«

* Noons wrote :
> On Jan 11, 10:41Â*am, Troy Piggins <usenet-1...@piggo.com> wrote:
>
>> Many USENET users filter out posts cross-posted to "too many"
>> groups, I know I do. Â*It's a way of keeping out spam, and there
>> aren't too many legitimate reasons to post to any more than 3 or
>> so groups. That's why they have individual groups with
>
> Geee, I wonder why cross-posting would then be a "recommended" method?

I believe the reason why it's recommended is that most of the
good newsreaders will mark a message as read in one group, and if
you open another group it was cross-posted to it will be marked
as already read there. Much better than reading the same
messages over and over.

RFC for Netiquette Guidelines:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855

In particular:
"If you feel an article will be of interest to more than one
Newsgroup, be sure to CROSSPOST the article rather than
individually post it to those groups. In general, probably only
five-to-six groups will have similar enough interests to warrant
this."

--
Troy Piggins

Troy Piggins wrote,on my timestamp of 11/01/2011 4:47 PM:


>>> groups, I know I do. It's a way of keeping out spam, and there
>>> aren't too many legitimate reasons to post to any more than 3 or
>>> so groups. That's why they have individual groups with
>>
>> Geee, I wonder why cross-posting would then be a "recommended" method?
>
> I believe the reason why it's recommended is that most of the
> good newsreaders will mark a message as read in one group, and if
> you open another group it was cross-posted to it will be marked
> as already read there. Much better than reading the same
> messages over and over.


Which simply means cross-posting should not be used. Otherwise, why do it if
"good newsreaders" will make it useless or hide it?
Sorry Piggo: on this one we'll have to agree to disagree.



> RFC for Netiquette Guidelines:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1855
>
> In particular:
> "If you feel an article will be of interest to more than one
> Newsgroup, be sure to CROSSPOST the article rather than
> individually post it to those groups. In general, probably only
> five-to-six groups will have similar enough interests to warrant
> this."
>


Yeah, but why then not point out this one:
(same RFC, precedes the one you mentioned, there are also other entries)

- In NetNews parlance, "Posting" refers to posting a new article
to a group, or responding to a post someone else has posted.
"Cross-Posting" refers to posting a message to more than one
group. If you introduce Cross-Posting to a group, or if you
direct "Followup-To:" in the header of your posting, warn
readers! Readers will usually assume that the message was
posted to a specific group and that followups will go to
that group. Headers change this behavior.



Cross-posting clearly is an abnormal situation that should be avoided or warned.