4 ms·

This is because parent and you are confusing a FAQ meant as a "what is the project going to do in its current state" for the general public with the blueprint a

by nolok 12y ago

This is because parent and you are confusing a FAQ meant as a "what is the project going to do in its current state" for the general public with the blueprint and historic objectives and logs of the mission. The mission's goals changed a hundred time since the project conception in the eighties, each of those version is archived, but it makes sense that the "space tourism" text meant to explain to everyday Joe what the mission is doing / has done reflects the up to date status.

johnchristopher 12y ago
If you deny there can be some confusion brought for by the fact the FAQ is a live document but nowhere on the web page is it stated then I don't see ground for discussing the matter at hand.
- arrrg 12y ago
  What? It’s the fucking web. Of course it’s a live document! If it wouldn’t be that would be a colossal failure. It also doesn’t tell you anything about the actual goals of this mission that would be relevant for future missions. What’s with the conspiracy brigade being out in full force?
  - nolok 12y ago
    Reading his other comments on this thread, he's obviously a troll and/or someone who needs to criticize this mission or ESA. He is not having an actual debate, only repeating his points ignoring any answering element he gets.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - johnchristopher 12y ago
      > Reading his other comments on this thread, he's obviously a troll and/or someone who needs to criticize this mission or ESA. He is not having an actual debate, only repeating his points ignoring any answering element he gets. 1. I do not need to criticize this mission or ESA and I'd like you to quote any sentences that makes you think so (and yes I believe a FAQ page being live updated should state it is being updated as the situation evolves becaues if not it brings confusion). 2. I answer with honesty to every replies directly made to me. Feel free to point out anything you believe I willfully ignored. 3. Regarding the elements I got: I mostly saw a (rather stupid IMO) point about how a webpage is live tech. so its content is updated (are we really missing the difference between editorial content and packets on a network ?) and another about how I would be expecting blueprints and the smallest technical details from a webpage presenting itself as a FAQ. I find these ridiculous and quite condescending. FWIW, I have been following the Rosetta mission for the past 6 years, had a nice chat a the Paris Air Show with some ESA members even though there never were any lectures about for the past 10 years there, and for the life of me I don't understand how you could believe I would troll about it. Or any other topic for that matter. I'm off.
- nolok 12y ago
  The confusion does not come from it being live (it's a web page, duh !), it comes from you taking a page about current status/faq for the public and consider it as the official mission's objectives list. All you need to do is look at the right document, and if you can't figure that out I certainly wouldn't want you making judgment about any science project involving my tax dollars (well, euros).
  - johnchristopher 12y ago
    > The confusion does not come from it being live (it's a web page, duh !), it comes from you taking a page about current status/faq for the public and consider it as the official mission's objectives list. Absolutely not. I am of the opinion that having a public FAQ on a website being updated without any notices it is being updated (there is not even a mention such as "last updated xx/xx/xx") is going to lead to some confusion and rightfully so. Thank you for taking me for an idiot that would believe a FAQ stands for a technical document for any project. > The confusion does not come from it being live (it's a web page, duh !) And I am the troll ? Of course the confusion comes from it being live without clearly stating it is. I wonder what your reaction would be, for instance, if every poster around these parts would go on editing each of their posts according to the evolution of the topic being discussed because "hey, it's live, it's a webpage, duh!)". > it comes from you taking a page about current status/faq for the public and consider it as the official mission's objectives list. No, I don't. Please quote any of my posts that make you think so.

by nolok 12y ago

johnchristopher 12y ago

If you deny there can be some confusion brought for by the fact the FAQ is a live document but nowhere on the web page is it stated then I don't see ground for discussing the matter at hand.

arrrg 12y ago
What? It’s the fucking web. Of course it’s a live document! If it wouldn’t be that would be a colossal failure. It also doesn’t tell you anything about the actual goals of this mission that would be relevant for future missions. What’s with the conspiracy brigade being out in full force?
- nolok 12y ago
  Reading his other comments on this thread, he's obviously a troll and/or someone who needs to criticize this mission or ESA. He is not having an actual debate, only repeating his points ignoring any answering element he gets.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - johnchristopher 12y ago
    > Reading his other comments on this thread, he's obviously a troll and/or someone who needs to criticize this mission or ESA. He is not having an actual debate, only repeating his points ignoring any answering element he gets. 1. I do not need to criticize this mission or ESA and I'd like you to quote any sentences that makes you think so (and yes I believe a FAQ page being live updated should state it is being updated as the situation evolves becaues if not it brings confusion). 2. I answer with honesty to every replies directly made to me. Feel free to point out anything you believe I willfully ignored. 3. Regarding the elements I got: I mostly saw a (rather stupid IMO) point about how a webpage is live tech. so its content is updated (are we really missing the difference between editorial content and packets on a network ?) and another about how I would be expecting blueprints and the smallest technical details from a webpage presenting itself as a FAQ. I find these ridiculous and quite condescending. FWIW, I have been following the Rosetta mission for the past 6 years, had a nice chat a the Paris Air Show with some ESA members even though there never were any lectures about for the past 10 years there, and for the life of me I don't understand how you could believe I would troll about it. Or any other topic for that matter. I'm off.
nolok 12y ago
The confusion does not come from it being live (it's a web page, duh !), it comes from you taking a page about current status/faq for the public and consider it as the official mission's objectives list. All you need to do is look at the right document, and if you can't figure that out I certainly wouldn't want you making judgment about any science project involving my tax dollars (well, euros).
- johnchristopher 12y ago
  > The confusion does not come from it being live (it's a web page, duh !), it comes from you taking a page about current status/faq for the public and consider it as the official mission's objectives list. Absolutely not. I am of the opinion that having a public FAQ on a website being updated without any notices it is being updated (there is not even a mention such as "last updated xx/xx/xx") is going to lead to some confusion and rightfully so. Thank you for taking me for an idiot that would believe a FAQ stands for a technical document for any project. > The confusion does not come from it being live (it's a web page, duh !) And I am the troll ? Of course the confusion comes from it being live without clearly stating it is. I wonder what your reaction would be, for instance, if every poster around these parts would go on editing each of their posts according to the evolution of the topic being discussed because "hey, it's live, it's a webpage, duh!)". > it comes from you taking a page about current status/faq for the public and consider it as the official mission's objectives list. No, I don't. Please quote any of my posts that make you think so.