Re: Automatic Moderator Insertion Of FAQ Pointers

---------

Joel K. Furr (jfurr@acpub.duke.edu)
Thu, 23 Feb 1995 08:36:20 -0500 (EST)

Al Crawford wrote:
->2. At the end of the body. The information could be in a "second signature"
-> tagged on after the users own signature. This sort of thing seems to
-> work rather well in rec.humor.funny but I try to let users posts through
-> as unaltered as possible, and this approach is aesthetically unpleasant.
->
->At the moment I'm tending to favour the latter approach. It's still far
->from ideal but seems to be more likely to reach the intended audience than
->using a header field. Does anyone have any comments on the desirability or
->otherwise of either of these approaches, or know of any other ideas from
->ramming FAQ information down the readers throats in an unobtrusive fashion?

Alt.humor.best-of-usenet has a sig which all moderators tack on to the end
of the post -- after removing the original sig entirely. Since sigs are
often duplicated anyway in posts to a.h.b-o-u (i.e., the original sig, and
the sig of the person sending the original post on to a.h.b-o-u for
reposting), we feel little guilt about taking both off; it cleans things
up dramatically and then putting the official a.h.b-o-u sig on makes it
very obvious what the policy is.

I personally don't have much use for long .sigs and my own .sig consists
of a one-line pointer to my home page. In comp.society.folklore and
alt.folklore.suburban, I routinely remove all .sigs and I think the signal
in the group benefits as a result of it.

[ 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