I've posted a question and no one has answered it!

Whilst the majority of cries for help on the forum get answered within the hour, some don't. There may be a valid reason for this so please don't take it personally.

I will try to list some of them and what you can do to make it more attractive to get answers.

The chances of getting an answer in a single unit of time are proportional to the number of people who can answer that question. If you ask a very obscure question it may take quite a while for someone knowledgeable enough to stumble upon it.
The chances of getting a good answer are proportional to the quality of the question. Phrasing, spelling, proper use of caps and punctuation, descriptive title and so on and so forth. If you have a file pertaining to the question and you are allowed to post it, do so. If you have an image/pdf/link that pertains to your question, include it.
Questions that allow for prompt answers will be dealt with quicker than questions which are vague, ambiguous, open-ended or large in scope. I.e. "How do I make a facade like this in Grasshopper?" will probably not be answered as it would be far too much work.
If you use Google Translate to post a question in English, also be sure to include the question in a language you are fluent in. Google Translate is a pretty terrible way of communicating and phrases usually get mangled beyond recognition.
Before posting a problem, reduce it to the smallest workable (but still problematic) subset. I.e. don't post a 200 component file if a 5 component file can be used instead.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Michael Pryor on July 27, 2012 at 5:32pm

sure ;)

Permalink Reply by David's Girlfriend on July 28, 2012 at 5:01am

"Writing conventions, you're doing it [sic] wrong."

Sic, from the Latin adverb "so, thus, in this manner" is commonly used to indicate that the preceding item in a quote is reproduced verbatim. I.e. whatever flaw, mistake or preposterous statement was indeed so in the original text and not an error on the part of the reproducer. It is not to be used as an indicator of an inserted corrected version.

Even if you were right about the verb tense (which you most decidedly are not), your use of sic was quite frankly a complete cock-up. The right way to do it would have been as follows.

["]The chances of getting an answer in a single unit of time are [sic] proportional to the number of people who can answer that question.["]

Also, please note the quotation marks inserted in the square brackets. I'd recommend you look into the proper usage of those as well.

All the best,

David's girlfriend who has a degree in English philology

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on July 28, 2012 at 9:24am

Welcome David's Girlfriend!

Something really must have got your goat for this to be your first foray of the forum.

I hope to see more of your work as I've heard great things.

Permalink Reply by David's Girlfriend on July 28, 2012 at 9:37am

Quite to the contrary, we had a good laugh.

Permalink Reply by Michael Pryor on July 27, 2012 at 5:14pm

If I could add another point would be something like

at least first attempt to solve the problem and present your efforts along with your question. Users will most likely ignore your plea for help if it is a plea for them to complete your work / assignment/ test for you.

Permalink Reply by Ángel Linares on July 28, 2012 at 4:41am

Totally right...Actually lot of people searching for this kind of support...:(

Permalink Reply by Danny Boyes on July 27, 2012 at 5:24pm

Hi John,

The best bit is that I didn't even write it. I was going to come back and fill in more stuff but needed a link from another post for this topic. In the mean time the FAQ fairy has paid a visit (Thank you David) and filled in the gaps along the lines of what I was thinking.

However unless Systemiq has hit the nail on the head, you have written this:

The chances of getting a reply are ( 'is', [sic]) proportional to the number of people that can answer that question. Cringe. What the heck are you going on about? Are you an imbocile?? Do you even know what a single unit if of time even refers to? Verbose, and pompous. And idiotic.

Where you have stated "chances" should be coupled with "is".... imbocile.....unit if of time....

and when added to your other post of this evening calling some one a retard I cannot help but feel that another caveat for the original topic should be: