[Prev][Next][Index]
Re: Technical content of RAFP vs APD
Fri, 15 Mar 1996 George Booth wrote:
<<[...] Since all the
"experts" have gravitated to the APD in the recent months [...]
We can have just as "meaningful" discussions in the newgroup as we can
here.>>
We're all obviously worried about the radically higher ratio of chaff to
grain on the newsgroup, but I think George has an excellent point here. If
existing APD members who are able will make an effort to have a presence on
the newsgroup, then we can significantly affect the flavor & heft of the
discussions.
<<Sure, there will be immature postings but these can be ignored.>>
Perhaps better than ignoring: we could all make our own version of a nice,
dry "RTFF, and here's how" to post in response to any & all questions that
*we* know would be helped by, well, Reading The Fabulous FAQ.
I think a lot of newbies read only a couple of other posts before posting
their own question. They may not even know what a FAQ is, much less have
noticed the FAQ-pointer that appeared 10 days before. A barrage of "answers"
that are naught (or at least little) but mini-FAQ-pointers could have quite
an effect. True, they could cause flames, but I seem to remember a long ago
post by George stating succinctly (though I paraphrase of course) that it is
no one's *responsibility* to answer any of the questions; it is a kindness.
So anyone who gets huffy at being told to do a little homework could receive
a similar barrage of nice, dry, "why are you doing this anyway if you aren't
willing to learn the basics?" messages.
"Courtesy of the APD Cartel"
Have a beautiful weekend everyone.
Anne Hull Seales
Sunny, soggy, and oh so froggy Santa Cruz CA