Wazoo Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 as posted in the spamcop newsgroup .. sure, it could have been polished up, straightened out but .. I'm not in the mood .. for those htat give a hoot but can't figure out NNTP .... the sub-thread starts at http://news.spamcop.net/pipermail/spamcop-...ead.html#105747 From: "WazoO" Newsgroups: spamcop Subject: Re: Dubious FAQ entry 166.html Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 00:30:32 -0500 Message-ID: <djsd1o$gjv$1[at]news.spamcop.net> "Frank Ellermann" wrote in message news:43606545.1E96[at]xyzzy.claranet.de... > Mike Easter wrote: > > > To me, the OE reader sees it bolded for OE in 119 and sees it > > bolded again [ostensibly for the OE reader of 119] in 166. > > > You have a legitimate argument about 'wrong' if you arrive at > > 166 from some other route > > I arrived at both 119 and 166 directly from your article... ;-) > > But when I saw that the scri_pt tries to implement "proprietary > terminology" forward-as-attachment resulting in garbage all my > flame throwers switched to full auto mode. I can't help but be bowled over at the amount of effort expended to bitch about the "official" FAQ, explain why it sucks, citing facts and figures on things that it should say, yet ...... where exactly is the "recommended change" ???? I ask this while looking at the contents of my Sent folder, showing something like 50-60 e-mails just in the last two weeks to Don/Deputies/JT that have the acronym FAQ in the Subject Line: Out of that, perhaps a dozen (I might even be stretching that) have been touched. Here my anger starts showing ... a number of responses have came back with the www.spamcop.net FAQ is "the" OFFICIAL FAQ, so the fact that I'm having a hard time moving, changing, fixing, updating, adding content and data to something that more closely relates to reality, fills in the gaps, etc., etc., etc. is "my" problem. And yet, here's another thread, bitching about content, missing/bad details, on and on ... The obvious point ... compare the size of the OFFICIAL FAQ to the Forum version of the SpamCop FAQ .... .and more stuff gets added at least weekly it seems.to the Forum version ... yet here "we" set, raising the same complaints that were raised 5 years ago about the same FAQ entries .... Trying to convert all this stuff to the KnowledgeBase view has pretty much come to a halt. I don't want to waste my time putting up data I know is wrong, should be fixed, knowing that it needs editing,, but .... changes aren't happening. I asked for help on building a whole new FAQ entry on the MailHost Configuration Process ... I was advised that there were "no FAQ type answers" ... I'm having a hard time trying to collate all the Frequently Asked Questions to build the framework, and stuck with a lot of no answers beyond "e-mail Ellen" ... even after I'd started whacking a FAQ together, provided the link to show that I wasn't asking for the internal MailHost configuration stuff, just trying to answer all the "how to do it" problem situations, get the comment "what do you want me to comment on?" .... I'm not happy, to say the least. My point right now is that there is an opportunity that's been offered to put all this effort into building a FAQ that has the data available, it's been available for quite a while. The KnowledgeBase version is just the latest attack on the situation. Yet, I can't get over the fact that this seems to be yet another lost cause. Hell, even the alternative side doesn't seem to be an action item ... where's the call for all the data developed in the UNOFFICIAL versions of the SpamCop FAQ to get added to the OFFICIAL FAQ? .... I just don't fathom some of the craziness involved with this whole situation ... Concurrence is seen that some Official FAQ data sucks ... submit the recommended changes ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PandA Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 as posted in the spamcop newsgroup .. sure, it could have been polished up, straightened out but .. I'm not in the mood .. for those htat give a hoot but can't figure out NNTP .... the sub-thread starts at http://news.spamcop.net/pipermail/spamcop-...ead.html#105747 35040[/snapback] wow, "Whack a FAQ".... How's that go again? Hey, *I* think you're doing a good job... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.