On 2022-10-01 at 05:46, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote:
> Debian-user is a mailing list provided for support for Debian users,
> and to facilitate discussion on relevant topics.
>
> Some guidelines which may help explain how the list works:
Allow me, if you will, to share my experience on receiving each month's
copy of the mailing-list FAQ:
"Oh, there's this month's repost of the FAQ."
"Well, there's no version number or last-changed date or other
information like that, so I can't tell whether or not it's been updated."
"I know I've read the FAQ before, so in the absence of any reason to
think that it may have changed, I'll just assume that it hasn't, and
skip reading it because I probably already know what it says."
By contrast, if the FAQ *did* include an indication of when it was last
updated, I would have one of two lines of reaction. Either:
"Oh, there's this month's repost of the FAQ."
"The version number is the same as last month's / the last-changed date
is more than a month old, so I know I've already read it."
"I'll skip reading it, because I already know what it says."
Or:
"Oh, there's this month's repost of the FAQ."
"Hey, the version number has been increased / I don't know what version
number last month's posting had / the last-changed date is recent, so
there might be information in there that I'm not familiar with."
"I'll read the whole thing, just to be sure I'm up to date on it."
I apply similar reasoning to updated terms-of-service documents, updated
telephone menus ("please listen carefully, as our options have changed",
without any indication of when they changed and so whether there's
anything new since the last time I *did* listen to the whole menu), et
cetera - except that in some of those cases there are immediate or
legally-binding consequences to missing any changes by failing to review
such a document (so I have incentive to shoulder the burden of going
through the document again), whereas with a FAQ such as this there is
not (so I do not).
Including a version number means there's a chance of people with my
mindset - who have read the FAQ before, and don't want to waste time on
reading an unaltered document - reading it again.
Not including one means that such people are guaranteed to not read the
FAQ each time it is reposted - and, therefore, that for such people the
monthly "reminder" copy of the FAQ is a pure waste, and is not achieving
or producing any benefit at all.
I therefore reiterate my suggestion, from what I think was one of the
first times (a previous version of?) this FAQ was (re)posted, that some
versioning information be attached to - and posted along with each copy
of - this FAQ.
--
The Wanderer
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature