The usual

[Griffon]

I may be fairly new here, but I am going to express my opinion on this topic anyways.

The OP has expressed an opinion of displeasure of the general flaming that occurs on this site when somebody asks a simple question.  There is nothing wrong with that, people should feel free to come on the site and ask questions.  Is there a search function? Yes.  Can you Google it? Yes.  Do you always get up-to-date, relevant, and accurate information that way? NO.

I can sit down and do all the research in the world, read information on the DIN, and look at old posts but it may do little else than provide me with more background info relevant to my situation without actually answering my question.  Do some people have it coming to them when they ask the same question somebody asked and had answered last week/month?  Probably.  But that doesn't mean that all the usual site members need to jump on the bandwagon and disrespectfully shut them down (and I am not referring to the majority of THIS thread, but rather to others on the site).

IMHO, this thread should have been done with Occam's post, or maybe Bruce's first.  To Michael O'Leary's statement:

"Now that you've been here a few months and probably know your way around the forum, please feel free to jump in on any thread and type out the answer so the poster doesn't have to search. Once you have answered the same question and few times, or a few dozen times, you may also find value in advising others that the search function can be helpful.  I see that you have not once attempted to do what you say "we" should be doing."

I suggest that if you don't want to take the time to answer a question AGAIN, don't.  That's it.  Just save your time and energy and leave it to somebody else.

As for how the last few posts have gone on this thread, we have George Wallace highlighting the intent to "provide the membership with a "Professional" site ", which is followed by a satire of the OP's post that receives a kudos from DS.  REALLY? I thought this site wasn't in the business of condoning that kind of behaviour.

If the intent is to keep it professional, then let's do that.  If somebody asks a question that has been answered, direct the poster to the answer and Lock/Merge the thread.  There is no requirement to flame a newbie for being a little ignorant and not searching, or to flame the guy that HAS looked and is asking anyways.  If somebody opens a rant thread (not this one, I think his post actually has some value), then LOCK IT.  It doesn't prove anything to jump on somebody and read them the riot act.

I don't think the OP is asking for too much, it's just a request that members keep things on a more amicable, respectful, professional manner, and I think that falls in line nicely with Bruce's third point on professionalism.

But that's just my  :2c:

Oh, and for the record, I haven't been chewed a new one yet, although I am sure I will for this one.

 

[jwtg]

...

I suggest that if you don't want to take the time to answer a question AGAIN, don't.  That's it.  Just save your time and energy and leave it to somebody else.

As for how the last few posts have gone on this thread, we have George Wallace highlighting the intent to "provide the membership with a "Professional" site ", which is followed by a satire of the OP's post that receives a kudos from DS.  REALLY? I thought this site wasn't in the business of condoning that kind of behaviour.

If the intent is to keep it professional, then let's do that.  ...

I've heard the best way to communicate is to speak to someone in their own language.  I took that literally, hence the satire using his words.  It seemed like the simplest way to address all of his concerns by providing rebuttal.  That doesn't sit well with you- so be it.  I consider my comical form of correction to be gentle and easy to take, especially compared to what someone is likely to experience during the course of a CF career, beginning with basic training.  I can't imagine that if I ask my instructors every day 'What are my boots supposed to look like for inspection?' they're going to smile and gently demonstrate for me the proper placement of boots for inspection.  They'll tell me to make use of the photographs provided for standards for inspection (of which I was undoubtedly made aware prior to preparing for inspection), or to look at a squad mate's cubicle, or use one of the many means of acquiring information I have at my disposal without wasting their time. 

They'll probably also make me do pushups.  If you'd prefer, I will begin to respond to posts like this with punishment/correction in the form of push ups, rather than satire.

...
Oh, and for the record, I haven't been chewed a new one yet, although I am sure I will for this one.

25 pushups please.  Then you have permission to recover.

##EDIT: Typo.  Had a word in there twice- thought it might meet Griffon's standards of professionalism if I corrected my error.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

I hereby motion that personnel looking for information contact Ridgeline, bleedbruins and Griffon. These 3 will patiently and gladly assist newcomers to the site and find all relevant information that the individual is seeking. That sounds fair, doesn't it?

 

[Griffon]

25 pushups please.  Then you have permission to recover.

DCO...Thank you.

I've heard the best way to communicate is to speak to someone in their own language. 

To this I would agree with to some extent, but I would say that the best way to communicate is to speak to someone at their level of comprehension.  One doesn't have to talk down to them, twist their words to suit one's desires or be condecending; but should rather communicate in a clear concise manner and at a level that the people you are addressing fully understand.

I hereby motion that personnel looking for information contact Ridgeline, bleedbruins and Griffon. These 3 will patiently and gladly assist newcomers to the site and find all relevant information that the individual is seeking. That sounds fair, doesn't it?

As I said, if someone asks a question that has been answered ad nauseum, I generally prefer to politely let it go.  If one would like to gently nudge someone in the right direction that's great, but I don't agree that people need to jump on a bandwagon and blast a guy for asking the question, that's all.

But yes, if it will take me less time and effort to answer the question than to do the research, post links, and tell the person to search, I just may do that.  But only if I actually know the answer.  :nod:

Cheers.

 

[aesop081]

But yes, if it will take me less time and effort to answer the question than to do the research, post links, and tell the person to search, I just may do that. 

Why ? what does a poster learn from that ?

This happens to me every day....i look for one peice of information and in the process of doing research, i find out many other things.

So, what does a poster learn by being spoonfed ?

I hereby motion that personnel looking for information contact Ridgeline, bleedbruins and Griffon.

Wait until April rolls around.........see the gongshow that this site will be...........

 

[Griffon]

Why ? what does a poster learn from that ?

This happens to me every day....i look for one peice of information and in the process of doing research, i find out many other things.

So, what does a poster learn by being spoonfed ?

Wait until April rolls around.........see the gongshow that this site will be...........

As I said, I may [answer], it depends on the question.  I understand how this forum works and that looking before asking is an excellent way of finding the information you are looking for, but I also understand that a new person may just ask a question because they are ignorant of the other methods of gaining that information, or because the info seeked is old or buried somewhere in an obscure corner of the site.  It isn't rude to answer the question or provide gentle guidance on how to independently find the answer, and one doesn't have to be condescending when responding to such a question. 

A forum is a place for discussion by definition:
"an assembly, meeting place, television program, etc., for the discussion of questions of public interest. "
"a meeting or assembly for the open discussion of subjects of public interest."
"a medium for open discussion, such as a magazine."
"a public meeting place for open discussion."

and discussions go two ways.  It is not always required to shut someone down, that's all.

As for the gong show, that's a beast to deal with unto itself, and I will probably exercise my right to remain silent for most of it. 

 

[jwtg]

...I also understand that a new person may just ask a question because they are ignorant of the other methods of gaining that information, or because the info seeked is old or buried somewhere in an obscure corner of the site....

Give a man a fish...teach a man to fish...

##Edit: Closed open quote tag.

 

[kratz]

This site encourages members to think and self-censure ourselves. This means there will tend to be more posts not encouraging disregard for site guidelines, than against.
Griffon offers straw arguments by enumerating how many active site members do not agree with the OP. This in itself is an indication the site serves those who
meet the litmus test and are striving to live and work within a military community. The DS (AKA moderators) are not here to hold hands or respect feelings, much like in real military life.
A new initiative, Mentors, was started to allow those dedicated to assist the site in an unofficial way. Mentors have some level of experience with the military or dedication to the site. Approval to join the DS or Mentors rests solely with the Site Owner.

Granted, since I have been with the site, we have become "kinder and gentler" to those who blindly post or demand answers. Most dogpiles and other negative
responses are muted. The OP's current version of complaint, while valid to him is a far cry from what would have been experienced years ago.

To paraphrase someone I respect:

"Thanks to super-recruit we now know how to post and complain. If we don't know, post and demand others to provide all the answers in a timely and conveniently ordered Coles Notes version that I can crib into my interview with the dreaded CFRC Recruiting Lord over my Interview, after I have defeated the monstrous CFAT with my airsoft gun."

Many people who have been around, no longer even read or answer the recruiting threads. Do You Know Why? I'll give you the first 50 repetitive questions before you figure it out. Griffon, my respect to you to attempt to take on all recruiting questions. But you already self-limted your answers in your own post (# 23) by admitting you can only answers questions you know the answers to. Often, new people only want to hear from the SMEs who are living and doing the job now. Those same SMEs are often, no longer participating in these threads because of expectations like the OP. Griffon has joined the site, agreed to the current rules, does not like them and is now redefining them all on his own to meet his own definition (#25).

This site is NOT and Official Site and will never make any such claim. That being said, with many current and past members of all ranks (literally), this site is one of the best sources for real answers if you are willing to accept and work within the rules. Which all people who signed up "agreed to do", it is their failure if they do not follow site rules.

I second Ex-Dragon's motion:

I hereby motion that personnel looking for information contact Ridgeline, bleedbruins and Griffon. These 3 will patiently and gladly assist newcomers to the site and find all relevant information that the individual is seeking. That sounds fair, doesn't it?

Sadly, I agree with CDN Aviator's prediction. This is the calm before the....show.

Mister PMC, can we have the vote now?


Kratz
Navy.ca Mentor

 

[Cdnleaf]

"A credible online reputation means you’ll have people paying attention when you add to a thread.  But it only takes one outrageous contribution that incites or adds to a flame war blow that all away.  And the evidence seldom, if ever, disappears.  And when you set yourself up as a questionable poster, those you could legitimately be helping may avoid your recommendations because they won’t know where you’re coming from any more."

