Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!uwvax!oddjob!ncar!ames!pasteur!agate!garnet!weemba
From: weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student)
Newsgroups: news.misc
Subject: Re: I Wish I Were An ...
Summary: here be a strange rambling
Message-ID: <10260@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: 24 May 88 11:44:27 GMT
References: <10228@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> <5643@chinet.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@agate.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student)
Organization: Brahms Gang Posting Central
Lines: 52
In-reply-to: rissa@chinet.UUCP (Patricia O Tuama)

[The replied-to article appeared in news.groups,talk.bizarre,sci.math.]

In article <5643@chinet.UUCP>, rissa@chinet (Patricia O Tuama) writes:

>John Woods [et al have] pointed out that most cross-posting is done by
>people who never read t.b but who want to make some sort of point
>or spin a certain discussion out of the newsgroup from which it
>originated.

I did cross-post into t.b.  Guilty!  I did not want to make a point;
I wanted to get a discussion out of s.m.  However, most of the com-
plaints have been about a gratuitous t.b inclusion, with no follow-
up control, by people who have zilch conception of t.b.

I had originally cross-posted to alt.flame, and decided against it.
I figured bizarrhoids could make hay with my name, but I guess the
days of "I wish I were a Gene Smith Rosen Wiener" are long gone.  I
suppose I figured wrong.

>Now I liked this article that weemba wrote and I'm glad he posted
>it to talk.bizarre.

Thank you and you're welcome.  In contrast, I do not appreciate this
particular cross-posting of yours into s.m: that group could care less
for a metadiscussion about t.b and cross-posting.  (My own article was
borderline at best--but it was at least following the context of a pre-
vious s.m discussion, in classic net.tradition.)

>		      But the next time certain people go into hys-
>terics about cross-posting, I suggest that they look back at this
>all too frequent example of someone cross-posting TO talk.bizarre
>and not FROM it.

Now wait a moment.  How can my one posting be "all too frequent"?
I are confused.

>		   And I'm sure we can find many others.

I suspect our articles together support John's contention: I do look
at t.b occasionally, but I don't think you look at s.m.  In particular,
I strongly favor software restrictions that require a user subscribe
to a newsgroup in order to post into it.

In particular, if your article is just so *important* that the readers
of alt.pinheads have *got* to see it, then you the poster should be will-
ing to go find out what alt.pinheads is really about.  And if you're not
willing, it just *couldn't* have been that important.

I would be more than happy to see more obnoxious rules made for articles
--or perhaps just followups--posted to say 3 or more newsgroups.

ucbvax!garnet!weemba	Matthew P Wiener/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720