average user if we direct them to a mailing list like this.


> You're dealing with a low level user base with OOo. The public is not made
> of developers used to mailing lists here, they are standard or low
> knowledge users. The former list was full of duplicates, the same questions
> come again and again, but that's the job.
> We have this kind of eternal September in the forum too. We could just
> reply "RTFM" or "Google is your friend". But we know that if the user asked
> the question, that's because he hasn't RTFM or searched the web or the
> forum. So we give the reply and that's all, that's part of the job (it
> doesn't prevent to add a note inviting to search the next time).
>
>
I understand. Users don't become smarter just because they are using the
forums. But I think the technology makes it easier for them. Once they
get beyond the initial registration the experience is quite nice and hard
to mess up.

The other critical thing is that it is very hard for a single user on the
forums to make a miserable situation for all other members. There is not
the all-to-all message sending. That alone is a great improvement.
(Noting as well that Marco has an idea for how that could be done with
mailing lists as well).


> Perhaps there are good reasons from our side to be bored with such users
> but their situation is special: they got frustrated about the application
> (from their point of view) and first they are not in their normal state and
> second any reply that doesn't help will be seen as proof that the product
> is not user oriented.
>
> Hagar
>
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@**incubator.apache.org<ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.**apache.org<ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org>
>
>

[Martin Groenescheij]

On 1/04/2012 7:53 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> I think the users want to send to a private
> support address where they will receive a
> personal response with no extraneous emails.
>
> Of course, we don't have that.
>
> So what is better for that kind of user? Fool
> them into thinking that ooo-users is what they
> want? Or direct them to the forums? Neither is
> what they really their preference. But I'm not
> sure we're really helping the average user if we
> direct them to a mailing list like this.
If you have health problems and want support, you
have to follow a certain protocol, go to your GP
and get a referral for a specialist. There is no
way you can consult a specialist without this
referral, so why couldn't we direct users to a forum?

[NoOp]

On 03/31/2012 01:40 PM, Hagar Delest wrote:
> Le Sat, 31 Mar 2012 09:57:48 -0400, Rob Weir <***@apache.org> a
> écrit :
>> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list,
>> he is not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly
>> copied on the response.
>
> Well, it's part of the channel. There are ways to spot unsubscribed
> posters (there are some bugs in TB preventing that, I agree) So up to
> the list power users to handle such posters. On the former OOo
> mailing list, users were quite used to CC OP when not subscribed IIRC

Sorry, but you'd be wrong Hagar... the OOo list (user and discuss) is
full of worthless to-and-fro electrons about 'good ways' if any, to
reliably spot 'Moderated' posts. You should know that as you've posted
on the OOo list (and thanks for doing so) for a few years. Could it be
that you just popped in when a forum user needed added help?

> (and at this time TB was doing a good job at spotting the headers, ok
> I'll stop here no TB devs here).

Again there was quite a bit of disussion regarding that issue as well.
It was only when TB allowed filtering on headers that the situation
improved (briefly) for those TB/SeaMonkey users. However, it was still
hit & miss a some users knew how to apply the filters, most did not.
Even back as far as 2005 headers containd a dual 'Delivered-To' header.
And in 2009 I pursued the issue on the Mozilla bug:
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16913#c101
Also see:
<http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.openoffice.questions/202093>
for an example thread on the subject.

>
>
>> B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated
>> by unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe
>> themselves without assistance.

@ Rob: I suspect that the majority of those "unrelated questions and
answers" will subside with valid subscribed posters/readers.

>>
>> So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
>> unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much
>> better place for users to raise such questions.
>>
>> What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list
>> compared to the support forums? On some project communications we
>> advertise both as equal support avenues for users to raise
>> problems. Is that what we should be doing? In other words, what
>> is the purpose of this list and how do we make that clear to
>> users?
>
> Basically, I'm not sure that redirecting a user to another place
> (forum for example) would help, it doesn't answer the question and it
> adds frustration (he has to register the forum whereas he was
> expecting a direct answer from the list).

And there is the key... "(he has to register the forum whereas he was
expecting a direct answer from the list)". So after all the wasted time,
effort, patience of OOo responders attempting to sort out the
subscribe/unsubscribe issue, it still comes down to: it's perfectly OK
to have the requirement for posters to register (subscribe) to the
forum, but hey, anyone can post to the user lists without ever subscribing.

>
> What would be the list then? A place for somehow advanced users only?

What is the forum then: A place for advanced users only?

> ... Just saw your post in the mean time, so yes, that's what you
> want. Then, the solution is quite simple: forbid any non subscribed
> user.

Agreed.

> But is it really the kind of support the community wants? Some

Yes IMO. Why is it good for the gander but not the goose?

> users don't want to use forums, does it means that they are on their
> own? You're dealing with a low level user base with OOo. The public

No, idealy means that the "user" will need to do exactly the same as
when they wish to ask a question on your forum; subscribe/register
before doing so. If a 'user' doesn't wish to use forums, then they are
very welcome on the lists, providing that they understand what the list
is, and subscribe before posting.

> is not made of developers used to mailing lists here, they are
> standard or low knowledge users. The former list was full of
> duplicates, the same questions come again and again, but that's the
> job.

Really? You started posting on the OOo list in 2009... the bulk of posts
you made start & continue with links/references to the forums. That is
quite OK & I very much appreciate your contribution & excellent advise.
However I'd have to look real hard to find any of your posts to an
'unsubscribed' or 'Moderated' user on the OOo user list.
So in all fairness, I do not think that you've delt with the
'unsubscribed' OOo list user supporters that became *highly frustrated*
with the subscribe/unsubscribe issue.
...

[Hagar Delest]

Le Sat, 31 Mar 2012 19:08:39 -0700, NoOp <***@sbcglobal.net> a écrit :
> On 03/31/2012 01:40 PM, Hagar Delest wrote:
>> ... On the former OOo
>> mailing list, users were quite used to CC OP when not subscribed IIRC
>
> Sorry, but you'd be wrong Hagar... the OOo list (user and discuss) is
> full of worthless to-and-fro electrons about 'good ways' if any, to
> reliably spot 'Moderated' posts. You should know that as you've posted
> on the OOo list (and thanks for doing so) for a few years. Could it be
> that you just popped in when a forum user needed added help?

I may be wrong but my feeling was that in the end, the filter trick was quite used.
And no, there was no preference about help given, I replied only for trivial questions that had already a good fix in the forum or the need of screenshots, especially for the spell check tutorial.


> And there is the key... "(he has to register the forum whereas he was
> expecting a direct answer from the list)". So after all the wasted time,
> effort, patience of OOo responders attempting to sort out the
> subscribe/unsubscribe issue, it still comes down to: it's perfectly OK
> to have the requirement for posters to register (subscribe) to the
> forum, but hey, anyone can post to the user lists without ever subscribing.

That's a choice, that's all. We could have allowed guest posts in the forum, it would have been a real mess then, that's why it is not allowed.
If you allow un-subscribed messages to the list, then be prepared to answer (and tag) them. Else, just make clear that's impossible.


>> What would be the list then? A place for somehow advanced users only?
>
> What is the forum then: A place for advanced users only?

Ah, good point, had never thought about that. Then, yes, we have made that choice. And the result is a quite nice place, without the noise we can find on a ML. Look at the topics, they are all linked to a relevant question. Plenty of them are duplicates of course but the reply is always neat: one post is enough to point to the relevant fix. If additional comments needed, others can contribute. But there are not tons of mail coming.


