Re: Why don't we have a charter (was: New Oracle monitoring tool ...)

From: Noons <wizofoz2k_at_yahoo.com.au>
Date: 11 Nov 2003 23:07:42 -0800
Message-ID: <73e20c6c.0311112307.67af508d@posting.google.com>

joel-garry_at_home.com (Joel Garry) wrote in message news:<91884734.0311111644.782f627_at_posting.google.com>...

> Well, yes, it is, until they get the hang of it. It is common on
> other groups to have a such periodic post, and in fact I just did a
> search for a charter for this group, and the only thing out there is

yes, but most of those will *not* be a newsgroup dedicated to a specific database server. I'd assume as a given that anyone using

this newsgroup would at the very least know what google is for, 
how to use it, what the Usenet is for, how to check netiquette,
etcetc.  I mean, it's not like this is rec.barbequeue.escargot, 

forchrissakes!

> Think how many times Sybrand has told someone off, Daniel has said
> tahiti, Howard has complained about how we just went around that
> subject. Then whomever they were responding to has to go through a
> flamage cycle.

and quite rightly.

> The point is to avoid or shorten that cycle.

I don't think a FAQ can do that. Nor is it its purpose. If they are naive enough to incur someone's flamage then wth are they doing here in the first place???

I mean, I lurk for a while and get in the mood when first going to a new newsgroup. Regardless of the content. FAQ or no FAQ. And I've been online for longer than I can remember. Received on Wed Nov 12 2003 - 01:07:42 CST