Timeline for Is it okay to tell users to RTFM?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 26, 2018 at 8:35 | comment | added | 0xC0000022L | What's wrong with referring to the friendly manual? | |
| Nov 17, 2016 at 16:46 | comment | added | user | Related: What to do with questions when the answer is in a man page? | |
| Sep 25, 2016 at 22:46 | answer | added | allo | timeline score: 4 | |
| May 17, 2016 at 14:25 | comment | added | Todd Wilcox | There are many questions I've had where I would happily accept "RTFM" as an answer if it also included a link to a f-ing manual!!. Sadly, some manufacturers have very confusing, hard to find, and/or poor documentation (cough, Microsoft, cough). And having spent 17 years slowly learning how to parse the arcane verbiage that makes up Cisco documentation, I would never relegate anyone asking a Cisco-related question to attempting to parse it straight from their f-ing "manuals". I come to SF.SE after R-ing the FM, because sometimes the FM is F-ing Useless. | |
| May 12, 2016 at 17:16 | comment | added | user9517 | @Sahuagin The restriction on RTFM answers does not obviate the need for people to do some research prior to asking a question. In fact, the tooltip for ownvotes even mentions This does not show any research effort. The kind of question where you may want to say RTFM! are those where writing the question is clearly more difficult and a longer process than reading the docs. If people don't learn to read the docs then the day they have no internet they're screwed. | |
| May 12, 2016 at 10:51 | comment | added | Sum1sAdmin | the complete opposite, really? so it's exclusively a question and answer site for managing information technology systems in a business environment...for people who won't RTFM, - maybe RTFM is offensive (I get that) - it's also very practical advice | |
| May 10, 2016 at 21:05 | comment | added | Dave Cousineau | Isn't "RTFM" the complete opposite of what StackExchange is supposed to be about? | |
| May 9, 2016 at 21:30 | comment | added | Sum1sAdmin | is there any users you don't want on this website? | |
| May 9, 2016 at 14:55 | comment | added | johnny | No, not if you want people to return to the website. | |
| May 5, 2016 at 23:31 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/ServerFault/status/728366453192331264 | ||
| May 5, 2016 at 17:09 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 11, 2016 at 3:13 | |||||
| May 5, 2016 at 16:40 | comment | added | Mast | Possible duplicate of RTFM inappropriate? | |
| May 4, 2016 at 13:14 | comment | added | Sobrique | I'll generally link to - and quote - TFM in the process, with a view to providing a dupe-target. (If one doesn't exist already) | |
| May 3, 2016 at 19:27 | answer | added | Anna | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 2, 2016 at 9:18 | comment | added | Daniel | I know your pain, but RTFM is really the most bland answer a human being is able to give. Because it applies to 99% of all questions in the world, regardless how many years of expertise and technical knowledge the questioner has. The more appropriate action is to tell the questioner that he has to put in some research effort and downvote or closevote the question until it is improved. | |
| Apr 29, 2016 at 16:19 | comment | added | user9517 |
No, in the pink-and-fluffy world that is SE, RTFM is very frowned upon even if, it is frequently necessary. A simple Down Vote and when you can close vote is sufficient. I Have been known to leave a comment Serverfault should not be expected to provide Reading Manuals as a Service. or similar.
|
|
| Apr 29, 2016 at 13:10 | vote | accept | Sum1sAdmin | ||
| Apr 29, 2016 at 13:07 | answer | added | sysadmin1138Mod | timeline score: 22 | |
| Apr 29, 2016 at 12:09 | answer | added | Jenny D | timeline score: 37 | |
| Apr 29, 2016 at 12:02 | history | asked | Sum1sAdmin | CC BY-SA 3.0 |