4 ms·

I often feel that it's necessary to stretch the truth a little bit on SO. Otherwise you ask "How can I do X?" and all your answers will be "Don't do X. Use Y in

by thurn 13y ago

I often feel that it's necessary to stretch the truth a little bit on SO. Otherwise you ask "How can I do X?" and all your answers will be "Don't do X. Use Y instead."

m_myers 13y ago
That happens because of the "old shoe or glass bottle?" question.[1] When newbies (or even oldbies) ask how to do something, often the real question could be solved much better by taking a completely different tack. This has also been called the "XY problem".[2] The best answers would ideally answer the question as asked (or explain why it can't be done) and also show a still more excellent way. [1]: http://weblogs.asp.net/alex_papadimoulis/archive/2005/05/25/408925.aspx http://weblogs.asp.net/alex_papadimoulis/archive/2005/05/25/... [2]: http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy...
- jamesbritt 13y ago
  The best answers would ideally answer the question as asked (or explain why it can't be done) and also show a still more excellent way. There are times I've asked how to do X, and for various reasons X is really, no kidding, exactly what wanted to do. Still, numerous people would question my desire to do X, turning the discussion into an inquisition on motives or skill comprehension. I'm sure in some odd way they all meant well, but they were spending a lot of cycles not actually answering the question. In those cases the better strategy is to, under some crafty pretext, bluntly assert that X cannot be done. This will evoke numerous rebuttals with full details on just how incredibly wrong and foolish that claim is. Both cases play to a trait all too common to many people on discussion boards: replying to questions with the primary goal of showing that you are, in fact, smarter than everyone else.
- manish_gill 13y ago
  I've seen this argument often enough, especially on IRC, where people smugly assume that there must be a flaw in what the person asking a question is trying to do. Problem with this is, a lot of times, I just want the answer to a direct question, which I can't find easily in the docs (or maybe it's not documented). Only, more often than not, people think they always know better and everyone asking a question must either not know the proper way of doing things, and why in the world are they trying to do <question_asked> ? This then leads to a debate about me trying to solve problem X which requires me to solve Y which requires me to do Z, which led me to ask the question. At the end, I get the exact answer I was looking for, but that took longer than necessary because other were looking at it the same way you described, that it's the XY problem. I can't help but feel that it mostly just wasted my time a lot. You don't always have to know the entire story behind the code to give straight answers, is all I'm saying. :)
danielweber 13y ago
Despite how much computer people love Eric Raymond's "how to ask questions" thing[1], it really isn't the best way to get your question answered. It's the way that people who get asked questions wish the universe would work. One thing I've found is that, beyond a pretty low floor, more details often means less answers. If you, forex, post your C code and ask why it doesn't work on IRIX, people will say "it must be something weird about IRIX, I don't care about that" and ignore you. If you post it without mentioning the OS, you can get some good answers. [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

by thurn 13y ago

I often feel that it's necessary to stretch the truth a little bit on SO. Otherwise you ask "How can I do X?" and all your answers will be "Don't do X. Use Y instead."

m_myers 13y ago

That happens because of the "old shoe or glass bottle?" question.[1] When newbies (or even oldbies) ask how to do something, often the real question could be solved much better by taking a completely different tack. This has also been called the "XY problem".[2] The best answers would ideally answer the question as asked (or explain why it can't be done) and also show a still more excellent way. [1]: http://weblogs.asp.net/alex_papadimoulis/archive/2005/05/25/408925.aspx http://weblogs.asp.net/alex_papadimoulis/archive/2005/05/25/... [2]: http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy...

jamesbritt 13y ago
The best answers would ideally answer the question as asked (or explain why it can't be done) and also show a still more excellent way. There are times I've asked how to do X, and for various reasons X is really, no kidding, exactly what wanted to do. Still, numerous people would question my desire to do X, turning the discussion into an inquisition on motives or skill comprehension. I'm sure in some odd way they all meant well, but they were spending a lot of cycles not actually answering the question. In those cases the better strategy is to, under some crafty pretext, bluntly assert that X cannot be done. This will evoke numerous rebuttals with full details on just how incredibly wrong and foolish that claim is. Both cases play to a trait all too common to many people on discussion boards: replying to questions with the primary goal of showing that you are, in fact, smarter than everyone else.
manish_gill 13y ago
I've seen this argument often enough, especially on IRC, where people smugly assume that there must be a flaw in what the person asking a question is trying to do. Problem with this is, a lot of times, I just want the answer to a direct question, which I can't find easily in the docs (or maybe it's not documented). Only, more often than not, people think they always know better and everyone asking a question must either not know the proper way of doing things, and why in the world are they trying to do <question_asked> ? This then leads to a debate about me trying to solve problem X which requires me to solve Y which requires me to do Z, which led me to ask the question. At the end, I get the exact answer I was looking for, but that took longer than necessary because other were looking at it the same way you described, that it's the XY problem. I can't help but feel that it mostly just wasted my time a lot. You don't always have to know the entire story behind the code to give straight answers, is all I'm saying. :)

danielweber 13y ago

Despite how much computer people love Eric Raymond's "how to ask questions" thing[1], it really isn't the best way to get your question answered. It's the way that people who get asked questions wish the universe would work. One thing I've found is that, beyond a pretty low floor, more details often means less answers. If you, forex, post your C code and ask why it doesn't work on IRIX, people will say "it must be something weird about IRIX, I don't care about that" and ignore you. If you post it without mentioning the OS, you can get some good answers. [1] http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html