Phred
2006-09-14 12:22:39 UTC
[ news.misc added to distribution and followups set to it. ]
Why do you think USENET was designed to enable cross posting?
Not only that, general netiquette clearly advises *against* posting
the same topic individually to different groups -- you're *supposed*
to cross-post it to avoid the damn thing cropping up again when you
open another one of the targeted groups.
If it's really better discussed in a specific group, then clearly the
original poster should set followups and indicate explicitly where
they will be directed.
Your approach of simply axing what you see as "other groups" may well
deprive others (all innocent parties :-) of the benefit of your
contribution. If you really can't bring yourself to simply accept the
original Newsgroups list, then it would be polite of you to at least
reply initially to them all and explicity set followups yourself, so
readers will know where they should look for subsequent discussion of
your contribution, should it be worthwhile.
above does sound like you're a friggin' wanker!
Even if you do have some religious hang-up about xposts, couldn't you
at least bring yourself to reply to both (all?) groups originally
listed, and simply set Followups to this group in your reply if that
is your wont -- and clearly tell people what you have done?
And, to expose my own bigotry in this matter, I find it absolutely
hilarious that someone in a *computer* group should oppose the idea of
cross-indexing info, which is one of the biggest advantages computers
have blessed us with in the modern era!
That said, I agree that yobbos who cross-post to irrelevant groups
(e.g. from religion, baseball, or whatever to a computer group) should
normally be treated with contempt if there is no content of common
interest.
[Snipped original technical discussion about hard drives.]
That's enough from me on this topic. Sorry to bore the rest of you.
Cheers, Phred.
i have no apology for someone seeking free advice that can't extend the
courtesy of respecting the people of a particular group by not
cross-posting. if they want the opinion of people from other groups then
they can go to that other group and ask for it. by cross posting members of
one group are subjected to the responses of another group. that is
obviously what the lazy op wants but it is impolite for them to assume that
it is something that everyone else in the group desires.
Oh, nonsense! If it's ON TOPIC in both groups, where's the problem?courtesy of respecting the people of a particular group by not
cross-posting. if they want the opinion of people from other groups then
they can go to that other group and ask for it. by cross posting members of
one group are subjected to the responses of another group. that is
obviously what the lazy op wants but it is impolite for them to assume that
it is something that everyone else in the group desires.
Why do you think USENET was designed to enable cross posting?
Not only that, general netiquette clearly advises *against* posting
the same topic individually to different groups -- you're *supposed*
to cross-post it to avoid the damn thing cropping up again when you
open another one of the targeted groups.
If it's really better discussed in a specific group, then clearly the
original poster should set followups and indicate explicitly where
they will be directed.
Your approach of simply axing what you see as "other groups" may well
deprive others (all innocent parties :-) of the benefit of your
contribution. If you really can't bring yourself to simply accept the
original Newsgroups list, then it would be polite of you to at least
reply initially to them all and explicity set followups yourself, so
readers will know where they should look for subsequent discussion of
your contribution, should it be worthwhile.
it is a simple
matter of manners and respect. laziness of the op is what this demonstrates
additionally demonstrated by his/her inability to actually continue the
original thread with the original subject line. they should be grateful
that anyone takes the time to reply.
Well I do agree that people should be consistent in matters like that.matter of manners and respect. laziness of the op is what this demonstrates
additionally demonstrated by his/her inability to actually continue the
original thread with the original subject line. they should be grateful
that anyone takes the time to reply.
no cross-positng please. this reply only to alt.pc-clone.dell where it
was
read...
Chris mate, I usually read what you have to say; but, really, thewas
read...
above does sound like you're a friggin' wanker!
Even if you do have some religious hang-up about xposts, couldn't you
at least bring yourself to reply to both (all?) groups originally
listed, and simply set Followups to this group in your reply if that
is your wont -- and clearly tell people what you have done?
And, to expose my own bigotry in this matter, I find it absolutely
hilarious that someone in a *computer* group should oppose the idea of
cross-indexing info, which is one of the biggest advantages computers
have blessed us with in the modern era!
That said, I agree that yobbos who cross-post to irrelevant groups
(e.g. from religion, baseball, or whatever to a computer group) should
normally be treated with contempt if there is no content of common
interest.
That's enough from me on this topic. Sorry to bore the rest of you.
Cheers, Phred.
--
***@THISyahoo.com.INVALID
***@THISyahoo.com.INVALID