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/51970.0.html

The quote is from one of the many nuggets at the link; still one of my personal favorite posts/threads to read.  A few times I've searched for things, not found it - then asked someone/DS/relic/veteran etc. rather than posting.  As for grammar, perhaps it's a personal/professional thing; if I have attempted my best and given the spell check a run through, that's good enough for me.  All the best.

 

[dimsum]

I like to think of the "search this, get something completely different" lesson of using this search engine as training for trying to search anything on the DWAN/DIN.  But that's just me.

Seriously though, one would hope that people did some research besides just asking randomly (and seemingly repeatedly) how to get into "insert trade here."  As for grammar/spelling, it's definitely a professional thing (if not personal) since at some point in our careers, we will have to write something intended for other people to read. 

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Another reason for the original poster as to why we 'push" the search function.

All those 'merged' or 'superthreads' you see, ala The Iran Superthread repersent many, many hours of VOLUNTEER work to make/ edit.

Just go through that thread and count the various titles that are in it and then post it here......[ I'll bet you grow weary before you have finished :nod:]

 

[Journeyman]

Those same SMEs are often, no longer participating in these threads because of expectations like the OP.

...as well as the posters who believe medical and/or fitness standards should not apply to them because they're somehow "special."

As for the, "don't like the repetitive/dumb questions, then don't respond," we see many occasions of that, where the 'entitlement-/short attention span' poster will then post "I POSTED 5 MINUTED AGO; WHERE'S MY ANSWER?!  :crybaby:  YOU PEOPLE ARE DICKS!    ....dude."

But Kratz is correct; I can't speak for others, but my postings in Recruiting are severely curtailed -- I'm having enough heartache with poorly thought-out posts in the Current Events threads  :



And Kratz, it's looking like you're making a killing in MilPoints today  

 

[Griffon]

Griffon offers straw arguments by enumerating how many active site members do not agree with the OP. This in itself is an indication the site serves those who meet the litmus test and are striving to live and work within a military community.

Please elaborate; the OP has an opinion which has validity in many cases.  And as I said earlier, it is not the difference in opinion I have an issue with, it's the "I'm right because I have been here longer than you, and you're annoying me now so piss off" attitude that I have seen in response to questions that I have the issue with.

Many people who have been around, no longer even read or answer the recruiting threads. Do You Know Why? I'll give you the first 50 repetitive questions before you figure it out. Griffon, my respect to you to attempt to take on all recruiting questions. But you already self-limted your answers in your own post (# 23) by admitting you can only answers questions you know the answers to.

At no point did I say that I would answer all recruiting questions.  And if people don't want to answer recruiting questions, they don't have to.  They don't have to flame the poster either.

Often, new people only want to hear from the SMEs who are living and doing the job now. Those same SMEs are often, no longer participating in these threads because of expectations like the OP.

How does reading a necro post from four years ago give a person current and relevant information on how to become a {insert trade here}?  Things may, and have, changed a lot; there's a lot of value in the recency of the information.

Griffon has joined the site, agreed to the current rules, does not like them and is now redefining them all on his own to meet his own definition (#25).

Please cite said rules I am "redefining" so I may rectify my conduct (for the record, I just went through http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/24937.0.html, http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/51970.0.html, and http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/64206.0.html)

This site is NOT and Official Site and will never make any such claim. That being said, with many current and past members of all ranks (literally), this site is one of the best sources for real answers if you are willing to accept and work within the rules. Which all people who signed up "agreed to do", it is their failure if they do not follow site rules.

Agreed...for now at least.  I would like to remain in an open CF forum where I can seek information and provide answers freely and without judgement, and I hope that milnet.ca will remain that place.

 

[kratz]

Griffon,

I am not going to piss for post per post with you. I have stated my personal opinion only, if you need direct answers from me, before the DS say it, ask me on PM. Otherwise, my comments stand.

In fairness, to answer necro posts. This phrase is too subjective to use as a defense when discussing a topic. Some people (this site) think a necro post if anything over 180 days. Most new people on this site think that if their question has not been asked in the past week if new....*pause*















Take some time and answer that one yourself.

 

[mariomike]

Mr. Wallace said something that I believe is relevant.
Topic: "On asking questions & hostile dog-pile replies." ( 4 pages ):
"That is what this is all about..........lazy people who want to be spoonfed eventually grating on the nerves of other site members.  This site is a good source of info, and even if that info may be dated, it is often still relevant.  I am sure at some time when this site was first created someone made a statement that the sky is blue.  Now that statement is over ten years old, but it still holds true.  Why must someone discard info here that wasn't created in the last 24 hours?  How often have we seen this?  Why must we put up with it?  We have seen people ask questions and then we have also seen people "with attitude" ask questions.  I would say that in the majority of cases the membership has been quite obliging to new members, until such time that some may show "attitude" and then we see the dogpiles."
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/90702/post-894765.html#msg894765

 

[denimboy]

I'll risk my self replying to this thread.
As an active member of other forums, I can (and I'm sure many of you can) tell this issue is not specific to this forum.

