David McRitchie - Where are we on crossposting?

[Harlan Grove]

Yes, this is a brand new thread inspired by other threads, specifically,

http://www.google.com/groups?thread...elm=%23Ss59VHUDHA.2196%40TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl

(or http://makeashorterlink.com/?W28165465 )

and

http://www.google.com/groups?thread...-7F716B.22382512072003%40msnews.microsoft.com

(or http://makeashorterlink.com/?L2C115465 ).

So, what's the verdict?

Is crossposting the evil twin of the devil's spawn, multiposting?

Do we have to refine what we mean by 'fractured thread'?


And why not a few comments while I'm at it?

- If Google Groups is 'storing' posted articles in a single newsgroup - the
first that appears in the Newsgroups tag - no big deal. It's efficient and VERY
sensible for an NNTP server to store any given message ONLY ONCE. If the server
accomodates multigigabyte daily throughput, minimizing article storage and
transmission with other NNTP servers is an absolute necessity. As long as those
articles 'appear' in listings of other crossposted newsgroups, who cares how
they're stored on the server?

- Responding to a crossposted article in FEWER newsgroups without using
Followup-To tags is, in a practical sense, worse than multiposting (converting
originally crossposted threads to an effectively multiposted ones - respondents
should know better than OPs). If we're going to gripe about multiposting, we
should come down even harder on people who fracture threads by doing this,
whether they do so out of ignorance or conscious though misguided belief that
they're 'fixing' crossposting - by converting it to multiposting!

- There are some newsreaders that can't handle crossposting. The only one I've
used myself is AOL's. To use AOL's, it's necessary that AOL be ISP, but if so,
all versions of AOL's software since version 4 (both 16- and 32-bit versions)
allow Outlook Express to run at the same time, so AOL users using version 4 or
later *could* use OE as their newsreader rather than relying on AOL's.

- CDO allows crossposting, but it doesn't mark crossposted articles as read in
all crossposted newsgroups when read in any one of the crossposted newsgroups.
However, if you close your browser, then reload it and go back to the *same*
newsgroup in CDO, you'll find that it doesn't retain *any* 'previously read'
indicators. Add that to its stupid sort order which leads so many to repost, and
it's sad but true that CDO users have a crippled newsgroup experience ignoring
the crossposting issue. Indeed, if you crosspost to .misc and .links, it'd be
much easier to find responses in .links made by people reading and responding in
misc - crossposting to high *AND* low volume newsgroups may actually *REDUCE*
the instances of CDO reposting - a good thing!

 

[Richard Choate]

Hey guys,
I'm not an MVP but I hope you won't mind my chiming in. I like the current
setup. I feel that in general, I can expect people in the programming group
to be willing and sometimes able to use VBA. People in the functions group
are generally looking for those answers and are less VBA inclined, and the
other groups are a mish-mesh of largely non-VBA OPs. Sometimes I want to
help but I don't often want to help with code, so I'll stay away from the
programming group. If I'm in the mode to do code then the opposite occurs.
This seperation is especially important in the Access groups. Over there, it
would be a nightmare to have everybody together.
Thanks for allowing me a paragraph.
Richard Choate

Harlan,

Just a comment...don't beat me up too bad on this, but........
I always wondered why there were so many different groups in the first
place?
If we *All* read *All* the groups, why have so many?
OP's post programming questions in .newusers., .misc & .functions; function
questions in .programming, etc., etc.

IMHO.......
One group.
One stop shopping for all OP's.
We can pick and choose what we can (or want to) answer
which is pretty much what we do now, from one long list
(instead of bouncing between multiple newsgroups).

Crossposting/multiposting/posting to the wrong group would
become a thing of the past.

Again, just an opinion,
John

 

[jaf]

This may be slightly off topic, but while your at it, maybe you can get an
answer to these.

Who or whom is the issuing authority for these rules?
Who or whom was granted the authority to issue the above authority?
Under what jurisdiction were these rules made?
Under what jurisdiction are these rules enforceable?
Under what countries laws?
Under what International Treaty.
Who or whom has been issued the authority to enforce these rules?
Do they have badges?
Do they have guns to back up their "authority".
What is the penalty for a rules violation?
Can we be extradited to another country for violating the rules?
Imprisoned?
Executed?
Where are the trials held?
Do we get a trial????????????

Do we need a lawyer to represent us in court, or are we to just expect
constant nagging and whining about arbitrary, unenforceable and irrelevant
rules conceived by self appointed internet cops that obviously have nothing
better to do?

 

[Harlan Grove]

--------------536D06A6BFD74FC96E63380D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I won't beat you up for your comments, but if this isn't the LAST time you post
in MIME format (even MIMEd plain text) . . .

I always wondered why there were so many different groups in the first place?
If we *All* read *All* the groups, why have so many?

...

Few read all the groups. Some respondents may try to, but not all the OPs, not
all the lurkers. I'll admit it's hard to see a compelling need for both .misc
and .worksheet.functions. However, .programming is definitely a separate beast,
and (speaking just for myself) unless a message is crossposted one of the ngs I
read regularly, I never see anything posted only to .links, .setup, .charting
etc.

There was already a USENET newsgroup, comp.apps.spreadsheets, before Microsoft
decided to start its own NNTP server, so there was no *need* for Microsoft to
set up the .excel.* ngs. But I believe in the more the merrier, even if many
(most?) ngs are unnecessary.

The one necessary consideration for crossposting is that the article be on-topic
in *ALL* crossposted newsgroups. VBA questions may be so in both .misc and
programming, even .worksheet.functions if the subject is UDFs. On the other
hand, it'd be a big stretch satisfying this when crossposting to both .newusers
and .programming.

 

[Harlan Grove]

This may be slightly off topic, but while your at it, maybe you can get an
answer to these.

Who or whom is the issuing authority for these rules?

First, 'who or whom' is gramatically incorrect/obtuse. 'Who' alone is correct. I
could end here by saying that these norms of newsgroup behavior are as
enforceable as the rules of grammar, but why limit myself?

Social convention. As enforceable as rules against public nose picking.

Who or whom was granted the authority to issue the above authority?

Social convention needs no grant.

Under what jurisdiction were these rules made?

They evolved. Combination of objectively demonstrably most efficient and most
practical. With respect to newsgroups, this would be influenced by NNTP itself
(network news transport protocol), so you could say the RFC process and the IEC
subgroup responsible for NNTP.

Under what jurisdiction are these rules enforceable?

They're not, but if you violate them often and severely enough, no one will read
anything you post. You'll become nothing more than transmission noise and
additional NNTP server storage overhead.

Under what countries laws?

Laws? On the Internet?

The internet is an experiment - can humans behave and interact without state
coersion to behave by laws and regulations issued from on high. Mostly it's a
success, but there are gaps. It still needs rules, but the rules are more or
less based on consensus. If you didn't accept the consensus, no one could force
you to follow the rules. That does NOT mean there are no rules, rather that
you'd have decided to ignore them.

Under what International Treaty.
Whee!!!

Who or whom has been issued the authority to enforce these rules?

No one. They're unenforceable in the coersive sense. They're enforceable only in
the sense that if you break them spectacularly enough, you can be IGNORED with a
degree of completeness that's impossible to equal in real life.

What is the penalty for a rules violation?

...

Basically, same as for public nose picking. No doubt you're a strident defender
of the rights and perogatives of militant public nose pickers too.

Do we need a lawyer to represent us in court, or are we to just expect
constant nagging and whining about arbitrary, unenforceable and irrelevant
rules conceived by self appointed internet cops that obviously have nothing
better to do?

I see. So you'd be indifferent to EVERY message posted to ANY Excel newsgroup to
be repeatedly MULTIPOSTED to ALL Excel newsgroups? Rhetorical trick question: if
there were 100 spam postings for every on-topic posting in .misc, would you
care? If you did care, what could you do? If you alone could do nothing, how
would you feel? How about a few hundred multimegabyte file attachments a day?

So, you see no point to any rules at all? No point to reaching consensus? [Or
more to the point, do you understand the issues under discussion?]

 

[jaf]

I see. So you'd be indifferent to EVERY message posted to ANY Excel newsgroup to
be repeatedly MULTIPOSTED to ALL Excel newsgroups? Rhetorical trick question: if
there were 100 spam postings for every on-topic posting in .misc, would you
care? If you did care, what could you do? If you alone could do nothing, how
would you feel? How about a few hundred multimegabyte file attachments a

day?


