---------------- Reposting -----------------
Getting a bit strange: ;-)
It's time to rethink where we see the FAQ process going in the future.
So where do I see FAQs going ? I think there are two different futures.
First, the bad news path... FAQs slowly die out as Usenet is further and
further blended in with web based distribution. news.answers becomes a
glorified notification service that is nothing more than pointers to
different web sites. Those FAQs that are created are more focused on
products than information. FAQ archives become less and less archives
and become more and more web pointer pages. The FAQ Maintainer community
drifts into a memory and user's are forced to wade through all sorts of
search engines to try to find what use to appear in their spool directories.
The replicated, distributed nature of FAQs supplied by Usenet and ftp
archives become a thing of the past. Access to the remaining FAQs is
based on the available resources of the maintainer. A far cry from
the FAQ process of the past.
Second path... Something is done to evolve the process and make it more of
an ingrained resource in the evolving net as a whole. FAQ Authoring becomes
something that people are proud to put on their resume'. The FAQ process
fosters information distribution in a manner that benefits the readership
and authors alike while encouraging more people to participate.
In the eyes of Usenet, FAQ authors are seen as volunteers contributing
their time to make things better for all. Why does this process have to
be a 'catch as catch can' type of process ? Why can't we put something
in place that benefits the authors just as much as the readership ?
I'd like to see the establishment of an FAQ Consortium. The FAQ
Authors would be members of the consortium. Now, before you hit delete
and dismiss this as a crazy idea, please clear your mind and read the
following.
- The FAQ Consortium would be a non-profit body that would be able to solicit
corporate sponsorships to assist in the operation and funding. (Of course
the corporations would be getting a tax break as well. (win-win))
- The FAQ Consortium would work to facilitate direct connections to all
major search engines linking the FAQs more and more into the heart of
the net. People would be able to query FAQs as a body of information
from all major search engines (win-win).
- The FAQ Authors would be able to proudly state that they are participating
members of the FAQ Consortium. This would be something that they could
put on the resume's. (..)
- The FAQ Consortium sponsors official sites for distribution of FAQs.
This would benefit the authors, the readership and the consortium.
Today there are no "official" mirrors of RTFM. (University's legal
won't allow MIT to sanction any site as an "official" anything.)
- The FAQ Consortium could setup facilities in the US, Europe and in the
Far East so as to Internationalize the process and contents.
- The FAQ Consortium would decide to allow or disallow advertisements and
act as a focal point for authors and advertisers. Ads could be restricted
to index pages or could be allowed on all types of pages. Authors would
benefit individually if advertising was included on their pages.
- Authors could directly be paid a majority percentage of any advertising
that occurs on their individual FAQ pages. Authors as a whole would
receive a distribution of monies for participating depending on other
fiscal concerns.
- FAQ authors would have access to one or more of the official site systems
to assure they have the facilities they need to update and maintain their
postings. This does not restrict authors from using their own facilities,
simply assures that they have access in the event they need it during
transitions (such as job changes).
- The FAQ Consortium could become a positive educational resource for K-12.
- The FAQ Consortium could provide services to vendors such as allowing
links to vendors sites for a fee. (i.e. FAQs about some product.) This
type of non-participating member service could be separated from the
participating members. It would be available from a link or a search
engine.
- The FAQ Consortium could sponsor additional projects around the net
that advance information distribution (on-line writing improvement course,
research allowing for more natural language FAQ lookup search techniques,
etc).
- Sometimes getting a publisher to pay attention to a book idea is rough.
The FAQ Consortium could assist FAQ authors in getting access to publishers
regardless of whether or not the book is an FAQ based book.
- The FAQ Consortium might even produce a series of books based on major
topic areas with the authors being paid for their efforts.
- ...
This may sound crazy but please, re-read this, think about where FAQs are
today, what the trend of the net is, and how we might continue to play a
valuable and viable role in the net for years to come.
---------------- Reposting End -----------------
Now before anyone gets me wrong, I am not looking to take any money (or
tee shirts) out of your hands from the potential proceeds of the book.
This is a separate topic all together.
As one outcome of the thread, Nancy thought that it might be a good idea
to register faqs.org before some other group grabbed it. I am happy to
say that we have it. :-) The domain registration has even been paid. ;)
faqs.org is setup. I threw out the idea of changing references from
landfield.com to faqs.org and people thought that made sense so I have.
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/ points at the hypertext archive. For those
that may have landfield.com in your faqs, don't worry, they are still
active and valid links and will be for quite a while.
There is a lot to discuss so let the discussion begin. If people think
it would be better to have this discussion elsewhere, please reconsider.
This could be a valuable evolution for FAQs and for you and we need your
input...
Hi Ho, Hi Ho, its off to the flame thrower we go... ;-)
--- Kent Landfield Phone: 1-817-545-2502 The Landfield Group FAX: 1-817-545-7650 Email: kent@landfield.com http://www.landfield.com/ Please send comp.sources.misc related mail to kent@uunet.uu.net. Search the Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive at http://www.landfield.com/faqs/
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997
All rights reserved