> Any piece of E-Mail about a particular FAQ needs to be dumented, so
> that any of us can take up where another left off. This also adds to
> the workload.
Why do something that adds to the work load? Is there a reason that
if moderator A gets a first time posting that needs to be fixed before
the FAQ header is approved, that moderator A cannot deal with it until
it's OK?
> We're down to three people at the moment, with two volunteers about to
> begin; it'll still be some time until they can take a significant part
> of the workload.
How much effort is being put into finding more modertors? If you
don't have enough, you need to get more. I would volunteer but already
do a few things on the Net.
> I'm not happy with the way things are right now, either, but I see no
> immediate recourse. The new SS20 will help, when it goes online
> (the present rtfm machine simply isn't up to the job, which also slows
> us down considerably), but we have little time working on tools to
> improve things while the incoming queue needs clearing up, badly...
I have had fairly good luck with the *.answers moderators, but then I
try hard to keep my questions and requests clear and concise. I know
what it's like to handle lots of mail. Maybe if the FAQ maintainers
could all make an effort to do this, it might help a bit.
-- ASCII ART FTP: ftp.wwa.com/pub/Scarecrow/ - InterNet Newsgroup: rec.arts.ascii Email, requests, finger: boba@wwa.com - ASCII ART FAQ finger: asciifaq@wwa.com WWW Pages: <a href=http://gagme.wwa.com/~boba/spider.html>- Spider's Web -</a> <a href=http://gagme.wwa.com/~boba/scarecrow.html>- Scarecrow's WWW Link -</a> <a href=http://gagme.wwa.com/~boba/faq.html>- ASCII ART FAQ, Web version -</a>
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved