On 11/10/2000, David Alex Lamb at dalamb@cs.queensu.ca wrote:
> If there are former news.answers moderators on the list who can help
> train new people, your assistance would be greatly appreciated.
Dave -
My blessings on you. I'm also on disability for physical reasons but was fortunate to recently return to something part time.
That said, one of the issues that I have seen over and over on this list is that fewer and fewer people have knwoledge of Unix or telnet procedures or language requirements. We live in an environment that is increasingly web-browser oriented - like it or not. This is making the handling of FAQs and Usenet related items occult to the next generation coming up.
IMHO the present methodolgy for handling FAQs is outdated and needs all new tools or multiple tools to get the job done. If that is not technically possible then we have to consider if the news.moderation process, and team, is even relevant anymore. There has been much bandied about here with no firm solutions.
Had we not had a FAQ posting service (the FAQ auto-posting server at mit.edu) I'd not be even posting a FAQ at all simply due to the lack of a news posting program that allowed for the necessary data fields, secondary headers and all formatting associated with that. Once I obtained access to the server and learned how to post and update my FAQ by e-mail to the server things changed for me greatly. I can update as necessary, force a post on a specific date, or simply allow the system to automatically post with no additional conscious thought on my part. As a result the newsgroup in which this happens thinks of me as a god simply because I post on time and regularly. <G>
I think this is the way of the future.
Now it has been said on this list that the server is a tool that should not be overtaxed and is not meant to post every possible FAQ out there. But as we are now seeing, the old method simply does not work anymore.
I suggest that the autoposting server be expanded if mit.edu can be convinced, come up with a posting schedule that will not overtax it, and ask people to start using it.
Its convenient, quick, you can use any e-mail program to update a FAQ or parts thereof, and issue commands to post, suspend, etc. And there always remains an option for anyone to manually post a FAQ with their newsprogram as well. I use the FAQ posting server to do the main chores and about mid-month I manually post a pointer to the archives. Works for us.
The auto posting server sends to the necessary moderated newsgroups and archives and is propagated from there.
I don't see why more people are not using it, or see it as a solution to the problem before us.
This then leaves "moderation' chores to "approving" FAQs, some of which is already automated, and some maintenance on the server side itself.
And if a FAQ is abandoned, it would be easier to handle. The server could be set to date code the material and if no update or other commend from the maintainer is received after a 1-2 year period it is simply deleted from the server. It would still likely be at what ever archives its propagated to but posting would cease. That would be a flag to some other person to take up the ball and run with it - process TBD.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Dennis Kirkpatrick
Boston, MA
nat@tiac.net
*************************************************************
To unsubscribe send a message to majordomo@faqs.org as
unsubscribe faq-maintainers fill-in-your-email-address-here
*************************************************************
[
FAQ Archive |
Search FAQ Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet References
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000
]
© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997-2000
All rights reserved