Klarinet Archive - Posting 000831.txt from 1999/12

From: LeliaLoban@-----.com
Subj: [kl] More Thoughts on an FAQ for "klarinet"
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 14:10:47 -0500

redcedar wrote:
> When Dan Leeson proposed his approach to FAQs he appended a set of sample
> questions relating to clarinet materials of construction. Maybe I got the
> bull by the tail, but I interpreted this example as an indication of serious
> intent, and envisaged the probable development of substantive responses to
> the FAQs. Some subsequent posts would suggest that perhaps I was in error,
> for it appears that others may see such responses more in the realms of a
> ten-second sound-bite with data links provided for those who desire more
> information.

Daniel Leeson wrote,
>>It was never my intention to produce pap, nor did you say so. But you are
correct in that the general reaction also gave me the impression that what
was needed were some sound bites that are not too long for fear that someone
would get bored.>>

>>I am almost ready to throw out the first request for material for a
specific faq, and if I don't get things of substance, then it is not really a
project that I want to work on. In sum and substance, I am in agreement with
what you wrote and want to enter into it with that spirit.>>

If I'm one of the people you thought wanted to see "pap" or "sound bites,"
then I failed to make myself clear. I suggested brevity because people had
started talking about transmitting the FAQ automatically once a month or so
to the whole klarinet e-list. Short means concise. It doesn't have to mean
condescending or useless. I should have defined my terms. By "short" I mean
that the entire FAQ should print out to fewer than, say, ten pages. Does
that sound reasonable?

Do people really want an enormous text file attachment landing with a mighty
thud in our mailboxes automatically, every few weeks? Deleting the FAQ isn't
that big a deal, nor is stripping it out of a digest, as long as the
*overall* size of the digest is somewhere near normal, but for those of us
with servers (such as aol) that limit the size of acceptable e-mail, there's
a limit to how large a text file attachment we can receive. If we're going
to post the FAQ to the whole list, therefore, IMHO it needs to be short
enough so that if it happens to automatically post itself to the list at a
time when the current digest is already close to the size where it
automatically mails itself out, the result won't be a file attachment so huge
that some servers refuse to download it. A 10-page FAQ seems reasonable to
me as an extension of a normal digest that typically runs between 10 and 20
pages long.

I think a FAQ is an excellent idea, but may we discuss whether sending it
regularly to the whole list is the best way to transmit this information?
Boredom isn't really the issue so much as waste of bandwidth, if the FAQ
constantly goes out to people who don't need to see it again and again.
Can't it go to the whole list once, then automatically to all subsequent
*new* members, as part of the welcome package? Then maybe the digest could
periodically include a reminder that the FAQ is available. The
alt.music.saxophone newsgroup does things this way, with a reminder message
about once a month to direct people how to get a copy of the FAQ.

Lelia
~~~~~~~~~~
Flea market wisdom #5:
Get there while the dealers are still unloading their vans. By the time the
market officially opens for business, the best bargains are long gone.
~~~~~~~~~~

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org