[computronus]

I happen to have just written a do-nothing script, so I can answer why I found it helpful vs. a do-something script.

- I am still developing the procedure in the script, so it is premature to automate. A do-nothing script still benefits you by telling you exactly what to do - in my case, spitting out exact commands to run - but you can assess its steps before performing them.

- The script still gathers a lot of information and associates it together in order to figure out the correct commands. That work is valuable all by itself.

- Even though you have to run commands yourself, it's copy-and-paste vs. hand-typing, so it's already less error-prone.

- The script documents the procedure even without automation, so the benefit is immediate.

Now, I think that it's better for a do-nothing script to _evolve_ into a do-something script. But, if that effort is delayed or never happens, at least you've got something.