From: lowen@lorc.UUCP (Lamar Owen)
Newsgroups: news.admin.policy
Subject: Re: RFD: Should rec.music.makers.synth stand as a group name?
Summary: Admins are elite?  Only if they act that way.  TLC does wonders.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 11:29:19 -0500
Organization: LORC Enterprises

[Note: this is a relatively long post, my opinions seem to go one way in
 the beginning of it, then they make a 180, then they make a 90.  So, it
 is probably a good idea to read the whole thing, even though the natural
 impulse will be to hit either 'n' or 'k' and just skip it.]

[news.groups has been removed from the newsgroups line, as this post is
 not really relevant to that group]

In <1992Nov17.231314.16493@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
>jan@bagend.uucp (Jan Isley) writes:

>>Could it be that they would make your response seem more ludicrous
>>because it clearly shows that you are trying to violate the guidelines?

>And why the hell not, since you folk seem to be so addicted to them? They
>caused an unfair result in my perception, so they are unworkable in my
>opinion. 

Let me ask you a question then: why did you LIKE the idea of renaming
r.m.s to r.m.m.s at the first, then?  mathew@mantis has already reposted
your statement to that effect; do you deny making the statement?

What changed your mind?  I personally see nothing wrong at all with 
rec.music.makers.synth; it fits in with the rest of the RFD/CFV that
was posted.  I read alt.guitar.bass at the time (don't have time
to follow it now), and being a relative newbie I still understood
that r.m.s was going to be renamed.

Point: if people that are governed do not read the laws, they still cannot
claim ignorance, particularly when the rules are publicly available.

Yes, the users on Usenet are in a manner of speaking governed by the
oligarchy of admins.  The admins may make it a benevolent oligarchy, but
the ultimate power still lies with the admin (or their supervisor, if
the machine is not owned by the admin).  The users only have the power
their admin(s) give them.  In most cases, it is quite large.  It could
be taken away, however.

Is this elitism?  Possibly.  How so?  Even though all men are created
equal (according to the US Constitution), in practice that doesn't
pan out: people are born into different environments, have different
genes, and have different abilities.  They may be LEGALLY equal, but they
are actually not.  Einstein was not equal to the normal man of 1915, he
WAS superior.  However, it's very much like comparing apples to oranges
because of the many multitudes of comparison fields.  Einstein was a
terrible student--in this regard he was inferior.  His social and
hygenic abilities were decidedly inferior.

What is my point?  Simple: admins are admins because either a) they are
better at adminning than others (superior), or b) they were able to
weasel their way into the job better than someone else (superior), or c)
they got stuck with it because somebody else didn't want it. (??). C could
be construed (inferior), but, if the admin the perserveres, (superior)
would be appropriate. But, the only superior admin is the one that
actually cares about his/her users instead of empire-building.  Admins
may know more about adminning than the users (like the case of newsgroup
creation/renaming/reorganizing), but I'm sure there are areas where the
user is superior to the admin.

So, if a user misbehaves, the admins could simply kick them off.  What
would/could happen?

In a corporate environment, users have recourse if the admin causes them
grief, up to and including the admin's firing.  On a BBS or public
access system, the user's recourse can be refusal to pay fees.  On a free
access system, the user has no recourse.

A change of direction in my thoughts is in order here...

Admins in general know more about the system than J Random User does.  This
is both a strength and a weakness, as admins can have difficulty communicating
on the lowest levels with the user.  Example, Jane Doe wants to send mail
to another user somewhere.  J Vernon Sysadmin tells her to load up
the mail program, enter the DNS address (making sure to fully qualify the
domain name), route the message as appropriate if the target user doesn't
have a DNS address, and send it.  However, Jane knows NOTHING about
DNS, FQDN's, or bang-paths.  She doesn't even CARE: she just wants to
send mail.  But, the mail command is not on her menu...  What does an
admin do in this instance?

1.) Get a decent user agent that has help.  Elm is good for mail, Tass
    is ok for news (if you are on a DOS box running Waffle and have a LAN or
    local newsspool, you will want to use Helldiver for windows which is
    easily the best user interface to news/mail I have yet to see).

2.) Be prepared for UBD questions like: what key do I press here? and so on.
    (UBD-User Brain [damage,death].) Give courteous answers, even if you
    ARE busy.

3.) Don't insult the user's intelligence with the stock RTFM expletive.
    RTFM is SURE to alienate the user, as it graphically shows just how 
    little effort the admin wants to put forward.  And don't say RTFFAQ,
    either, as a newbie user don't know what the abbreviation stands
    for and wouldn't know a FAQ list if it was dropped on his head.  Put
    forth the effort, and your users will appreciate it (most of the
    time....:-)).

4.) When a user calls (e-mails) with a problem, and the solution is
    obvious to you, don't tell the user that.  Make it look like the
    solution is a little tricky, or tell them that it is a mistake you
    yourself have made, or something to make the user feel good about
    their knowledge.

Proverb: If a user feels good about a system due to the admin's TLC in 
introducing it, the user will be far more likely to get interested in
the little details (like newsgroup creation/renaming/reorganizing) as
time marches on.

5.) When a newsgroup reorg comes across the wire, take time to explain
    in a global message to all your users in a local group just what
    the message means.  Make it easy for the users to understand what is
    going on-they probably have not read the news.newusers.annouce postings
    (Which are far to big and far too disorganized for J Random Newbie
    to comprehend).  It would be nice to have hypertext help for those
    that cannot figure things out, although I don't see that happening
    on Usenet in the near-term.  However, if each admin provides the
    Introduction to Usenet postings as bulletins that are required
    reading, and breaks them up into subject matter for the user's
    quick perusal, then the users feels like the admin cares.  This
    promotes good will in the user community, and can cause you to get
    more users (if you WANT them, like a Public Access site would) by
    the legendary power of word-of-mouth.

6.) Be helpful.  Be helpful.  Be helpful.  Be helpful.  Any questions?

The admin at my feed site, nanook@eskimo.com, is a good admin in this way,
even though he is very busy.  How does he do it?  Be helping people, who
then start fielding questions for him.  See, you may not have time to
answer users' questions, but if you have cultivated a community of
knowledgable users, then they will, more than likely, help you out.  I
find Eskimo North to be one of the better run Public Access Unix sites
around because of this friendly atmosphere.  It did seem a little
intimidating at first, but, through friendly help, a little hand-holding,
I was able to learn the new stuff rather quickly.  Now I admin my own
site.

The question then becomes--do the users exist for the admin, or do the
admins exist for the users?  Both.  The users pay for the admin's hobby
(in the case of Public Access sites), and the admin helps the users learn.

In my corporate climate, the activities of my users (the engineers, marketing
suits, draftsmen, shop formen, and workers) pay my salary; at the same time
I provide a valuable service to them by dealing with the details (file
managment, e-mail delivery, transport mechanism) that they don't want to
and don't have time for.

In an educational climate, the users (students) provide the admin salaries
through tuition, and the admin provides an environment for the students
to learn in.  This may include "padding the cell" at times, but it is
part of the job.

As a private, free acess system, you can do anything you want.  "Don't like
my policies? Go somewhere else."

Dave, provide a service to your users by locally aliasing r.m.m.s to r.m.s,
or are they really the reason you are arguing?  mathew has already
posted how to do this with Waffle.  Help your users along instead of being
uselessly adamant.

If my users on my Novell LAN were to read r.m.s, I would do this.  Both to
further the smooth running of the net, and to help the users along.  I
would then gradually move them over to r.m.m.s.  If they are too stubborn
to accept something as minisule as a name change, then maybe they DO need
and attitude adjustment--but only after the other options have been tried
and found useless.

An good example is when we upgraded our Novell LAN's e-mail system.  The
name of the system changed, the user interface changed, and the whole feel
of the application changed--even though it was the same old app.  We
e-mailed to everyone that a change was coming a couple of weeks in advance
of the change.  We then warned them again of the change, specifying
just what was changing, how to cope with it, and what to expect of it.
We then upgraded. The upgrade went smoothly, the users transitioned smoothly,
and they like the new look MUCH better--but it would have been totally
different if we had just dropped it in without warning.

Most Usenet Admins do care.  The efforts of these are heralded and 
appreciated.  The efforts of those that put together FAQ lists and the
Introduction to Usenet postings are commended.  However, having been on 
the system for so long, it is still easy to overlook the newbie with the
RTFM expletive.

In any case, hope this posting helps someone, and doesn't generate TOO many
flames... Although I do have a good set of asbestos longjohns available. :-)

Keep up the good work, guys.



Dave, you have some good points.  However, in the specific matter of this
particular reorg, I think you're all wet.  Particularly since you *were*
FOR the renaming, according to the repost by mathew.  There is, I know,
a time to stand up for principles.  This is probably not a good time.

-- 

Lamar Owen, Systems Consultant          | If there were a tax on syn,
GE Lighting Systems, Hendersonville, NC | we'd all be broke.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
My opinions are not those of GE and do not reflect GE policy in any way.