Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!sco!davidbe
From: davidbe@sco.COM (The Cat in the Hat)
Newsgroups: news.misc
Subject: Re: Wish List re: Crossposting
Message-ID: <555@scovert.sco.COM>
Date: 17 May 88 01:01:23 GMT
References: <3938@gryphon.CTS.COM> <439@bacchus.DEC.COM> <119@pigs.UUCP>
Reply-To: davidbe@sco.COM (The Cat in the Hat)
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.  (Scovert Operations)
Lines: 38

A long long time ago in an article far far away (<119@pigs.UUCP> to be exact) haugj@pigs.UUCP (John F. Haugh II) said:
-In article <439@bacchus.DEC.COM>, reid@decwrl.dec.com (Brian Reid) writes:
-> I think that if you took a poll of the rank and file of the network, you
-> would find most people in support of a rule that talk.bizarre should not be
-> allowed to crosspost to ANYTHING. In general crossposting is a bad idea.
-> Crossposting from talk.bizarre is an especially bad idea.
-

Let people crosspost FROM talk.bizarre.  Don't let people crosspost TO 
talk.bizarre.  That's where most of the trouble comes from.  People who don't
understand the purpose of talk.bizarre.

	[ But that message is not why I'm here... ]

-i don't know what the actual propagation for talk.bizarre is, but then
-i don't have any of the talk groups.
-

Talk.bizarre has an 82% propogation, if the latest arbitron list is to be
believed. 

-i like it that way, keeps dR. bOb TeCh out of my disk drive.
-

Not necessarily.  There's no reason (other than desire) why he can't post to
a non talk.* group.  Unless you check automatically junk messages from him
when you unbatch articles...

-- john.


-- 
David Bedno (aka The Cat in the Hat) Now appearing at: davidbe@sco.COM -OR-
...!{uunet,ihnp4,decvax!microsoft,ucbvax!ucscc}!sco!davidbe -OR- 
at home: 408-425-5266 at work: 408-425-7222 x5697 (I'm probably here...)
Disclaimer:  Not SCO's opinions.  At least not that they've told me.

"...or a baby's arm holding an apple."