The fact that army.ca is a serious forum about army things, and specifically The Recruiting topic, I totally understand and agree that potential recruits should not be spoon fed and proper spelling should be respected. With that being said...

I'm not taking part on either side. Both have arguments which I partially agree with. This is just my point of view.

Let's just start by mentioning not every new member is familiar with forums and therefor may not know how to use the functions.
There are MANY topics and thread subjects. They will eventually get to know their way around.
The rules are clear and everyone has to agree them. Unfortunately some people don't read and understand them and don't take the time to familiarize with the functions.

When someone is debuting his research on a potential career in the CF, he/she is probably not familiar with military terms and acronyms and even the recruiting process itself. IMHO, searching the forum can be difficult if you don't know what to search for in the first place.
I would think this is the main reason of all the redundant threads.

Newbies (let's say who registered less than two weeks ago) creating threads on discussed and answered questions will continue to happen everyday no matter what the outcome of this thread is. This is reality.

Now this is how I think the community should respond to newbie threads :

1) Moderators. There are many active moderators everyday on this forum. When such a thread is created, they will decide if it is redundant and/or is not relevant to the topic. If no actions are taken by the moderators (because they actually have lives and may not be present) the thread should remain "valid" and the replies accordingly and see number 2. No matter how much it frustrates you, the thread is created and the OT can't do nothing about it [the thread] except not doing it again.  They were not here a week ago and are not aware of the issue. You are then free to report the thread to a moderator. If the member as been on here for awhile, well this a different story as they should be more familiar with the forum and I'll let the moderator deal with it.

2) Now, some people actually do search and don't come up with answers. In this case, they either didn't search enough or the information found were old and/or incomplete. Anyone is free to answer or not. Without actually doing the searching, someone can point out what to search for (as many do already). This would help the OT in his/her research and if they get their answer by them self, they will likely repeat the process. Simply saying "search" is not much helpful when the question can't be summarized in keywords. Because we all know the search function is not 100% accurate.

I have to say that being "hard" on newbies "works". But let's try to keep the flaming down. There is a difference on being direct and being harsh. Being harsh will provoke the person and start a never ending rant and this is also taking bandwidth.

Summarized: There will always be newbie threads. Let the moderators do their thing. If you don't want to answer, don't. If you suggest to search, saying what to search for is more helpful than simply asking to search. And remember that not everyone is as familiar as you with the forum. Don't spoon feed, but don't flame either. If the member is purposely doing such threads, report to moderator.

My  :2c:

 

[aesop081]

I've been on this site since 2004.........this argument, by a vast minority of individuals, occurs on a regular basis. That this site continues to grow as it does every single year means (IMHO) that we're not doing things wrong.

We (the larger, majority, we) have certain expectations and will likely continue to do so. If that doesnt work for some, i'm fine with that, there is always militaryphotos.net.

 

[Griffon]

denimboy, I completely agree with your statement, and i think you may have gotten your point across a little more eloquently than myself.  Thanks!

CDN Aviator, I understand your (and many other people's) opinion/stance on this issue, and I do not disagree.  The only point I was trying to make is that I think some individuals on this site go on the attack a bit too fast when somebody asks one of those questions again.  I am sure you are familiar with http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/99479.0.html and http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/99454.0.html.  So yes, I get it.

I apologize if I may have ruffled a few feathers here, but I just wanted to point out that we don't need to paint all those that ask a question with the same broad brush and that we can be a little more diplomatic in adjusting unwanted behaviours.  And I think most of us are on the same page, for the most part anyways, on this issue.  And now on to other topics for me...

 

[kratz]

It's good to hear denimboy has gone through "pages on a topic", (#646), demonstrating an experienced 19 posts.  :-X I'm jumping on you for speaking up, I should walk away now, since your 19 posts and how many years of military experience trump site members? So starting unclear and unresearched new threads is ok according to denimboy.

I did not notice super-applicant can jump the CFAT queue in a single month and dictate his own training schedule Better yet, super-applicant is the SME on armour and will lead the way into 1212. Super-applicant (#14) finally admits defeat and he has to ask directions to Worthington Tank Park.

 

[denimboy]

Kratz, my last post applied to me as much as any other new member. As a newbie to this forum I did my share of mistakes, learned from it and keep learning everyday. My point of view still stands whether you agree or not.