Finding the Wiki (was: Re: [OS X TeX] Tex to rtf converter)

[cfrees at imapmail.org]

On Thu 5th Aug, 2010 at 15:14, Herbert Schulz seems to have written:

>
> On Aug 5, 2010, at 3:02 PM, Joseph C. Slater PE, PhD wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 5, 2010, at 3:32 PM, Herbert Schulz wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 5, 2010, at 12:38 PM, Gerrit Glabbart wrote:
>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>
>>> If everything on the web had to have a date prominently displayed it would be better.
>>>
>>
>> The wiki history shows dates on it (although it's not as full-frontal as I think you'd desire). If it becomes the customary first place to go it will be maintained and up to date (or very nearly so) at all times so dates shouldn't be necessary.
>>
>> It really ought to be a shared environment but the logs show differently. It has a significant number of readers, but very few contributors. I'm at a loss as to why. I support cfr's contention that in the long run, pointing people to the wiki will focus the emails on questions and solutions that are challenging and unavailable and reduce the traffic. Reduced traffic would help keep our very most valuable members (the ones with the most hard-to-find answers) interested and participatory.
>>
>> J
>
> Howdy,
>
> I've done some editing and even contributed an article to the wiki and I certainly support what you've done. But, I'm sure at least some of what I've written is probably in good need of updating.

Some of what I've written *definitely* needs updating. But it hardly
seems pressing when I see the questions it answers asked and answered
here again and again without anybody ever being directed to the wiki or
seeming in the least aware of its existence. Perhaps people do use it.
I can only assume that, if so, they are not members of this list.

This isn't to say I don't mean to update it, but there are other things
to do and so it is less of a priority. If I knew people actively used
it, it would be a higher priority.

- Clea