>A CFV for a FAQ would accept one content and reject another
>content. It would decide among competing ideas. Even worse,
>it would approve one maintainer and disapprove another
>maintainer. That is hostile to the spirit of free
>speech. Only the readers, by popular consensus over years
>and centuries, decide among authors and documents.
Quite. There's also the problem that a given group may, quite
legitimately, have multiple viewpoints - and getting one FAQ for all viewpoints
on some issues (e.g., politics) may not be truly possible. Then you've got the
situation that all the opponents to a given viewpoint will vote no on any FAQ
that seems "approving" of that viewpoint. A group can be for general
discussion, although you still run into (idiot) people insisting that its
presence is a sign of approval of some topic or another; a FAQ tends to be
more focused on a given viewpoint or set of closely related viewpoints.
-Allen
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved