[jroseattle]

Allow me to clarify a few things:

- Format: we don't dictate format on docs. In terms of sharing important information, it's irrelevant. Dealer's choice.

- Audience: we are writing documents that are internal to our team, but also for consumption by other groups. Audience is engineering-focused.

- Consumption: we refer to documents as a way of learning all the things before asking uninformed questions to team members. RTFM is an expectation in my groups.

> instead of answering their very reasonable and pertinent questions you instead accuse them of being either incompetent or lazy.

These expectations aren't random; they are well-known, part of project deliverables, and non-negotiable. Existing projects show the quality of what's been produced in the past, to help with an understanding for anyone documenting what they've built and want us to depend on in production. After that, we definitely help those who still require help, but this isn't a surprise.

[marcinzm]

>Allow me top clarify a few things:

It was your story written by you on how you interact with engineers. I'm not the one you should be clarifying things to.

edit: The read I get is that a number of engineers fundamentally disagree with the value of your approach. As they're the ones who should be getting value from it based on your clarification that's a very bad sign.

[jroseattle]

I was thinking you were asking questions and/or engaging to understand, of which I've made an incorrect assumption.