>> But is it really the kind of support the community wants? Some
>
> Yes IMO. Why is it good for the gander but not the goose?

Agreed.


>> users don't want to use forums, does it means that they are on their
>> own? You're dealing with a low level user base with OOo. The public
>
> No, idealy means that the "user" will need to do exactly the same as
> when they wish to ask a question on your forum; subscribe/register
> before doing so. If a 'user' doesn't wish to use forums, then they are
> very welcome on the lists, providing that they understand what the list
> is, and subscribe before posting.

Agreed. I think that there should be a small wiki page explaining low level users what is a mailing list, that messages are public and indexed by search engines. Don't know if there is already something like that (similar to what can be found on netiquette).


> Really? You started posting on the OOo list in 2009... the bulk of posts
> you made start& continue with links/references to the forums. That is
> quite OK& I very much appreciate your contribution& excellent advise.
> However I'd have to look real hard to find any of your posts to an
> 'unsubscribed' or 'Moderated' user on the OOo user list.
> So in all fairness, I do not think that you've delt with the
> 'unsubscribed' OOo list user supporters that became *highly frustrated*
> with the subscribe/unsubscribe issue.

Indeed, I've learned about the moderated header rather late. I remember from the date I set up filters in TB to have CC the OP when non subscribed. So I may have missed all of them before and also after the bug appeared (I discovered it only few days ago, as you may have noticed from my mail in another topic in this list). So I may have participated to frustration of non subscribed users. Since I rarely replied to the mailing list, I never questioned myself about the seemingly disappearance of the non subscribed users according to the TB filter. My bad.

Hagar

[Scooter C]

This whole discussion is off the mark!!
Caesar is absolutely right.
Computer illiterates have no business owning a computer UNLESS they put
forth SOME effort to learn.

Learning on this list is NOT good for anyone.
We're here for a specific purpose Open Office
*I vote to disallow non-subscribers* for all the reasons given
and strongly suggest some rules be made to for dismissal of
disruptive list members

Hopefully this will be my last rant.
Take Care.
Scooter
College Park, MD USA

Rob Weir wrote on 3/31/2012 9:57 AM:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Caesar<***@hiwaay.net> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 30 Mar 2012 19:51:42 -0400, Stacie Jones
>> <***@gmail.com> wrote Re Re: I Hate Your Product:
>>
>>> Is it a prerequisite that everyone on this list have absolutely no manners
>>> whatsoever? I'm so sick of getting these nasty messages.
>> I'm glad you brought this up. This list server seems to have the
>> highest percentage of computer-clueless people I have seen anywhere.
>> It's unbelievable. The top posters are the worst offenders.
>>
>>
> A quick perspective from a list moderator.
>
> The parent post was not sent by a list subscriber. Apache lists are
> configured to allow anyone to post, including non-subscribers. If someone
> is not a subscriber their posts are held for moderation. If they are not
> spam, I let the post through. This is true, even if the post is rude.
> (But if it included a lot of swearing I would not let it through).
>
> Now, let's look at it from the user's perspective, and have some sympathy.
> Their first choice was not to send a note to this list. Their post comes
> at the end of a long chain of failures and frustrations, being bounced
> around by Dell and Amazon, not figuring out OpenOffice, probably not
> finding a good answer searching Google or on our website.
>
> However, I think a user that is in this state is not best served by sending
> a note to this list.
>
> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
> response.
>
> B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
> unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
> without assistance.
>
> So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
> unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
> place for users to raise such questions.
>
> What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list compared to
> the support forums? On some project communications we advertise both as
> equal support avenues for users to raise problems. Is that what we should
> be doing? In other words, what is the purpose of this list and how do we
> make that clear to users?
>
> -Rob
>

[Hagar Delest]

Le Sat, 31 Mar 2012 17:32:51 -0400, Scooter C <***@scootersdesk.com> a écrit :
> This whole discussion is off the mark!!
> Caesar is absolutely right.
<snip>
>> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Caesar<***@hiwaay.net> wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>> It's unbelievable. The top posters are the worst offenders.

You made my day!
Sorry, couldn't resist.

Hagar

[John Hart]

On 3/31/2012 2:32 PM, Scooter C wrote:
> This whole discussion is off the mark!!
> Caesar is absolutely right.
> Computer illiterates have no business owning a computer UNLESS they
> put forth SOME effort to learn.
I disagree with the attitude but agree with the content of this point.


>
>
> Learning on this list is NOT good for anyone.
> We're here for a specific purpose Open Office
> *I vote to disallow non-subscribers* for all the reasons given
> and strongly suggest some rules be made to for dismissal of
> disruptive list members

Non subscriber posts could be moderated before going to the list and
responses could be tagged by respondents to be sent back to non
subscribers if they were appropriate.

>
>
> Hopefully this will be my last rant.
> Take Care.
> Scooter
> College Park, MD USA

jrh

[Rory O'Farrell]

On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 15:37:23 -0700
John Hart <***@testra.com> wrote:

> On 3/31/2012 2:32 PM, Scooter C wrote:
> > This whole discussion is off the mark!!
> > Caesar is absolutely right.
> > Computer illiterates have no business owning a computer UNLESS they
> > put forth SOME effort to learn.
> I disagree with the attitude but agree with the content of this point.
>
>
> >
> >
> > Learning on this list is NOT good for anyone.
> > We're here for a specific purpose Open Office
> > *I vote to disallow non-subscribers* for all the reasons given
> > and strongly suggest some rules be made to for dismissal of
> > disruptive list members
>
> Non subscriber posts could be moderated before going to the list and
> responses could be tagged by respondents to be sent back to non
> subscribers if they were appropriate.

The best method would be some mechanism whereby moderation was not necessary - say if a list daemon could identify that the user was not subscribed and insert an automatic Reply-to or CC/BCC. Moderation is a heavy burden to place on anyone - automation is preferable. No matter what course is taken it won't please everyone.

--
Rory O'Farrell <***@iol.ie>

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

Non-subscriber posts ARE moderated.

However, the moderators have limited options with regard to approving/rejecting posts. One can approve the message or reject it. (A reason for rejection can be given but I have no idea what is done with those.)

The moderator sees the message as an attachment to the moderation message. It is possible to reply to it in addition-to/instead-of allowing the post to go to the list.

The problem is that all (the few, the proud, the irritable) moderators here receive the same message for moderation approval/rejection. The moderators can copy each other via the moderator address so the others know the disposition, but it gets ungainly quickly.

In moderating here, my job is done if I see that the post has already reached the list. If not, I check the submitted message mainly for spam to discard, including the occasional LinkedIn connection request to the list. I will not know whether another moderator has done the same thing already.

If the message is related to OpenOffice-lineage support, I approve it, allowing peer support to do the rest.

As this list becomes a bigger target for support requests/grievances/etc, human moderation will break down under scale.

- Dennis

PS: As the moderator of an unrelated private list, I regularly reply to non-spam requests that I am not approving. I copy the other moderators of that list so they know and so they can provide more-specific responses if they wish. However, this is a case where someone is using the wrong list entirely and they need to know that there are other places to post their problems/concerns. That is, they need to come to a list like this one or find a forum.

