why is there so much animosity
one could easily see that the so called seniors are very rude. this guy might be wrong with the title of his post but than this is what he probably thought. Just because you know something doesn't mean that you have to be rude to others as it must have taken long time for you guys to learn.i didn't see any straight answers or clear reference to anything that these guys have given.
be nice to newbies as once you were also one
i asked a few questions here before when i was just starting out
No, you didn't. This is the first time ever anyone posted here using that name.
Interesting that you should try to falsely claim a higher post count of your own to give credibility to your claim that some unnamed person bolstered their own post count to gain purportedly undeserved credibility. That's actually quite funny.
it might be if it were fiction.
and for what its worth i never said that the expert status and post count was reported on this forum.
instead of being so one dimensional and defensive in looking for my name youd spend your time better by looking for the Please read the manual responses!
Are you saying that threads could not have a valid outcome of sending the requester to read the documentation?
Are you saying that threads should always duplicating the available documentation? Again, and again, and again?
no and no. but someone who clearly does not know the answer and just says Please read the manual with no sensible follow up is someone who should consider whether that response is of value. and quite frequently its just Please read the manual with no reference to the relevant part of the documentation!
its not always the original question that should be considered stupid and a waste of time!
i am not going to post an example or give clues. there are plenty there for you to find but i suspect you just want to go defensive.
So link to that magic thread where someone who "clearly does not know the answer" says that the OP should read the documentation.
And sometimes, there should not need to be any reference, because the source of information should be so obvious. You don't need a link to find Google, do you? And 8051 + GSM + SMS should be quite obvious search words?
No - I think you are avoiding examples because you are not so sure you can find good examples. Telling us that were just "going defensive" is shying away from your original argument.
you are quite wrong. of more than 21000 threads covering more than 12 years you think not one example exists? did you look? no. as i expected it looks like you did go defensive.
No. But your post is quite meaningless. If there were but "one example", then this forum would be one of the best forums in the world. If there are 100 such threads, it would still be an excellent forum.
But for this thread to be meaningful, you should be able to link a large number of examples, since there is only reason to complain if a significant percentage of threads are relevant to this debate.
Your implication was that it wasn't one of the seldom-posters who did a Please read the manual without being close to knowing anything about the subject. So show some proof. You make a claim, you put some weight behind it with proofs.
Can you post 5 threads out of the most recent 100 threads, where someone just got a "Please read the manual" answer and: 1) it is likely that the one suggesting to read the documentation didn't know the answer 2) it really wasn't a good suggestion to spend time with the documentation?
no. i will not provide any. doing so would obviously provide a name and it is not my duty to name and shame an individual. if you cannot find such an example then fine. if you cannot find others who have commented on such posts then fine. i know whose responses to trust and whose to ignore. there are some excellent contributors here. there are some frequent contributors here. there are even some excellent frequent contributors here. unfortunately there are some frequent contributors who seem to post to simply boost their ego. for what its worth i normally trust your posts. in this case you seem to have your blinkers on and in this case i think you are wrong.
Your claim of having asked for help here before is fiction.
you think not one example exists?
Why should anyone bother to think about that? It's your claim that this not only happened once, but rather that it was some kind of typical behaviour. The onus for proving that claim is on you. And no, a single example wouldn't prove that.
did you look? no.
Aha, so now you're a telepath, too. You're getting funnier by the minute.
would you like me to lend you a copy of simple logic theory?
.
Nah. You keep that --- you need it more.
look back at your deduction. or rather the lack of.
But wait now - logic theory claims that a single example doesn't prove that a significant number of threads contains what you claim they contains.
Which was why I said to show a selection of examples from last 100 threads.
What part do you find wrong with that?
And that entirely insubstantial admonishment is all you, proud owner of a book on simple logic theory, could come up with? Must be not a very good book, then. It seems to teach stuff like "proof of a generalized statement by claim of existence of one example" and "proving your point is the job of your opposition".
That looks like I'll have to amend my earlier advice: you should not keep that book --- you should burn it and get a better one.