Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #21656 > unrolled thread

JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors.

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-19 11:56 -0700
    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-20 04:42 -0700
      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-21 15:50 +0100
        Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 10:01 -0700
          Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-22 20:04 +0100
          Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-24 14:31 +0100
            Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-24 15:08 -0700
              Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-25 14:39 +0100
                Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-25 14:41 -0700
    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-20 17:37 +0100
      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-20 21:13 -0700
        Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Adam Silver <adambsilver@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 07:49 -0700
          Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-21 09:03 -0700
            Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Adam Silver <adambsilver@gmail.com> - 2013-10-22 07:06 -0700
              Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-22 10:10 -0700
                Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Adam Silver <adambsilver@gmail.com> - 2013-10-22 10:28 -0700
                  Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-22 12:57 -0700
                    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-22 13:33 -0700
              Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-29 03:45 +0100
                Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-29 09:22 -0700
                  Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-10-29 20:05 +0100
                    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-29 19:41 -0700
                      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-10-30 09:35 +0100
                        Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-31 13:30 -0700
                      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2013-10-30 11:57 -0700
                        Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-31 13:40 -0700
                          Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-10-31 23:21 +0100
                            Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-31 15:28 -0700
                              Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-10-31 23:50 +0100
                              Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-02 18:48 +0000
                                Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2013-11-03 21:05 +0100
                                  Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-04 01:49 +0100
                                    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-05 19:26 +0000
                                      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-06 01:12 +0100
                                        Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-07 16:53 +0000
                                          Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-08 02:02 +0100
                                            Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-09 18:43 +0000
                                      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Mike Duffy <md_002@videotron.ca> - 2013-11-06 00:22 -0500
                                    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2013-11-06 22:24 +0100
                Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-30 18:13 +0000
                  Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2013-10-30 20:08 -0700
                Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-10-31 07:12 +0100
                Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-31 16:57 -0700
                  Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-11-01 16:27 +0000
                    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Mike Duffy <md_002@videotron.ca> - 2013-11-01 13:16 -0400
                    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-11-02 09:49 -0700
                      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2013-11-02 12:57 -0700
                  Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-11-01 17:27 +0000
                    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-11-01 19:45 +0200
                      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Mike Duffy <md_002@videotron.ca> - 2013-11-01 14:51 -0400
                      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-02 18:55 +0000
                        Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-11-03 09:13 +0200
                    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-11-01 21:14 +0000
                      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-11-02 02:49 +0000
                        Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-11-02 08:48 +0000
                          Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-11-02 13:07 +0000
                            Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-11-02 21:44 +0000
                  Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2013-11-02 12:45 -0700
                    Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-11-02 19:54 +0000
                      Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2013-11-02 12:58 -0700
                        Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-11-03 00:05 +0000
                  Re: JSFAQ.org, Hosting and Contributors. Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-11-02 18:50 +0000

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

#21794

On Wednesday, October 30, 2013 1:13:36 PM UTC-5, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
> But we must remember that the stealing of resources is an essential part of
> the American way of life.

Following in the tradition of British ancestry of course. What was the saying? "Dominion over palm and pine"? But unlike them, the sun (thus far) still sets on the American Empire.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21795

Christoph Michael Becker wrote:

> Adam Silver wrote:
>> Bit concerned that we now have the current/out-of-date FAQ, Thomas
>> Lahns' updated FAQ on his website, Scotts Sauyet's proposed Github
>> solution, your proposed Github solution and now my placeholder
>> organisation.
> 
> I am more than a bit concerned about that.  Which of these FAQs is the
> official one?

    The true intentions of a person are revealed
    by the results of their actions.
                                          ─Surak

Let each person choose the FAQ they wish to refer to when they need to refer 
to one.

> Which FAQ will be appropriately maintained in the (near) future?

I have no plans stopping the maintenance/editing of the FAQ for 
comp.lang.javascript.

> If I have suggestions for improvement, how can I convey
> these--and to whom?

See my initial proposition.  My modus operandi is not going to change, so 
your future contributions will be considered the same as your past ones.

> I'm not sure what would be the best solution for the sake of this
> newsgroup, but I'm rather confident, that having several FAQs isn't it.

ACK.  OTOH, I rather have competing approaches to a FAQ than (effectively) 
no FAQ.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21811

On Monday, October 28, 2013 7:45:41 PM UTC-7, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
> Adam Silver wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > Bit concerned that we now have the current/out-of-date FAQ, Thomas
> 
> > Lahns' updated FAQ on his website, Scotts Sauyet's proposed Github
> 
> > solution, your proposed Github solution and now my placeholder
> 
> > organisation.
> 
> 
> 
> I am more than a bit concerned about that.  Which of these FAQs is the
> 
> official one?  Which FAQ will be appropriately maintained in the (near)
> 
> future?  If I have suggestions for improvement, how can I convey
> 
> these--and to whom?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure what would be the best solution for the sake of this
> 
> newsgroup, but I'm rather confident, that having several FAQs isn't it.
> 
> 
Andrew Paulos, John Stockton, Adam Silver, and Michael Haufe all seem to think I'm not doing the right thing here. So I have to ask, then, what is it that I'm doing wrong? Better yet, what is the right thing to be doing here?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21815

On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 16:57:05 -0700, dhtml wrote:

> Andrew Paulos, John Stockton, Adam Silver, and Michael Haufe all seem to
> think I'm not doing the right thing here. So I have to ask, then, what
> is it that I'm doing wrong? Better yet, what is the right thing to be
> doing here?

The right thing to do is not to try and hijack control of the faq.

In that respect you seem to be as bad as elf ears.

There is no clear consensus in the group on the way ahead. Hence it is 
inappropriate for anyone to have made or be making any changes or 
arrangements relating to the future of the faq at present.

-- 
Denis McMahon, denismfmcmahon@gmail.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21822

On Fri, 1 Nov 2013 16:27:28 +0000 (UTC), Denis McMahon wrote:

> There is no clear consensus in the group

I suspect that a consensus may never emerge. Whose opinion matters the
most? I count myself as probably the least knowledgable regular contributor
in the group. I'm not sure why I bother to continue subscribing, now that
all my newbish questions have been answered to the level needed for me to
write the little scripts I used to embellish my "pet" website.

Is it too early to perform a poll? 

--
http://pages.videotron.com/duffym/index.htm

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21850

On Friday, November 1, 2013 9:27:28 AM UTC-7, Denis McMahon wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 16:57:05 -0700, dhtml wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > Andrew Paulos, John Stockton, Adam Silver, and Michael Haufe all seem to
> 
> > think I'm not doing the right thing here. So I have to ask, then, what
> 
> > is it that I'm doing wrong? Better yet, what is the right thing to be
> 
> > doing here?
> 
> 
> 
> The right thing to do is not to try and hijack control of the faq.
> 
> 
> 
> In that respect you seem to be as bad as elf ears.
> 
> 
> 
> There is no clear consensus in the group on the way ahead. Hence it is 
> 
> inappropriate for anyone to have made or be making any changes or 
> 
> arrangements relating to the future of the faq at present.
> 
I see it is not wanted. That I am not wanted here. I have no more to do with this group.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21853

On Saturday, November 2, 2013 11:49:44 AM UTC-5, dhtml wrote:
> I see it is not wanted.

What is not wanted is for one person to run with it regardless of any misgivings. You didn't even wait 24 hours for your earlier mentioned opponents to respond. If the FAQ needs anything, it's a maintainer/editor of better stability.

> That I am not wanted here.

The FAQ and yourself are not tied at the hip

> I have no more to do with this group.

A shame.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21825

dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> writes:
<snip>
> [...] what is the right thing to be doing here?

I'd suggest answering questions, should any actually be posted.  If, as
seems increasingly likely, there are none, everything else becomes moot
(US sense) anyway.

-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21828

2013-11-01 19:27, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

> dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> writes:
> <snip>
>> [...] what is the right thing to be doing here?
>
> I'd suggest answering questions, should any actually be posted.

That's a good idea, or at least the most constructive presented in this 
thread.

> If, as
> seems increasingly likely, there are none, everything else becomes moot
> (US sense) anyway.

Once upon a time, FAQs were really answers to Frequently Asked 
Questions. Later, companies stating putting "FAQ pages" or even "FAQ 
sections" on their web sites, often answering just question they wanted 
people to ask - you c an even see "FAQs" on brand new sites, so that 
nobody really had the opportunity to ask a question, not to mention 
asking a question frequently.

