Re: Reflections on the loss of the Official CSA2 F

[supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer)]

spec@vax2.concordia.ca (Mitchell Spector) wrote:

>In article supertimer@aol.com (Supertimer) writes...
>
>> jbcole@ix.netcom.com (JB) wrote:
>>
>>>The FAQ's are not entirely lost.  One can search on
>>>http://www.dejanews.com for past postings of the FAQ.  Although I will
>>>certainly miss Nathan's updates and future versions of his software I can
>>>understand his departure.
>>
>>With Nathan gone, we may still have the FAQs on Ground, but
>>they are not "official" in the sense that they can be posted to
>>news.announce.  How can we make them official?  What is the
>>process?
>
>    I'm not sure if that's the best route to follow. First off, those
>were never really FAQ's in a true sense. From what I've seen of them
>they appear to consist of a collage of comp.sys.apple2 posting (that
>makes it more an organized archive than anything else). Secondly, at
>least in my case, no permission was asked in using those clippings.
>I personally don't have any objection since it's almost no different
>from the archives kept inside Ground's 'MiscInfo' folder or the Deja-
>News Usenet archive--however, as an official and registered FAQ, it
>would then be very different story.

I've seen FAQs that are more or less the same.  The official (posted
to news.announce) SCSI FAQ is also a collection of posts.
However, if anyone objects to their followups being used as FAQs,
that's a legitimate gripe.  I don't have any objections on my own
followups being included in the official FAQs.

>    I think the best thing to do--considering Nathan destroyed the
>existing csa2.FAQ and had copyright ownership over all the changes
>he made to it anyway--would be to contact Dan DeMaggio and go back
>to the point where Nathan started off.

Dan DeMaggio's FAQs are so out of date that it would be better
to start off from scratch.  I wrote a set of "specification" sheets
for various models of A2 that I think would make a great addition
to the new official FAQs.  Let me polish them a little more and,
added to your IIGS FAQ, could form the backbone for a new
official CSA2 FAQ...

>That is, get permission from
>Dan to take his last update of the FAQ and start maintaining that.
>This would include updating information, correcting mistakes and
>adding new sections as required.

I think it is better to start from scratch or to make sure there
are no objections to FAQs on ground becoming official.  Dan's
FAQs are too outdated.

>You cannot just take over the FAQ
>as it was in Nathan's hands--not without permission first, and going
>by what was said and done in his leaving speech, I highly doubt
>he'd be willing pass it on.

Nathan's FAQs, comprehensive as they were, did not strike
me as particularly helpful...too many editorialisms.  I actually
found the FAQs on ground (answers from people like you and
me) more helpful.  Perhaps that says something.  We should
not base the new FAQ on Nathan's either...

>Besides, I don't think many people were
>pleased over the FAQ restriction that happened before (banning
>entire sites access) or the editorial bits that made it in. A FAQ
>should be all about, well, facts--and a lot less, if any, opinions.

I agree completely.  ;-)  About time someone said it out loud!

>    That said, I was working on an Apple IIgs FAQ about a year or
>more ago as a more in-depth and detailed supplement to the csa2.FAQ.
>It looks like now would be a good time to get back to work on it and
>try and finish off enough to release it.

Good luck Mitch...and I'll try to hurry up polishing my specification
sheets to add to the new official FAQ...there IS life after Nathan!