Me, I'd say, don't do it, and especially don't do it by trying to
imbue the *.answers team with some kind of status they don't have
and don't want.
> Every commercial site has an faq it seems...
Indeed, but I'm afraid there's nothing we can do about that.
"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery", and even if the
commercial FAQ lists aren't very sincere, their existence is one
of the prices we pay for our own success in defining the form.
> I am not trying to strike the fear or god into my readers, but something
> to distinguish my faqs from others would be nice. Suggestions?
If you want to make your FAQ lists stand out as embodying the
very best that the traditional, noncommercial net has (had?)
to offer, do it by making them as accurate, unbiased, and
nonselfcongratulatory as possible. Post them to the net and
let them speak for themselves. If readers value them, those
readers will let it be known that the FAQ lists in question
are things of value and discrimination, and you won't even
have to try.
Please don't take this the wrong way, but if I saw an FAQ list
that tried to inflate its status as being "official", or
pointedly noncommercial, or "authorized", or anything like that,
its very attempt to do so would immediately move it a notch or
two away from those qualities you're trying to uphold.
Maintaining a traditional FAQ list is a labor of love, and I
think that, in a way, the old adage about "If you love something,
set it free" applies. If your work deserves it, it will receive
the praise and adulation you hope for, and you can be justly
proud of it. But you can't expect or ask for or insist on that
praise, because if you do, it will be that much less likely to
come back.
Steve Summit
scs@eskimo.com
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997
All rights reserved