Re: Writing good articles that have much better chance to be seen
by others
In article <20091229152640.468@gmail.com>, Kaz Kylheku <kkylheku@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2009-12-24, tanix <tanix@mongo.net> wrote:
So, from this standpoint, try to keep the context of the article
intact. No not delete some section of the article you are following
upon because you think it is "insignificant" in YOUR opinion.
In my opinion, it is bad netiquette not to trim the quoted article
as much as possible.
Just the other way around.
Quite often, this stripping procedure is explicitly meant to
distort the material and present it as something else.
Secondly, there is absolutely no issues with technical aspect of it.
A Usenet archive to be useful must preserve the tree structure of
threads.
Not true.
There may be SOME articles in a thread that are of interest
generally. They may contain some code, some specific ideas,
etc.
While majority of articles, or even thread may not represent
any value for all practical purposes.
Secondly, unless you have a server with years worth of retention,
all you can see is just a couple of days of articles.
You can not search it to find what you are looking for.
You can not review some interesting thread, written years ago,
and ALL sorts of things like that.
If you can't navigate to a parent article to recover context,
find a better quality Usenet archive search tool.
VAST majority of article views happen via web,
and what they end up seeing is a SINGLE article.
In most cases, they can not even follow threads,
because there is not next, prev button.
Because it may turn out to be significant in readers opinion.
Nice sentiment;
It is not a sentiment.
It is a BASIC principles of democracy.
but the reader of an archive isn't a paying customer of the
article author, so he doesn't get to dictate how the article should have been
structured to serve him best.
:--}
Looks like a bad joke by someone, whose intent is probably
not that kosher.
Do you realize how damaged the usenet archives are as a result
of this stripping procedure?
Well, probably at least 50% of all articles are useless.
ALL the significant context is gone.
All the intermediate discussions, considerations and issues
are gone.
When you look at usenet from the web, it is totally fragmented
goubledy gook in more cases then not.
--
Programmer's Goldmine collections:
http://preciseinfo.org
Tens of thousands of code examples and expert discussions on
C++, MFC, VC, ATL, STL, templates, Java, Python, Javascript,
organized by major topics of language, tools, methods, techniques.