Re: [cobalt-users] Proposed meta-FAQ / "read before posting" article.

["Brian Curtis" <admin@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> In the absence of a proper FAQ, or any response from Cobalt with
> regards to putting a "welcome" email in place, I propose somebody
> / something posting something like the following on a regular basis.

Not a bad idea IMHO.  Have someone send it on a regular basis (once a week)
from a special address (say, cobaltumlfaq@xxxxxxxxxx) that way those of us
who don't want to read/download it have the ability to filter it easily.

> 0.  Do not be afraid to ask questions.  There are helpful people here.
> Nobody got born with this knowledge - and we are all still learning.

Simple grammatical mistake, "Nobody was born"

> 1.  There's ways of annoying those helpful people, and there's ways of
> getting the most from them.  This is what this guide is primarily about.

I'd say switch item 0 with item 1.  Then combine (the old) item 0  and item
5 to make item 1.

> 2.  The chances are that you are not the first person to have asked your
> question.  In the case of Cobalt's products, the answers are archived in
> the Knowledge Base and in the mailing list archives.  Check those
resources,
> and learn how to search the Web for answers on non-Cobalt specific
questions.
> When you post, indicate that you have tried these avenues - people are
> much more willing to help those who try to help themselves first.
> Invest in some books; and don't expect the list to do your job for you.

Provide a link to the archives even though it's tailed onto every message.
Redundancy is good (to a point).

> 3.4. Do not top-post.  That is to say, when replying to a post, give
> context to your post in the form of just enough quoted material,
> and put your response *after* the quoted material.  Again, consider the
> effect top-posting has on the digest form of the list, and consider how
> when you were searching the archives (as you were, remember?) the most
> useful replies were the ones that came *after* the question.  Further
> argument about this point can be referred to RFC 1855 and just about
> every guide to newsgroup and mailing list ettiquette ever written.
> It is not a "personal preference".  It is a standard.

What about situations where it might be more helpful to intersperse your
answers?  Take this reply for example.  Also, misspelling above: etiquette.

> 3.6. Read your post through before sending, and check for spelling,
grammar,
> and layout.  The easier it is to read, the more likely people are to
respond.

It's not so much a spelling/grammatical situation, rather make sure your
post makes sense.  Include enough information necessary so people reading
your question will understand and be able to provide a more meaningful
response.  However, don't include a .5 mb log file that only has one line
relevant to your question.

> 4.  Do not assume that everybody lives in the same country.

Quick Q; What does this have to do with list etiquette?

I'd add another item:

(a): Do not repost your question before X number of days (a week maybe?)
have elapsed.  If you do not receive a prompt reply, it's probably because
your post was not well written in the first place, the question has been
answered several times already (check the archives), the gurus of the list
are behind on reading posts, or there's nobody on the list that can answer
your question.  If you wish to repost your question after said amount of
time, be sure to include any additional information you may have gathered
since your last post which would help someone respond.  Reposting your
question multiple times within a short time period (i.e.: daily) will likely
ensure you are /dev/null'd (redirected to the bit bucket, however you wish
to phrase it).


Just my $.02

--
Brian Curtis