Proposal on (pinned) FAQ for posting questions

Meta
1

I'd like to propose that @admins and/or @moderators compose and pin forum-wide message on asking questions. Hopefully, that may help forum participants to get most from the forum and may benefit Ubuntu Mate users looking for community support. Proposed draft for such a message content follows. See also Guide on posting

Who answers questions

Questions are answered by regular Ubuntu Mate users who managed to build their competence through years of using Ubuntu Mate and mastered their Internet search capabilities. They may volunteer to answer questions and help requests if they find them relevant and/or interesting. Ubuntu, Debian, Linux, Mate and applications developers are generally found elsewhere.

Topic subject
Provided that

  • Ubuntu Mate is a flavour of Ubuntu featuring Mate desktop environment
  • Ubuntu is based on Debian
  • Debian is a GNU/Linux distribution

users' questions pertaining essentially to Ubuntu Mate can actually be Ubuntu, Debian or Linux questions. Such the questions well may be answered. At the same time, questions directly related to upstream Ubuntu distribution, Debian, GNU/Linux in general or specific applications are discouraged due to the fact that this is Ubuntu Mate specific forum. Such the questions are better asked at relevant forums/communities. Grievances on Ubuntu Mate (Debian, Linux) are not welcome.

Topic title
Topic title has to be possibly specific rather than general. E.g. topic title "Software problem" is too vague and is unlikely to urge a desire to read a message and help.

Before creating a topic
Well formed topic title, aka concise problem description, is an excellent Internet search request. That is not a secret that a great majority of support/help requests in Linux world are resolved through Internet search rather than personal competence. Do not hesitate a second to perform Internet search before creating a topic. You see, an impression that someone posts a question with the sole purpose that somebody else performs Internet search for someone's sake may be quite annoying.

Topic itself
The topic body must include

  • Ubuntu Mate version
  • Hardware details for hardware-related problems
  • Concise and relevant description of a problem

Please note, that problems, except for hardware ones, almost never occur by themselves. As a rule, user does something before a problem manifestation. That is why it is desirable to address preconditions to a problem as well. E.g. system update, configuration changes, etc.

Communications
Please, be responsive and report additional information requested in the course of discussion of the topic as well as results of suggested actions.

Avoid granularity
Each substantial question deserves its own topic. Do not ask extra questions within the same topic if they do not relate to the main topic subject.

6 Likes
2

This is an excellent suggestion.

It would help to cut out a lot of the irrelevant questions that don't pertain to Ubuntu Mate in the Support&Help Requests category.

1 Like
3

This seems like its related to "Support and Help Requests" rather than forum-wide; and I agree a pinned message there would be useful.

There are a two unwritten 'meta' rules that I've noticed, which I'm not sure I agree with. What I mean by this, is I see responses that indicate a person has asked a question that does not deserve support because of one of two rules:

  1. The question was not Ubuntu MATE specific (i.e. it may have been Debian + MATE, or other + MATE).
  2. The UM distribution in question is past end of standard support (see End of Standard Support).

I don't think there's a strong reason to exclude questions about reasonably general MATE problems, or about older Ubuntu MATE installs because we aren't Canonical Tech Support so their rules don't apply to a community support network.

I use a fairly loose interpretation of:

This community is for users, and potential users of, the Ubuntu MATE operating system.

Sure, not every Mint + MATE user is actually a potential user of Ubuntu MATE. But I don't see those users as being that different that they should be, as a rule, denied support.

5 Likes
4

I think it's a really great idea to say who is answering the questions. We can use this to inform the constraints on the topics etc.

Some thoughts:

  1. I'd put Before creating a topic straight after Who answers questions, and I'd also poach from the "Guide to posting" by adding:

    Use the magnifying glass :mag: in the right-top corner to search this community. There is a chance your question has already been answered.

    I'd also borrow from point 5. in "Guide on posting" as this gets the message across about searching and looking for solutions for plain Ubuntu (if relevant) early.

  2. Topic subject: I'd use something more like "Given that this forum is for users and potential users of Ubuntu MATE, then the subject should be matched to that expertise. The less related the question is to Ubuntu MATE, the less likely that anyone can assist, and the more likely the question is better asked elsewhere, some suggestions are available at: mate-desktop.org - Community."

  3. Topic title: As in "Guide to posting", I think an example of good vs bad is needed, so as you say "Software problem" is bad, but "Whatsapp desktop not opening" is good.

  4. Topic itself: Yep, Ubuntu MATE version and an indication of hardware (either describe these, or supply output of inxi -SMz). You could also shout out pastebin as did "Guide on posting".

Some things that I think can be edited out:

Ubuntu, Debian, Linux, Mate and applications developers are generally found elsewhere.

There are some developers floating around, so I wouldn't make this explicit.

Grievances on Ubuntu Mate (Debian, Linux) are not welcome.

