FAQ - What do I have to do before posting to clj?

F

FAQ server

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FAQ - What do I have to do before posting to clj?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Before posting to clj, you should thoroughly read this document.
You should also check the resources mentioned in section 3 and
the Quick Answers in section 4. Read FYI28/RFC1855

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1855.txt

,on Usenet and

http://www.jibbering.com/faq/faq_notes/clj_posts.html

Also you should read all appropriate posts to the clj newsgroup
for several days. Most questions come up at least once every
other day and people can get annoyed of answering them
repeatedly.

Please state your question as clearly and concisely as possible,
as this will make it far easier for the other readers of the
group to understand your problems and suggest possible solutions.
Use the Subject: of your post to indicate the type of problem
you have, but include the question in the body as well. 'Help!'
or 'I hate Netscape!' are not nearly as useful to contributors
who do not read every post as 'parseInt("09")!=9'.

Has the same question already been posted that day? - if it has
wait to see if the answers to that solve your problem.

Include the script you have been working on (or URL) - indicate
the problem spots and/or previous attempts. Try to limit the
length of your post by removing extraneous page elements, but
avoid removing script unless you are sure it is not an issue. If
the script is long though, please do not post the full script
and just provide a link. As a guide more than 500 lines for a
post is not normally a good idea in any circumstances. A
mention of which platforms and browsers are used or are giving
problems is also necessary.

Post in plain-text only. Do not post using HTML. If you have to
include your script, paste it in to your post in plain-text. Do
not uuencode it or attach it using MIME. There is good reason for
this request: many newsreaders do not read HTML or MIME, and this
limits the number of people who could help you. Test posts belong
in test newsgroups (they have "test" in their names).

When replying to a message on the group quote the minimum of the
preceding messages that is sufficient to provide context for
the reply but trim the remainder, and add your comments below the
pertinent section of quoted material, as per FYI28/RFC1855 (never
top post).

If posting through groups.google.com don't use the "Reply" link
at the bottom of the article, instead use "Show Options" at the
top of the article and than click the "Reply" option exposed
there. This automatically includes the quote of the preceding
message to be edited down as described above.

Don't ask, or at least expect, to be emailed individually. Some
individuals run scams for the purpose of collecting active email
addresses and many won't risk being victimized. If you have
circumstances that won't allow you to read clj for the
follow-up, explain what they are and ask to be CC'ed a copy. You
also might try

http://groups.google.com/

to read replies.

Don't expect to be able to e-mail contributors to the group
privately. E-mail addresses are often obscured, fictional or
unmonitored span sinks (this is an increasingly normal (and
even unofficially recommended) practice as open e-mail
addresses in news articles will be both the target of spam
and used as fake sender's addresses in spam to third parties).

Don't take flames too seriously, and don't start a thread
complaining about rude or flippant responses. There is already
enough noise in clj. Keep a sense of humour while posting and
reading and everything will be a lot more enjoyable.

Remember that it is _not_ the _job_ of posters
here to help you. The majority of regular posters here do so
_voluntarily_ in their free time. They have good days
and bad days just like everyone else.

clj is a technical group: the posting of job adverts and
commercial adverts are not welcome. Job postings should go to
an appropriate regional jobs group. Announcements of products
of particular relevance to javascript are welcome, but not
more often than once per major release, and then post a short
link to the product's webpage.


===
Postings such as these are automatically sent once a day. Their
goal is to answer repeated questions, and to offer the content to
the community for continuous evaluation/improvement. The complete
comp.lang.javascript FAQ is at http://www.jibbering.com/faq/.
The FAQ workers are a group of volunteers.
 
D

Dr John Stockton

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, dated Tue,
1 Aug 2006 23:00:01 remote, seen in FAQ


I think that you are wasting everybody's time, including your own,
unless all this effort and posting actually results in updates to the
generally-accepted FAQ.

I've not seen any assurance that such updating will actually happen,
whether by the "current" maintainer or by someone else.



The contents of Sub-Section 2.3 are basically sound and necessary. BUT

(A) As a Sub-Section, it is far too long. It needs to be split, either
into more Sub-Sections or into Sub-Sub-Sections such as (a) The Group,
(b) Reading, (c) Asking, (d) Responding. As is, it is deterringly
bulky.

(B) It needs a complete re-write (the whole FAQ needs re-punctuation).

(C) The last paragraph would be better placed in "2.2 What questions
are off-topic for clj?" which would better be named "2.2 What is on-
topic in c.l.j?"

===
Postings such as these are automatically sent once a day. Their this
goal is to answer repeated questions, and to offer the content to
the community for continuous evaluation/improvement. The complete
comp.lang.javascript FAQ is at http://www.jibbering.com/faq/.
The FAQ workers are a group of volunteers.

That last line implies that they are an identifiable group, a distinct
subset of those who read and write in the group, with some criteria for
joining and leaving the set. I don't think that is so; but, if it is,
that note should cite where details can be found.
 
B

Bart Van der Donck

Dr said:
[...]
I think that you are wasting everybody's time, including your own,
unless all this effort and posting actually results in updates to the
generally-accepted FAQ.

I agree.
FAQ Server:
this

Perhaps better, yes. Adapted.
FAQ Server:

That last line implies that they are an identifiable group, a distinct
subset of those who read and write in the group, with some criteria for
joining and leaving the set. I don't think that is so; but, if it is,
that note should cite where details can be found.

I don't see such connotations in it; just expressing what noble gents
the FAQ workers are :)
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,769
Messages
2,569,580
Members
45,054
Latest member
TrimKetoBoost

Latest Threads

Top