Time and Effort: FAQ's, moderators and life

[Ernest Retzel 1535 49118]

I almost replied to Una's post; I can't help but add some support to
Dave's.

Una, I agree with Dave that a FAQ is more than a user post, no matter what
your reasons for doing it.  In general, in other newsgroups, these are 
created collaboratively and with combined expertise and editorial skills.  
They are meant to be unambiguous, authoritative answers to user questions.  
As such, the concept of "authorship" and "rights" should be relegated to a 
consensus of "correctness."  

This appears to be far from what you are doing at the moment.

If you really have the time to compose e-mail that is designed to frustrate 
and anger, I would suggest you find a hobby.  Get a pet.  Take up
wine-tasting.  There are lots of better ways to spend your time [and ours].

I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that Dave's work [yes, and 
many others] is the reason these newsgroups are a success today.  
*I* wouldn't have put up with the flack he takes for a variety of decisions 
that are beyond his control [to wit, the NSF policy concerning job postings 
he recently resolved to our benefit].

Most moderated newgroups go past just editorializing; frequently, moderators
simply reject articles without explanation.  Why anyone would think that an 
announcement newsgroup would not be subject to editing is beyond me.  I
personally argued for that group to be unmoderated primarily because of the
work involved, and I did not consider it worth the effort.  But I had not
foreseen things like this.

Una, lighten up.  This is not nearly as important as you think it is.

Ernie Retzel

Medical School
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, MN

ernest at lenti.med.umn.edu