I, for one, thank you for your message. It is a valuable
insight into commercial FAQ writers. My first reaction on
reading it was shame but then I realised that there is more
to the story which you have not mentioned and which might
help understand where we're coming from.
I can't speak for anyone else, of course, but for me its a
matter of principle; recently in mail I was explaining what
FAQs were and I now realise that I used the word "pure" to
mean their being impartial and non-commercial.
I am not against commercialism on the net; indeed, I rely on
Amazon for books and now get my income from working in an
Internet consultancy, but having kept my FAQ impartial and
non-commercial is my way of giving a respectful nod to the
net which latterly came about through similar volunteer
efforts and for which I have much to thank (my partner whom
I met in misc.misc 11 years ago, for example).
Although this sounds irrational, I always thought that "FAQ"
was like a trademark that meant an approved periodic posting
(or equiv) by rtfm. Perhaps that's where the elitism comes
in but you have to recognise that there is a strong positive
culture surrounding Usenet FAQs and the approval process. I
even feel like an imposter being on this mailing list given
that I stopped posting my FAQ to Usenet 3 years ago. And
when our clients wanted to put up questions and answers on
their web sites and to call them an FAQ, I used to suggest
other names. I don't fight it anymore because new net users
don't know or care what Usenet is, let alone what FAQs are.
So, it's not that I disparage "commercial" FAQ writers, but
that I would like the ethos behind traditional FAQs to be
acknowledged.
On the other side of the fence, I have to say that I have been
struggling with my FAQ which I took over in 1993. I have read
this thread with interest because InetUK, which started out as
the uk.net FAQ and is now a web site, has always been commercial
in nature since it's a directory of Internet companies. In the
past few years, I have watched commercial web sites spring up
with similar directories and I just do not have the time to be
able to compete with them (in terms of keeping the information
fresh); even though my company hosts the directory, I still
maintain it in my own time.
People have urged me for years to try to make money from it
(I am regularly offered money to rent out mailing lists) but I
have been resisting the temptation, if only because it's been
the last thing I have which reminds me of the net used to be
like and because I am proud to be part of the tradition (more
elitism, perhaps).
However, I have resigned myself to the fact that if I am to
continue working on the directory I have to raise some
money so that it can be redeveloped and so I will therefore
be looking for ways to make money from it. I have decided
that I will always provide a free version on the net but
that is ultimately just a personal decision to make.
I think the idea of us communicating with commercial FAQ
writers is a good one. Ideally, companies would contact
and help the volunteer/(theoretically)impartial FAQ writers
and also to refer to those FAQs as alternative sources of
information.
Paola
-- UK & Irish Internet Company Directory http://www.limitless.co.uk/inetuk/
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997
All rights reserved