Three cheers for the readability of c.l.p.misc 
Author Message
 Three cheers for the readability of c.l.p.misc

Last night, because I hadn't done it in so long, I ventured into one of my
old newsgroup hangouts, which I won't mention by name.  It's a
miscellaneous programming group for one of the major OS platforms.  I ran
screaming from that sucker in about 5 minutes.

The level of noise in there was *staggering*.  It made me think about my
newsreading habits of over a year ago, when I read that group on a
constant basis.  I spent all of my time there, answering trivial FAQ-ish
questions, just trying to be helpful.  Rarely would I gain a really good
nugget of information.

I contrasted that to clp.misc, where I can extract great information much
more often.  The only reason for the difference, really, is the vigilance
fostered by the core contributors.  I know that people whine about the
constant RTFM attitude, so I just wanted to offer a coutering, supportive
opinion of their efforts.

Thanks,

Chris Russo

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Russo                          A-Link Network Services, Inc.

http://www.*-*-*.com/ ~crusso



Fri, 09 Apr 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Three cheers for the readability of c.l.p.misc

Quote:

> I contrasted that to clp.misc, where I can extract great information much
> more often.  The only reason for the difference, really, is the vigilance
> fostered by the core contributors.  I know that people whine about the
> constant RTFM attitude, so I just wanted to offer a coutering, supportive
> opinion of their efforts.

Things have improved over the last few months, but have not returned to the
group quality of the past year(s).

Between an increased attitude towards RTFFAQ/RTFM, and various mailing
lists and archives, as well as FAQ automailing, much of this group's
FAQ-related has decreased.

Nate



Fri, 09 Apr 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 Three cheers for the readability of c.l.p.misc

| I contrasted that to clp.misc, where I can extract great information much
| more often.  The only reason for the difference, really, is the vigilance
| fostered by the core contributors.  I know that people whine about the
| constant RTFM attitude, so I just wanted to offer a coutering, supportive
| opinion of their efforts.

        Three cheers for your post.  I agree entirely.  This
        is one of the most informative newsgroups on the
        internet, and the people here are some of the
        helpful.  Thank you all.



Sun, 11 Apr 1999 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 3 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. cheer up Tad

2. Readability & Languages HOWTO

3. code optimization and readability

4. How to enclose scalar for readability?

5. "cat"-ing three files into three files.

6. Median of Three

7. Three-argument form of open() and I/O disciplines

8. A Three Ring Circus: multi-window perldb

9. Parse a word into three strings

10. three suggestions for perl

11. three quick questions

12. Three Operand Conditional Operator

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software