In article <keens-030694151250 at 126.96.36.199>, keens at pitvax.xx.rmit.edu.au (Jeremy Keens) writes:
|> In article <2sknnu$pft at mserv1.dl.ac.uk>, TOMASI at MVCHSS.CINECA.IT wrote:
|>|> > I consider posting a whole FAQ on the net rather inappropriate. It wastes
|> > a lot of bandwidth. The persono who did it should have offered a pointer to
|> > that FAQ instead (and, perhaps, maybe, to other relevant net material).
|>|> me, i consider it very appropriate. the net is full of FAQs many, which i
|> read some of, about relatively insignificant things like NineInchNail,
|> heavy metal, king crimson, classsical and manymany other musical groups,
|> types etc. here we have an FAQ in a group which it is very relevant to.
I think Tomasi's point was the posting the actual (VERY LONG) FAQ was
inappropriate. I didn't see that he was saying that bringing it up was
inappropriate. Very long documents shouldn't be posted because some people
pay for this service based on the amount of information they receive. They
should have posted a POINTER to the FAQ (as Tomasi mentioned). Then, the
interested people would be able to get it, but it wouldn't bother people
who don't want to read it.
Just because other groups post entire FAQs doesn't mean that we have to
be inconsiderate of others here and do the same.
dr bruce parnas
brp at psychomo.arc.nasa.gov
/usr/local/Std.Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are mine and
not those of NASA, but you probably could have guessed that.
It's not my fault. Not all of us here at NASA are Rocket Scientists