[sf-lug] didn't try to solve ... (was: Re: SF-LUG meeting notes for Monday 18 March 2019)

[Michael Paoli]

> From: "Rick Moen" <rick at linuxmafia.com>
> Subject: Re: [sf-lug] SF-LUG meeting notes for Monday 18 March 2019
> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 18:05:27 -0700

> I note that you apparently _didn't_ try to solve those problems, there
> or elsewhere.  Just 'didn't work, didn't work', and then no more about
> that except move on to next.

Well ... sometimes too, folks like to moan/groan/vent/complain, and ...
*aren't necessarily trying to solve*.  And, yes, that too
has (some) (limited) usefulness.

Heck, many(/most?) Linux (and especially [L]UG) folks like(/love) to
bash Microsoft (often highly deservedly so) - but ... trying to *solve*
Microsoft woes (other than run like hell to Linux) ... generally not ..
or at least hopefully not in *this* venue/resource (would be quite OT,
and probably highly annoyingly so).

But ... back to Linux.  Sure, not *always* trying to "solve".  Sometimes
also useful to point out where something was disappointing, or just friggin'
ugly/awful/stupid/whatever.  It's not like "Linux" - or any particular
distro, or package within, is immune from some significant or larger
blunders - and sometimes not so much does one (or many) want to, uh,
"fix" - or "solve" that ... so much as to be aware of it and step
around it.

And, sure, too, how "fixable" ... Linux, Open Source, ... generally all
quite fixable.  But, what particular item and what LoE (Level of Effort),
and by whom / what resources?  Some may not want to put much time/effort
into it (or may not be able to).  Some may want to cut their "losses"
*super* early (or caution others there might be at least some slight
snags).  Others might want to dig as deep as necessary (or reasonably
feasible) to fix anything that might be significant - or blocking of a
relatively smooth Linux experience.  And some issues/problems might be
so big/messy (e.g. nasty horribly buggy/insecure spaghetti code of a
huge monstrous mess of an ugly package) that it might be best to
step around / avoid.

Anyway, certainly at least *some* venting/complaining, etc. about Linux
stuff that doesn't work as one would expect/want, and sure, light on
details and without the (effort/time/...) trying to "fix"/solve it seems
to me quite within reason.  Now, exactly how much, how regularly, to what
extent, how light on details (e.g. as to make it infeasible to attempt to
"fix"/solve from the (lack of) details) ... well, I think I'll (mostly?)
side-step away from that "argument"/debate.  Yes, I'm sure I've got my
opinions ... especially on what ought generally be optimal (not that
I necessarily exactly myself even optimally - or mostly so - post),
but, as to what's over-all most optimal for list usage, what kind of
mix, balance, variation, etc. - I don't think I'll even particularly
hazard a guess as to what "is" - or might be, best in that regard.

Random Microsoft vent/groan:  When one does Control-Alt-Delete ... and it
takes quite a while to respond ... and when it finally does, it gives some
dialog about not being able to give you that selection (lack of
resources or something unavailable or whatever the hell its "excuse"
was).  And, nope, not tryin' to solve that one ... hell no.  Run like
hell to Linux!  :-)  Besides, this wouldn't be the place to try in solve
some Microsoft cr*p (other than avoiding it and using Linux).