If David is just a voluteer approver and not a FAQ maintainer, I am puzzled as
to why his name would appear in association with any FAQ he approves?
Paul
On Mon, 28 Jun 1999, era eriksson wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jun 1999 09:45:38 -0400, flaps@dgp.toronto.edu
>(Alan J Rosenthal) wrote:
> >>> Being easy doesn't make anything right. Being hard doesn't make
> >>> anything wrong.
> >>> David's solution is an easy way out for him and it's wrong.
> > Yes, it is an easy way out for David and, as he is a voluteer, why
> > shouldn't we help to make his job easier? What David wants is only
> > wrong in your opinion; in my opinion what he wants is perfectly
> > reasonable.
>
>Seconded, with a smack over the head to whoever wrote the >>> part.
>(Sorry, attributions messed up in the original.)
>
>/* era */
>
>And to whoever asked about the alt.null FAQ: Yes, you can definitely
>get *.answers approval for +any+ material which adheres to the
>*.answers guidelines. You cannot count on +any+ content screening by
>the moderators, nor more than hope that "erroneous" FAQs will be
>refuted by responsible volunteers.
>
>--
>.obBotBait: It shouldn't even matter whether <http://www.iki.fi/era/>
>I am a resident of the state of Washington. <http://members.xoom.com/procmail/>
> * Sign the European spam petition! <http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/> *
>
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997
All rights reserved