I was not able to read your recent email to me. Read on for the
reasons why and what you can do to contact me.
SPAM is a terrible thing which has invaded the net as of late. Every
day I receive between 10 and 30 spam emails, many of which are very
long and/or contain uuencoded pictures or attachments or other CRAP
which, unfortunately, sits in my mailbox all day since I read mail at
night.
I am billed by netcom for all this spamola piling up in my box and I
just can't afford it anymore, so I have had to resort to a draconian
solution.
All messages sent to me > 150 lines are automatically deleted from my
inbox immediately upon receipt. If you are a legitimate correspondent,
please contact me with a shorter message and I will tell you how you
can get your message past the spam-killer. Your message is appended
below for your convenience.
If you are a spammer, forget it. Your worthless spam is being bounced
back to you below for your enjoyment and I hope you choke on it.
> From FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com Thu Apr 24 12:54:06 1997
> Return-Path: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> Received: from mail.zocalo.net (mail3.zocalo.net [157.22.1.19]) by mail6.netcom.com (8.6.13/Netcom)
> id MAA17768; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:53:52 -0700
> Received: from lists.consensus.com (lists.consensus.com [157.22.240.8]) by mail.zocalo.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA04172; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:50:21 -0700 (PDT)
> Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:45:46 -0700
> Message-Id: <199704241945.MAA15387@mail5.netcom.com>
> From: wbb@netcom.com (Will Bell)
> Subject: Your message was rejected by spam-killer
> To: FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com
> Precedence: Bulk
> X-Listserver: ListSTAR v1.1 by StarNine Technologies, a Quarterdeck Company
> Reply-To: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> Errors-To: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> X-List-Subscribe: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=subscribe>
> X-List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=unsubscribe>
> X-List-Help: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=help>
>
> Dear correspondent:
>
> I was not able to read your recent email to me. Read on for the
> reasons why and what you can do to contact me.
>
> SPAM is a terrible thing which has invaded the net as of late. Every
> day I receive between 10 and 30 spam emails, many of which are very
> long and/or contain uuencoded pictures or attachments or other CRAP
> which, unfortunately, sits in my mailbox all day since I read mail at
> night.
>
> I am billed by netcom for all this spamola piling up in my box and I
> just can't afford it anymore, so I have had to resort to a draconian
> solution.
>
> All messages sent to me > 150 lines are automatically deleted from my
> inbox immediately upon receipt. If you are a legitimate correspondent,
> please contact me with a shorter message and I will tell you how you
> can get your message past the spam-killer. Your message is appended
> below for your convenience.
>
> If you are a spammer, forget it. Your worthless spam is being bounced
> back to you below for your enjoyment and I hope you choke on it.
>
> > From FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com Thu Apr 24 12:45:29 1997
> > Return-Path: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > Received: from mail.zocalo.net (mail3.zocalo.net [157.22.1.19]) by mail5.netcom.com (8.6.13/Netcom)
> > id MAA15192; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:45:24 -0700
> > Received: from lists.consensus.com (lists.consensus.com [157.22.240.8]) by mail.zocalo.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA03647; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:41:14 -0700 (PDT)
> > Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:36:21 -0700
> > Message-Id: <199704241936.MAA11529@mail5.netcom.com>
> > From: wbb@netcom.com (Will Bell)
> > Subject: Your message was rejected by spam-killer
> > To: FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com
> > Precedence: Bulk
> > X-Listserver: ListSTAR v1.1 by StarNine Technologies, a Quarterdeck Company
> > Reply-To: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > Errors-To: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > X-List-Subscribe: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=subscribe>
> > X-List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=unsubscribe>
> > X-List-Help: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=help>
> >
> > Dear correspondent:
> >
> > I was not able to read your recent email to me. Read on for the
> > reasons why and what you can do to contact me.
> >
> > SPAM is a terrible thing which has invaded the net as of late. Every
> > day I receive between 10 and 30 spam emails, many of which are very
> > long and/or contain uuencoded pictures or attachments or other CRAP
> > which, unfortunately, sits in my mailbox all day since I read mail at
> > night.
> >
> > I am billed by netcom for all this spamola piling up in my box and I
> > just can't afford it anymore, so I have had to resort to a draconian
> > solution.
> >
> > All messages sent to me > 150 lines are automatically deleted from my
> > inbox immediately upon receipt. If you are a legitimate correspondent,
> > please contact me with a shorter message and I will tell you how you
> > can get your message past the spam-killer. Your message is appended
> > below for your convenience.
> >
> > If you are a spammer, forget it. Your worthless spam is being bounced
> > back to you below for your enjoyment and I hope you choke on it.
> >
> > > From FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com Thu Apr 24 12:36:16 1997
> > > Return-Path: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > > Received: from mail.zocalo.net (mail3.zocalo.net [157.22.1.19]) by mail5.netcom.com (8.6.13/Netcom)
> > > id MAA11454; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:36:09 -0700
> > > Received: from lists.consensus.com (lists.consensus.com [157.22.240.8]) by mail.zocalo.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA29631; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 12:03:11 -0700 (PDT)
> > > Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:58:46 -0700
> > > Message-Id: <199704241858.LAA26571@mail5.netcom.com>
> > > From: wbb@netcom.com (Will Bell)
> > > Subject: Your message was rejected by spam-killer
> > > To: FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com
> > > Precedence: Bulk
> > > X-Listserver: ListSTAR v1.1 by StarNine Technologies, a Quarterdeck Company
> > > Reply-To: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > > Errors-To: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > > X-List-Subscribe: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=subscribe>
> > > X-List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > X-List-Help: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=help>
> > >
> > > Dear correspondent:
> > >
> > > I was not able to read your recent email to me. Read on for the
> > > reasons why and what you can do to contact me.
> > >
> > > SPAM is a terrible thing which has invaded the net as of late. Every
> > > day I receive between 10 and 30 spam emails, many of which are very
> > > long and/or contain uuencoded pictures or attachments or other CRAP
> > > which, unfortunately, sits in my mailbox all day since I read mail at
> > > night.
> > >
> > > I am billed by netcom for all this spamola piling up in my box and I
> > > just can't afford it anymore, so I have had to resort to a draconian
> > > solution.
> > >
> > > All messages sent to me > 150 lines are automatically deleted from my
> > > inbox immediately upon receipt. If you are a legitimate correspondent,
> > > please contact me with a shorter message and I will tell you how you
> > > can get your message past the spam-killer. Your message is appended
> > > below for your convenience.
> > >
> > > If you are a spammer, forget it. Your worthless spam is being bounced
> > > back to you below for your enjoyment and I hope you choke on it.
> > >
> > > > From FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com Thu Apr 24 11:58:27 1997
> > > > Return-Path: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > > > Received: from mail.zocalo.net (mail3.zocalo.net [157.22.1.19]) by mail5.netcom.com (8.6.13/Netcom)
> > > > id LAA26340; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:58:16 -0700
> > > > Received: from lists.consensus.com (lists.consensus.com [157.22.240.8]) by mail.zocalo.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA28973; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:49:10 -0700 (PDT)
> > > > Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:44:45 -0700
> > > > Message-Id: <199704241844.LAA20404@mail5.netcom.com>
> > > > From: wbb@netcom.com (Will Bell)
> > > > Subject: Your message was rejected by spam-killer
> > > > To: FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com
> > > > Precedence: Bulk
> > > > X-Listserver: ListSTAR v1.1 by StarNine Technologies, a Quarterdeck Company
> > > > Reply-To: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > > > Errors-To: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > > > X-List-Subscribe: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=subscribe>
> > > > X-List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > X-List-Help: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=help>
> > > >
> > > > Dear correspondent:
> > > >
> > > > I was not able to read your recent email to me. Read on for the
> > > > reasons why and what you can do to contact me.
> > > >
> > > > SPAM is a terrible thing which has invaded the net as of late. Every
> > > > day I receive between 10 and 30 spam emails, many of which are very
> > > > long and/or contain uuencoded pictures or attachments or other CRAP
> > > > which, unfortunately, sits in my mailbox all day since I read mail at
> > > > night.
> > > >
> > > > I am billed by netcom for all this spamola piling up in my box and I
> > > > just can't afford it anymore, so I have had to resort to a draconian
> > > > solution.
> > > >
> > > > All messages sent to me > 150 lines are automatically deleted from my
> > > > inbox immediately upon receipt. If you are a legitimate correspondent,
> > > > please contact me with a shorter message and I will tell you how you
> > > > can get your message past the spam-killer. Your message is appended
> > > > below for your convenience.
> > > >
> > > > If you are a spammer, forget it. Your worthless spam is being bounced
> > > > back to you below for your enjoyment and I hope you choke on it.
> > > >
> > > > > From FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com Thu Apr 24 11:44:26 1997
> > > > > Return-Path: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > > > > Received: from mail.zocalo.net (mail3.zocalo.net [157.22.1.19]) by mail5.netcom.com (8.6.13/Netcom)
> > > > > id LAA20235; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:44:23 -0700
> > > > > Received: from lists.consensus.com (lists.consensus.com [157.22.240.8]) by mail.zocalo.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA28855; Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:47:09 -0700 (PDT)
> > > > > Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 11:36:19 -0700 (PDT)
> > > > > Message-Id: <199704241836.LAA18220@kudo20.kudonet.com>
> > > > > From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva)
> > > > > Subject: Style/History of FAQs (was Re: The FAQ Manual of Style)
> > > > > To: FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com
> > > > > Mime-Version: 1.0
> > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> > > > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > > > > Precedence: Bulk
> > > > > X-Listserver: ListSTAR v1.1 by StarNine Technologies, a Quarterdeck Company
> > > > > Reply-To: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > > > > Errors-To: <FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com>
> > > > > X-List-Subscribe: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=subscribe>
> > > > > X-List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > X-List-Help: <mailto:FAQ-Maintainers@consensus.com?subject=help>
> > > > >
> > > > > 49970424 AA1 Hail Satan!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > re _The FAQ Manual of Style_
> > > > >
> > > > > Pamela Greene:
> > > > > #># seen its cover and table of contents. From what I can tell from
> > > > > #># those, it's a pretty good manual for creating FAQs, although it seems
> > > > > #># to emphasize "corporate" FAQs more than run-of-the-mill volunteer
> > > > > #># informational FAQs. (Section titles include "FAQs can be good for
> > > > > #># business," "Leading site visitors to your FAQ," and "Using your FAQ to
> > > > > #># sell advertising," and examples are mainly from FAQs such as Kodak's
> > > > > #># and SPRYNET's.)
> > > > >
> > > > > this is what I was previously characterizing as the 'nontheoretical
> > > > > corporate creep' of FAQ development. it makes some sense that technical
> > > > > organizations would take off from the "FAQ as information file" and
> > > > > use their expertise in the field to produce a reference guide. note
> > > > > that this does vary from forum-centered 'orientation guide', designed
> > > > > to answer questions succinctly and with some thoroughness in areas that
> > > > > are more easily defined or consolidated, or the 'noise-reduction tool',
> > > > > used to dissuade redundant conversation to the exclusive of dedicated
> > > > > and continuing research.
> > > > >
> > > > > as long as the organization makes their production of the text known,
> > > > > I think this is a positive development. the danger is when 'generic
> > > > > FAQs' begin to appear produced by corporate sponsors which
> > > > > surreptitiously market a product in the guise of a 'FAQ'. this would
> > > > > be the final desecration of FAQ into 'media propaganda device',
> > > > > something which does already occur within theoretical fields (oriented
> > > > > to a particular perspective which the editor/author considers to be
> > > > > 'more correct' or 'authoritative' for whatever reason without so
> > > > > identifying their bias, if they are even aware of it themselves).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #># There are other, more general topics covered as well, such as
> > > > > #># attributes of good FAQs and how to keep FAQs up to date; I don't
> > > > > #># know the "spin" on those.
> > > > >
> > > > > it would be great to get a thumbnail sketch of the main attributes
> > > > > so outlined. I think there is a 'FAQ on FAQs' in Usenet, but several
> > > > > of these files should be compared and contrasted (at least referenced!)
> > > > > in this forum so as to assist FAQ-makers who subscribe.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Danny R. Faught:
> > > > > #> ...it actually seems to be a good treatment on the subject.
> > > > >
> > > > > have you seen many such treatments? could you compare/contrast?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #> he was able to make the venture financially viable because he also covers
> > > > > #> "Web FAQs", which most often means commercial web sites that have a
> > > > > #> FAQ of their own. So I tolerate the web diversions because he does
> > > > > #> also do a good job of covering each topic from a Usenet point of view.
> > > > >
> > > > > it is logical to presume that Usenet is not the only forum or channel
> > > > > of communication within which questions might become frequently asked.
> > > > > web sites, especially corporate, which present a subject for public
> > > > > reference and provide a channel (eddress) for feedback/query could
> > > > > generate a 'FAQ' in the technical sense of 'questions frequently asked
> > > > > about this product in the field'. they could also produce a FAQ in
> > > > > the more degenerated sense of 'reference information about our product'.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #> it's been a worthwhile read. He obviously did a lot of research....
> > > > >
> > > > > if you'd like to say what you found valuable about his advice to
> > > > > FAQ-makers (design, style tips, etc.), I would appreciate it.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Russell Shaw <russellshaw@delphi.com> (the author the book):
> > > > > #...The FAQ Manual of Style came out last year. I'm a veteran journalist
> > > > > #who has covered the Internet from more of a commercial than a
> > > > > #participatory perspective.
> > > > >
> > > > > #I've gotten some heat from Usenet "purists" for the commercial tone of
> > > > > #this book. The publisher felt that there was already a communal,
> > > > > #information-sharing culture about how to write FAQs in the Usenet
> > > > > #community, but no institutional body of knowledge about these tools
> > > > > #existed in the ".com" Web world.
> > > > >
> > > > > there is a 'FAQ on FAQs' of which I am aware. did you utilize this in
> > > > > preparation for your book? were there more than one of them in the
> > > > > Internet which we may somehow access? the more varied advice we can
> > > > > come by as regards structure and content the better as I see it. that
> > > > > kind of information is particularly valuable within this forum.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #...some Usenet folks have criticized it for being too Web-centric.
> > > > > #I suppose that could be expected; many folks on this side of cyberspace
> > > > > #feel that the "commercial" Web folks have usurped what was theirs
> > > > > #(the FAQ format) and via cynically motivated means, taken this tool
> > > > > #of community knowledge and adapted it for their own purposes.
> > > > >
> > > > > not only that, but the Internet is notoriously feudish, and there exists
> > > > > some great deal of anguish over the diversity which it makes possible
> > > > > (as regards data and source as well as perspective and slant). that one
> > > > > eventually finds it impossible to be everywhere at once or absorbing all
> > > > > the information on a topic from substantive sources makes rivalry and
> > > > > infighting an inevitability.
> > > > >
> > > > > your paragraph above is why I have entered into this conversation. does
> > > > > *anyone* know the historical original of the term 'FAQ' and its initial
> > > > > usage as compared to what it has come to mean? I figured that this could
> > > > > have been a basic question covered in your book, for example, and was
> > > > > curious.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #The feeling seems to be that Usenet FAQs are the only "real" FAQs, and
> > > > > #Web "FAQs," -- especially if they are designed to help sell a product --
> > > > > #aren't really FAQs because any altruistic intent is of secondary
> > > > > #importance at best.
> > > > >
> > > > > to be expected, as you said above, but I think it is illogical to claim
> > > > > that Usenet has any 'control' or 'authority' in this area. the logical
> > > > > argument is that only FORUMS have authority here inasmuchas they have a
> > > > > TIMESCALE by which 'frequently' could be meaningful. as I said above,
> > > > > however, this bears little on whether an organization has created or
> > > > > been exposed to corporate channels wherein discussion about its product
> > > > > may have occurred (in which case 'frequent' again becomes meaningful).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #...These Web FAQs -- although they are written by people on the
> > > > > #payroll of the company the FAQs are posted on -- perform a valuable
> > > > > #service. If I have a problem with a product, I'd be likely to
> > > > > #chec both the Web and Usenet FAQs. These commercial FAQs perform a
> > > > > #service.
> > > > >
> > > > > yes, they are REFERENCE files on their products. more often than not
> > > > > the term 'FAQ' is utilized solely on the basis of its resemblance to
> > > > > the descriptor 'FACTS', attempting to persuade (often legitimately,
> > > > > but not always so) the reader to think that the source is reliable
> > > > > and is not attempting to sway hir to a particular point of view as
> > > > > regards the subject matter (be that product or rational paradigm).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #My function was to tell these FAQ writers how to perform this
> > > > > #service -- i.e., write and maintain FAQ lists -- in a way that's more
> > > > > #beneficial to their customers and their clients.
> > > > >
> > > > > this is a valuable reference as it provides design and content advice
> > > > > which enables clear, honest communication about the subject matter
> > > > > or forum of its reference. I hope that more attention will be paid
> > > > > to the clarification of the term 'FAQ' and the criteria of its usage,
> > > > > such that it can stand for something more than 'advertizement' or
> > > > > 'propaganda file', however.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #Not dismissing the import of Usenet FAQs, I used input from this
> > > > > #community, and specificaly, from many FAQ-maintainers members. I found
> > > > > #this to be a vital part of the book, but you may notice I devoted little
> > > > > #if any attention to the WAY in which the lists should be maintained, or
> > > > > ~~~~~~~~~
> > > > > #the tools used in maintaining them. That's because thhere already are
> > > > > #resources on the subject. I suppose the book Pam is assembling will be
> > > > > #of great benefit in this area.; I'll want to read it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm unsure to what this refers. if you mean the FAQs themselves,
> > > > > typically they are called 'files' even while they MAY contain lists
> > > > > of questions and responses (they don't always do this -- some are
> > > > > really reference files attempting to cover a specific subject like
> > > > > an overview, similar to what might appear in a book and not in any
> > > > > way a question-answer format).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #Rather than bring up tools or structure, I thought it would be more
> > > > > #useful to discuss the specific points the FAQ (Usenet or Web) deals
> > > > > #with, and how to write and organize them in a cogent, flowing manner of
> > > > > #benefit to the outside world (customers or otherwise)....
> > > > >
> > > > > then it sounds like your aim was quite specific. sounds great.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > #...a chapter is devoted to Usenet groups that deal with the subject.
> > > > >
> > > > > then perhaps you can provide some idea of the history of FAQs with
> > > > > respect to Usenet, inclusive of whether the term developed therein,
> > > > > if it migrated there, and what it originally meant. thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com
> > > > > nagasiva
> > > > > --------
> > > > > editor, alt.satanism FAQ, alt.magick FAQ; contributor to a few other
> > > > > esoteric FAQs and REFs, cyberlibrarian of esoteric materials
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>