META: FAQ and Thread Summaries

[s001gmu at nova.wright.edu]

On Tue, 9 Dec 1997 coder at ibm.net wrote:

> 
> On 03/12/97 at 09:57 AM, s001gmu at nova.wright.edu said:
> 
> 
> >[coder at ibm.net:]
> 
> >> Specific questions I have:
> >>   1) Should we have a FAQ?
> 
> >yup.  I think it could only help the list.
> > 
> >my one suggestion, make it a nicely formatted HTML doc.  
> 
> My temptation would be to have two documents, one produced from the other,
> or both produced from a common meta file.  The HTML fom would berely be an
> indexed super-set of the flat text version.  The flat text would be posted
> periodically here, added to the welcome message, or some such similar. 
> The HTML would be slated for the list's web site when that eventually
> happens (things have managed to get in the way again)

Even better.  A few other ppl have brought up the 2-docs idea, and I 
can't argue with it.  best of both worlds. :)  I believe I mentioned in a 
later post that I didn't want anything too fancy out of the HTML doc.
 
> >there's nothing 
> >I hate more than having to flip through pages of plain text, looking for 
> >a nicely labeled section 3.2.4.1.1 on the specific question I was looking
> > for an answer for.
> 
> I really doubt that any FAQ coming from our lot of petty rebels would be
> quite that structured, detailed, or organised.
 
Touche.

> >As for thread admin, I think it'd have to be a purely voluntary basis... 
> >and mostly after the fact (too high of a mutation rate, etc).  I like the
> > summaries, but get by just fine w/o.
> 
> I'm becoming increasingly conviced that its a good idea that should be
> left as precisely that; A Good Idea.

*shrug*  fine by me.  :)

-Greg