-----Original Message-----
From: John Hart [mailto:***@testra.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 15:37
To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]

[ ... ]

Non subscriber posts could be moderated before going to the list and
responses could be tagged by respondents to be sent back to non
subscribers if they were appropriate.

[ ... ]

[Rob Weir]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 7:19 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <***@acm.org
> wrote:

> Non-subscriber posts ARE moderated.
>
> However, the moderators have limited options with regard to
> approving/rejecting posts. One can approve the message or reject it. (A
> reason for rejection can be given but I have no idea what is done with
> those.)
>
>
I assume it goes back to the sender. I've used that markup a few times,
but I've never seen what it looks like on the receiving end. Maybe worth
an experiment sometime.


> The moderator sees the message as an attachment to the moderation message.
> It is possible to reply to it in addition-to/instead-of allowing the post
> to go to the list.
>
> The problem is that all (the few, the proud, the irritable) moderators
> here receive the same message for moderation approval/rejection. The
> moderators can copy each other via the moderator address so the others know
> the disposition, but it gets ungainly quickly.
>
> In moderating here, my job is done if I see that the post has already
> reached the list. If not, I check the submitted message mainly for spam to
> discard, including the occasional LinkedIn connection request to the list.
> I will not know whether another moderator has done the same thing already.
>
>
I do similar, but I don't check to see if the post is already on the list.
if you approve an already-approved message it is a no-op. So I find it is
faster to approve than to check the list. Your mileage may vary.


> If the message is related to OpenOffice-lineage support, I approve it,
> allowing peer support to do the rest.
>
> As this list becomes a bigger target for support requests/grievances/etc,
> human moderation will break down under scale.
>
>
Summarizing the analysis of user support via ooo-users mailing list:

Pro:

Some users prefer email
Some volunteers prefer email
Does not require registration

Con:

Users not receiving responses since they are often not subscribed
Users posting personal information because they think they are posting to a
private address
Users frustrated by traffic level of list
Users unable to unsubscribe
Attachments not allowed
Not easy to search for previous issses and resolutions
No ability to categorize issues, update useless subject lines (e.g,,
"Help!") or mark an issue as resolved.

But note that despite these limitations other Apache projects do fine with
their existing users lists. Some are quite large. The Tomcat users list,
for example, has over 3000 subscribers and at times has had over 4000
posts/month:

http://markmail.org/search/+list:org.apache.tomcat.users

How do they manage it? Is it purely skill level of the users? End user
versus server products?

-Rob

- Dennis
>
> PS: As the moderator of an unrelated private list, I regularly reply to
> non-spam requests that I am not approving. I copy the other moderators of
> that list so they know and so they can provide more-specific responses if
> they wish. However, this is a case where someone is using the wrong list
> entirely and they need to know that there are other places to post their
> problems/concerns. That is, they need to come to a list like this one or
> find a forum.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Hart [mailto:***@testra.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 15:37
> To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]
>
> [ ... ]
>
> Non subscriber posts could be moderated before going to the list and
> responses could be tagged by respondents to be sent back to non
> subscribers if they were appropriate.
>
> [ ... ]
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
>
>

[Mike Scott]

On 01/04/12 00:57, Rob Weir wrote:
...
> But note that despite these limitations other Apache projects do fine with
> their existing users lists. Some are quite large. The Tomcat users list,
> for example, has over 3000 subscribers and at times has had over 4000
> posts/month:

That's a totally unfair comparison though! (Sorry to be blunt)

"Apache Tomcat is an open source software implementation of the Java
Servlet and JavaServer Pages ...." (I'd never even heard of it before).
OOo/AOO clearly has an intended rather wider and less computer-literate
user interest base. It's hardly surprising the OO list has more problems
due to unskilled users.

The question here is how to offer help /both/ to those who can barely
find the on-off switch much less describe a problem concisely, as well
as to those who are highly competent and technically skilled.


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[M. Fioretti]

On Sun, April 1, 2012 1:57 am, Rob Weir wrote:

> Is it purely skill level of the users? End user versus server products?

yes, that's the only reason we have a problem. An office suite is used by
people who only bought a computer because they can't buy typewriters
anymore.

For any other product, I'd be saying "just silently discard email from
unsubscribed users". But this is probably the first encounter of many
people with FOSS, so it's surely the skill level is much lower, but those
people can't be ignored.

> Summarizing the analysis of user support via ooo-users mailing list:

I took the liberty to rearrange your cons in another way:

> Users not receiving responses since they are often not subscribed
> Users frustrated by traffic level of list
> Users unable to unsubscribe

The above become non-issues with my autoresponder

> Users [thinking[ they are posting to a private address

write very big in the help pages and in the website that everything posted
to this address stays on the internet forever, and it's not your problem
anymore.

> Attachments not allowed

this, I confess, remains an issue I don't know how to handle. Though I've
seen it being a problem very few times.

> Not easy to search for previous issses and resolutions
> No ability to categorize issues, update useless subject lines (e.g,,
> "Help!") or mark an issue as resolved.

with the exception of the "mark as resolved" bit, these issues (IF a
mailing list is used, of course) are ONLY the fault of the well meaning,
but clueless SUBSCRIBERS who answer in the wrong way.

If the archives don't look categorized and/or aren't easy to search it is
mainly for two reasons:

1) people fight to death on top vs bottom posting, but none of them ever
cares to TRIM useless text before replying. If they did, not only
top-vs-bottom posting would stop being relevant in 90% of cases, but any
search would return 10 instead of 50 results.

2) Joe Clueless User must be excused if he sends an email with an empty or
totally useless subject like "help" or "openoffice". But the volunteer who
doesn't reply CHANGING THE SUBJECT TO SOMETHING MEANINGFUL (e.g. "how to
create a custom paragraph style, was "Help with paragraphs") is doing a
disservice open office, because he is filling the archives with messages
that aren't easy to search.

Sure, with forums categorization is (theoretically) much less manual. But
that would matter if we were discussing how to support people who ARE able
to recognize by themselves which category their question belongs to...

Marco

[Mike Scott]

On 01/04/12 14:17, M. Fioretti wrote:
...
>> Users [thinking[ they are posting to a private address
>
> write very big in the help pages and in the website that everything posted
> to this address stays on the internet forever, and it's not your problem
> anymore.

Hmmm. There's still those who 'bought' OOo on one of those dubious
websites, and been given the mail list as the "support" email address. I
see that as a good reason for requiring subscription.

...
> If the archives don't look categorized and/or aren't easy to search it is
> mainly for two reasons:
>
> 1) people fight to death on top vs bottom posting, but none of them ever
> cares to TRIM useless text before replying. If they did, not only

A perennial problem, and not just here. uk.legal, for example, has posts
where you wade through screenfuls of irrelevant, multiple-depth-quoted
stuff to find the single-line followup at the bottom.

> top-vs-bottom posting would stop being relevant in 90% of cases, but any
> search would return 10 instead of 50 results.
>
> 2) Joe Clueless User must be excused if he sends an email with an empty or

Why? Even JCU must realise that a box for "subject" should contain
/something/, surely? And a modicum of common sense would dictate that
the mere fact of sending the mail says that "Help" is implicit, so the
subject might just contain something useful instead. Maybe that's the
problem - I fear "common sense" to be in increasingly short supply, and
the list must needs cope.

> totally useless subject like "help" or "openoffice". But the volunteer who
> doesn't reply CHANGING THE SUBJECT TO SOMETHING MEANINGFUL (e.g. "how to
> create a custom paragraph style, was "Help with paragraphs") is doing a
> disservice open office, because he is filling the archives with messages
> that aren't easy to search.

I agree. But I also have to admit I've done it. If you're dashing off a
quick response to an easy query, it's too easy to forget. (Sorry!)


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[M. Fioretti]

On Sun, April 1, 2012 4:31 pm, Mike Scott wrote:

> There's still those who 'bought' OOo on one of those dubious
> websites, and been given the mail list as the "support" email address. I
> see that as a good reason for requiring subscription.

First of all, if they politely ask for help instead of demanding a refund,
why shouldn't they get it? Secondly, IIRC, those people are MUCH less than
those who did download the software for free from the original website,
but will panic when subscribed to a mailing list, make everybody's life
impossible because they can't unsubscribe etc.

And in any case you will never cover all the possible cases with a bunch
of volunteers and none or very little money for infrastructure. Just
ignore the corner cases. Trying to deal with all the possible corner cases
of "how to recognize unsubscribed users from email headers" is what
paralyzed ooo-users for ten years.


> Why? Even JCU must realise that a box for "subject" should contain
> /something/, surely?

1) No, not at all. Not in this case, I mean. Rob explained it well at the
beginning of the thread. Open Office support is needed (also) by all the
countless people who can barely turn their computer on.

2) Such people would very often write wrong subject, e.g. "printing
problem" when it is a formatting or style problem instead. So you can't
count on the subject having anything at all to do with the actual issue


> I agree. But I also have to admit I've done it. If you're dashing off a
> quick response to an easy query, it's too easy to forget. (Sorry!)

I wasn't criticizing occasional slips. On ooo-users there were
"volunteers" who NEVER bothered to change the subject when they answered,
and when I explained to them how and why this was a disservice, all I got
was insults.

Marco

[Mike Scott]

On 01/04/12 17:49, M. Fioretti wrote:
>
> On Sun, April 1, 2012 4:31 pm, Mike Scott wrote:
>
>> There's still those who 'bought' OOo on one of those dubious
>> websites, and been given the mail list as the "support" email address. I
>> see that as a good reason for requiring subscription.
>
> First of all, if they politely ask for help instead of demanding a refund,
> why shouldn't they get it? Secondly, IIRC, those people are MUCH less than

No reason at all. I was just thinking that they're likely to be the ones
that think this is a formal "support line", and having paid (in their
mind) for the service are more likely to be stroppy.

> those who did download the software for free from the original website,
> but will panic when subscribed to a mailing list, make everybody's life
> impossible because they can't unsubscribe etc.
>
> And in any case you will never cover all the possible cases with a bunch
> of volunteers and none or very little money for infrastructure. Just
> ignore the corner cases. Trying to deal with all the possible corner cases
> of "how to recognize unsubscribed users from email headers" is what
> paralyzed ooo-users for ten years.

No. But "corner cases" can be mighty annoying, far beyond what their
mere numbers might suggest. Although I suppose if no-one (or just one)
rose to the bait, it might help. There's a reason for the saying, "do
not feed the trolls", which I see applies here too.

....
>...... On ooo-users there were
> "volunteers" who NEVER bothered to change the subject when they answered,
> and when I explained to them how and why this was a disservice, all I got
> was insults.

Now that really is a sad state of affairs. I'm sorry.


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[M. Fioretti]

On Sun, April 1, 2012 9:06 pm, Mike Scott wrote:

> "corner cases" can be mighty annoying, far beyond what their
> mere numbers might suggest.

I agree. The reason why I am so quick to tell people to ignore them in
this case is that it was always so difficult to manage the basic case.

> Now that really is a sad state of affairs. I'm sorry.


thanks! Seriously!

Marco

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

It is fascinating to me that when users figure out how to submit a bug on our Bugzilla, it is likely closed as an user support question, usually with a remark that the support lists be used.

Hah!

Meanwhile, I completely support seeing if there is a secure way to implement Marco Fieretti's technique for pseudo-subscribing unsubscribed users. I don't have the chops for that, but I would certainly like to see someone who does and can work with ASF Infrastructure to do it.

I would recommend that messages that are forwarded in that manner have bottom-of-message, and maybe an added top-line message that advises the OP what is happening and how to control it, especially where to find the list archive so that it is understood what has happened and what the conversations are. There could also be suggestion of alternatives (maybe a link to a page about what peer support is and where to find it in all of its forms.

I would also like to see a modification so that duplicates are not sent to a subscriber when it is possible to determine that.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rob Weir [mailto:***@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 14:53
To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]

[ ... ]

Honestly, I think a large percentage of posts from non-subscribers don't
even realize that they are posting to a list. They think they are sending
an email to a private support list. In other words, they think it is
similar to how they get support for many other software products. Although
we say it is a "mailing list" and recently changed that to say "public
mailing list" on the website, I don't think that sinks in.

[ ... ]

I think the users want to send to a private support address where they will
receive a personal response with no extraneous emails.

Of course, we don't have that.

So what is better for that kind of user? Fool them into thinking that
ooo-users is what they want? Or direct them to the forums? Neither is
what they really their preference. But I'm not sure we're really helping
the average user if we direct them to a mailing list like this.

[ ... ]

The other critical thing is that it is very hard for a single user on the
forums to make a miserable situation for all other members. There is not
the all-to-all message sending. That alone is a great improvement.
(Noting as well that Marco has an idea for how that could be done with
mailing lists as well).


[ ... ]

[Mike Scott]

On 31/03/2012 23:43, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> It is fascinating to me that when users figure out how to submit a
> bug on our Bugzilla, it is likely closed as an user support question,
> usually with a remark that the support lists be used.

Bugzilla was (is??) a real pain. As an ordinary user, it was never clear
what many of the categories meant. I eventually gave up and simply
worked round bugs (if no help was possible from the list).
>
> Hah!

Indeed.

>
> Meanwhile, I completely support seeing if there is a secure way to
> implement Marco Fieretti's technique for pseudo-subscribing
> unsubscribed users. I don't have the chops for that, but I would
> certainly like to see someone who does and can work with ASF
> Infrastructure to do it.

Marco and I don't agree on the "right" way (if indeed there is any such
thing), but I fully support the basic idea of an auto-responder. Others
differ, I know. I see the switch to Apache as a good time to set such
things in motion.

I did mention elsewhere about gatewaying between the list and a web
forum, which might offer possibilities, but would be harder. One could
do both!


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[M. Fioretti]

On Sun, April 1, 2012 9:32 am, Mike Scott wrote:

> Marco and I don't agree on the "right" way

Mike,
I confess I forgot what is exactly that we disagree about.

Marco

[Mike Scott]

On 01/04/12 14:22, M. Fioretti wrote:
>
> On Sun, April 1, 2012 9:32 am, Mike Scott wrote:
>
>> Marco and I don't agree on the "right" way
>
> Mike,
> I confess I forgot what is exactly that we disagree about.
>
> Marco
>

Actually, while I remember a disagreement, I'm not sure myself of the
details. I think it might have been about using some sort of engine to
guess a likely answer to unsubscribed queries - I vaguely seem to recall
you didn't approve: apologies if my memory is wrong.

On that latter point, do I understand correctly that the basis of your
approach is to track incoming unsubbed emails, and automatically copy
corresponding list responses to their originators, so removing the
subbed/unsubbed issue entirely? Response would still be from a person,
but they'd not have to worry that the originator might not receive the
reply.

My thought was that unsubbed emails could be redirected to an
autoresponder, which would analyse the email and send a likely answer
(if possible) plus carefully worded information about subscribing and
the benefits (and otherwise) of doing that.

One might mix both approaches.


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[M. Fioretti]

On Sun, April 1, 2012 4:41 pm, Mike Scott wrote:

> Actually, while I remember a disagreement, I'm not sure myself of the
> details. I think it might have been about using some sort of engine to
> guess a likely answer to unsubscribed queries - I vaguely seem to recall
> you didn't approve:

Yes, now I remember, thanks. I stepped in because you suggested a bayesian
autoresponder, and I explained why in my opinion it wouldn't work in this
case. But it was a purely technical disagreement, nothing personal. Heck,
I was so happy to have found somebody else that didn't want to "send again
to unsubscribed user"!. Anyway, it's all in the thread I posted yesterday.

apologies if my memory is wrong.
>
> On that latter point, do I understand correctly that the basis of your
> approach is to track incoming unsubbed emails, and automatically copy
> corresponding list responses to their originators, so removing the
> subbed/unsubbed issue entirely? Response would still be from a person,
> but they'd not have to worry that the originator might not receive the
> reply.

correct. The way I propose to recognize unsubscribed users is the ONLY one
that can work because, running on the same server as the mailing list
software, can do it in the right way: checking if the sender address is in
the list of subscribers :-)

Then it sends copy of all and only the list replies to that message to
that sender address. Details in the thread I posted yesterday, there's no
need I type the whole thing again.


> plus carefully worded information about subscribing and
> the benefits (and otherwise) of doing that. One might mix both approaches

Bayesian filters cannot work in this case because they assume that the
sender knows what he's talking about. And it's not needed at all, if the
sender receives answers from real humans anyway. But of course the copy
automatically sent by the autoresponder can and should have added the
extra info you describe.

Marco

[Mike Scott]

On 01/04/12 18:01, M. Fioretti wrote:
>
> On Sun, April 1, 2012 4:41 pm, Mike Scott wrote:
>
>> Actually, while I remember a disagreement, I'm not sure myself of the
>> details. I think it might have been about using some sort of engine to
>> guess a likely answer to unsubscribed queries - I vaguely seem to recall
>> you didn't approve:
>
> Yes, now I remember, thanks. I stepped in because you suggested a bayesian
> autoresponder, and I explained why in my opinion it wouldn't work in this
> case. But it was a purely technical disagreement, nothing personal. Heck,

Nothing personal taken. We're all allowed - I hope - our opinions.

I did actually start categorising list responses at one time, just to
see if a Bayesian system might work (it was only a particular example).
But it was taking too much time, so I dropped the project and chucked
the data. Ah well.

....

> Bayesian filters cannot work in this case because they assume that the

Maybe. I don't know, and thought it might be worth trying. There's
usually /some/ key word or phrase that gives the game away.

> sender knows what he's talking about. And it's not needed at all, if the
> sender receives answers from real humans anyway. But of course the copy

One thing I was trying to reduce was the endless repetition of the same
answers. People have better things to do, I hope, than tell endless
numbers of others the same thing over and over -- 'you unsubscribe
by.......'. Boring to do, boring to see on list.



--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[M. Fioretti]

On Sun, April 1, 2012 9:15 pm, Mike Scott wrote:

>> Bayesian filters cannot work in this case because they assume that the
>
> Maybe. I don't know, and thought it might be worth trying.

the "cannot work" above is just a strong feeling of mine, but nothing I
would feel hurt or offended if proved wrong!

>> sender knows what he's talking about. And it's not needed at all, if the
>> sender receives answers from real humans anyway. But of course the copy
>
> One thing I was trying to reduce was the endless repetition of the same
> answers.

Here's a thought: couldn't whoever has admin access to the website add a
google search box to the page where the list address is, with written
"only write to this address if this search doesn't work" in big letters
all over it?

Marco

[Rob Weir]

On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Mike Scott <***@scottsonline.org.uk> wrote:

> On 01/04/12 18:01, M. Fioretti wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sun, April 1, 2012 4:41 pm, Mike Scott wrote:
>>
>> Actually, while I remember a disagreement, I'm not sure myself of the
>>> details. I think it might have been about using some sort of engine to
>>> guess a likely answer to unsubscribed queries - I vaguely seem to recall
>>> you didn't approve:
>>>
>>
>> Yes, now I remember, thanks. I stepped in because you suggested a bayesian
>> autoresponder, and I explained why in my opinion it wouldn't work in this
>> case. But it was a purely technical disagreement, nothing personal. Heck,
>>
>
> Nothing personal taken. We're all allowed - I hope - our opinions.
>
> I did actually start categorising list responses at one time, just to see
> if a Bayesian system might work (it was only a particular example). But it
> was taking too much time, so I dropped the project and chucked the data. Ah
> well.
>
> ....
>
>
> Bayesian filters cannot work in this case because they assume that the
>>
>
> Maybe. I don't know, and thought it might be worth trying. There's usually
> /some/ key word or phrase that gives the game away.
>
>
I think it is fair to say it would work some of the time. But I don't
think there are any silver bullets here.




> sender knows what he's talking about. And it's not needed at all, if the
>> sender receives answers from real humans anyway. But of course the copy
>>
>
> One thing I was trying to reduce was the endless repetition of the same
> answers. People have better things to do, I hope, than tell endless numbers
> of others the same thing over and over -- 'you unsubscribe by.......'.
> Boring to do, boring to see on list.
>
>
>

And I assume this is not fun for the user as well. Writing to ooo-users
is probably not their first choice. I think when a user has a problem they
do things like:

1) Repeat the action

2) Quit OpenOffice and restart and try the action

3) Maybe reboot

4) Maybe hit F1 and see if the online help does anything

5) Post to Twitter "I hate OpenOffice, it can't do X"

6) Search Google (or Bing) for some words that they think are related to
the problem

7) Somehow end up on this mailing list. But honestly I don't know the
exact path here.

So reducing repeated questions helps us and helps the user, especially if
we can get those FAQ's in front of their eyes earlier in the cycle, like at
step 6, or even step 4. By the time they end up here, users tend to
already be frustrated.


>
> --
> Mike Scott
> Harlow, Essex, England
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-unsubscribe@**incubator.apache.org<ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.**apache.org<ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org>
>
>

[Mike Scott]

On 01/04/2012 21:08, Rob Weir wrote:
....(snipped throughout; attributions missing)
>> Bayesian filters cannot work in this case because they assume that the
>>>
>>
>> Maybe. I don't know, and thought it might be worth trying. There's usually
>> /some/ key word or phrase that gives the game away.
>>
>>
> I think it is fair to say it would work some of the time. But I don't
> think there are any silver bullets here.

I agree. But I reckon even a, say 50%, success rate would be of
considerable help.
....
> And I assume this is not fun for the user as well. Writing to ooo-users
> is probably not their first choice. I think when a user has a problem they
> do things like:
>
> 1) Repeat the action
>
> 2) Quit OpenOffice and restart and try the action
>
> 3) Maybe reboot
>
> 4) Maybe hit F1 and see if the online help does anything

So far so good.

>
> 5) Post to Twitter "I hate OpenOffice, it can't do X"

Irrational. And probably expected.