Instead I'd put a link at the start to the FAQ as this covers the expected behaviour: FAQ - Ubuntu MATE Community

Communications
Please, be responsive and report additional information requested in the course of discussion of the topic as well as results of suggested actions.

Probably not needed at all. It's up to the user seeking help to choose how they engage with any support or feedback.

1 Like
5

Excellent idea, Eugene.

My initial feedback is that I would have that "pinned FAQ" minimized, showing the initial "qualifier" statements, but requiring that you need to click to expand to see the full blurb.

I have to disagree with Stephen on this one. I feel that there is an explicit need to spell out that those, asking for help, need to be told they have a responsibility to

  • not waste the Community Members' time
  • be fully aware of their responsibility to reply in a timely manner (I've seen quite a few topics left with no clear indication whether the last response resolved an issue), and
  • to be a contributing member by providing feedback on the quality of responses/assistance that was provided (not many but enough don't flag a response as "solution" with the checkmark (is this because that checkmark "scoring" should be shared amongst more than one response?).

To that end, I wonder if there is a way for OPs to assign a rating on a scale, as to the quality or relevance of the responses offered. I find the "heart" symbol's yea (or ignore by not selecting) an insufficient discriminator for that characterization/feedback. I also feel there is a need to offer feedback on whether a response was "reviewed/considered" (i.e. acknowledgement of viewing) but wasn't quite at the level that the OP felt gave "fulcrums" to pivot the response's focus closer to the "orientation" the OP originally intended for their question. (... and I just realized this contradicts my other earlier statement about responsibility to response. I guess the point leaves me a bit conflicted. :slight_smile: )

To push that idea further, would there be any benefit for each of quality and relevance to have their own scales/ratings?

I have to say that I like the +/- arrows on StackOverflow, to indicating that the response was helpful/endorsed, vs not helpful or less desirable as solution, an excellent concept, but don't know to what extent this Community would want such "fine-grained" feedback/tracking.

Just some food for thought!

2 Likes
6

I think this is more of an issue of not every user of a forum is going to be aware of what the "Solution" :ballot_box_with_check: button does (or even see it).

If a person experiences an issue, and it is resolved, and they don't select a "Solution"; then it's possible that another user who experiences the same problem can look at the forum posts and try some of the suggestions - then confirm/disconfirm a solution (I believe some users have privileges to select a Solution even if they are not the OP). If a problem is stale after a suggestion - someone could follow up and ask "Is the problem resolved" if they want to.

I agree it's nice when someone does select a solution.

I don't like the vibe that you either have to be really contributing or you don't really belong/deserve support. Ubuntu MATE (and Ubuntu generally) is meant for everyone, and everyone deserves support - regardless of whether they are going to be an outstanding member of a community or not.

I don't know if there's a mechanism for this within the platform used by this forum (https://www.discourse.org/)

7

I think what made the Ubuntu MATE community warm and friendly in the beginning is that we don't import the legacy way of how forums operate - like hard rules, "read this before posting", or encourage any kind of elitism or strict formality.

Discourse's FAQ uses the "public park" analogy. :deciduous_tree: I think that works well. I feel introducing a support FAQ like this risks vibes like:

  • :angry: :point_right: "Hey! Mint user! Get out of the park! UM only!"
  • :rofl: :point_up: "What?? Caja in Xubuntu? Get outta here!"
  • :astonished: :wastebasket: "PowerPC Mac!? Nobody uses that any more!"
  • :neutral_face: :mantelpiece_clock: "UM EOL? I don't care you need it for some old software! Upgrade anyway!"

... those kind of vibes just kill a community.

Instead, we could:

  1. Pin the site-wide FAQ to the left sidebar, by default.
  2. Add a section to that FAQ if we feel we need more emphasis on:
    • Support detail - what went wrong, the system, what has been tried.
    • We could mention our community consists of ordinary computer users from different industries & countries.
  3. We can edit the message when users write their very first topic.
  4. We can set up a template when users create topics in Support & Help Requests
  5. We could introduce profile fields, requiring everyone to fill out their primary system specs or OS choice. I suggested this before I was moderator but I don't recall it was successful then (as optional fields, anyway)
    • ... also, there'll be many users who aren't very tech-savvy. What seems simple to us might be very complex to them.
    • ... a good point was raised that people might have multiple systems.

Some other thoughts:

  • Discourse works well as a place for long-term knowledge. Not as a dumping ground of quick questions that's been answered numerous times. If this place is a mess (e.g duplicates, low quality), we might need to start cleaning up.
  • Sometimes, a web search lands users here... and we all know that feeling when results are utterly useless. So, deleting old, abandoned topics could be justified.
  • If we were to go all-in "Ubuntu MATE exclusive", then we risk closing up and migrating to Ubuntu Discourse's "Ubuntu MATE" category. Just like Lubuntu did, because they'd be advantages being part of the wider Ubuntu community.

We do have a Leader role, if we need more hands on the tidying (editing titles, recategorisation). Regular users have some minor abilities too.

