[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[cobalt-users] Re: Let's get this over with...shooting from the hip

In response to Kris Dahl


on 8/28/00 11:14 AM, Jerry Pape at jpape@xxxxxxxx wrote:


 All,

 NEWSGROUPS and Categorical Web-Based HOW TOs are the next step...

 Let me offer the flame-out option
 -----------------------------------
 Try searching for '~user' or any other common UNIX construction in the
 archives--you can't--instead you get hits on 'user' because the search
 engine ignores many specials. As I am sure you all know, there is an awfully
 large difference between '~user' and 'user'. This deficiency should alone
 be the death knell of ht:dig, the current engine.


ht:dig can probably be configured to do this 'properly'.  ht:dig, in my
opinion, is kick ass.
Then why, isn't it? Also, you should evaluate ht:dig's status as an exploitable service as indicated by SANS, the Network Security Institute. 



But I would ascertain that the problem is rarely the search engine, rather
PEBKAC (problem exists between keyboard and chair).
A priori ignorance of all users, is a dreadful assumption. Systems behave according to developer's dictates. As such, it is perhaps safer to presume that the user's expectations were not met due to a lack of explanation or implementation by the developer as was clearly the case here. 



  What is the likelihood
that ~user would pop up with the answer to the (albeit obvious to you an I)
question?  Slim to none.  '~user' is not really standard format for
requesting documentation on the UserDir apache directive.  It all comes back
to RTFM... with a minimum amount of research you should be able to learn the
lingo necessary to find the answer.  If you don't know the language, how can
you ask a question and expect a correct answer?  While this applies to this
example, and there are certainly several exceptions to my logic here, by and
large you *must* know the subject in order to talk intelligently about it.
This use of "~user" has nothing to do with the UserDir directive because there is no user attached to a vsite in Cobalt. You have as completely missed the point. Cobalt provides linkage only to indiv. users' pages, but not the vsite itself. As virtually every major hosting operation in the world provides access via http://www.somedomain.com/~user with a direct vsite to username correspondence this is not only an important discrepancy, but one that would be searched for in precisely the syntax and context I indicated. Thus it might be suggested instead that you: 

	learn the lingo necessary to understand the question.


Point in fact: If I go to Honda's website and search their knowledgeable for
'4 x 100mm' I can't expect the search engine to return information about a
bolt patterns for civic wheels.  I mean give me a break.

The common misconception is that everyone thinks that they can jump into
providing internet services without doing their due diligence--which is
quite simply not true.  I don't by a Car from Honda and expect to know how
to maintain, fix, repair or even operate it without doing a significant
amount of research.


 Let's consider the overall objective:
 ------------------------------------------------------------------
 Put yourself in the mindset of a cobalt user, you:

 1) Might be a UNIX whiz with no Cobalt experience
 2) Might be a high-end user with a little experience in several OSes
 3) Might have little or no experience in UNIX or Cobalt.
 4) Might be a UNIX & Cobalt whiz (why are you here?--to help others?
 my point exactly)


I can't even remember the last time I solicited this list for assistance.
That puts me in the wrong percentile, but the list suits me perfectly.
That would put you in category #4--the helping category, as evidenced by your postings of today alone (at least if discouraging someone from buying and using Cobalt hardware because they might not "have the skills and the funding necessary to run a successful hosting company" can be considered helping ref: Re: [cobalt-users] [WANTED] RaQ2 Consulting From: Kris Dahl <krislists@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>). 




 Let's consider bandwidth?
 ------------------------------------------------------
 Can anyone tell me why it is better to get 100-200 messages per
 day from Cobalt USER-SEC-DEV lists than to download x-over headers via NNTP
 once or twice a day and then chose to selectively pull a few
 interesting articles?

 The current system is outrageously wasteful of net bandwidth and a
 pretty piteous example of net-citizenship.


The current setup of this list has been argued over and rehashed more times
then I like to remember.


That would seem to suggest that the factions are not satisfied.



Several of the repeating themes as to why a mailing list is superior to a
newsgroup:
* pro-active: messages come to you
* require little additional setup
* performance--reading news, especially if you aren't getting the feeds
direct appears to be slow to many users

And it doesn't save much bandwidth--just moves it around.  Instead of having
all the users downloading the lists, we just have a gazillion news servers
doing it.  How can this possible provide a overall bandwidth savings?  And
what the hell is this about "wasteful of net bandwidth"?  The net isn't
really a non-renewable resource that is getting wasted--on the contrary--if
you *don't* use the bandwidth it gets wasted.  And besides this is the sort
of high-value content that 'deserves' the bandwidth... as even having
morally justify this is making me nauseous.
Who said anything about "a gazillion news servers"? You don't read very well. The initial post specifically suggested "a private news server"--wouldn't be very private if it was propagated publicly now would it? Further, if any discussion of this nature provokes nausea, are you sure you haven't eaten something that disagrees with you. I find it hard to imagine that a discourse as tepid as this should result in stomach upset.
The bottom line--It is a waste of bandwidth--80% of the posts are not relevant to any one user at any give time. Use newsgroups and lower bandwidth and unnecessary posting geometrically. Hundreds of users pulling the XOVER headers twice a day costs an order of magnitude less than hundreds of users pulling the full content of 100-200 messages daily, 80% of which don't apply them. Common sense dictates that less is more here. 




And one last thing: bandwidth is cheap.  The volume we are talking about is
some minute that I can't even believe I am 'wasting' the precious bytes
talking about it.


 2)  Lurking as an in vitro learning tool requires an eventual
 encounter with an FAQ. These netiquette violations can be reduced
 with the regular FAQ posting found in most serious newsgroups. As I

 > see it, "no FAQ=no foul", so stop throwing rocks at each other--you

 sound like a bunch of undersexed unix.


While I am perfectly comfortable reading this message in a newsgroup type
setting, many users are just plain unfamiliar with it.  This would exclude
the exact people that you claim are not be effectively served by the methods
currently being implemented.
The ostensible purpose of either mechanism, is or should be to gather data for presentation on universally viewable categorical How-To web pages.
Furthermore, if an individual is busy mucking around at a shell prompt trying to reconfigure a Cobalt box or manage something like DNS, etc, then they are more than bright enough to comprehend and use newsgroups--if they can't they will have bigger problems than we can address here.
Just look at the lists 80% of the questions require telnet/shell access and the execution of various Linux command that often require superuser status. 

If you "su" you had best be able to understand basic NNTP clients.



And even though I read usenet, I prefer this format anyway.


 3) Look at this from the top down--the simple fact that every new
 Cobalt customer asks the same spectrum of questions (perms, cgiwrap,
 php, DNS, service mods [read--warranty violations], security
 concerns, updates, etc), runs the risk of igniting the wrath of the
 petty for some innocent netiquette faux pas, and still comes up
 empty-handed is a complete INDICTMENT of the current system.


What makes you think that by shifting to a newsgroup or whatever would cut
down on this?  By simply posting a FAQ every once in a while?  Hell, we can
do that NOW.  And we should.  But again, we'll be shifting the questions
from a mailing list to a newsgroup--a net effect of zero.

You are aware, of course, that there are gateways between mailman lists and
newsgroups--you can have your cake and eat it too.  If this is what you want
to do, by all means go ahead and do it.
Why would I be doing it? The purpose of my postings is to gain support for a forum that will urge Cobalt to become the best provider of information about itself--as it should be. 




 In conclusion
 ---------------------------------
 Because the newsgroups can have greater categorical detail in naming,
 the postings to and subsequent archiving of the groups would be
 naturally self-categorizing (i.e. cobalt.raq3.ups would speak for
 itself).


This is the big problem and the main reason we haven't fragmented the lists:
most of the issues cover all products.  We would be required to read a
gazillion different lists (or per your proposal, newsgroups) to find a
solution.  Less than idea.
Why? If it applies to many platforms, then simply categorize it by service or common aspect. This method doesn't create any fragmentation. 



And this is what I always get wielded out by.  This list is a fairly low
volume list.  Yet people are always complaining about the volume.  While I
agree that "high-volume" is an interpreted meter, I find the complaints
ridiculous.  It isn't 'overwhelming' by any stretch of the imagination.




So instead of having a moderate volume list (where answers come quickly)
some people propose to break them up into several, less effective, very low
volume lists.  Good idea!  Then we deal with all the lamers who think
cross-posting is cool.  That will PO guys like me (and certainly Dom) more
than even the most atrocious offenders currently.
Who are you or Dom? Has you participation in the lists conferred special status upon you as arbiters of decorum? Is your personal mission with the lists somehow different than: 

	1) Observe
	2) Gain knowledge
	3) Offer aid
I don't think that "the ability to categorize 'lamers' & 'cross-posters', or 'determine most atrocious offenders'" are in any way criteria for list participation. 

Did you somehow forget that this is a support list for a corporate entity?
Perhaps it has escaped you that this is a democratic forum, that coping a 'tude of who is good or bad, proper or improper is inappropriate.
These lists exist to give or receive assistance not to judge worthiness or mete punishment. 




 Lastly, and most importantly, the big picture--whether it's lists or
 newsgroups, either should be viewed as nothing more than a gathering
 mechanism for the regular collation and publishing of categorical HOW
 TO web pages, thereby facilitating easy access, lower frustration,
 and good karma for all.


So I would say, build a gateway and see if it is popular.  It can be done.

Although I disagree with your logic and conclusions in their entirety, I
appreciate the straight forward method in which you have provided your
opinions. You have presented the facts in a method that is vastly superior
than anyone else has.
Gee, thank you for your appreciation of my "vastly superior presentation of the facts" that according to you are, "both illogical and inconclusive"--now go back and read this again, and this time don't letter your fingers run ahead of your mind. 

Pointedly,

JP




-k


_______________________________________________
cobalt-users mailing list
cobalt-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To Subscribe or Unsubscribe, please go to:
http://list.cobalt.com/mailman/listinfo/cobalt-users


--
--------------
|  Jerry Pape
|  jpape@xxxxxxxx
--------------