Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rochester!ritcv!jrc
From: jrc@ritcv.UUCP (James R Carbin)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Pet Peeve - Posting same article to several newsgroups
Message-ID: <614@ritcv.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 30-Sep-83 01:57:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: ritcv.614
Posted: Fri Sep 30 01:57:15 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Oct-83 01:42:58 EDT
Lines: 47


     A DISCLAIMER:  There are times when the same article legitimately
                    should be posted to more than one newsgroup.

<<<< FLAME ON >>>>

     But why (too often?) do I see an article with the following heading:

     Newsgroups: net.general,net.a,net.b,net.c,net.d,net.e,net.f,net.g,net.etc

     Is it ever necessary to post the same article to three, four, or five 
     newsgroups?  Most of us read more than one newsgroup, and for many,
     there is often an intersection of these posted newsgroups.

     Such multiple postings increase the number of articles transmitted
     around the net, using up modem time, port time, and disk space.
     
     Perhaps the only justification is that the "poster" of the article
     receives some self-gratification from thinking that his ideas have
     been seen by so many on the net.  I can't speak for the rest of the
     people on the net, but for me, such multiple postings are a
     nuisance, at 300-baud take up too much of my time (I read the net.news
     at home), and after seeing the same article in several newsgroups, I
     simply don't take the submitter seriously.

     So before you post an article to five newsgroups next time, PLEASE
     ask yourself, in what newsgroup or at most two newsgroups does this
     article belong.

<<<< FLAME OFF >>>>

     Seriously, if there is a trend towards multiple postings, it could
     turn out to be the straw that broke the camels back:  management
     may simply decide that the expense of supporting the net with a
     significant increase in cost at their site to be just too great and
     as a resut, will withdraw from the net, and none of us want that to
     happen.

     Afterthought:  Like the clergyman who assails his congregation in his
     sermon for not attending church services when it is those who are NOT
     in church for whom the message is intended,  I may be directing this
     <<<< FLAME >>>> at the wrong group.  Perhaps (?) people who read
     net.flame are less apt to be guilty of unnecessary multiple postings.

as ever,

j.r.