February 25, 2009 at 11:03 am
Let me clarify something about "best practices". I don't mean to imply that we should insist that OPs follow my standards (or Lynn's standards) about where to put commas, or whether or not white space should be on either side of an '= ' symbol.
But the "best practices" links are about how to set up a question so that the person helping you has all the information needed to actually start work on answering it. Complete information makes everything run faster and smoother. We all contribute our time because we want to give something back and help others. Wasting time dragging details out of OP "A" is time that could be used to help OP "B". (The needs of the many outweigh the need of the one.)
I know that everyone gets exposed to those links, but that is AFTER the fact. Hitting them with it on the front end, along with an explanation of why it's important, might get more of them to understand that it is something expected of everyone, and take it more seriously. Of course the only way some of them will take it seriously is if everyone waits to answer until sufficient information is presented. That's not going to happen.
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
February 25, 2009 at 11:04 am
lmu92 (2/25/2009)
From my point of view any type of best (or recommended) practice does not need to be mentioned as an "entry requirement for requests" unless there is any "reward" for OP's following that practise versus others that don't.If I as an OP get my question answered no matter how the code is formatted, I'd use the easiest way (from my perspective).
Maybe it would help to add a few lines of comments to the answers that would explain why the code is formatted the way it is or what the applied "standard" is.
This would leave enough room for everybody who answers to stay with her/his preferred standard and still would tell the OP that there are better ways of coding... - and over time we would see a number of recommended practice that -most probably- would all follow two simple patterns: each format will be standardized and easy to read.
And maybe a few of the OP's will figure out that changing their way of coding makes it easier for them as well as for others.
Most of us try helping when we can regardless of how the question is posted (except if you've seen the 200-300 line SQL code with zip formatting).
I have seen several OP's that have actually solved their own problem while putting together a post following the guidelines in Jeff's article. Other OP's have gotten a better understanding of what they were trying to ask and provided more info that greatly assisted helping them.
Some OP's are trainable, others aren't, regardless of how much we may ask them to help us help them. Those that consistently fail to help us tend not to get as much help as those that do.
February 25, 2009 at 11:06 am
Bob Hovious (2/25/2009)
Steve, a suggestion: Why not expose first time OPs to a best practices for asking questions link BEFORE they enter their question. Just pop it up when they go to enter a new question, and don't let them enter the new question for at least 5 or ten minutes. Do this to them the first two or three times, and after just let them post questions without having to see it. Other people may have better ideas about how to present it, I'm just throwing this out there.I know OPs can just ignore it and plow blindly on, but part of the education process should be teaching newcomers the nature of the system they are participating in and how they can best help it work for them. It really is a surprisingly good system, and works beautifully when the OPs cooperate.
I don't like the idea of a "barrier to entry". Many of the people I help out here aren't up to even understanding what we're asking for, and writing documents that go into enough detail for them will be a major pain for people who are up to the task already.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
February 25, 2009 at 11:09 am
As an addition to this, there have been plenty of questions that "violated the posting practices", that I was able to help out pretty easily. Some questions require much more detail, others are easy to answer even without all the details. I prefer that it be on a case-by-case basis.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
February 25, 2009 at 11:14 am
Couldn't resist. This should be post 2000!!
For best practices on asking questions, please read the following article: Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help[/url]
February 25, 2009 at 11:15 am
Alvin Ramard (2/25/2009)
Couldn't resist. This should be post 2000!!
Or this one 😛
-------------------------------------------------------------
"It takes 15 minutes to learn the game and a lifetime to master"
"Share your knowledge. It's a way to achieve immortality."
February 25, 2009 at 11:17 am
Which makes my prior post the "Party with Prince" post! Woot! 🙂
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
February 25, 2009 at 11:21 am
We have confirmed that we do not have a P2K problem. We seem, however, to have developed oddly tangetial interests in science fiction literature, the Illuminati, and code layout, all at the same time.
February 25, 2009 at 11:21 am
I agree, there shouldn't be a barrier to entry. We, as mentors should try and help educate the neophyte on how best to ask for help. The first is to point them in the right direction, have them read articles on how to best ask questions that get good answers. If they still have problems, and are willing to ask for guidance on how to do what is asked, then we should help them with that as well.
My pet peeve on this, are those we point to the article, then don't do anything to help themselves. I've gotten the "I read it, but I need to solve this problem so I don't have time to do what it asks" responses. Really makes you want to help them, not. But then some of us still persevere and try to help hoping that the NEXT time the ask for help they'll do more to help us help them.
February 25, 2009 at 11:21 am
Hey G 🙂
It's not barrier to entry. Nobody has to take a test on the material. It's just something that first time OPs should read before they ask their question. If they spend five minutes reading it, they might even get their question answered faster.
This community is committed to helping everyone, regardless of their skill level, which is a great thing. The point is that the more people you can teach to ask correctly, the faster you can get their questions answered and the more time will be available to help others. Also, as was previously pointed out, sometimes just setting up the question helps an OP see the answer.
Many of you have heard the old saying "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he can feed himself for a lifetime." Just out of curiousity, how many of you see this forum's ultimate objective to be giving people fish, or teaching them to fish?
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
February 25, 2009 at 11:26 am
Bob Hovious (2/25/2009)
Just out of curiousity, how many of you see this forum's ultimate objective to be giving people fish, or teaching them to fish?
Teaching, but you can't teach someone who doesn't want to be taught.
Gail Shaw
Microsoft Certified Master: SQL Server, MVP, M.Sc (Comp Sci)
SQL In The Wild: Discussions on DB performance with occasional diversions into recoverability
February 25, 2009 at 11:30 am
Bob Hovious (2/25/2009)
Hey G 🙂It's not barrier to entry. Nobody has to take a test on the material. It's just something that first time OPs should read before they ask their question. If they spend five minutes reading it, they might even get their question answered faster.
This community is committed to helping everyone, regardless of their skill level, which is a great thing. The point is that the more people you can teach to ask correctly, the faster you can get their questions answered and the more time will be available to help others. Also, as was previously pointed out, sometimes just setting up the question helps an OP see the answer.
Many of you have heard the old saying "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he can feed himself for a lifetime." Just out of curiousity, how many of you see this forum's ultimate objective to be giving people fish, or teaching them to fish?
I'm actually with Bob on this, we are here to help people to "teach them to fish" not give them the "fish" (though we all have done that too).
Unfortunately, I think a lot of the younger people that come here are looking for the quick fix, instant gratification. Not trying to figure out how things work or how to do things better/differently. We can ask that they read, ask that the provide additional information, but (as I tell my kids) we can't make them do anything they don't want to or don't see a benefit to do.
February 25, 2009 at 11:31 am
GilaMonster (2/25/2009)
Bob Hovious (2/25/2009)
Just out of curiousity, how many of you see this forum's ultimate objective to be giving people fish, or teaching them to fish?Teaching, but you can't teach someone who doesn't want to be taught.
True -- JosephTran2002
February 25, 2009 at 11:33 am
Bob Hovious (2/25/2009)
Hey G 🙂It's not barrier to entry. Nobody has to take a test on the material. It's just something that first time OPs should read before they ask their question. If they spend five minutes reading it, they might even get their question answered faster.
This community is committed to helping everyone, regardless of their skill level, which is a great thing. The point is that the more people you can teach to ask correctly, the faster you can get their questions answered and the more time will be available to help others. Also, as was previously pointed out, sometimes just setting up the question helps an OP see the answer.
Many of you have heard the old saying "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and he can feed himself for a lifetime." Just out of curiousity, how many of you see this forum's ultimate objective to be giving people fish, or teaching them to fish?
I see having to read moderately technical documents before being allowed to post as a barrier to entry. Terms and conditions are already there to be bypassed, why add more to it that can be ignored just as easily?
I kind of judge the fish thing by the person I think I'm dealing with.
Some people want to go to the grocery store and buy a fish.
Some seem to want a free fish just for being alive.
Some would like to learn how to fish, but don't have the time.
Some are already skilled hunters, and just need a fish this once to supplement their venison.
Some are ready to learn how to fish and just need to learn how to stop poking themselves with the hook.
Some already know how to fish, but are having bad luck with their current pole and bait.
Periodically, someone who is already a master fisherman just can't seem to find his bait that particular morning.
And sometimes you teach someone to fish, and he spends his days drinking beer and lying about how many miles long the one that got away was.
(Maybe I'm getting too much mileage out of that metaphore.)
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
February 25, 2009 at 11:39 am
Here is an example of what I would call well formatted code, but not to my personal standard. It won't take long for me to change some for me, but I can read it as is.
select b.homelaborlevelname1 as company
,b.homelaborleveldsc1 as company_descr
,b.homelaborleveldsc3 as location
,b.personnum as emplid
,b.personfullname as employee
,e.personfullname as prev_approver
,d.enteredondtm as prev_approval_time
,c.personfullname as last_approver
,a.enteredondtm as last_approval_time
from vp_person b
inner join vp_wfcaudit a on a.personnum = b.personnum
and a.enteredondtm = (select max(enteredondtm) from vp_wfcaudit -- get max Supervisor Approval row within past 2 weeks
where personfullname = a.personfullname
and personnum = a.personnum
and wfcaudittype = a.wfcaudittype
and clientusername <> b.personnum -- exclude where employee is approver
and enteredondtm between dateadd(d,-14,getdate()) and getdate())
and a.wfcaudittype = 'Supervisor approval'
inner join vp_person c on a.clientusername = c.personnum -- get last approver name
inner join vp_wfcaudit d on d.personnum = b.personnum
and d.enteredondtm = (select max(enteredondtm) from vp_wfcaudit -- get max Supervisor Approval row prior to above row
where personfullname = d.personfullname
and personnum = d.personnum
and wfcaudittype = d.wfcaudittype
and clientusername <> b.personnum
and enteredondtm < a.enteredondtm)
and d.wfcaudittype = 'Supervisor approval'
inner join vp_person e on d.clientusername = e.personnum -- get previous approver name
where b.employmentstatus = 'active'
and b.homelaborlevelname1 not in ('Test01','uis','dlx','art','rtl','lfs','mcm','rad')
and b.personnum = '00005880'
and e.personnum <> c.personnum -- only include where previous approver is different than current approver
order by company, employee
Viewing 15 posts - 1,996 through 2,010 (of 66,000 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply