[FFmpeg-user] New user question

[Dave Blanchard]

On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 14:41:46 -0800
amindfv--- via ffmpeg-user <ffmpeg-user at ffmpeg.org> wrote:

> Ironically the single reason this thread has devolved into personal attacks and irrelevance to the original question is your own contributions. 

"The single reason"? So I'm control of the keyboard of all participants in this thread?

There was in fact no response necessary to this thread at all, other than Carl's original email, which actually gave an answer to the person's question. All other comments could be deleted with no loss to the thread. Patrick's comment had no relevance at all to the actual question.

> Someone who took the time to read the new user's question asked a polite "Please include your command" request, that is all. Maybe they wanted to test the command on their own system for comparison; maybe they had one of the reasons Carl mentioned. 

Except none of that was actually the case. These are all excuses you're inventing to play devil's advocate, which has nothing to do with actual thread.

The reply in question was just your typical, ordinary, everyday "OMG SOMEONE BROKE A RULE, MUST REMIND OF RULES" response--as Carl's followup proved. 

I ask again: how does giving the command line used help in any way solving the user's problem, in this particular circumstance?

Interestingly, Carl didn't even bother asking for the command line in his own response. Seems he didn't need that information to actually answer the question.

> Even if your messages were intended to increase friendliness to new users, they had the opposite effect due to how confrontational they were. I know if I were a new user asking a question here I'd be a lot more scared off by your argumentative messages than a simple "Please include your command" sentence.

LOL. 

So you wouldn't be at all bothered at being called an idiot by a certain loser, because your subject line wasn't so great, but would instead be bothered by the guy actually sticking up for your noob self?

> My 2¢,
> Tom

Thanks for your input, Tom. Anyone else got a foolish comment to add, before we move on?

Dave