dbd@martha.utcc.utk.edu (David DeLaney) writes:
>> and is there a good reason not to have a news.answers.d?
>
> The news.answers team thinks so; they think FAQs can be discussed quite
> well in the newsgroups they're crossposted to.
that's obviously what would _not_ be discussed there.
> There is a faq-maintainers mailing list for those who want to discuss
> the care and feeding of FAQs, and apparently the people on it feel it
> works better as a mailing list than as a newsgroup.
of course, faq-maintainers-announce had to go moderated anyway.
I don't get faq-maintainers here because
- even though I use my newsreader to read mail, a lot of people
don't. that means lost threads, making it a pain to read.
- I'd have to subscribe as a different alias (see other threads
about good ways to deliver mail to a folder) or set up something
to process all my incoming mail -- which would be overkill for me.
right now all FAQ-related mail goes to an alias anyway, but it's
all related directly to me -- not to FAQs in general. I can get
to it quickly, which helps the quality of the FAQ dramatically.
- my mail comes uncompressed, my news compressed. I can't see a
good reason to move more bits to the more expensive format.
the last two have technical solutions -- don't think I don't realize
that. it's just that I already have those procedures in place with
news, as do most people who participate.
or is it just the easiest way to get away from the `public-infested
Usenet' of today? I can live with that. (but we have _got_ to have
some better tools for it)
-- Russell Schulz russell@alpha3.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ersys!rschulz Shad 86c
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved