If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Cross posting
A Google search seems to indicate no method for disallowing
messages posted to more than one newsgroup using Outlook Express and other newsreaders with the facility seem to be flaky or rather ancient. Has anyone had any new ideas on the subject since cross often seems to be an indication of trolling or early teen scatological posts? -- James V. Silverton Potomac, Maryland, USA |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
From: "James Silverton"
| A Google search seems to indicate no method for disallowing | messages posted to more than one newsgroup using Outlook Express | and other newsreaders with the facility seem to be flaky or | rather ancient. Has anyone had any new ideas on the subject | since cross often seems to be an indication of trolling or early | teen scatological posts? | | -- | James V. Silverton | Potomac, Maryland, USA | Cross-posting is often abused and therefore associated with spam. However, if the appropriate News Groups are selected where the subject matter is On Topic in the Cross-Posted message that is OK. In addition, it is often best to set a follow-up to a chosen News Group such that all collected replies to the post are herded into that one chosen News Group. Cross-Posting is also preferred over Multi-Posting. There is nothing worse than going to a half a dozen News Groups and you find the same posted message. Often those other News Groups will have different answers/replies. -- Dave http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
David H. Lipman wrote:
From: "James Silverton" A Google search seems to indicate no method for disallowing messages posted to more than one newsgroup using Outlook Express -- James V. Silverton Cross-posting is often abused and therefore associated with spam. However, if the appropriate News Groups are selected where the subject matter is On Topic in the Cross-Posted message that is OK. In addition, it is often best to set a follow-up to a chosen News Group such that all collected replies to the post are herded into that one chosen News Group. Cross-Posting is also preferred over Multi-Posting. There is nothing worse than going to a half a dozen News Groups and you find the same posted message. Often those other News Groups will have different answers/replies. I can certainly understand what you say but, for myself, I wish there was a rule that would allow me to reject *all* cross-posting. I think I could live without the small amount of legitimate cross posts. -- James V. Silverton Potomac, Maryland, USA |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"David H. Lipman" wrote in message
.... it is often best to set a follow-up to a chosen News Group such that all collected replies to the post are herded into that one chosen News Group. This is the "convention" about cross-posting that I have the greatest difficulty. If somebody who normally posts in one newsgroup cross-posts into my newsgroup and I answer it I don't want to have to go through the effort of subscribing to his chosen follow-up newsgroup just to be able to check on any subthread my reply might cause. In cases where the chosen follow-up newsgroup is a USENET newsgroup that wouldn't even be possible because the only server that I can connect to is the Microsoft msnews server. Much better that the subthread continue including my newsgroup *and* whatever follow-up newsgroup OP wants to use. Similarly dropping one of the other newsgroups from the list may force someone who subscribes only to it to subscribe to the follow-up newsgroup just to be aware of any thread continuation. Therefore, if the topic was relevant to those newsgroups I think it should be continued in them all as a courtesy to their readers. Followup-To causes confusion too. For example, I once started a thread cross-posting to another newsgroup hoping to elicit some expert comment on matters which were relevant to both newsgroups and later discovered I was replying to subthreads which were no longer including that other newsgroup because someone had set their own Followup-To back to my newsgoup, thus cutting off any possible input from the readers I had originally hoped to attract! The only time that I have thought that Followup-To was used well was when the OP included a promise to repost a summary of all replies. I can't remember if that was a case of Followup-To: poster and then I suppose subsequently to followup E-mail threads but even that approach seems to sabotage the collaborative intent of newsgroup discussions. IMO Robert Aldwinckle --- |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Robert Aldwinckle" wrote in message
"David H. Lipman" wrote in message ... it is often best to set a follow-up to a chosen News Group such that all collected replies to the post are herded into that one chosen News Group. This is the "convention" about cross-posting that I have the greatest difficulty. If somebody who normally posts in one newsgroup cross-posts into my newsgroup and I answer it I don't want to have to go through the effort of subscribing to his chosen follow-up newsgroup just to be able to check on any subthread my reply might cause. In cases where the chosen follow-up newsgroup is a USENET newsgroup that wouldn't even be possible because the only server that I can connect to is the Microsoft msnews server. Much better that the subthread continue including my newsgroup *and* whatever follow-up newsgroup OP wants to use. Similarly dropping one of the other newsgroups from the list may force someone who subscribes only to it to subscribe to the follow-up newsgroup just to be aware of any thread continuation. Therefore, if the topic was relevant to those newsgroups I think it should be continued in them all as a courtesy to their readers. Followup-To causes confusion too. For example, I once started a thread cross-posting to another newsgroup hoping to elicit some expert comment on matters which were relevant to both newsgroups and later discovered I was replying to subthreads which were no longer including that other newsgroup because someone had set their own Followup-To back to my newsgoup, thus cutting off any possible input from the readers I had originally hoped to attract! The only time that I have thought that Followup-To was used well was when the OP included a promise to repost a summary of all replies. I can't remember if that was a case of Followup-To: poster and then I suppose subsequently to followup E-mail threads but even that approach seems to sabotage the collaborative intent of newsgroup discussions. IMO Robert Aldwinckle --- If FollowUp is set and I reply, I unset it. -- Frank Saunders, MS-MVP, IE/OE Please respond in Newsgroup only. Do not send email http://www.fjsmjs.com Protect your PC http://www.microsoft.com./athome/sec...t/default.aspx http://defendingyourmachine.blogspot.com/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Custom caption not appearing in Cross Reference dialog | Jenna | General Discussion | 3 | August 18th, 2004 01:52 PM |
FAQ - frequently asked questions - please read before posting - June posting unofficial | Charles Kenyon | New Users | 4 | June 28th, 2004 02:58 PM |
FAQ - frequently asked questions - please read before posting - June posting unofficial | Charles Kenyon | Page Layout | 4 | June 28th, 2004 02:58 PM |
FAQ - frequently asked questions - please read before posting - June posting unofficial | Charles Kenyon | General Discussion | 4 | June 28th, 2004 02:57 PM |