UseNet is not a religion and is more to UseNet than Excel.
If you don't like what you see, change the channel or shut it off.

"God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to
change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."

 

[Harlan Grove]

...
...

UseNet is not a religion and is more to UseNet than Excel.
If you don't like what you see, change the channel or shut it off.

...

Too true.

USENET is NOT a religion. Science is also not religion, but is harder to
dismiss/ignore when it becomes inconvenient.

What works efficiently and effectively in USENET is subject to objective
analysis. Beyond a doubt, multiposted messages consume more server storage and
waste more respondents' time than crossposted messages. How Google Groups deals
with crossposted messages is also subject to objective analysis.

As for change, precisely what I'm trying to accomplish with regard to some
people's attitudes toward crossposting. Whether that's a 'can be changed' is a
judgment call that I get to make for myself rather than delegating to you.

 

[Don Guillett]

In TEXAS we just hang em to the highest tree. Nuf said?

 

[Andy Brown]

Hi Harlan.

Excuse my ignorance (or not if you prefer, I'm not bothered) -- what's the
deal with MIME? It's a problem why?

Rgds,
Andy

"We'll have rules! Lots of rules! Then when anyone breaks 'em ..."
William Golding

 

[Harlan Grove]

Excuse my ignorance (or not if you prefer, I'm not bothered) -- what's the
deal with MIME? It's a problem why?

....

MIME can include document components that include scripts. Same for HTML. If
you think attached files are a problem because they could contain viruses,
realize that you'd need to detach the file then open it in order to be
affected by the virus. MIMEd viruses could be fired up simply by opening the
posting in your newsreader's preview window.

Also, if the MIMEd content is encoded, Google sometimes won't archive it.

 

[Phobos]

MIME can include document components that include scripts. Same for HTML. If
you think attached files are a problem because they could contain viruses,
realize that you'd need to detach the file then open it in order to be
affected by the virus. MIMEd viruses could be fired up simply by opening the
posting in your newsreader's preview window.

As in the kak worm (for example).

P

 

[Richard Choate]

How can I avoid sending or receiving MIME messages? What is the
non-mailicious purpose of MIME?
Richard Choate

Excuse my ignorance (or not if you prefer, I'm not bothered) -- what's the
deal with MIME? It's a problem why?

....

MIME can include document components that include scripts. Same for HTML. If
you think attached files are a problem because they could contain viruses,
realize that you'd need to detach the file then open it in order to be
affected by the virus. MIMEd viruses could be fired up simply by opening the
posting in your newsreader's preview window.

Also, if the MIMEd content is encoded, Google sometimes won't archive it.

 

[Andy Brown]

MIMEd viruses could be fired up simply by opening the

posting in your newsreader's preview window.

Yeah, I remember hearing that a while back. It's a bit beyond me, but as far
as I can tell my format's not offensive -- at least I hope so.

I'm not sure about this "internet as a sociological experiment" tho'. Surely
it was primarily a tool invented by the US to stay ahead of the Russians.

Rgds,
Andy

 

[Harlan Grove]

I'm not sure about this "internet as a sociological experiment" tho'. Surely
it was primarily a tool invented by the US to stay ahead of the Russians.

Evolution.

In DARPA days, there never would have been spreadsheet newsgroups. Also,
there weren't web pages or HTML. The advent of browsers kinda changed it a
bit. It's this new 'everyone welcome' Internet I mean.

 

[Andy Brown]

I'm sorry Harlan, that you're not getting any response on your crossposting
query. And that I'm going seriously OT.

"The internet is an experiment".

Assuming that's not in the traditional sense - somebody (or bodies) decides
to implement it, then later evaluates it and decides whether or not to
continue it.

IMO, it has the potential to be a great leveller. You 've no idea if I'm
black or white, male or female or transgender, straight or gay or
ambivalent, Jewish or Catholic or whatever, 18 or 80, a perfect specimen or
chronically disabled (apologies to anyone who doesn't consider the D word
PC). OTOH, I can download illegal material or material illegally, and
probably find out how to make bombs, spam people and steal their identities.

NGs may have a lot of "rules" (really? if I transgress them and get blanked
by the community, can I not just change my ID?), but the 'net seemingly
doesn't. Should we worry that there's no off switch?

