RTFM: Difference between revisions
Undid revision 215714185 by Prom3th3an (talk) Changed the Czech UTFG link to the original English one |
Semicolons (talk | contribs) m →Use and overuse: "a FAQ" » "an FAQ" |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
An [[Internet forum]] where users read the [[FAQ]] before posting their questions is more likely to have a better [[Signal to noise ratio#Informal use|signal to noise ratio]] than one that is filled with repetitive postings, and hence is more likely to attract continued participation. When evaluating whether it is acceptable to express sentiments like RTFM, one must consider the trade-off between maintaining the [[usability]] of an Internet forum for its existing users, and making a forum welcoming to newcomers. |
An [[Internet forum]] where users read the [[FAQ]] before posting their questions is more likely to have a better [[Signal to noise ratio#Informal use|signal to noise ratio]] than one that is filled with repetitive postings, and hence is more likely to attract continued participation. When evaluating whether it is acceptable to express sentiments like RTFM, one must consider the trade-off between maintaining the [[usability]] of an Internet forum for its existing users, and making a forum welcoming to newcomers. |
||
Critics say that frequent users of the phrase (or similar variants) are simply expressing [[elitism]], and that their attitude drives away newcomers without helping them. Their time could better be spent adding the question and answer to |
Critics say that frequent users of the phrase (or similar variants) are simply expressing [[elitism]], and that their attitude drives away newcomers without helping them. Their time could better be spent adding the question and answer to an FAQ, pointing the user to a helpful website, or simply not responding.<ref>[http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?t=195983 Telling people to use "Google," to "RTFM," or "Use the search feature"]—[[LinuxQuestions.org]]</ref> They point out that '''RTFM''' is often used when it is not even clear which manual their correspondent should be reading.<ref>[http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?t=305648 Please point to the right "M" so I can "RTFM"] — LinuxQuestions.org</ref> One of the most frequent criticisms of the [[open source]] community is lack of friendly support for newcomers. The [[Ubuntu (operating system)|ubuntu]] Forums and LinuxQuestions.org, for instance, have instituted "no RTFM" policies to promote a welcoming atmosphere.<ref>[http://ubuntuforums.org/index.php?page=policy Forum Policies and Expectations] — Ubuntu Forums</ref><ref>[http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?p=2164604#post2164604 "Newbie subspecies"] — thread on LinuxQuestions.org</ref>. |
||
{{Quotation|1= |
{{Quotation|1= |
||
Revision as of 19:07, 9 July 2008
RTFM is an acronym for the statement "Read The Fucking Manual" or in a more polite conversation can mean "Read The Friendly Manual" or "Read The Freaking Manual" or "Read The Famous Manual" and has many more meanings not dealt with in this article. This instruction is sometimes given in response to a question when the person being asked believes that the question could be easily answered by reading the relevant "manual" or instructions. In clean texts, "Read The Fine Manual" is sometimes used.[1] On other occasions, the F is simply ignored.
More recent variants are STFW ("Search The Fucking Web"), GIYF ("Google Is Your Friend") or JFGI ("Just Fucking Google It"). These variants have emerged due to the accumulated information on the World Wide Web and the quality of the results provided by the Google search engine.
Use and overuse
An Internet forum where users read the FAQ before posting their questions is more likely to have a better signal to noise ratio than one that is filled with repetitive postings, and hence is more likely to attract continued participation. When evaluating whether it is acceptable to express sentiments like RTFM, one must consider the trade-off between maintaining the usability of an Internet forum for its existing users, and making a forum welcoming to newcomers.
Critics say that frequent users of the phrase (or similar variants) are simply expressing elitism, and that their attitude drives away newcomers without helping them. Their time could better be spent adding the question and answer to an FAQ, pointing the user to a helpful website, or simply not responding.[2] They point out that RTFM is often used when it is not even clear which manual their correspondent should be reading.[3] One of the most frequent criticisms of the open source community is lack of friendly support for newcomers. The ubuntu Forums and LinuxQuestions.org, for instance, have instituted "no RTFM" policies to promote a welcoming atmosphere.[4][5].
RTFM [and] "Go look on google" are two inappropriate responses to a question. If you don't know the answer or don't wish to help, please say nothing instead of brushing off someone's question. Politely showing someone how you searched or obtained the answer to a question is acceptable, even encouraged.
...
If you wish to remind a user to use search tools or other resources when they have asked a question you feel is basic or common, please be very polite. Any replies for help that contain language disrespectful towards the user asking the question, i.e. "STFU" or "RTFM" are unacceptable and will not be tolerated.
— Forum Policies and Expectations — Ubuntu Forums
This phrase is also commonly used in Massive Multiplayer Online games, from people frustrated by newbies asking how to do something that is explained in the manual.
Some hackers have suggested that in some situations "RTFM" is actually the best advice that an aspiring hacker can receive.[6] They posit that hacking is a dynamic art which requires independence and drive on the part of the hacker, and see "RTFM" as more of a long-term advisement than it is a response to any single query. This argument is only applicable when used with other hackers, however, given that the concepts surrounding open source software are designed to be suitable for use by non-hackers. In fact, usability experts recommend designing some kind of software to be usable without a manual at all, since users don't ever actually read them.[7] Although, of course, there is the argument that users don't read manuals because designers, knowing that users don't read them, don't bother to make them very useful. Regardless of original cause, this problem could be mitigated as the 'contextual help' paradigm comes into play.
See also
- Internet slang
- Unix manual ("man" pages)
- Usability engineering
- User interface design
References
- ^ Howard & LeBlanc - 19 Deadly Sins of Software Security - McGraw-Hill/Osborne
- ^ Telling people to use "Google," to "RTFM," or "Use the search feature"—LinuxQuestions.org
- ^ Please point to the right "M" so I can "RTFM" — LinuxQuestions.org
- ^ Forum Policies and Expectations — Ubuntu Forums
- ^ "Newbie subspecies" — thread on LinuxQuestions.org
- ^ "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way" — Eric Steven Raymond
- ^ User Interface Design for Programmers - Chapter 6: Designing for People Who Have Better Things To Do With Their Lives
External links
- RTFA — Read the Fucking Article, Wiktionary definition
- RTFM — Jargon File definition
- UTFG — UTFG website