You know the difference between "We" and "I". You don't speak for the rest of the membership.
I don't believe I post anything with "we" that isn't generally applicable. Is there anyone here who intends to be a free consulting service? I suppose there could be. I know I certainly don't mind free consulting as long as I find the problem interesting and the user knows it isn't what we normally would intend.
Some people are offended by certain presentations;
Some people are impossible not to offend by any presentation. I know that I am very, VERY difficult to offend - even if someone is trying to offend me. It would be honest to admit that I sometimes forget other people may not be quite that way.
my goal is to keep friction off the boards
This is a reasonable goal.
and to treat new members with neutral language.
Unfortunately, "neutral" is a matter of opinion and personality.
MMM Approach
"Please read the forum guidelines." Is brief, maybe curt, possibly off-putting, and it clearly indicates to the user that a behavioral modification is suggested. I have observed that this reply often results in an apology. I'm not sure why it is not usually taken as harsh or offensive. Often, besides a link to the Forum Guidelines, there is nothing else offered in the initial short response. In my mind, this deficiency should lead to greater offense, not less. Oddly, that doesn't seem to be the case.
TKHunny Approach
"We are not a free consulting service." Is brief, maybe curt, possibly off-putting, and it clearly indicates to the user that a behavioral modification is suggested. More often than not, this elicits no response at all, since it is usually followed by an attempt to be of assistance. Occasionally, it is taken as rude or confrontational.
Stapel Approach
"What section are you studying?"
"What formulas have you been given?"
"Have you worked other problems like these?"
"What instructions were you given with this assignment?"
"What does _____ mean? Did you discuss this term in your class?"
...
This is not usually brief. I don't recall many responses to this. I think it may be off-putting - maybe just too much and the student runs away? It always makes me smile when I see it.
It's a tough call, "neutral language". All three of these methods (and there are many others) have significant value and reasonable justification. The very intent to accept a wide variety of students suggests a wide variety of approaches might be a good way to go.
If a new member creates a few posts at once, before understanding the guidelines, then their post count ought not to be perceived as an abuse. Let's give people the benefit of the doubt, until they give us a real reason not to.
Fair enough.
If you're still unable to compromise, then I'll invite Ted, staple and Subhotosh to weigh in, and hopefully we can arrive at a concensus together. :cool:
Compromise what? If you would like me to espouse your impression of what constitutes "neutral language", I'd happy to do so.