[Asterisk-Users] List tips for new subscribers <--sorry for 2 nd post, missed this.

[Steven Critchfield]

On Wed, 2005-02-23 at 08:54 -0700, Colin Anderson wrote:
> >This list is for discussions among users of Asterisk, not a getting 
> >started hotline for beginners. Beginners learn by reading documentation 
> >and examining the sample files included. 
> 
> Mmm, I (respectfully) disagree. One of the unstated objectives of mechanisms
> like this list is to evangelize the platform. Obviously, we all want it to
> do well. You can only do that by creating mindshare. You create mindshare by
> winning people over. You win people over in a technical context by helping
> them wrap their heads around the concept and implement it. Sometimes, this
> involves hand-holding, as I do with my boss, my boss' boss etc every day. 

Why evangelize to those who have already at least put forth the effort
to get here? You also don't increase mindshare here, you do that at your
LUG or other networking levels. 

As far as hand-holding, maybe that is the name of the next mailing list
needed. Noobs aren't to be disrespected but the people who expect to get
their business up and running via handholding and not having to pay for
the consultant can go over to the handholding list and be safely
ignored.

As for what you do with your boss and or any level of management above
you is why you have a job. Your boss is doing exactly what we expect
some users here to do. When it either goes beyond their capacity or
beyond what effort they are willing to put forth, they must pay for the
support. 

I'm sure I'm not the only one that first gages the effort exhibited in
the messages that I actually read. If it appears the person has actually
put forth effort, they get treated very well. The less effort exhibited,
the less I care about the person. Effort is usually exhibited by the
question asked. If it is about a specific detail, the user obviously has
learned enough already to get to asking about a detail. Asking if
asterisk can make coffee, do the laundry, sense the bladder level... No
effort was applied.

> Look, there are two kinds of people (on the list): One that can deal with
> the technical implementation of Asterisk and have no problem with it, and
> the other kind, that get fired up about the *concept* but are short of the
> chops to make it happen. We ignore the second kind at our own peril (I
> actually should have said "you guys" instead of "we" because I am in-between
> the two types). I can see a scenario where if the platform becomes
> inaccessible to PHB / noob types because of things like attitude, Asterisk
> will be relegated to "also-ran" status with such illustrious company as the
> Amiga, which still has an incredibly vocal minority that insists that Amiga
> still r00lz, but nobody listens to them and considers them crackpots who
> should Just Get Over It.

As with everything else in life, when there are only 2 options you
probably oversimplified. Take my comments above and apply them to your
thoughts here and you get at least a 3 dimensional graph where people
lie somewhere on the 3 axis. X axis is technical now how, Y axis is
conceptualizers, and the Z axis is the amount of effort willing to be
applied. 

Of course I am sure there are other factors to be added into that as
well.

> We *know* Asterisk is a category-redefining platform. We *know* it is
> Insanely Great. But ticking people off with brusque answers and flames will
> *not* win the hearts and minds of potential adopters. *1-2
> 
> *1 As far as the previous "black box" comment goes (where an implementor
> doesn't want someone to know about the inner workings, so they can charge
> $$$), there is a certain truth to that, and, while GPL allows for that, it
> is completely contrary to the spirit of the platform and makes the Asterisk
> community no better than (insert your favorite telecom player whipping boy
> here)

There are many users who don't care about the implementation. That is
part of the reason that people haven't cared about building open
solutions previously. I am guessing, but I doubt most integrators care
much about the internals. They only care about their interface and what
level of stability they can provide. 

> *2 Are you so fussy about how your inbox or whatever is displayed that you
> are willing to alienate a potential adopter because he top posts or uses
> HTML? Come on you guys, who cares? What if you pissed off the CTO of a
> Fortune 500 and he ruled out an Asterisk rollout because he took your flames
> personally? (sounds like a stretch, but I find it plausible) You didn't do
> too much to help the platform that day, did you? 

Fortune 500 companies are lemmings. They don't tend to go out on a limb.
It is rare that a fortune 500 made it where they did by being very
innovative. If the CTO of a fortune 500 made it here, he probably is
only doing it for fun. The CTO would  have delegated down about 3 levels
of management before it hit someone who needs to do real work.

As for how one uses email... It is very analogous to speaking etiquette.
You where taught not to interupt while another is speaking, you are
taught to enunciate, and most are reminded not to ramble. If someone
comes up to you and doesn't follow those rules, you might well brush
them aside and work your way on to something else. Why is email any
different? There are plenty of arguments against HTML in email for
99.999% of email. If you haven't figured out the superiority of replying
inline with quoted messages, your about equivalent to the rambling
speaker. 
-- 
Steven Critchfield <critch at basesys.com>