>
> 6) Search Google (or Bing) for some words that they think are related to
> the problem

Now there's a conundrum. Google is a bit of an art - often I've found
answers quite quickly where non-computer-savvy friends have totally
failed. It seems you need a fair bit of experience to see the right
keywords.


>
> 7) Somehow end up on this mailing list. But honestly I don't know the
> exact path here.

I've wondered that too. If they came via the web site, they /ought/ to
be more aware of what the list is than some seem to be. Some will be
sent by unscrupulous vendors, so won't know what they're dealing with.

>
> So reducing repeated questions helps us and helps the user, especially if
> we can get those FAQ's in front of their eyes earlier in the cycle, like at
> step 6, or even step 4. By the time they end up here, users tend to
> already be frustrated.

One thing I've noticed lately is how easy it is to forget the
exceedingly steep learning curves involved in some of this stuff. I'm an
ex sysadmin, so when I don't know some answers, there's a pretty wide
knowledge base to build on, and it's usually easy to understand and
phrase a problem and find an appropriate arena to get help. /And I take
that for granted/. Others don't have that start line, and I find it very
easy to get frustrated in trying to explain things to some people that,
to me, rate as glaringly obvious yet they simply don't 'get'. And that's
/my/ fault, not theirs.


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[Scooter C]

Good Afternoon Group,

The answer is the Open Office Community Forum:
http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/index.php?sid=5f44791e21a137a70602fed3ba0c37b6

The list server may have change but the website Forum has not.
IF I had known this, I could have directed the "Hate" man to this site.
I am surprised Mr Weir didn't.

Take Care.
Scooter
College Park, MD USA


Mike Scott wrote on 4/2/2012 3:25 AM:
> On 01/04/2012 21:08, Rob Weir wrote:
> ....(snipped throughout; attributions missing)
>>> Bayesian filters cannot work in this case because they assume that
>>> the
>>>>
>>>
>>> Maybe. I don't know, and thought it might be worth trying. There's
>>> usually
>>> /some/ key word or phrase that gives the game away.
>>>
>>>
>> I think it is fair to say it would work some of the time. But I don't
>> think there are any silver bullets here.
>
> I agree. But I reckon even a, say 50%, success rate would be of
> considerable help.
> ....
>> And I assume this is not fun for the user as well. Writing to
>> ooo-users
>> is probably not their first choice. I think when a user has a problem
>> they
>> do things like:
>>
>> 1) Repeat the action
>>
>> 2) Quit OpenOffice and restart and try the action
>>
>> 3) Maybe reboot
>>
>> 4) Maybe hit F1 and see if the online help does anything
>
> So far so good.
>
>>
>> 5) Post to Twitter "I hate OpenOffice, it can't do X"
>
> Irrational. And probably expected.
>
>>
>> 6) Search Google (or Bing) for some words that they think are related to
>> the problem
>
> Now there's a conundrum. Google is a bit of an art - often I've found
> answers quite quickly where non-computer-savvy friends have totally
> failed. It seems you need a fair bit of experience to see the right
> keywords.
>


>>
>> 7) Somehow end up on this mailing list. But honestly I don't know the
>> exact path here.
>
> I've wondered that too. If they came via the web site, they /ought/ to
> be more aware of what the list is than some seem to be. Some will be
> sent by unscrupulous vendors, so won't know what they're dealing with.
>
>>
>> So reducing repeated questions helps us and helps the user,
>> especially if
>> we can get those FAQ's in front of their eyes earlier in the cycle,
>> like at
>> step 6, or even step 4. By the time they end up here, users tend to
>> already be frustrated.
>
> One thing I've noticed lately is how easy it is to forget the
> exceedingly steep learning curves involved in some of this stuff. I'm
> an ex sysadmin, so when I don't know some answers, there's a pretty
> wide knowledge base to build on, and it's usually easy to understand
> and phrase a problem and find an appropriate arena to get help. /And I
> take that for granted/. Others don't have that start line, and I find
> it very easy to get frustrated in trying to explain things to some
> people that, to me, rate as glaringly obvious yet they simply don't
> 'get'. And that's /my/ fault, not theirs.
>
>

[David Rivers]

Mike Scott wrote:
> One thing I was trying to reduce was the endless repetition of the
> same answers. People have better things to do, I hope, than tell
> endless numbers of others the same thing over and over -- 'you
> unsubscribe by.......'. Boring to do, boring to see on list.
>
> --
> Mike Scott
> Harlow, Essex, England
I have a stock answer to the unsub question which I can just copy and
paste to send to the questioner directly, eliminating the need to
rethink, retype a solution. The response directly back to me is usually
a relieved "Thank you".

[Michael Adams]

On Monday 02 April 2012 05:01, M. Fioretti wrote:
> On Sun, April 1, 2012 4:41 pm, Mike Scott wrote:
> > Actually, while I remember a disagreement, I'm not sure myself of
> > the details. I think it might have been about using some sort of
> > engine to guess a likely answer to unsubscribed queries - I
> > vaguely seem to recall you didn't approve:
>
> Yes, now I remember, thanks. I stepped in because you suggested a
> bayesian autoresponder, and I explained why in my opinion it
> wouldn't work in this case. But it was a purely technical
> disagreement, nothing personal. Heck, I was so happy to have found
> somebody else that didn't want to "send again to unsubscribed
> user"!. Anyway, it's all in the thread I posted yesterday.

I agree Marco. Among technically minded i see this issue failing often
on the W3C Validator list where the Validator attempts to explain why
a certain line of code does not meet a given (X)HTML standard. There
are often involved, sometimes heated exchanges about wording of the
auto responder. Any programmer knows error messages seldom tell you
what is wrong, but often merely help with where to look. The
auto-responder for newbies[TM] would be a far greater challenge by an
order of magnitude. BEWARE Mike - There be dragons here... and you
are crunchy and taste nice with tomato sauce.

--
Michael

[Mike Scott]

On 03/04/12 10:24, Michael Adams wrote:
.
>.... BEWARE Mike - There be dragons here... and you
> are crunchy and taste nice with tomato sauce.
>

Then I'll take all due precautions to avoid that fate - I can't stand
the stuff :-)


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[M. Fioretti]

On Sun, April 1, 2012 12:43 am, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> I would recommend that messages that are forwarded in that manner have
> bottom-of-message

IIRC, I included this in my proposal, but even if I didn't it shouldn't be
a problem. procmail can do that.

> I would also like to see a modification so that duplicates are not sent to
> a subscriber when it is possible to determine that.

??? there are NO duplicates. Please read the proposal again.

Marco Fioretti (not Fieretti :-) )

[David Rivers]

[The autoresponder thing sounds interesting. So you don't allow any
non-suscriber traffic. Any posts from non-susbcribers get an automatic
response that presumably outlines their support options, tells them they
would need to subscribe first if they want to post to the ooo-users list,
maybe gives some hints for writing useful support request posts, etc.

I think that would be an improvement. What do others think?

-Rob]


Good idea, indeed, but for many newbies, running an unfamiliar complex machine like a computer and a sophisticated word processor,let alone dealing with a mailing list or forum is a scary thing. Confidence needs building first and a means to escape.
That's why pilots are taught how to land a plane first, before being taught how to take off. Thus the autoresponder may be more successful by providing the non-subscriber with the unsubscribe method first, then showing how to subscribe. :)

[Michelle Konzack]

Hello Rob Weir,

Am 2012-03-31 09:57:48, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> The parent post was not sent by a list subscriber. Apache lists are
> configured to allow anyone to post, including non-subscribers. If someone
> is not a subscriber their posts are held for moderation. If they are not
> spam, I let the post through. This is true, even if the post is rude.
> (But if it included a lot of swearing I would not let it through).

And what about uses adding HUGE attachmenst of several MBytes to there
posts?

On the OpenOffice List I was bombed arround 40 or 50 times with Mails of
4-8 MByte in size and I received the messages on my cellphone.

If I am right, and I have already gotten such monster mails on the
<apache.org> lists, every one can bomb the whole lists whith such crap,
instead of using "pastebin" or other free public file services..

Reals, I hate such users. I have to pay 1 Euro/MByte if I am outside of
the UMTS network and it is definitively not funny.

Such mails should be blocked in ANY case

> Now, let's look at it from the user's perspective, and have some sympathy.

Absolutely NOT.

> Their first choice was not to send a note to this list. Their post comes
> at the end of a long chain of failures and frustrations, being bounced
> around by Dell and Amazon, not figuring out OpenOffice, probably not
> finding a good answer searching Google or on our website.

Is the bouncing of Dell and Amazon the fault of LibreOffice?

> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
> response.

If he does not get an response, why does he post?

> B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
> unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
> without assistance.

He should make a driver-license or a weapon-license for the Internet :-P

> So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
> unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
> place for users to raise such questions.

Right, they should post on Web-Forums and not bother mailinglists

> -Rob

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack

--
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ######################
Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux
Internet Service Provider, Cloud Computing
<http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/>

***@tdnet Jabber ***@jabber.ccc.de
Owner Michelle Konzack

Gewerbe Strasse 3 Tel office: [phone]
77694 Kehl Tel mobil: [phone]
Germany Tel mobil: [phone] (France)

USt-ID: DE 278 049 239

Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/

[k***@gmail.com]

Dear moderator
I have tried to unsubscribe to no avail.
HHHEEEELLLPPP ...........



Powered by Telkomsel BlackBerry®

-----Original Message-----
From: Michelle Konzack <***@tamay-dogan.net>
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 11:48:06
To: <ooo-***@incubator.apache.org>
Reply-To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]

Hello Rob Weir,

Am 2012-03-31 09:57:48, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> The parent post was not sent by a list subscriber. Apache lists are
> configured to allow anyone to post, including non-subscribers. If someone
> is not a subscriber their posts are held for moderation. If they are not
> spam, I let the post through. This is true, even if the post is rude.
> (But if it included a lot of swearing I would not let it through).

And what about uses adding HUGE attachmenst of several MBytes to there
posts?

On the OpenOffice List I was bombed arround 40 or 50 times with Mails of
4-8 MByte in size and I received the messages on my cellphone.

If I am right, and I have already gotten such monster mails on the
<apache.org> lists, every one can bomb the whole lists whith such crap,
instead of using "pastebin" or other free public file services..

Reals, I hate such users. I have to pay 1 Euro/MByte if I am outside of
the UMTS network and it is definitively not funny.

Such mails should be blocked in ANY case

> Now, let's look at it from the user's perspective, and have some sympathy.

Absolutely NOT.

> Their first choice was not to send a note to this list. Their post comes
> at the end of a long chain of failures and frustrations, being bounced
> around by Dell and Amazon, not figuring out OpenOffice, probably not
> finding a good answer searching Google or on our website.

Is the bouncing of Dell and Amazon the fault of LibreOffice?

> A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on the
> response.

If he does not get an response, why does he post?

> B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
> unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
> without assistance.

He should make a driver-license or a weapon-license for the Internet :-P

> So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
> unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
> place for users to raise such questions.

Right, they should post on Web-Forums and not bother mailinglists

> -Rob

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack

--
##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ######################
Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux
Internet Service Provider, Cloud Computing
<http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/>

***@tdnet Jabber ***@jabber.ccc.de
Owner Michelle Konzack

Gewerbe Strasse 3 Tel office: [phone]
77694 Kehl Tel mobil: [phone]
Germany Tel mobil: [phone] (France)

USt-ID: DE 278 049 239

Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/

B‹KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKCB•È[œÝXœØÜšX™KK[XZ[ˆÛÛË]\Ù\œË][œÝXœØÜšX™P[˜ÝX˜]Ü‹˜\XÚK›Ü™ÃB‘›ÜˆY][Û˜[ÛÛ[X[

[Rob Weir]

On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 5:48 AM, Michelle Konzack <
***@tamay-dogan.net> wrote:

> Hello Rob Weir,
>
> Am 2012-03-31 09:57:48, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
> > The parent post was not sent by a list subscriber. Apache lists are
> > configured to allow anyone to post, including non-subscribers. If
> someone
> > is not a subscriber their posts are held for moderation. If they are not
> > spam, I let the post through. This is true, even if the post is rude.
> > (But if it included a lot of swearing I would not let it through).
>
> And what about uses adding HUGE attachmenst of several MBytes to there
> posts?
>
> On the OpenOffice List I was bombed arround 40 or 50 times with Mails of
> 4-8 MByte in size and I received the messages on my cellphone.
>
> If I am right, and I have already gotten such monster mails on the
> <apache.org> lists, every one can bomb the whole lists whith such crap,
> instead of using "pastebin" or other free public file services..
>
> Reals, I hate such users. I have to pay 1 Euro/MByte if I am outside of
> the UMTS network and it is definitively not funny.
>
> Such mails should be blocked in ANY case
>
>
I believe they are banned on most Apache lists. Except for patches
submitted on the dev lists we don't really see many file attachments. Some
even say we ban too much.

> Now, let's look at it from the user's perspective, and have some sympathy.
>
> Absolutely NOT.
>
>

Please?


> > Their first choice was not to send a note to this list. Their post comes
> > at the end of a long chain of failures and frustrations, being bounced
> > around by Dell and Amazon, not figuring out OpenOffice, probably not
> > finding a good answer searching Google or on our website.
>
> Is the bouncing of Dell and Amazon the fault of LibreOffice?
>
>
It is not a question about blame. Remember, even an articulate user who
understands how lists work and can fully explain their question could still
have been responsible for causing the problem they are seeing in the
OpenOffice configuration.


> > A) First, since the original poster is not subscribed to the list, he is
> > not receiving any of the responses, unless he was explicitly copied on
> the
> > response.
>
> If he does not get an response, why does he post?
>
>
Good question. I don't know where these users are coming from and how they
were directed to the list. The most obvious path would be the
www.openoffice.org homepage, but the "get help" link takes them here:

http://www.openoffice.org/support/

But that entry for the Users List clearly directs them to subscribe, even
makes it easy for them. And it does have an easy link for them to post
without subscribing.

So I assume there is a link someplace on the web that encourages users to
send posts to this list without subscribing. Of course, if we can find it
we can fix it ;-)



> > B) If the user does subscribe, they will likely soon be frustrated by
> > unrelated questions and answers, but be unable to unsubscribe themselves
> > without assistance.
>
> He should make a driver-license or a weapon-license for the Internet :-P
>
>
There will always be a percentage of users who are total novices. Everyone
has to start someplace. I don't think we (the Apache OpenOffice project)
can avoid their needs entirely. After all, the new users of today is the
power user (and recommender) of the program tomorrow. The real question
is: how do we (the Apache OpenOffice project) best handle support for this
user segment? Mailing list? Forums? Something else?


