Re: Slashdot reply final

[Guylhem Aznar <guylhem@metalab.unc.edu>]

On Tue, Feb 15, 2000 at 01:08:46AM -0800, David Lawyer wrote:
> Others are outside our scope while others can be solved if we get more
> people to help in the effort.

added

> Many of your comments were important.  Don't say this but some
> comments were little more than unreasoned, and nonsensical flames.

flames go to /dev/null

> But if you use DOCBOOK it can also be a HOWTO.

I explained this on the next chapter

> we will not process it until the errors are fixed.

added

> enough people doing it.  It would be better to say "we would like to be
> able to have our peer review team proofread each submitted
> document."

added

> Most readers are not about to go to all the work to update an outdated
> document and many of them don't know enough about it to even be able
> to do this.  So we should no ask them so bluntly to do this.

Yes we should, if 100 try and only 10 succeed, there will be 10 new
authors.

> revised.  There is an ongoing discussion of license issues, however.

added

> Also, the above might tend to scare away some potentially good
> authors.  For example, one could take over the maintenance of an
> existing doc without a thorough technical knowledge of the subject.
> Then one could improve their technical knowledge by feedback from
> readers, surfing the web, reading parts of books, etc.  We can accept
> below-average writers and help them become above-average writers.

There's no point lying to them. Being an author is hard, and they'll
find it in a way or another.

Moreover, it should have been the final version ; I can't include fixes
each day or it will never be submitted.

-- 
Guylhem P. Aznar                               http://www.linuxdoc.org
guylhem \@/ metalab.unc.edu             http://metalab.unc.edu/guylhem
"They who can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."  -----  Benjamin Franklin

PGP signature