Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!mcvax!kth!draken!d87-hho
From: d87-hho@nada.kth.se (Henrik Holmstr|m)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Posting (was Re: Another silly question)
Summary: Common sence, NOT about C
Message-ID: <950@draken.nada.kth.se>
Date: 3 May 89 22:59:52 GMT
References: <pointer> <array> <reference> <access> <element> <2459@nmtsun.nmt.edu> <155@mole-end.UUCP> <157@mole-end.UUCP> <941@draken.nada.kth.se> <418@algor2.UUCP>
Reply-To: d87-hho@nada.kth.se (Henrik Holmstr|m)
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Lines: 30

This article talks about how to post.  If you are only interested in C I
suggest you hit 'n'.

In article <418@algor2.UUCP> jeffrey@algor2.UUCP (Jeffrey Kegler) writes:
>In article <941@draken.nada.kth.se> Henrik Holmstr|m writes:
>>Do we need 28 follow-ups to a trivial question?  You know the rule, if you
>>see something obviously wrong or simple, don't just hit 'F'.  Wait a day
>>or two and see if someone else answered the question (or just mail the anwser.

>While I sympathize with Mr Holmstr|m, I hope his advice is not followed.  For a
>start, if it were universally followed, you would get 28 answers 2 days late.
No.  The probability that everyone would wait exactly 2 days and then do a
follow-up is at the most 0 (zero).

>More important, even when the question is "silly", and I already know the
>answer, the answers from 28 other people usually add to my knowledge.
Yes, some do.  But pretty many seem to be so glad they know the answer they
just *have* to post (mail the flame - no follow-ups please).
Most of the follow-ups to a simple question are very similair.

>The only real alternative would be a moderated group where the moderator had
>a panel of C experts he called upon.
Not needed.  All it takes is common sence.

I think a big problem with this group is that there are to many postings.
As someone else pointed out some week ago, the number of postings has increased
dramaticly in the last months.  The important stuff disapears in the flow of
"talk".

   Henrik Holmstr|m