Re: PROBLEM! misc.busines...

This thread is an attempt to start a crossposted flamewar between sci.electronics.design and comp.arch.embedded. If you reply to those same two newsgroups you are helping the shit-stirrer.

There is no reason why a poster should never crosspost to a moderated newsgroup. Some newsgroup moderators allow crossposts, some don't, and there is nothing wrong with either policy.

Crossposting complaints about the moderation policy of misc. business.product-dev to comp.arch.embedded and sci.electronics. design, on the other hand, *is* a violation of netiquette.

Although you won't see my answer because you have killfiled me I must point out that it was YOU.... who

1) Crossposted your original question to misc.business.product-dev and comp.arch.embedded 2) Crossposted your original question to misc.business.product-dev and sci.math

Therefore it was YOU as the moderator of misc.business.product-dev who started with this crossposting. You have been touting your moderated newsgroup in unmoderated ones trying to, dare I say Troll People into it. It is probably the reason why you crosspost in the first place.

I don't know what the policy of the moderator for sci.math is but your ill conceived restrictions on crossposting limits your behaviour.

You can

1) Crosspost your question to relevent newsgroups... comp.arch.embedded and sci.maths. Which unfortunately means you are forced to leave yours out so no-ones answers appear in your precious newsgroup.

2) You can keep your question in your precious newsgroup in which case no one will see it.

3) You can do what you did.

When I first saw that, not realising that sci.math was moderated and might operate a similar policy to you (stupid though it is) I thought it was a bit pretentious. I still do and that was my original complaint. By choosing to do it the way you did you denied others access to information that may have been useful to them

Realise that I am not complaining about misc.business.product-dev but about your behaviour as moderator. As such you should be excercising a much higher level of 'usenet etiquette'. There are a number of times when you have either started threads from 'your' newsgroup and tried to plead with people to continue responding there. You have also tried to hi-jack threads from unmoderated newsgroups into yours.

This is crossposted to SED because that's where I generally live and have met you. I don't like you or your attitude, that's my opinion. I might behave like an idiot most of the time but I don't feel any need to prove anything.

Having dropped my pants I shall leave this arena.

DNA

Yes indeed there is. Crossposting to a moderated newsgroup exposes not only the replies (for those who don't carefully check the newsgroups line) but even the ORIGINAL post to the whims of the moderator. As a result, for example, it may never reach any of the unmoderated newsgroups.

Totally unacceptable, IMHO.

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

--
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

No, I'm lying... I'll sit and see.

Not interested? PLONK me or the thread.

DNA

If that's totally unacceptable to you, feel free to avoid posting or crossposting to moderated newsgroups.

I don't know if you noticed, but the first time someone from sci. electronics.design made a polite request that I not allow crossposts there, I stopped approving any crossposts to sci.electronics.design. I did this not because I had to or because anyone made a good argument, but simply because it seemed like the polite thing to do. It would be nice if I got an occasional scrap of politeness thrown back to me, but that's the decision of whoever is doing the posting to make.

While on the subject of being polite, shall we discuss whether crossposting your off-topic opinions about moderation policies to comp.arch.embedded and sci.electronics.design is the polite thing to do?

Your argument contains a fatal flaw. It assumes that, just because some posters are foolish enough to use a newsreader that posts to whatever newsgroups the post they reply to was posted to *and* are foolish enough to let the decision the newsreader made stand without reviewing it, they should be allowed to dictate where other posters can and cannot post just to shield them from the consequences of their foolish behavior.

This is Usenet. You don't get to tell me what to do, and I don't get to tell you what to do. You are 100% responsible for anything you post - headers and body. You can choose to quote from someone else's post and you can choose to post to where someone else posted, but the choice is yours and so is the responsibility.

As for your "for those who don't carefully check" concept, this was decided a long time ago in another context. There was a proposal floated that all moderated newsgroups have the word "moderated" in the newsgroup name, much like the way binary newsgroups are labeled. The argument was that those who don't carefully check might end up posting and having their posts not approved or posted with an added moderator's comment on the bottom. The consensus among news administrators was that it is the poster's responsibility to pay attention, and that it is not Usenet's responsibility to shield him from the consequences of not paying attention. This basic concept was built into the fabric of Usenet when it was decided that any poster can set followups - another situation where those who don't carefully check might be surprised at the results they get.

"This is not a list. This is not a board. This is not some web page forum with rules and moderators. This is USENET. The wild west of online communication. Where trolls and flames roam rampant. Where you keep your asbestos underpants handy if you lack wit (or have an ego that greatly exceeds your actual abilities). If you don't like it, feel free to run back to the comfortable safety of moderated web forums and mailing lists where everyone lives in enforced peace and harmony in the land of Nod." -Cichlidiot

Just don't play in Gee's arena. Leave him alone to wither and die.

With Agent it is trivial to kill cross-posts to groups you don't want to see the response... just delete Gee's group from the Newsgroup header.

...Jim Thompson

--
|  James E.Thompson, P.E.                           |    mens     |
|  Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
|  Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
|  Phoenix, Arizona            Voice:(480)460-2350  |             |
|  E-mail Address at Website     Fax:(480)460-2142  |  Brass Rat  |
|       http://www.analog-innovations.com           |    1962     |
             
I love to cook with wine.      Sometimes I even put it in the food.

I would have appreciated, if you had included .moderated in your newsgroup name.

I think that if the discussion is conducted only in a moderated newsgroup, the moderation delays are quite OK.

However, if I post a message to a moderated and an unmoderated newsgroup, I really do not think that it is acceptable that my response to the unmoderated newsgroup is delayed by the moderation delay. In such cases, I would rather only post to the unmoderated newsgroup or posted two separate entries, one to the unmoderated and one to the moderated newsgroup. Unfortunately, in the latter case, many readers will se two entries with the same contents.

Paul

Because gee continues to try to suck the good people here into his trap.

It's easy in PAN and Gravity too, if I notice. I think he should be shot out of SED too as long as he plays his silly NNTP games.

--
  Keith