FAQ

In case you're interested and/or didn't know, Simon Ward has emailed me to
say that he is no longer the official FAQ keeper for this NG, and the FAQ is
essentially in abeyance.

There are those who think FAQs are obsolete, but I'm not one of them (not
least because they act as a sort of homepage for a Usenet group).

I have it in mind to resurrect the FAQ and update it. But not if anyone
else wants to because I have plenty of other things to do with my time.

I could also host it on my free ISP webspace (not my home server which can
be subject to arbitrary outage, e.g. when I decide to break it trying to
apply an update). Unless anyone else has a robustly hosted site where they
would be prepared to host it (several possibilities spring to mind).

Your thoughts?


--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.com

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...
In case you're interested and/or didn't know, Simon Ward has emailed me to
say that he is no longer the official FAQ keeper for this NG, and the FAQ
is
essentially in abeyance.

There are those who think FAQs are obsolete, but I'm not one of them (not
least because they act as a sort of homepage for a Usenet group).

I have it in mind to resurrect the FAQ and update it. But not if anyone
else wants to because I have plenty of other things to do with my time.

I could also host it on my free ISP webspace (not my home server which can
be subject to arbitrary outage, e.g. when I decide to break it trying to
apply an update). Unless anyone else has a robustly hosted site where
they
would be prepared to host it (several possibilities spring to mind).

Your thoughts?

I would say that the fully searchable nature of Google Groups means that a
faq is virtually obsolete now.

Simon

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

I could also host it on my free ISP webspace (not my home server which can
be subject to arbitrary outage, e.g. when I decide to break it trying to
apply an update). Unless anyone else has a robustly hosted site where they
would be prepared to host it (several possibilities spring to mind).

Would be welcome by me, at least.

General side note about chapmancentral is it seems to dislike Mozilla
and NS7. Both just siezed up when I was having a browse yesterday, both
Sun SAPRC and Wintel, where Internet Exploder seemed to manage okay.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...


General side note about chapmancentral is it seems to dislike Mozilla
and NS7. Both just siezed up when I was having a browse yesterday, both
Sun SAPRC and Wintel, where Internet Exploder seemed to manage okay.


Yes, thanks, it's a known issue. I've developed a replacement but it is
aesthetically sub-optimal at the moment, I'm expecting to resolve that Real
Soon Now.

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.com

"Simon Mason" wrote in message
...

I would say that the fully searchable nature of Google Groups means that
a
faq is virtually obsolete now.

That was Simon Ward's view, but searching doesn't give you the charter /
purpose (albeit that one can infer it from hierarchy), or some of the
historical sidenotes (e.g. helmets) which can reduce the incidence / length
of repetitive threads.

The full-on ninety-seven page FAQ is definitely a thing of the past but I
can see merit in a short page detailing who we are, what we are about, and
the things which are likely to result in your being flamed.

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.com

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

That was Simon Ward's view, but searching doesn't give you the charter /
purpose (albeit that one can infer it from hierarchy), or some of the
historical sidenotes (e.g. helmets) which can reduce the incidence / length
of repetitive threads.

Another point, of course, is that searching Google Groups for info on
something like lids will produce the sort of response which it will take
quite a bit of heavy trawling to garner anything conclusive from. A FAQ
gets the distillation done up front, hopefully in a way that reflects
Received Wisdom, where opening x random posts from a flamefest won't.
Quick test-ette, asking about "helmets" gives you "about 4,230"
articles... Rather less useful for a quick query than the wee bit on
Guy's existing Not The FAQ page.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

That was Simon Ward's view, but searching doesn't give you the charter /
purpose (albeit that one can infer it from hierarchy), or some of the
historical sidenotes (e.g. helmets) which can reduce the incidence / length
of repetitive threads.

Another point, of course, is that searching Google Groups for info on
something like lids will produce the sort of response which it will take
quite a bit of heavy trawling to garner anything conclusive from. A FAQ
gets the distillation done up front, hopefully in a way that reflects
Received Wisdom, where opening x random posts from a flamefest won't.
Quick test-ette, asking about "helmets" gives you "about 4,230"
articles... Rather less useful for a quick query than the wee bit on
Guy's existing Not The FAQ page.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Simon Mason wrote:

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...


There are those who think FAQs are obsolete, but I'm not one of them (not
least because they act as a sort of homepage for a Usenet group).

I have it in mind to resurrect the FAQ and update it. But not if anyone
else wants to because I have plenty of other things to do with my time.

Your thoughts?

I would say that the fully searchable nature of Google Groups means that a
faq is virtually obsolete now.

Agreed.

I can imagine some threads even longer than we get now arguing merits or
otherwise of h*lm*ts and even whether such a subject has a place in an FAQ.

They are today rather pointless.

Instead of being helpful to a 'newbie' asking a question, we'll have curt
"Refer to the FAQ" answers instead of the more useful help that was requested.

My vote is a No.

John B

Simon Mason wrote:

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message
...


There are those who think FAQs are obsolete, but I'm not one of them (not
least because they act as a sort of homepage for a Usenet group).

I have it in mind to resurrect the FAQ and update it. But not if anyone
else wants to because I have plenty of other things to do with my time.

Your thoughts?

I would say that the fully searchable nature of Google Groups means that a
faq is virtually obsolete now.

Agreed.

I can imagine some threads even longer than we get now arguing merits or
otherwise of h*lm*ts and even whether such a subject has a place in an FAQ.

They are today rather pointless.

Instead of being helpful to a 'newbie' asking a question, we'll have curt
"Refer to the FAQ" answers instead of the more useful help that was requested.

My vote is a No.

John B

"JohnB" wrote in message
...

I can imagine some threads even longer than we get now arguing merits or
otherwise of h*lm*ts and even whether such a subject has a place in an
FAQ.

On the other hand, if the questions genuinely are frequently asked, it's a
good way to ensure a consistent and accurate reply.

Instead of being helpful to a 'newbie' asking a question, we'll have curt
"Refer to the FAQ" answers instead of the more useful help that was
requested.

Advocatus diaboli and all that, would "please see the FAQ at ....." be more
or less desirable than a helmet thread?

My vote is a No.

A vote? Has democracy broken out on Usenet? Who knows where that could
end... http://www.avidorstudios.com/r137.html

--
Guy
===

WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.com