I flagged this post as not an answer: https://askubuntu.com/a/977614/760903 and my flag summary says a moderator declined this because they found no evidence to support it.
Here's the details:
- both Q and A are posted by the same user. I know this is acceptable in this site, so no problems from that alone.
- the question is essentially composed of two parts:
- How to convert text to speech
- How to do it periodically
- the first part is mostly a duplicate, OP even identified the duplicate question
- they identified the command in the title of the question and linked to the dupe in the answer: How to text-to-speech output using command-line? (note that they also posted an answer there describing a command that was already listed in an answer from three years ago)
for the second part, in the question they say:
My plan is to have cron jobs speak so I can leave the monitor shut off.
Beginning with having it do a time announcement each hour. It is OK if it is not perfectly precise to the second.
And in the answer:
Set in cron to run at the top of the hour, it does the trick.
That's all. Nothing about how to set anything in Cron, or how to set it to run "at the top of the hour".
I wrote a comment describing how nonsensical this is, but it was deleted.
- part of the question is a duplicate
- the other part is just repeated in the question and answer without any concrete information
I flagged the answer as not an answer because it should describe how to do it with Cron, since that it can be done with Cron is already in the question.
The moderator who handled it said there's a "second individual". I think they got confused by "muru" editing the post. Or they had many browser tabs open and got things mixed up. What should I do?
espeak(as mentioned in the linked post) and they even say how to do so for their case with an example. The question says they plan to use
cron, not that they need help with
cron(which is fairly simple to use and documented elsewhere). This answer may not add much value to the site, but it is definitely an answer imho. If you can edit it to make it more useful, or comment to constructively suggest how the author might improve it, please consider doing so.
cron. You suggest that to be a good answer, the answer should explain how to use
cronto do this particular job. I agree with that; I was only trying to explain why the answer should be considered an answer and not flagged. It satisfied the OP, who apparently did not need help with cron. But answers are not just for OP. (Better) answers could be posted which explain how to use
cronand they would not be appropriate answers to the proposed dupe question.