[bilgepump]

from pandering to idiots?

If you assume that somebody's ignorance isn't due to idiocy, or neglect, or malfeasance, you can approach the same-old, same-old without being annoyed, and without letting annoyance colour the responses. It's like I said before, if we try not to let the last interaction colour the next one, it can help in how we word things. Just because we might think somebody's an idiot, it doesn't mean we have to tell them (unless they are such an idiot they ask for it).

It can be hard to remember when you didn't know something that "everyone knows", but if you don't make judgments and just answer the question (or not, if you really think they should find it out for themselves) it makes it easier to keep the annoyance down. IMO

[Tinwarble]

Nobody's.... And why consider "fault" at all.

That's because usually the only people who don't want fault assigned are those who are at fault. People who get upset are like someone who goes to another persons house, craps on their rug even though there's a sign on the front door the clearly stating "Don't crap on our rug", then complains because the person that owns the house gets mad.

It's not like there isn't a sign on the "front door" of Kodi when you sign up.

4. Be as descriptive and detailed as possible. Assume nothing, there are no mind readers on the Kodi Community Forum.

5. Post all the the information requested in forum stickies, everything you've tried so far, any suspicions you have. Show that you've made an effort on your own. And remember “the latest release” can mean many different things, so be descriptive in what version of Kodi you are using
.
6.When posting a problem you are encouraged to post a debug log from when the problem occurred. When posting a log or other lengthy code in the forum, please use a paste site, as described in the debug log wiki page. Do not post log snippets on the forum, if you want to point out a specific part refer to the line number.

And it doesn't matter if you think something is "useful" or not, those assumptions that you keep referring come from the experience of threads upon threads having to be sent to the garbage bin because someone else start from the same position.

By the same token, if a user doesn't like a response they are free to ignore it and I would suggest that if someone makes a comment that doesn't apply to you, whether it's an accusation or not, then you grow a thicker skin and not be bothered by it.

Sometimes though, a statement is just a statement with no real intent behind it and people take it as they want.

[Gobberwart]

from pandering to idiots?

If you assume that somebody's ignorance isn't due to idiocy, or neglect, or malfeasance, you can...

Disappointingly, in 9 cases out of 10, it is. You can assume whatever you like, but you get pretty tired of it very quickly.

Edit: I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you. It would be a much nicer place if everyone had infinite patience. Experience shows that not to be the case in any public forum.

[nickr]

In my experience, every forum is like this. Not at first, but it doesn't take long for experienced users to get heartily fed up with answering the same questions over and over again. Those users can get testy, and I can understand it completely. It's especially frustrating when someone takes the time and effort required to collate and publish FAQ type information, only for it to be ignored completely.

Like the whole damn wiki...

[bilgepump]

if everyone had infinite patience.

You don't have to have it, you just keep your "FFS, you idiot, can't you READ?" thoughts in your head and not put it down in your response. All you'll get is defensive "I'm not an idiot!" responses and the whole thing goes down the drain debating whether or not somebody is an idiot.

Yes, you do get commentary on every forum, but there does seem to be a lot of preconceptions and judgmental remarks here.

When I first signed up to forums and started looking at "the internet" a member on a forum had a signature along the lines of "don't argue with idiots, you'll just get annoyed and they'll beat you with experience" (I can't remember, something like that). I took notice of it and it has helped me to avoid "jumping on" when the "discussion" turns to whether the poster is an idiot or not. Not always, but a lot of the time. If someone truly is an idiot, telling them so is a complete dead end in productive discourse. Just leave them in their idiot bubble and make a cup of tea.

Like the whole damn wiki...

There is an assumption that everything is in the wiki and it's all clearly explained. As Grok has given feedback, it isn't. Much of the information is outdated or hard to understand. For example, how would a new user looking at all the screenshots of confluence relate that to their newly-installed estuary? A long-term user can call on their experience to figure out where to find things, but somebody looking it up for the first time?

Yes, it would be better for somebody to say that they've looked at the wiki and couldn't find or understand what to do, but just because they don't say that, doesn't mean they haven't, or they're an idiot, or that the required information is, indeed, there. Some people are better at communication than others.

Anyway, I've had my say about this, there really isn't anything else to go with the discussion. I think it's better to try to keep people "on side" than off. JMO.

[Gobberwart]

"don't argue with idiots, you'll just get annoyed and they'll beat you with experience" (I can't remember, something like that).

"Never argue with an idiot. He'll just drag you down to his level, and then beat you with experience. "

A terrific quote indeed. So is this:

"When you die you don't know about it. All the pain and suffering is left for those around you. The same thing happens when you're stupid."

Not really helpful I know but I could use a chuckle.

[learningit]

]You don't have to have it, you just keep your "FFS, you idiot, can't you READ?" thoughts in your head and not put it down in your response. All you'll get is defensive "I'm not an idiot!" responses and the whole thing goes down the drain debating whether or not somebody is an idiot.

Yes, you do get commentary on every forum, but there does seem to be a lot of preconceptions and judgmental remarks here.

When I first signed up to forums and started looking at "the internet" a member on a forum had a signature along the lines of "don't argue with idiots, you'll just get annoyed and they'll beat you with experience" (I can't remember, something like that). I took notice of it and it has helped me to avoid "jumping on" when the "discussion" turns to whether the poster is an idiot or not. Not always, but a lot of the time. If someone truly is an idiot, telling them so is a complete dead end in productive discourse. Just leave them in their idiot bubble and make a cup of tea.

I pretty much agree with you here.
I only posted here because I was accused of things that are untrue by a forum user.
Read the post I quoted from that user here and the user's accusations:
2570471 (post)

Then read the all the forum posts in the thread that I linked to in my response here, which is the interchange we had:
2569603 (post)

I usually leave idiots to themselves, as you state above, but the accusations made are just plain false. Hence my response.
I see this time and again flowing from hot headed forum users who don't get their way or insist on something not allowed in the forum.

Generally users are great and I try very hard to respond to issues and keep add-ons going in a timely manner.
People don't realize the pressure on add-on authors from content providers/owners. Sometimes it's directed to Team Kodi, other times it ends up in my github or email accounts. We have to balance what an add-on does and what we discuss to keep content providers from issuing takedown requests or sending threatening emails or letters.

That was all I was trying to explain to the user who shit all over me.

[nickr]

@bilgepump you are free to update the wiki

I agree, but it is a big task to update the wiki.

[bilgepump]

@bilgepump you are free to update the wiki

I'd be happy to give it a go, but I'd have to figure out how to do it, and I'm not sure that my knowledge is sufficient to do it properly. I know (only) what I've learned, but I don't know what the people who wrote the code do. I wouldn't want to mess anything up. This is part of the issue with things like this. Those who "know stuff" are busy/too busy, and those who have time may not know enough....

Is there like an editor who can decide whether any rewrites/updates are worthy of publication?

Thanks for that quote, gobberwart. That's the one.

[nickr]

Yeah it is easier said than done. I have done basic wiki editing before, but some of those pages have a lot of quite complex wiki speak in them.

I'd like to have two versions of each page, one for Confluence, one for Estuary. A bit like there are separate tabs for different OSes on this page http://kodi.wiki/view/MySQL/Setting_up_MySQL

[Tinwarble]

@bilgepump you are free to update the wiki

I'd be happy to give it a go, but I'd have to figure out how to do it, and I'm not sure that my knowledge is sufficient to do it properly. I know (only) what I've learned, but I don't know what the people who wrote the code do. I wouldn't want to mess anything up. This is part of the issue with things like this. Those who "know stuff" are busy/too busy, and those who have time may not know enough....

Is there like an editor who can decide whether any rewrites/updates are worthy of publication?

Thanks for that quote, gobberwart. That's the one.

It's not that easy, but once you learn you can manage to muddle through it. If the page is already created then you can just change text or images as necessary and not have to worry about knowing all the "wiki speak". I'm in the process of updating pages as we speak, though it will be a daunting task and I encourage other to do what they can.

I'd like to have two versions of each page, one for Confluence, one for Estuary. A bit like there are separate tabs for different OSes on this page http://kodi.wiki/view/MySQL/Setting_up_MySQL

That would be to confusing, not only in keeping the wiki updated but in finding information. We should only support the most current version of Kodi since that will be what Kodi will be going forward.

[Gobberwart]

It's not that easy, but once you learn you can manage to muddle through it. If the page is already created then you can just change text or images as necessary and not have to worry about knowing all the "wiki speak". I'm in the process of updating pages as we speak, though it will be a daunting task and I encourage other to do what they can.

As a bonus, the wiki will record every change made, so even if it does get completely messed up, rolling back to an earlier version is pretty simple.

[Tinwarble]

Right, you if you mess something up you can always revert back.

Not being a expert with the wiki, something that I've had to do several times.

FYI: If you update the images it can take sometime before the updated images actually show up on the page. So be aware of that.

[nickr]

Yes I saw you updating images, looks like you are looking to update the bits I was looking at.

[bilgepump]

Are there "how to edit the wiki" instructions somewhere? Does the wiki software have a name I can search to look up how to do things on it?