Re: More FAQ formalities [flamage]

---------

Aliza R. Panitz (buglady@bronze.lcs.mit.edu)
Tue, 30 Nov 93 05:04:38 EST


rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec) said:
>I find this condescending, I'm-a-visionary-but-you're-all-blind attitude
>highly offensive, [...]

"L. Detweiler" <ld231782@longs.lance.colostate.edu> answered:
> Mr. Kulawiec, my prose definitely did not deserve this kind of
> seething, vicious, searing personal attack.

Most people who've been on UseNet for a while would look for references
to their mother's personal habits with the excrement of Nazi sheep
before calling something a "seething, vicious, searing personal
attack".

> some people are going to try to develop these new FAQ standards. either
> leave them alone or help, but *please* DO NOT ATTACK THEM AS ARROGANT
> CONDESCENDING JERKS. You have done an outstanding job of the latter!

Even those people who *are* arrogant condescending jerks?

> Apparently, then, judging by your flame, your motivation is
> Recognition. Well, my apologies for not addressing that issue.

I dunno, *my* motivation for writing the r.g.r. hierarchy FAQ was that I,
personally, was tired of the stream of repetitive requests and misplaced
posts in the various newsgroups. There was some altruism there, but
not as much as you might think.

(See? Some actual relevant content in this post! So there! :-)

- Aliza



[ Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive | Search Mail Archive | Authors | Usenet ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 ]

---------

faq-admin@landfield.com

© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved