| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
Wasnt tye who said if you complain the title is inadequate you should specify a suggestion for a better one basically be constructive and you already have power to consider node -- whatever the purpose of your admonishment, if youre going to follow up with %well rtfm link% you shouldn't have bothered with such weak sauce; go complain about spelling
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
Yes, in the context of "node consideration", I did. No, it wasn't much about "basically, be constructive" (though, being constructive is certainly also useful in that context). It was particular to a process like node consideration where a request for privileged action is asked for and voted on but can't really be commented on. For such, the request needs to be very specific (and the person making the request needs to be highly convinced that the action is the best action).
In other situations, it can be potentially beneficial to not offer an answer but to instead offer a suggested direction for finding an answer. But such can easily fail.
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |
| [reply] [Watch: Dir/Any] |