Massive cross-posting and slow drifting
Francoi...@inria.fr
It's been a while now, and its beginning to get on my nerves.
There is *far too much* cross-posting in comp.sys.amiga.{advocacy, misc}.
Worse, many topics drift into .misc after a few days or weeks in .advocacy.
Sometimes they even drift to .programmer.
Some recent examples:
Re: Amigas are better than PC's, but why? Please
Re: Commodore in Violation of SEC Rules
Re: Ideas for new Amigas
Re: The Marc N. Barrett Invisibility Project
If you are going to answer: learn about kill-files, think twice. There is no
kill-file solution that allows one to read .misc regularly, without these
crossposted threads, and .advocacy from times to times without loosing
messages. Once you've killed the crossposted articles, you won't see them
again.
Please control yourselves, check the Newsgroups: line.
--Francois
--
Francoi...@inria.fr Projet Chloe - INRIA Rocquencourt
or finger rou...@margaux.inria.fr
<A HREF="http://sylvaner.inria.fr/rouaix/home.html">Experimental Home Page</A>
Steve Brown
> It's been a while now, and its beginning to get on my nerves.
> There is *far too much* cross-posting in comp.sys.amiga.{advocacy, misc}.
> Worse, many topics drift into .misc after a few days or weeks in .advocacy.
> Sometimes they even drift to .programmer.
>
> Some recent examples:
>
> Re: Amigas are better than PC's, but why? Please
> Re: Commodore in Violation of SEC Rules
> Re: Ideas for new Amigas
> Re: The Marc N. Barrett Invisibility Project
>
> If you are going to answer: learn about kill-files, think twice. There is no
> kill-file solution that allows one to read .misc regularly, without these
> crossposted threads, and .advocacy from times to times without loosing
> messages. Once you've killed the crossposted articles, you won't see them
> again.
>
> Please control yourselves, check the Newsgroups: line.
>
> --Francois
I couldn't agree more.
*********************************************
| Steve Brown, WD5HCY | |
| sbr...@charon.dseg.ti.com | Simplicate |
*********************************************
wa...@vax.oxford.ac.uk
> There is *far too much* cross-posting in comp.sys.amiga.{advocacy, misc}.
> Worse, many topics drift into .misc after a few days or weeks in .advocacy.
> Sometimes they even drift to .programmer.
>
> Some recent examples:
>
> Re: Amigas are better than PC's, but why? Please
> Re: Commodore in Violation of SEC Rules
> Re: Ideas for new Amigas
> Re: The Marc N. Barrett Invisibility Project
>
> If you are going to answer: learn about kill-files, think twice. There is no
> kill-file solution that allows one to read .misc regularly, without these
> crossposted threads, and .advocacy from times to times without loosing
> messages. Once you've killed the crossposted articles, you won't see them
> again.
>
Alternatively, if you really feel that a thread doesn't belong in .misc and
should not have been cross-posted here, you can ANSWER and set the
follow-up to only those groups you feel appropriate. Since this is
tantamount to booting a thread off the newsgroup, you'd better be pretty
damn sure of your ground.
Speaking personally, after the nth "Amigas are better than PCs" posting, I
posted, killed the .misc header and sent it to .advocacy only, _politely_
stating why I felt this thread was inappropriate and should have remained
in .advocacy I didn't get any static back from .advocacy about it, so I
guess they either agree or don't care. That was a pretty clear-cut case,
though - the posting had pretty much disintegrated into a personal grudge
match between various .advocacy heavyweights.
I'd be hesitant about bouncing a Marc Barrett post, since, much though they
irritate me, they do, by and large, have a right to be in .misc as well as
.advocacy, so it would be out of order for me to kill the .misc header.
What do people think? Is it "heavy fascist mind-control" to bounce a
thread that you truly feel is inappropriate? Assuming powers that perhaps
aren't yours to take?
Bill Bennett
CRC Growth Factors Group
wa...@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Mike Meyer
> > If you are going to answer: learn about kill-files, think twice. There is no
> > kill-file solution that allows one to read .misc regularly, without these
> > crossposted threads, and .advocacy from times to times without loosing
> > messages. Once you've killed the crossposted articles, you won't see them
> > again.
> >
>
> Alternatively, if you really feel that a thread doesn't belong in .misc and
> should not have been cross-posted here, you can ANSWER and set the
> follow-up to only those groups you feel appropriate. Since this is
> tantamount to booting a thread off the newsgroup, you'd better be pretty
> damn sure of your ground.
Better yet, if you feel that way, don't set Followup-To:, and set the
newsgroups to comp.sys.amiga.advocacy *only*. I'm positive the bozos
in c.s.a.a who keep flaming about this don't ever look at the newsgroups
line, and they won't notice. I have proof, as I found some answer to
them in c.s.a.a when I checked (and answers to the answers, etc.).
Of course, other people followup to the articles and don't do this, it
isn't really effective. But neither is setting the Followup-To: line.
And my method doesn't offer incentive for some to change it back if
they notice, and doesn't clutter *this* newsgroup with postings.
> I'd be hesitant about bouncing a Marc Barrett post, since, much though they
> irritate me, they do, by and large, have a right to be in .misc as well as
> .advocacy, so it would be out of order for me to kill the .misc header.
The trouble is, they quickly degenerate into things that are
inappropriate for this group. We've had a number of posts recently
("What's wrong with Commodore", "Commodore charges dealers for
support", etc.) from people who think that the current state (with
lots of c.s.a.a things in .m) is normall, and don't realize that if
something belongs somewhere other than .m, it *doesn't* belong in .m.
> What do people think? Is it "heavy fascist mind-control" to bounce a
> thread that you truly feel is inappropriate? Assuming powers that perhaps
> aren't yours to take?
Setting the Followup-To: is a fascist thing to do, as it says "My
article is good enough for this group, but I know yours won't be".
However, it's accepted practice, and I've never seen anyone complain
if you put notice in the body of the article (hmm - this implies that
expecting people to read the header lines of ther article is
unacceptable; not good). Setting the Newsgroups: line directly isn't.
After all, this is *your* article. Posting it where you feel it's
appropriate is the *right* thing to do.
Personally, I applaud what you did, but wish you'd take a stronger
stand. If more people edited Newsgroups: lines and added Followup-To:
lines to articles, the net would be a better place for everybody.
<mike