| |||||||||||||
Wayland and Weston 0.85.0 releasedWayland and Weston 0.85.0 releasedPosted Feb 11, 2012 23:16 UTC (Sat) by jensend (guest, #1385)In reply to: Wayland and Weston 0.85.0 released by danielpf Parent article: Wayland and Weston 0.85.0 released
This isn't a TV news channel; there's a presumption around here that people are acquainted with the open-source world and the major projects out there. It's vastly preferable that LWN provide the core info rather than indulge people who are too lazy to self-educate (all it takes is a single google or wikipedia search) by wasting everybody elses' time with a bunch of hand-holding. The Wayland project is quite well known, and your claim that their release announcement is "garbage" because it doesn't play to your ignorance was rude, crude, and un-called-for.
Next we'll see people claiming they need a paragraph-long explanation of why they should care affixed to every announcement about the kernel, X.org, etc. That way lies madness.
(Log in to post comments)
Wayland and Weston 0.85.0 released Posted Feb 12, 2012 7:31 UTC (Sun) by andrel (subscriber, #5166) [Link] I don't know why you're paying for your subscription, but I'm paying for mine precisely because I do want some hand holding. That hand holding is the whole point of reading LWN instead of GMANE: Jon, Rebecca, and co identify which posts are important, boil them down into short summaries, and provide the context explaining why they are important.
Wayland and Weston 0.85.0 released Posted Feb 12, 2012 11:27 UTC (Sun) by danielpf (subscriber, #4723) [Link]
Let me first apologize to LWN audience if I used too sloopy wording, it was indeed counterproductive as my basic intention is not to content my emotional part but to improve the information efficiency at LWN.
Let us try to stay rational and think about the whole process. The number of people reading a given LWN message amounts to well a few 1000's. Of these I guess a minority knows about W&W and don't need or will wish a simple link/explanation/summary about W&W. But even if a majority knows about W&W and only 10% of readers get impatient like me, and need each to google to learn about the basics of W&W they will well need a few 10's of sec to satisfy their curiosity, instead of a fraction of sec to read a short summary. On the other hand the time for the editor to write a short summary may take, say 10 sec. The overall global gain in time and satisfaction is clearly vastly in favor of this little investement by the LWN editor.
What you are fearing, "paragraph-long explanation", would be indeed counterproductive if the time spend by the editor to produce such explanations would not even be gained by the readership. Too wordy texts are also bad as they tend to become a time loss for the general audience. So one can estimate when a news channel is too terse or too wordy. My guess is that LWN is far from an average TV channel. In general I find the level right, just occasionally it may be too terse like in this case.
|
|||||||||||||