> > So we all want users to be able to resolve their issues, without
> > unnecessary complications. I think the support forums are a much better
> > place for users to raise such questions.
>
> Right, they should post on Web-Forums and not bother mailinglists
>
> > -Rob
>
> Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
> Michelle Konzack
>
> --
> ##################### Debian GNU/Linux Consultant ######################
> Development of Intranet and Embedded Systems with Debian GNU/Linux
> Internet Service Provider, Cloud Computing
> <http://www.itsystems.tamay-dogan.net/>
>
> ***@tdnet Jabber ***@jabber.ccc.de
> Owner Michelle Konzack
>
> Gewerbe Strasse 3 Tel office: [phone]
> 77694 Kehl Tel mobil: [phone]
> Germany Tel mobil: [phone] (France)
>
> USt-ID: DE 278 049 239
>
> Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
>

[NoOp]

On 04/01/2012 02:48 AM, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> Hello Rob Weir,
>
> Am 2012-03-31 09:57:48, hacktest Du folgendes herunter:
>> The parent post was not sent by a list subscriber. Apache lists
>> are configured to allow anyone to post, including
>> non-subscribers. If someone is not a subscriber their posts are
>> held for moderation. If they are not spam, I let the post
>> through. This is true, even if the post is rude. (But if it
>> included a lot of swearing I would not let it through).
>
> And what about uses adding HUGE attachmenst of several MBytes to
> there posts?
>
> On the OpenOffice List I was bombed arround 40 or 50 times with
> Mails of 4-8 MByte in size and I received the messages on my
> cellphone

Oh please. I count a total of 9 post attachments from 2005 to 2011 on
the OOo user list that are over 1MB in size. If you had any multiples
it was due to some 'helpful' list person that responded with the
original attachment included. Example:
<http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.openoffice.questions/214256>

>
> If I am right, and I have already gotten such monster mails on
> the <apache.org> lists, every one can bomb the whole lists whith
> such crap, instead of using "pastebin" or other free public file
> services..
>
> Reals, I hate such users. I have to pay 1 Euro/MByte if I am
> outside of the UMTS network and it is definitively not funny.

So find a better email/nntp client that allows you to download and
review only the headers + msg size prior to downloading.

In most cases I found/find OOo list attachments very helpful in
assisting the user.

>
> Such mails should be blocked in ANY case

Again, use an email/nntp client that can be configured to read
headers/size before downloading. If that doesn't work, then don't read
the list when you are in situations where you can't control the download.
...

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

The recommendation about duplicates is for the list server, not for the inclusion of unsubscribed OPs.

This has to do with folks objecting to being CC-ed when they are already subscribers.

For example, my use of Replay All here is going to end up sending two copies to mfioretti@

I suppose, since the list can't do anything about the direct one, what it can do is refrain forwarding from the list to an addressee already on a post. Doesn't seem quite right though.

So folks who object to being directly e-mailed will have to treat it as an etiquette matter, like top posting [;<).

- Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: M. Fioretti [mailto:***@nexaima.net]
Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2012 05:59
To: ooo-***@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: A moderator's view of this list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]


On Sun, April 1, 2012 12:43 am, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> I would recommend that messages that are forwarded in that manner have
> bottom-of-message

IIRC, I included this in my proposal, but even if I didn't it shouldn't be
a problem. procmail can do that.

> I would also like to see a modification so that duplicates are not sent to
> a subscriber when it is possible to determine that.

??? there are NO duplicates. Please read the proposal again.

Marco Fioretti (not Fieretti :-) )

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ooo-users-***@incubator.apache.org

[M. Fioretti]

On Sun, April 1, 2012 5:37 pm, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> The recommendation about duplicates is for the list server, not for the
> inclusion of unsubscribed OPs.

ah, OK, now I understand. Thanks for the clarification

Marco

[Michael Adams]

On Sunday 01 April 2012 01:57, Rob Weir wrote:
> What do you think? What is the purpose of this ooo-users list
> compared to the support forums? On some project communications we
> advertise both as equal support avenues for users to raise
> problems. Is that what we should be doing? In other words, what
> is the purpose of this list and how do we make that clear to users?

Personally i detest using forums. As an individual i am basically lazy
and a push method works for me much better than a pull one. Both have
there place. Many find email a good way to contribute back to the
community with the same support option available to us if needed. If
the mailing list is only retained for Beta Testing purposes i would
still be subscribed. It remains a useful method for squashing less
complex issues, "where has 'File - Page Setup' gone", without the
requirement to appeal direct to developers. The RFE/ bug reporting
channel can then be sufficiently complex to prevent many of the
nuisance reports.

Take note Joomla! community!

--
Michael

[Mike Scott]

On 03/04/12 10:08, Michael Adams wrote:
...

> Personally i detest using forums. As an individual i am basically lazy

+1

But it's not really laziness - it's yet another username (or was it an
email address this time, and which one?) and yet another password to
remember before one can ask for help. And yet another website that works
differently to all the others. Or maybe being overwhelmed counts as
laziness?

> and a push method works for me much better than a pull one. Both have
> there place. Many find email a good way to contribute back to the

And I'll ask again, as there was no response before. Is there any
logical reason why the two should be gatewayed? List and forum that is.
Naively, ISTM if the database of submissions is properly organized, 'the
forum' or 'the list' is only the interface to a common dataset.

>


--
Mike Scott
Harlow, Essex, England

[Caesar]

On Tue, 03 Apr 2012 09:38:54 +0100, Mike Scott
<***@scottsonline.org.uk> wrote Re Re: A moderator's view of this
list [was: Re: I Hate Your Product]:

>On 03/04/12 10:08, Michael Adams wrote:
>...
>
>> Personally i detest using forums. As an individual i am basically lazy
>
>+1
>
>But it's not really laziness - it's yet another username (or was it an
>email address this time, and which one?) and yet another password to
>remember before one can ask for help. And yet another website that works
>differently to all the others. Or maybe being overwhelmed counts as
>laziness?

I prefer the "newsstand" analogy. Which is more convenient: going to
several different newsstands every morning to buy several different
newspapers, or having them all delivered to you mailbox?

I prefer the mailbox.

[floris v]

Quoted from Caesar:
"I prefer the "newsstand" analogy. Which is more convenient: going to
several different newsstands every morning to buy several different
newspapers, or having them all delivered to you mailbox?

I prefer the mailbox."

I just checked. The user mailing list got some 300 posts in March,
that's a lot for this one, and it amounts to some ten posts per day. The
user community forum gets over ten times as many posts per day, on
average, over almost five years. Even the old oooforum.org still gets
more than ten genuine new posts every day, amid all the spam. Just think
what'd happen to your mailing list if all the people posting on just
those two forums would send their questions to this mailing list. You
may say "filtering", but then you forget that all those questions still
have to be answered.
I'm not opposed to mailing lists, mind you, they're excellent things for
people who like them, just as MS Office is great for people who like it.
The advantage of this mailing list is that it offers users an
opportunity to talk to the developers. And it's quiet.

As this topic started with hate mail, here's a sample of some of the
hate mail we get at the forums and of how we deal with it: The worst
office suite ever
<http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=2468>. Have
a good day. :)

Peter aka floris v