Added prohibition against requesting help with homework.

[SVN r11371]

1 files changed, 16 insertions, 15 deletions

diff --git a/more/discussion_policy.htm b/more/discussion_policy.htm
index 6aa41c88ca..dae13e7468 100644
--- a/more/discussion_policy.htm
+++ b/more/discussion_policy.htm
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
 </table>
 <h1>Boost Discussion Policy</h1>
 <p>Email discussion is the tie that binds boost members together into a community.
-If the discussion is stimulating and effective, the community thrives.&nbsp; If
+If the discussion is stimulating and effective, the community thrives. If
 the discussion degenerates into name calling and ill will, the community withers
 and dies.</p>
 <h2>Acceptable topics</h2>
@@ -41,24 +41,25 @@ will let you know.</p>
   <li>Advertisements for commercial products.</li>
   <li>Requests for help getting non-boost code to compile with your compiler.
     Try the comp.lang.c++.moderated newsgroup instead.</li>
-  <li>Requests for help interpreting the C++ standard.&nbsp; Try the comp.std.c++
+  <li>Requests for help interpreting the C++ standard. Try the comp.std.c++
     newsgroup instead.</li>
   <li>Job offers.</li>
+  <li>Requests for solutions to homework assignments
 </ul>
 <h2>Prohibited behavior</h2>
-<p>Prohibited behavior will not be tolerated.&nbsp; The moderators will ban
+<p>Prohibited behavior will not be tolerated. The moderators will ban
 postings by abusers.</p>
 <h3>Flame wars</h3>
 <p>Personal insults, argument for the sake of argument, and all the other
 behaviors which fall into the &quot;flame war&quot; category are
-prohibited.&nbsp; Discussions should focus on technical arguments, not the
+prohibited. Discussions should focus on technical arguments, not the
 personality traits or motives of participants.</p>
 <h3>Third-party attacks</h3>
 <p>Attacks on third parties such as software vendors, hardware vendors, or any
-other organizations, are prohibited.&nbsp; Boost exists to unite and serve the
+other organizations, are prohibited. Boost exists to unite and serve the
 entire C++ community, not to disparage the work of others.</p>
 <p>Does this mean that we ban the occasional complaint or wry remark about a
-troublesome compiler?&nbsp; No, but be wary of overdoing it.</p>
+troublesome compiler? No, but be wary of overdoing it.</p>
 <h3>Off-topic posts</h3>
 <p>Discussions which stray from the acceptable topics are strongly discouraged.
 While off-topic posts are often well meaning and not as individually corrosive
@@ -66,7 +67,7 @@ as other abuses, cumulatively the distraction damages the effectiveness of
 discussion.</p>
 <h2>Culture</h2>
 <p>In addition to technical skills, Boost members value collaboration,
-acknowledgement of the help of others, and a certain level of politeness.&nbsp; Boost
+acknowledgement of the help of others, and a certain level of politeness. Boost
 membership is very international, and ranges widely in age and other
 characteristics. Think of discussion as occurring among colleagues in a widely read forum, rather
 than among a few close friends.</p>
@@ -83,7 +84,7 @@ Re-read your message before submitting it.</p>
 <p>Apply social engineering to prevent heated technical discussion from
 degenerating into a shouting match.</p>
 <ul>
-  <li>Questions help.&nbsp; If someone suggests something that you don't think
+  <li>Questions help. If someone suggests something that you don't think
     will work, then replying with a question like &quot;will that compile?&quot;
     or &quot;won't that fail to compile, or am I missing something?&quot; is a
     lot smoother than &quot;That's really stupid - it won't compile.&quot;&nbsp;
@@ -95,22 +96,22 @@ degenerating into a shouting match.</p>
   <li>If most of the discussion has been in terms of specific code, try to talk
     a bit about hidden assumptions and generalities that may be preventing
     discussion closure.</li>
-  <li>Taking a time-out is often effective.&nbsp; Just say: &quot;Let me think
-    about that for a day or two.&nbsp; Let's take a time-out to digest the
+  <li>Taking a time-out is often effective. Just say: &quot;Let me think
+    about that for a day or two. Let's take a time-out to digest the
     discussion so far.&quot;</li>
 </ul>
-<p>Avoid Parkinson's Bicycle Shed.&nbsp; Parkinson described a committee formed
-to oversee design of an early nuclear power plant.&nbsp; There were three agenda
+<p>Avoid Parkinson's Bicycle Shed. Parkinson described a committee formed
+to oversee design of an early nuclear power plant. There were three agenda
 items - when to have tea, where to put the bicycle shed, and how to
-ensure nuclear safety.&nbsp; Tea was disposed of quickly as trivial.&nbsp;&nbsp;
+ensure nuclear safety. Tea was disposed of quickly as trivial.&nbsp;&nbsp;
 Nuclear safety was discussed for only
 an hour - it was so complex, scary, and technical that even
-among experts few felt comfortable with the issues.&nbsp; Endless days were then
+among experts few felt comfortable with the issues. Endless days were then
 spent discussing where to put the bicycle shed (the parking lot would
 be a modern equivalent) because everyone
 understood the issues and felt comfortable discussing them.&nbsp;</p>
 <hr>
-<p>Revised <!--webbot bot="Timestamp" S-Type="EDITED" S-Format="%d %B, %Y" startspan -->24 September, 2001<!--webbot bot="Timestamp" endspan i-checksum="39337" -->
+<p>Revised <!--webbot bot="Timestamp" S-Type="EDITED" S-Format="%d %B, %Y" startspan -->10 October, 2001<!--webbot bot="Timestamp" endspan i-checksum="39337" -->
 </p>
 
 </body>