Gavin Sinclair wrote:
> On Thursday, August 21, 2003, 1:29:01 AM, Brandon wrote:
>
>> I don't believe in lurking "to get the feel," and never have.  It is
>> a luxury for people with all the time in the world.  It's also a
>> form of submissiveness (shut up, don't speak until you know the
>> ropes) that I don't expect out of children, adults, or basically
>> anybody.
>
> OK, so you don't believe in something that most other people do
> believe in.

I don't concede that point in general.  In general, a significant contingent
of people are with me on the uselessness of FAQs.  That contingent may not
be much in evidence here.

> And you're going to shout to high heaven about your rights.

No, I'm going to do what I want, and quietly remind you that you don't have
any rights in an unmoderated Usenet newsgroup.  It's an anarchy.

> You're a stranger marching into a party beating a drum and
> demanding attention,

See, that's how you see your community.  Something private.  Something to be
protected.  Others see a newsgroup as a space of global public discourse.
With rules and mores common to all unmoderated newsgroups.

> and you wonder why you're getting a bad response.

Frankly, the responses have been far more good than bad.  It's only the
depth of the one bad truly response that I find shocking.

>> Nobody, IMHO, should be busting a newcomer's chops about whether
>> they've read all the FAQs or not.
>
> No-one did so until you posted about 30 messages in about 2 days.  How
> do you justify such time expenditure?

Getting "the Ruby question" out of the way and done with.  We're on the
wind-down now.  I'm really only settling issues about this nastiness, at
this point.

> AFAIK, and despite your ill-grounded protestations to the contrary,
> this was first a mailing list, then a gateway to a newsgroup was
> created.

It doesn't matter what you were before.  You signed on to Usenet.  There are
rules on Usenet for unmoderated newsgroups.  You went through a stringent
RFD process and your founders agreed to them.  People voted a Charter for
your newsgroup, it is a social contract that brings some expectations.  One
of those expectations is, you recognize that people do not have to "take
things offline" when their posts are topical.  You don't have to like,
aren't expected to like, everything that everyone posts on unmoderated
Usenet.  You are free to ignore what you don't like.  You're even free to
complain 'till you're blue in the face that someone should stop posting
about something and go away.  But when what's posted is topical, the Usenet
view is, that's not an appropriate response.  You should simply not read and
not participate in what you don't like.

>> I *did* look at www.ruby-lang.org before coming here.  I *read* a
>> FAQ about Ruby.
>
> But not about comp.lang.ruby, which is different and, I think, up to
> date.

I don't have time for "hunt the FAQ."  Your FAQ was not in my newsfeed when
I signed on.  As they say in engineering, Life Is Hard.  I read *a* FAQ
related to Ruby, and as far as I'm concerned, that's enough preparation.
You may have a culture of preparation, others don't have time for this
overbearing culture of preparation.

>> And the Python people confirmed that it was out of date.  Which put
>> my interest in your local FAQ process at zero.
>
> Polite, as always.

You feel a need to take a big issue with a factual statement, succinctly
stated?  If so, you definitely have more at stake here than I do.

-- 
Cheers,                         www.3DProgrammer.com
Brandon Van Every               Seattle, WA

20% of the world is real.
80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.