It seems that discussions about the FAQ are, at best, about questions 
that used to be frequently asked here years ago; at worst, much worse. 
Some of them might still be relevant. But talking about FAQs is 
disproportionate, when there are so few real on-topic questions here, 
and hardly any frequently asked questions. And all the foolish talk 
about FAQs, in addition to frequent trolling, with pointless lectures 
that carefully avoid answering real questions realistically, has made 
the relatively amount, and probably the absolute amount too, of genuine 
questions smaller and smaller.

Unfortunately, it is difficult to declare a Usenet group officially 
dead. And maybe this group still has some hope. Maybe the wannabe "FAQ 
maintainers" just find some other things to spoil, leaving more space to 
actual discussions about JavaScript. Maybe pigs will fly.

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21838

On Fri, 01 Nov 2013 19:45:57 +0200, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:

> 2013-11-01 19:27, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> 
>> dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> writes:
>> <snip>
>>> [...] what is the right thing to be doing here?
>>
>> I'd suggest answering questions, should any actually be posted.
> 
> That's a good idea, or at least the most constructive presented in this 
> thread.
> 
>> If, as
>> seems increasingly likely, there are none, everything else becomes moot
>> (US sense) anyway.
> 
> Once upon a time, FAQs were really answers to Frequently Asked 
> Questions. Later, companies stating putting "FAQ pages" or even "FAQ 
> sections" on their web sites, often answering just question they wanted 
> ... "FAQs" on brand new sites, so that nobody
> really had the opportunity to ask a question,

"Fervently Anticipated Questions"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21861

In comp.lang.javascript message <l50pcj$oor$1@dont-email.me>, Fri, 1 Nov
2013 19:45:57, Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> posted:

>Once upon a time, FAQs were really answers to Frequently Asked
>Questions.

That was not the real intent.  They were intended to be the answers to
*previously* frequently-asked questions, and thus to stop those
questions remaining frequently-asked.  With a sufficiently intelligent
readership, the questions in the FAQ would never again be asked.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK.  Mail via homepage.  Turnpike v6.05  MIME.
  Web  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms and links;
  Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
  No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Mail no News.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21864

2013-11-02 20:55, Dr J R Stockton wrote:

> In comp.lang.javascript message <l50pcj$oor$1@dont-email.me>, Fri, 1 Nov
> 2013 19:45:57, Jukka K. Korpela <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> posted:
>
>> Once upon a time, FAQs were really answers to Frequently Asked
>> Questions.
>
> That was not the real intent.

The statement you quoted describes what FAQs were, not what their intent 
was.

> They were intended to be the answers to
> *previously* frequently-asked questions, and thus to stop those
> questions remaining frequently-asked.

Hardly. The realistic intent was to provide a document that can be 
referred to when frequently asked questions were asked again. People 
would still post those questions, and would get miscellaneous wrong 
answers, but they might also get a a decent, compact statement like 
"This is a frequently asked question, which is answered at ...".

> With a sufficiently intelligent
> readership, the questions in the FAQ would never again be asked.

Few people, if any, expected Usenet users to be "sufficiently 
intelligent" in that sense, which is much more than just intelligence. 
We didn't really expect newcomers to even know that there is a FAQ, even 
in groups with regular FAQ postings. People just posted their questions 
without reading much of previous postings. We then hoped to help them 
and others by pointing them to the FAQ.

People seldom ask questions addressed in comp.lang.javascript FAQ any 
more. That's not because people are so intelligent, knowledgeable, and 
well-behaving that they look at the FAQ before posting. Rather, because 
this group has so little to offer. If you try asking how to compute 2 + 
2, you will get an essay-long lecture that starts from blaming you for 
the software you used for posting and ends nowhere, and carefully avoids 
answering the question in any useful way.

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21844

In article
<0.060c498c6d9869967b99.20131101172744GMT.8761sc6nhr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:

> dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> writes:
> <snip>
> > [...] what is the right thing to be doing here?
> 
> I'd suggest answering questions, should any actually be posted.  If, as
> seems increasingly likely, there are none, everything else becomes moot
> (US sense) anyway.

What d'ye mean, US sense. That's how I would use it.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21846

Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> writes:

> In article
> <0.060c498c6d9869967b99.20131101172744GMT.8761sc6nhr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
> Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>
>> dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> writes:
>> <snip>
>> > [...] what is the right thing to be doing here?
>>
>> I'd suggest answering questions, should any actually be posted.  If, as
>> seems increasingly likely, there are none, everything else becomes moot
>> (US sense) anyway.
>
> What d'ye mean, US sense. That's how I would use it.

OED:

2. N. Amer. (orig. Law). Of a case, issue, etc.: having no practical
significance or relevance; abstract, academic.

That's the sense I meant.

-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21848

In article
<0.dd9d48f97c04ba019e3e.20131102024900GMT.87ob635xib.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:

> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> writes:
> 
> > In article
> > <0.060c498c6d9869967b99.20131101172744GMT.8761sc6nhr.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
> > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> writes:
> >> <snip>
> >> > [...] what is the right thing to be doing here?
> >>
> >> I'd suggest answering questions, should any actually be posted.  If, as
> >> seems increasingly likely, there are none, everything else becomes moot
> >> (US sense) anyway.
> >
> > What d'ye mean, US sense. That's how I would use it.
> 
> OED:
> 
> 2. N. Amer. (orig. Law). Of a case, issue, etc.: having no practical
> significance or relevance; abstract, academic.
> 
> That's the sense I meant.

<furtle furtle>

Humph. Looks like you're right. Odd, I've never used in in any other
sense.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21849

On the word "moot":
Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> writes:
<snip>
> Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
<snip>
>> OED:
>>
>> 2. N. Amer. (orig. Law). Of a case, issue, etc.: having no practical
>> significance or relevance; abstract, academic.
<snip>
> [...] Odd, I've never used in in any other sense.

I think you are not alone.  I put "US sense" just to be clear, but my
impression is that it is often used with that meaning in the UK too.
For one thing, the OED's UK meaning of being up for debate, is not
nearly so useful.

-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21858

In article
<0.7357f30aa3acbff49e8e.20131102130744GMT.87iowb54v3.fsf@bsb.me.uk>,
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:

> On the word "moot":
> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> writes:
> <snip>
> > Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> <snip>
> >> OED:
> >>
> >> 2. N. Amer. (orig. Law). Of a case, issue, etc.: having no practical
> >> significance or relevance; abstract, academic.
> <snip>
> > [...] Odd, I've never used in in any other sense.
> 
> I think you are not alone.  I put "US sense" just to be clear, but my
> impression is that it is often used with that meaning in the UK too.
> For one thing, the OED's UK meaning of being up for debate, is not
> nearly so useful.

:-)

Or it may be (for me) that:

1) I didn't hear the word used much until later in life

2) by which time I'd spent 12 years in the US and had perhaps absorbed
the US meaning there without realising it.

In this instance I prefer the US meaning. There. I'll table that for
discussion <runs away>.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21851

On Thursday, October 31, 2013 6:57:05 PM UTC-5, dhtml wrote:

> Andrew Paulos, John Stockton, Adam Silver, and Michael Haufe all seem to think I'm not doing the right thing here. So I have to ask, then, what is it that I'm doing wrong? Better yet, what is the right thing to be doing here?

My stance is one of skepticism. Thomas's comment here I am in agreement with:

<https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=comp.lang.javascript/fW-DZEEV4zQ/01OuPP4RriIJ>

While it's true you've backed away from that quickly and have now gone for a more open approach, you've continued to operate as if you are the official steward of the FAQ. Your actions recently smell to me as being more politically driven than anything else.

The group is in general agreement, I believe, that either yourself or Thomas should be the FAQ maintainer. The problem though, from my perspective, is that you two seem to have a personality conflict that would prevent any form of collaboration.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21852

On Sat, 02 Nov 2013 12:45:35 -0700, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:

> The group is in general agreement, I believe, that either yourself or
> Thomas should be the FAQ maintainer.

I'm not convinced that there is a general agreement that one or the other 
(or jointly both) of them should be the faq maintainer, but I may be 
viewing things through my own distorted lenses.

-- 
Denis McMahon, denismfmcmahon@gmail.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#21854

On Saturday, November 2, 2013 2:54:58 PM UTC-5, Denis McMahon wrote:
> I'm not convinced that there is a general agreement that one or the other 
> (or jointly both) of them should be the faq maintainer, but I may be 
> viewing things through my own distorted lenses.

What is your view then?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web