On Thu, 17 Oct 2002, Rob Studdert wrote: > I applaud the concept however over the five years I've been here it's > been suggested quite a few times before and hasn't been seen through.
Yes, but how many of those five years have I been here, willing to write the first version in a vain attempt to avoid real thought and life? Bingo! > The problem is that it is really only useful if it's all encompassing. Understood. However, I don't think we need all encompassing, as too much makes for a giant, unweidly mess. > Many areas of your initial list are covered in detail under various > pages about the web, take Boz's for example, how do you condense that? I don't need to condense that. I'll link to that, as its a wonderful resource and can't be compared to. However, while that DOES have a "best body" option, it doesn't have a "best body for beginners" or a "why teh K1000 is overrated, and you should buy a ME Super." It also doesn't address the "which is the best/preferred long zoom / mid zoom / etc." It just has raw facts. > For an idea of the amount of work that is required to generate a > useful FAQ for a far more limited (equipment selection wise) camera > system check Andrews excellent Leica FAQ at: > http://www.nemeng.com/leica/index.shtml But, I wrote a fascinating FAQ all about myself at http://www.infotainment.org, also, if you search you can find the original alt.fan.torok.urine-soaked-rags usenet FAQ I wrote (which, honestly, I don't even remember). I'm a FAQQING machine, maaaan! Again, I'll check the Leica FAQ, but I don't plan to have an all encompassing resource. I plan on having a resource that'll goto new list members and their most generic questions, "what zoom lens should I buy" and the like.
