The following article may contain indirect reference(s) to people who are not members of JAFFAAS and, while we believe that people should be able to engage in respectful, constructive, open and frank discussion and that different opinions may be more difficult for some people to tolerate than for others, some people may take personal offence. We take this opportunity to apologise to any individual of the Joomla! community who takes exception to these principles and, in particular, to moderators of the Joomla! Forum™ for any offence caused.
We can never understand other people’s motives, nor their furniture.Mignon McLaughlin, The Neurotic’s Notebook, 1963
I can think of a dozen or more sound reasons for keeping software up-to-date and, further, why I would recommend that other people should not use outdated or unsupported software. However this article is not about my personal preferences; this article is about how we should recognise that everyone’s different and to respect people who have different needs or different views about such matters. In fact, while I can think of good reasons for not using outdated or unsupported software there is one reason that negates all the others: if a business is thriving on the use of outmoded technology, if there’s a continuing demand for it, then the business comes ahead of anyone else’s opinion.
Inasmuch as the Joomla! forum is a resource for people to ask questions and seek help, I’ve often written that there’s only one expert in the “room” at any given time. That expert is not me nor is it someone who’s written tens of thousands of words elsewhere. The true expert is the person who asks the question—even if they may not know the technical terms or how best to articulate that question. Our job should only be to facilitate in ways that relate to the questioner’s needs. The Joomla! forum should welcome people, irrespective of their technical proficiency, and respect their questionsRespect, of course, is a two-way street. People who abuse the forum to shamelessly promote themselves, products, services or violate the forum rules—people who show no respect to others who rely upon the forum for help—of course, deserve only to be shown the exit door. Our task is not to judge other people because of the choices they’ve made no matter what personal feelings we have.
Before continuing further, I have to admit that I haven’t always felt as I do now; I confess that I have criticised—some people may claim that I’ve judged—others for their choices. I confess that I have been among the chorus of opinionated “experts” who’ve condemned people who come to the Joomla! forum seeking help with obsolete software and told them to update—as if people were clueless, in the first place, about the need to update in any case. I even went as far as to request the abolition of J! 1.x-related forum categoriessee https://forum.joomla.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=960705. I admit I was wrong. I can’t retract what I have written in the past but, as poor an apology as this may be written here in a microcosm on the internet, I’m genuinely sorry.
User harassment: case study
In the following case studysee https://forum.joomla.org/viewtopic.php?f=615&t=974361 we will examine how a person asked a question at the Joomla! forum, was mistreated by the community, eventually resolved their problem—without help from the community—and (after all of that was done) continued to receive gratuitous, unhelpful “advice”. This is not an isolated event but, as you will read later, it typifies a kind of “lynch mob mentality” that needs to be called out for what it is. I would ask you to put yourself in the questioner’s shoes. How would you, dear reader, react to the kind of treatment that was handed out to the questioner? It makes you wonder why anyone would seek help at the Joomla! forum if such intolerance—such absence of respect—is paraded in public.
Let's examine the discussion in detail.
1. The original problem definition
The problem relates to menus that “disappear” on logging into a J! 2.5 website. The forum user makes it clear that they have their own reasons for keeping the website at J! 2.5 and they have no plans to update to J! 3.x in the near future. The user notes that the menu items become visible on refreshing the browser page and concludes that the problem is probably caused by caching.
The forum user asks if the browser contents can be automatically purged or, as an alternative, what changes can be made to the site to set the contents to expire automatically (thereby forcing the browser to obtain a fresh copy of the contents of the website output.
2. “First expert’s” first response
The first response surprisingly concludes that caching should be inconsequential to the matter except, perhaps, in the case of “static files”. That’s, indeed, a surprising reply because it is not based on any knowledge of the target website. The reply concludes with “you need to move to J! 3.9” and “prepare for J! 4” (which doesn’t yet exist), the first suggestion was explicitly ruled out by the original poster [OP] and the second suggestion has no bearing on the immediate problem.
3. “Second expert’s” response
Adding to the words of wisdom provided a week earlier, the second expert also bluntly states that the OP should “move to J! 3.9+” and gratuitously criticises the OP’s business model, portraying it as a fictional means of transportation featured in a TV cartoon series.
4. OP’s first reply
The OP—patiently tolerating the condemnation from these experts—justifiably reiterates that the purpose of the forum should be to assist users of J! 2.5 and to obtain a few pointers.
5. “First expert’s” second response
Without any knowledge of the OP’s business, the reply criticises OP’s assumptions and recommends that the underlying reason for not being able to upgrade the site to J! 3.x can be overcome by replacing a key part of the website’s operation with something tailor-made to the OP’s requirement. This is not what the OP asked for.
6. OP’s second reply
The OP, again patiently, explains that they’re seeking help to deal with what seems to be a caching issue. The OP also explains that their problematic—my word, not his—extension, specifically written for J! 2.5, relates to VOIP and that nothing similar exists elsewhere. Fair enough. Can we get some help for the caching problem, please?
7. “Third expert’s” first response
Also without any knowledge of the OP’s business, this response simply states that the OP’s website “doesn’t work; you need to update; there is no quick fix.” Sounds like the end of the for the OP who’s entire business is criticised by all these experts, doesn’t it?
8. “Fourth expert’s”/forum moderator’s response
Asks a reasonable question about what version of PHP is being used. The purpose of the question is to ensure that the version of PHP is compatible with the version of Joomla! used by the target website.
9. OP’s first reply to the “third expert”
Losing some his earlier coolAnother forum moderator intervenes at this point and removes some of the words the OP wrote in a moment of anger, the OP asks what possible value the “expert” (see point 7 above) may have in mind by simply stating that his website “doesn’t work; you need to update; there is no quick fix.” Quite justifiably, the OP points out that the opinion is based on a complete lack of knowledge of the OP’s operation.
10. OP’s first reply to the “fourth expert’s” question
OK, we’re using a version of PHP that is compatible with Joomla! 2.5. No big deal there.
11. “First expert’s” third response
An unsolicited opinion about PHP 5.6, largely irrelevant to the original problem.
12. “Third expert’s” response to post #9
Adding fuel to the fire, the “third expert” re-iterates his earlier conclusion by stating (in capital letters): “there is no quick fix.”
13. OP’s response to to post #2
Just pause for a moment. No-one has effectively responded to the original question which is about caching. All of the advice that’s being given is (a) based on no intimate knowledge of the OP’s website or business and (b) has been focused on blaming the OP for asking for help with a J! 2.5 problem.
I won’t editorialise the OP’s response; you can see for yourselves:
[ redacted ]The redactions, made by another forum moderator, are preserved here to give people a sense of understanding of the OP’s frustrations
Once again: as this a forum section dedicated to Joomla 2.5, any suggestion to upgrade to another Joomla version in my understanding is obviously off-topic. [ redacted ]
[ redacted ]
For your information, my website is working perfectly and is successful. It contains a lot of complex features and services that work perfectly. My customers are happy. It is giving me money. I cannot mention here the real website just to convince you and, by the way, this would be against the rules of the forum. But as I am perfectionist, I want to fix the only bug that is still remaining on the website.a forum user, Joomla! forum, 30-Oct-2019
14. “Third expert’s” third response
Remember my article about nit-picking? As if the OP hasn’t been bludgeoned enough, we have the same “there is no quick fix” (in capital letters). I hate to spoil the ending but, there was a quick fix.
15. “First expert’s” fourth response
At last, six weeks after the original question was posted, we’re back on-topic and the rancour seems to have subsided. This post offers some useful ideas.
16. OP’s response to post #15
The OP admits that he’s not entirely certain that his problem is about caching but he thanks the “first expert” for the ideas.
17. OP’s response to post #14
The OP’s composure seems to have returned. This post is a précis of post #13.
18. “Third expert’s” reply to post #17
Gratuitous sermonising: “there will soon come a time when your site will stop working”; “if you think updating is difficult now it will be much more difficult in the future”; “ignore the advice at your own risk”. Straight out of the Gospel according to St. Irrelevant.
19. “Second forum moderator’s” intervention
I believe this intervention falls short of the professional conduct that people would expect from forum moderators—on the whole they do a good job—but it was, in my opinion, an excessively inappropriate public rebuke of people who ask questions on the forum.
20. “Third expert’s” fifth response
More of the same sanctimony: “[It’s] you choice [to use J! 2.5] but at least others (who are reading this thread) will see why it’s a bad choice and avoid making your mistakes.” And what was the biggest mistake the OP made, I wonder? I think the biggest mistake was using the Joomla! forum to ask for help.
21. OP’s response to post #19
The OP has far more patience than me. I will just reprint some of his defence:
Since this forum is dedicated to J! 2.5, it is obvious that the posts of this forum are related to J! 2.5. So it doesn't look very useful and sensible, to repeat the mantra “you should upgrade”, "you should upgrade” in every thread of this forum, ignoring the original reason why the thread was opened.a forum user, Joomla! forum, 30-Oct-2019
22. “First expert’s” fifth response
More of the same opinionated rubbish about the OP’s “responsibilities”, if not to the OP himself, to his customers. What right do people have to criticise someone who chooses to operate a business—an apparently successful business—in whatever way they choose to run it?
23. “Third expert’s” sixth response
We know, we know already, that PHP 5.6 is end-of-life! What we don’t know is what arrangements the OP has made to continue to use PHP 5.6 for an indefinite length of time. More of the same “your site will eventually fail” hectoring. Well, by heck, nothing is permanent! All everyone’s sites will eventually fail one day.
24. OP’s response to post #23
The OP reminds us that these comments are off-topic.
25. “Third expert’s” response to post #24
Nit-picking. Bouyed by the second moderator’s intervention, our “expert” starts attacking the OP with the comment “you have been told [that I am right and you are wrong].” I do not know how we got to this point in the discussion. A technical forum is not a game—it’s not a contest—to prove who’s right or wrong. A technical forum should be where people can obtain help without being criticised for asking for help.
26. OP’s response to post #22
The OP is regretting that he asked for help. He writes that the discussion has become tedious, has wasted his time, has unnecessarily distracted him from his business and he is tired of it.
27. OP’s response to post #24
Counter nit-picking.
28. “First expert’s” seventh response
Revisionist history; trying to rewrite how the OP should have phrased his question. Back on topic, the post asks for confirmation about whether proxy caching may be involved.
29. OP’s response to post #28
Beaten into submission, the OP seems resigned to the way that various “experts” seem to treat J! 2.5 as some kind of blood-sport. Remember what I wrote at the beginning of this article? Who is the real expert in the room? Have you spotted him yet?
30. OP’s response to post #20
The OP is resigned to having to upgrade … perhaps …
31. (Page two) OP’s response to post #28
No, we’re not using proxy caching. Site caching has been disabled. Re-stating the problem: the issue relates to browser caching. Any ideas?
32. OP’s duplicated post #21
33. “First expert’s” eighth response
A few more good ideas (especially the one about looking at the .htaccess file for a way to set the expiry dates on site content).
32. OP’s comment
The OP quotes two passages from an articlehttps://joomla.digital-peak.com/blog/182-joomla-2-5-end-of-life-and-what-you-need-to-know and invites comments from people who have been involved in the discussion to date. This was unfortunate because it plays into the hands of the nit-picker brigade who can then use the opportunity to further impugn the OP’s reputation.
33. “First expert’s” ninth response
Pernickety response, unworthy in my opinion, and we’re heading back into you-should-upgrade territory again.
34. “Third expert’s” response to post #33
What else would you expect?
35. Second forum moderator’s” response to post #33
In effect, the moderator is basically telling the OP that he cannot put any faith into an article written five years ago.
34. “Fifth expert’s” response to post #33
I’m no expert when it comes to J! 2.5, so when I describe myself as the “fifth expert” I’m mocking myself. I intervened in the discussion to try to decrease the amount of heat that had been generated in more than thirty posts in the thread—that seemed to have gotten nowhere other than fuelling certain people’s ego—and tried to steer the discussion back on track if nothing more than press the reset button.
35. OP’s response to post #14
Problem solved … and a nice serve of mud-in-your-eye for the “third expert”, eh? Total elapsed time for resolution of the matter: six weeks (or 42 days).
36. OP’s response to post #34
It’s nice to get a thank-you every once in a while, even I didn’t actually contribute to the solution.
37. “Fifth expert’s” response to post #36
… and I returned the compliment.
38. “First expert’s” response to post #34
Yeah, well some people don’t seem to enjoy a happy ending.
And now for the conclusion …
If you survived the précised version of the topic, I ask you to review it in terms of how we should respond to people who ask for help. How well was the discussion moderated? Did it stay on topic? Did the lecturing, hectoring, moralising assist with the solution? Who maintained order: the sheriffs or the vigilantes?
The conversation however did not end here. The forum’s most prolific contributor hijacked a forum topic of minehttps://forum.joomla.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=967115&start=30#p3584671 to prosecute the case for closing the J! 2.5 forum category/categories because of someone’s “attitude”. I’ll leave the final word to Michael Babker … it’s absolutely priceless …
That thread is a prime example of the almost mob mentality that people get on this forum if someone posts and exposes that their site is not “whatever version of Joomla is current as of 4 minutes before creating your post” and “whatever version of PHP is current as of 4 minutes before creating your post”. Yes, in a perfect world everyone would day-zero upgrade every bit of software in every bit of their stack and you would never have people running anything outdated. That is not reality, even as much as WordPress seems to think that having versioned software is disrespectful (no, seriously, there are people in their core circles that seem to think that version numbers are rude and users should never see them).
People run on outdated and unsupported software, that is a reality of a lot of businesses for whatever reason. It’s not our job to dress down every person that comes into this forum looking for help on older software, and honestly I would suggest if the only thing you are going to do is badger someone into upgrading (without understanding the risks involved in said upgrade, because a lot of people don't grasp it), then don’t comment on a thread. It's that simple. Also, for a lot of people, the priority is to fix a bug in their active website, not to perform a massive upgrade with a higher risk of breaking something and completely destroying their website in the process. It can also be entirely possible that a user is actively working on an upgrade for their website, but until said upgrade is complete they still need to keep their live website, well, live.
Have a little respect for the people coming to this forum.Michael Babker, Joomla! forum, 4-Nov-2019
This won’t be the end of the discussion (and people can have their say here if they want) but it’s another sore point that I have with the Jooma! forum in general and it’s a matter that should be addressed.
