Personally, I'd rather not include Gus in the FAQ, because I just don't want to give whoever-he-was any more attention and bandwidth than he's already gotten from us.

I think writing it down once and being able to say "RTFF" takes up less bandwidth than rehashing it every time someone pops up to say "I wasn't around then, what happened?"

Putting it in the FAQ takes it out of Natter.

Maybe the faq can be like, "What or who is Gus?" with a link to the bureau discussion following the death announcement.

OTOH, the reason the faq hasn't been updated in so long is because we don't have a lot of newbies with frequently asked questions. So I doubt we'll be getting that one a lot.

I'd rather just answer the question when it comes up.

Yeah -- as opposed to hashing out language about it.

I think it could be done pretty simply, considering that Cindy did a lot of the link aggregating back in the day. At the very least, it would be simple to be able to point and go "There." and also explain the Fast Eddie recent references together.

Personally, I'd rather not include Gus in the FAQ, because I just don't want to give whoever-he-was any more attention and bandwidth than he's already gotten from us.

For what it is worth, I have agreed with everything Steph has said on this issue, but especially this comment.

I disagree. I'd rather treat it like an institution/community than as an individual

It personalizes it too much to focus on Gus' bad behavior and how we might feel about it. It should be "a poster acted in this way. This is what happened. This is how we dealt with it."

People have had a lot of questions about it, and that's why we have a FAQ.

I really don't get the impulse to "not draw attention to it." I prefer transparency and being forthright about it.

Do we really think Fast Eddie's run of publicity will last long enough for a FAQ entry to be relevant for any length of time? I suspect the questions have already hit their peak.

Do we really think Fast Eddie's run of publicity will last long enough for a FAQ entry to be relevant for any length of time?

Given the things that are currently still in the fact, this makes me laugh just a little bit.

That's kind of my point though. We can see that some things aren't relevant anymore.

One reason I'd want it in the FAQ is that it's been asked more than twice. I mean, the question might be "What does TV Tropes have to do with the Buffistas? I thought Fast Eddie started tvtropes.org from b.org?"

Answer (which I'm not wordsmithing) would say something like: We had a Gus, he said he started tvtropes.org from his basement, then he "died" and then, years later, Fast Eddie said he was a Buffista that started it, but we don't know who that is. With links to B'cracy for "died" and to the zip file where Gus decides to start the site.

Or something like that.