In the wild, I had something deleted from Discourse Meta because they were tidying up and my support request for an email problem didn't get resolved... That's an option should we wish to take that approach of "cleaning the park" to lead by example. :broom: :wastebasket:

Anyway, that's just my thoughts. I appreciate time was spent on this proposal. What are the reasons for wanting a new FAQ and can we improve what we already have?

6 Likes
8

Let me clarify my motivation for the proposal, please.

There was no intention to call for total control and strict ruthless regulation.

References to "UM only" can be softened or discarded as well as anything deemed inappropriate and/or problematic. That was just a proposal to be weighted and rejected or modified and adopted.

The existing FAQ is in essence a code of conduct. Surely, it deserves a better visibility. It lacks technical recommendations on asking questions, though.

There was no expectation that the proposal, if assumed, would be enforced somehow. I just hoped that such well-visible recommendations would help posters to ask more sensible questions which would save some frustrations for those who answers.

3 Likes
9

Points 1-4 make sense to me (and 5 I don't mind, but it may not be worth the effort).

Having a link to the FAQ in the message for a first topic might be a good idea (if there isn't one already).

10

Check! I've added the FAQ on the sidebar. That'll be better then having it buried under More → About → "FAQ". Plus, Discourse already links there when new users sign up, like the welcome PM & when composing their first post.

I'm happy for a condensed, precise, to the point version to be added into the site's FAQ. Something to fit with Discourse's tone. I'm thinking a "Best Practices for Support" section with points like:

  • Check for an existing topic or answer online.
  • Clear topic titles.
    • :white_check_mark: Perfect: "example here"
    • :x: Try another: "example here"
  • Include release version and system specifications if applicable.
  • Include detail - what's been tried? do you know how it happened? how can we reproduce it?
  • We do accept MATE questions from other distros, although there could be technical differences.

(Any others? Do we wish to encourage/educate about tags...?)
(Actual wording to be written, I'll look into this again tomorrow)
(See also: @stephematician's suggestions above)

I do wonder about a topic template. Not everyone is going to read the FAQs, never mind a pinned topic - should they start from the home page's "New Topic" button - skip skip, create topic!

More thoughts...

My reasons for not being so sure about a pinned topic is that it does feel the community becomes less approachable by adding upfront paragraphs to read, or members start policing content instead of contributing to the topic. It could be the proposal currently reads to me like a rule book, even though that's not intentional.

That topic from 2016 ended up forgotten & buried - likely because Discourse didn't have a "pin forever" option back then. Still, we seldom use pinned topics and really only for 'important' news.

I do wonder if any particular topics, distros or specific members are causing frustrations over in the Support & Help Requests category?

4 Likes
11

Great!

  • How to perform fresh install preserving my data
  • Nothing works all at once

It well may be my personal professional (traumatic?) deformation for the cause that decades of serving 2-nd/3-rd line of tech. support as server and network administrator take their toll... All in all the proposal was sparked by situations which failed to comply with proposed guidelines, i.e. vaguely named topics, elementary requests resolved through self-service via online search, etc.

5 Likes
12

Best Practices for Support

When seeking help from our community, a few extra moments crafting your question can help us help you more efficiently.

  • Before posting in Support & Help Requests, check if an existing topic or online search already addresses your issue.
  • Use clear and descriptive topic titles.
    • :white_check_mark: This is good: "How can I perform a fresh install while preserving my data?"
    • :x: Try another: "Can't install anything"
  • Provide context: explain what you've tried so far, how the issue occurred, and any steps to reproduce it.
  • Include relevant details like release version and system specifications.
    • Tip: Run inxi -SMz in the :terminal: Terminal and paste the output into code tags.
  • If you're not using Ubuntu MATE yet, we do accept MATE questions from other distros. Just be aware there might be minor differences.

How does this sound? This post is a wiki if any of you wish to condense/improve it further.

Should we put it under Your Participation Counts, before If You See a Problem, Flag It?

4 Likes
13

IMHO that's fine.

What about within Improve the Discussion?

14

Stephen, my comment was intended to be interpreted more along the lines of

... if you start a discussion topic, you can't just sit back and watch what happens.

To me, that falls more into the category of "Trolls" stirring the pot. Hence my point tha they need to offer feedback. (As I said in my earlier post, I recognize that I am guilty of this "bad behaviour" myself for a few items, but I strive to keep it to a minimum, and to revisit those, even if after a very long delay. I am not fond of issues that are left "dangling"! :frowning: )

2 Likes
15

Thanks everyone. The FAQ has been updated with the new guidelines:

https://ubuntu-mate.community/faq#support

I might put up a temporary banner for this month to inform everyone. With 25.04 releasing April 17, there might be an influx of new and returning visitors soon.

We've recently updated our FAQs with a new section: Best Practices for Seeking Support

9 Likes
16

This topic was automatically closed after 4 days. New replies are no longer allowed.