Rgds,
Andy

 

[Stephen Dunn]

Of course there's an off-switch, just hit disconnect. Each individual
has that choice.

Getting back on topic: these particular newsgroups are designed for
people to help each other out. Some groundrules have grown up to
facilitate that. Every now and then they are revised and evaluated by
the people who spend most time here, since they are the ones in the best
position to do so.

If you want to attend a party where other guests are likely to spit in
your drink without the host having something to say about it, by all
means go and find one, there are plenty out there. If, however, you
expect some manners to be shown, let's take a look at what's acceptable
and what isn't.


Personally I have nothing against crossposting, but find multiposting
irritating. Just as bad, is when OPs post follow-ups in new threads, so
work that was done hours or days ago is repeated rather than improved
upon.


Steve D.

 

[Harlan Grove]

Personally I have nothing against crossposting, but find multiposting
irritating. Just as bad, is when OPs post follow-ups in new threads, so
work that was done hours or days ago is repeated rather than improved
upon.

....

To be fair, if we had to use CDO, we might start new threads. Trying to find
threads begun just 2 or 3 days ago is agony.

 

[Harald Staff]

...
For multiposting or attaching files?

Files. Multiposters hang from treeS

Best wishes Harald

 

[Andy Brown]

Hi Stephen.

Of course there's an off-switch, just hit disconnect.

I know *I* can disconnect. I was just pondering whether the net itself can
be turned off, in the event the experiment proves to be a failure.
Re-reading Existentialism and Humanism was perhaps a bad idea, with
hindsight. I get the impression that you find being this far off topic
irritating, so I'll end this discussion.

Rgds,
Andy

 

[David McRitchie]

Sorry, guess I'm just not up to examining what Google does or doesn't
do with same subjects and cross postings.

So if the groups are completely different would you have cross-posting
being good because you have a wider range of expertise.

If the groups are the same would you have cross-posting being good
because you have a wider range.

If it is the same people are in most of the cross-posted groups answering
anyway, would you have that as good because they would have
read them anyway, and if they have a "decent" newsready like you
have and know how to use it properly you only see it once.

I am of the opinion that one should try to select the best group and
bother the fewest people. There are experts in all of the major
Excel groups and they are usually the same people.

And I know for sure we all agree that people should at least try to find
answers first in Google Groups among the Excel newsgroups to see
if they can find an answer or at the very least ask a more meaningful
question about what they know, don't know, tried, or point out an
article that almost solves their problem. I kind of think some of the
biggest mistakes are people who say: "I know I saw this somewhere",
"I can't find my post, did anyone answer it", "this is probably a stupid
question" -- without first searching for an answer.
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=group:*Excel*&num=100

Which would also give a much clearer picture of where to post a
particular question if someone is clueless.

Many of the cross postings in the past included English, German, and
Japanese sites. In fact someone was so arrogant as to say
he didn't care because he spoke several languages so any response
he got would be okay. I personally doubt that German and Japanese
sites really want English postings. But those seem to be in the minority
after CDO came along and evidently made cross-posting, attachments,
and HTML look like it was good and encouraged the full power
of the internet (and everbody's servers and PC's inbetween)..

The only valid exceptions I can think of are where more than one
product is involved. Excel and MS Word Mailmerge, Excel and
Access, Excel and MS Money, Excel and Quicken (Intuit), Excel
and HTML. May learn something on some of those.

FWIW, though you said I broke your rules when I said I was going to
test something similar:t :
The original thread was in newusers, which make it hard to find here.
http://groups.google.com/[email protected]
I split of the reply to another group and the thread did grab onto
a different thread even though the original message-id should be intact..
http://groups.google.com/[email protected]

I think Google considers any cross posting after five as spam but I simply
hate cross-posting. That would just be an arbitrary figure that they and
administrators might use. Could not find what I was looking for but may
be interesting reading anyway.
http://www.google.com/googlegroups/help.html "spam" "moderated"
http://www.google.com/googlegroups/basics.html "spam" "cross-posting"
http://www.google.com/googlegroups/glossary.html "spam" "cross-post"
http://www.google.com/googlegroups/posting_style.html "spam" "cross"
http://www.google.com/press/newyorker.html interesting, but no mention of deja
You may get more information from moderated newsgroups where they can
set their own rules and enforce them.