Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
No it is not perfectly reasonable not to search for it, Darrius.

This is a reasonable example of why I think you should tone down the way you talk to people. I tried to make my response quite gentle (successfully or otherwise) by referring to how I might do it, whereas you instantly turn around and TELL me that I'm being unreasonable. This is fairly slight compared to some of the responses I see you give (at least you're not shouting every few words as though I'm too stupid to understand them), but it does show your underlying nature in these things.

I'm not trying to be nasty, I just want you to understand that you need to show a little more empathy in how you address people.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:

When I am searching i try every possibility i can imagine and ususally somewhere in there is the answer I am looking for. I said search Scanner, not bar Code Scanner or UPC...why? because that yielded the answer. Your type of thinking is what leads newbs to repeat the same question week after week ad infinitum. SEARCH is your friend, learn how to use it and you WILL find the answer...the truth is out there..

It's wonderful when you know the answer before trying to answer the question.   If "Barry's big blue balls" gave the right answer, would you talk down to someone for not knowing it? Whether you accept it or not, I think that most people would believe that searching for 'bar code scanner' would produce better results than 'scanner', and that there was no point trying the more vague term. If you know the tricks it's easy, but that isn't how, say, Google works (which is where most people get their experience).

You know, I've supported users on computer systems for several years. One thing that came through very clearly from that is that if you don't want newcomers to ask the question, make the answer accessible. On a quick scan through the main pages of the site and forum, I didn't spot anything about bar code scanners as a feature - I think that's enough to make it a fair question. When you add that doing a search in the 'Google fashion' doesn't give the answer either, I think it is a wholly reasonable question.

As for your assertion that 'my type of thinking' (which has often been referred to by my users as 'patient and understanding') is damaging to the DVDP community, would you rather I was 'belittling and overbearing'?

Stuat

Quoting ya_shin:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
I said search Scanner, not bar Code Scanner or UPC...why? because that yielded the answer.

You searched for those terms, because you are aware that multiple words don't work ;)

I didn't know that, I guess you can learn something new every 5 or 6 YEARS    


Larry

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Your type of thinking is what leads newbs to repeat the same question week after week ad infinitum.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
I never said you were damaging to the Community, that IS your interpretation.

Well, you seem to think I'm having a negative effect on something, else why the above comment? Unless you consider repeat questions not to be a problem, in which case the only complaint that either of us have is your response to them.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
As I have noted some people need desperately to get a sense of humor around here, for reference try the humor of Don Rickles...you hockey puck.

You might also watch the Billy Video, for a laugh. Sheesh.

I remember a typical response from bullies being "well, is he doesn't see the funny side of having his head flushed, that's his problem!" Doesn't hold water with me there or here. I must have missed the joke, 'cause belittling someone you've probably never spoken to before doesn't seem very funny to me. And no, that doesn't mean I have no sense of humour.

Quote:
You might also watch the Billy Video, for a laugh. Sheesh.

You see, there you go again. You could have left it at "... for a laugh", but then you had to add that extra word. A lot of people would take that to mean you thought I was being unreasonable and were expressing it in a not-so-pleasant way. It just makes what may have otherwise been a neutral comment and makes it unquestionably negative (not that I'd suggest for a moment that it was meant as a neutral comment ). There is a better way...


Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
Dudes, let it go.

Why? The page count hasn't even reached double figures, and no-ones even accursed anyone of being the Devil incarnate yet.

Stuart

Quoting DariusKyrak:

Quote:

I remember a typical response from bullies being "well, is he doesn't see the funny side of having his head flushed, that's his problem!" Doesn't hold water with me there or here. I must have missed the joke, 'cause belittling someone you've probably never spoken to before doesn't seem very funny to me. And no, that doesn't mean I have no sense of humour.

You're wasting your time. Skip is rude and bullying and has always been rude and bullying. There are a large number of people that have already been turned off this forum by him. He will never change as he has no real life. This forum is all he has.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
John:

Rude and bullying...no..I do not suffer fools and idiots well.

Yet another excuse for your rude, bullying behaviour. Unacceptable. How many people does it take to make you understand that.

Quoting Skipnet50

Quote:
Rude and bullying...no..I do not suffer fools and idiots well.

Skip...proving his ignorance 1 post at a time. Good thing they're so many.  

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
There are more than few ignorant people around here tlevel and you certainly lead the crew.

Skip

Rude and bullying. How many times does this need to be pointed out to you?

Now now gentlemen, I'm trying the softly softly approach. I'm taking the view that Skip responds in the way he does because he's ignorant of how it's really coming across. I'm trying to make him understand that by being a little more understanding and tolerant he can make both his experience and the experience of other on this forum much more pleasant.

I'm going to waffle for a little bit (because I love the sound of my own voice), so here we go.

I while ago I did some study into something called 'transactional analysis'. It's quite important to get the right introduction to this to understand it properly, and I can't possibly do it justice here, but I'll give you the gist. It basically works on the principle that people exist in ego states, which at the top level are parent, child, and adult. These work in opposite, such that a parent action tends to trigger a child response, and an adult action triggers an adult response. The transactions work as follows (text from Wikipedia):

Quote:
Reciprocal or Complementary Transactions

A simple, reciprocal transaction occurs when both partners are addressing the ego state the other is in. These are also called complementary transactions.

Example 1

    A: "Have you been able to write the report?" (Adult to Adult)
    B: "Yes - I'm about to email it to you." (Adult to Adult)

Example 2

    A: "Would you like to come and watch a film with me?" (Child to Child)
    B: "I'd love to - what shall we go and see?" (Child to Child)

Example 3

    A: "Is your room tidy yet?" (Parent to Child)
    B: "Will you stop hassling me? I'll do it eventually!" (Child to Parent)

Communication like this can continue indefinitely. (Clearly it will stop at some stage - but this psychologically balanced exchange of strokes can continue for some time).

Crossed Transactions

Communication failures are typically caused by a 'crossed transaction' where partners address ego states other than that their partner is in. Consider the above examples jumbled up a bit.

Example 1a:

    A: "Have you been able to write that report?" (Adult to Adult)
    B: "Will you stop hassling me? I'll do it eventually!" (Child to Parent)

is a crossed transaction likely to produce problems in the workplace. "A" may respond with a Parent to Child transaction. For instance:

    A: "If you don't change your attitude you'll get fired"

Example 2a:

    A: "Is your room tidy yet?" (Parent to Child)
    B: "I'm just going to do it, actually." (Adult to Adult)

is a more positive crossed transaction. However there is the risk that "A" will feel aggrieved that "B" is acting responsibly and not playing his role, and the conversation will develop into:

    A: "I can never trust you to do things!" (Parent to Child)
    B: "Why don't you believe anything I say?" (Child to Parent)

which can continue indefinitely.

It's also worth mentioning that there are sub-egos of child and parent, which can be positive or negative.

If you look at the majority of Skip transactions, his ego state falls either into that of parent or child, but very rarely into adult. When speaking as the voice of experience, it's often said in a parent-type way, which tends to attract child-like responses (those who quietly comply (conformative child) and those who answer back (rebellious child). A rebellious child response then often triggers a similar child-like response, and chaos ensues. The ultimate failure is that Skip seems to find it hard to adjust to the adult state, even when many around him attempt to do so.

Let's look at this thread (bearing in mind that I will probably look favourably on my own responses) - remember that I'm trying to use the accepted terms here, so any offense taken from this should be directed to a bunch of dead psychiatrists:

jfrowe1            - adult query
wtmac              - adult response
skip50            - immature child response (first point of communication failure)
wtmac              - parent response (???)
8ballMax          - adult response (this is exactly what should happen to avert the impending collapse)

Dr. Killpatient  - adult response
Juoquim          - adult response
johnd                - critical parent response (direct result of skip50's ego state)
skip50              - critical parent response (and the failure gets worse as skip shuns the natural child role)
DariusKyrak    - adult response

skip50              - resistant child (again, causing a crossed transaction)
DariusKyrak    - adult response
skip50              - resistant child
ya_shin            - adult / playful child
Cary B              - adult / immature child

skip50              - critical parent (see how skip's mood improves as soon a he conforms to the opposite role)
DariusKyrak    - adult response, with hint of parent and child (making it rather difficult to respond to - a communication failure on my part as I fail to resist the natural opposite to skips changing ego state)
skip50              - immature child (see how skip doesn't really respond to my message, probably as a result of my mixed state)

LDH                  - playful child
Dr. Killpatient  - adult response / playful child
DariusKyrak    - nurturing/critical parent (& playful child to Dr. Killpatient)
Dr. Killpatient  - structuring parent (I disagreed with him, but conforming to transactional analysis avoided any potential conflict)
johnd                - can't really place this one, but it 'ain't adult

skip50              - resistant child
johnd                - parent (can't decide which, but probably a more positive version)
skip50              - resistant child
ya_shin            - playful child
tlevel                - playful child

skip50              - resistant child (we are now well and truly into kindergarten by now, mostly playful (which isn't so bad), but a lot of negative as well)
johnd                - parent (can't decide which, but probably a more positive version)
tlevel                - playful child / resistant child
DariusKyrak    - adult / parent response

You might argue about some of my categorising, but I think that it comes through that skip is causing a lot of the communication failure by his varying ego states. If you look through pretty much any thread where problems occur, you can see that it is often started when someone (often skip sadly) performs as crossed transaction, and deteriorates to another degree when ego states fail to conform (take a look and see if you agree with me on the 'how' as well as the 'who'). It's skips wildly varying ego sates that trigger a lot of deterioration (although you have to accept that it takes two to tango).

Skip, I believe that YOU would benefit from understanding how you're reactions are likely to trigger a response and I think that you would do well not to ignore this as you do so many others. I am trying to help you as much as I'm trying to avoid the negative impact it has on the forum, especially for newbies.

I'm suspecting that this won't be accepted, and will probably trigger another resistant child response. If so...

Stuart