Re: Crossposting
- From: Jim Lawton <ucan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2005 09:13:59 GMT
On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 21:45:59 -0800, floyd@xxxxxxxxxx (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
>Jim Lawton <ucan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>On Wed, 11 Aug 2005 02:59:22 , "Stephen Hayes"
>><Stephen.Hayesp0.f10.n7903.z8@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>FamilyNet Newsgate
>>>
>>>Jim Lawton wrote in a message to All:
>>>
>>> JL> From: Jim Lawton <ucan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> JL> In my experience, I rarely need to cross-post, and when I need to I
>>> JL> usually post the same item in each group as separate threads. Then
>>> JL> it's up to me to pursue the answers in each group.
>
>*DO NOT MULTIPOST*. Simple as that.
>
>>>Thereby depriving others of useful responses that may be posted in different
>>>groups.
>>
>>To resolve that it is oly necessary to add an "also posted in" line, and then
>>those interested can go and have a look.
>
>That does *not* resolve anything. In addition to fragmenting
>responses, any response (as well as the original) must then be
>transmitted and stored twice on every Usenet news server.
>
>Multiposting is *inherently* bad, and should be avoided because
>there simply are no benefits.
>
>Crossposting was initially developed to provide a facility to
>avoid the evils of multiposting. It is inherently a *good*
>thing, but can obviously be abused.
>
>The problems often attributed to crossposting actually has
>little to do with crosposting, except as a demonstration of just
>how effective crosposting is at what it is supposed to do.
>
>Both off topic posts and trolls are problems often laid at the
>doorstep of crossposting. But in fact crossposting is merely
>an amplifier that makes both of those problems more noticeable.
>The solution, however, is *not* to claim crossposting is the
>cause, because it is not.
>
>>>That's multiposting, which is more often bad than crossposting.
>
>Multiposting is *always* bad. Crossposting is effective.
>
>>Why?
>
>This is a short article, and I can't say that I'm necessarily
>explaining it in a way that anyone and everyone will understand.
>If "Why?" is still a question for you, point out what doesn't
>make sense, and I'll try to both restate it in different terms
>and find a few URLs on the net that also discuss it.
No, don't bother ,thanks, because I neither cross-post, nor in general
multipost. I shall go on doing what I do, and being a reasonable person, I do
not expect that my behaviour will cause much offence.
Insofar as it bothers me at all, I have to say that I have been far more
frequently inconvenienced by crosspostings than I have ever been by any other
form of posting.
I might also add, for the record, that I am not offended by top-posting, five
line sigs or much else that happens on usenet. Only gratuitous nastiness and
bullying really get up my nose.
--
Jim
"a single species has come to dominate ...
reproducing at bacterial levels, almost as an
infectious plague envelops its host"
http://tinyurl.com/c88xs
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Crossposting
- From: Floyd L. Davidson
- Re: Crossposting
- References:
- Re: Crossposting
- From: Jim Lawton
- Crossposting
- From: Stephen Hayes
- Re: Crossposting
- From: Jim Lawton
- Re: Crossposting
- From: Floyd L. Davidson
- Re: Crossposting
- Prev by Date: writing style of Gulliver's Travel
- Next by Date: Origins of "the bird"
- Previous by thread: Re: Crossposting
- Next by thread: Re: Crossposting
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading