In message <014b01c0d5e9$86c30d40$3f495acf@heidikins>
"Heidi M. Anderson" <heidi@www.bmeworld.com> wrote:
[snip]
> > Unless this is the case, the best course of action would be to write
> > a new FAQ.
>
> And this has already begun, several months ago. My question is how
> do we go about getting our new FAQ to be the "official" one that can
> get posted to *.answers and archived, etc, without defining a new archive
> name and having them exist side-by-side in the archives, which could get
> confusing.
Um. This sort of situation can get a little complicated. If we are informed
that a FAQ is dead by its maintainer we can mark it as such in our records
and release the archive-name. The ideal situation here, then, would be for
the old FAQ maintainer to tell us that her FAQ is dead: I'll contact her
about this today.
If she isn't prepared to do so, things go a bit more up in the air. It's
neither our job nor our place to mediate newsgroup disputes, so really you
should try to sort these things out between yourselves.
Cheers,
Nick
-- It must be remembered that we have heard only one side of the case. God has written all the books. -- Samuel Butler, "Notebooks"************************************************************* 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