«

I just recently set up Thunderbird. When responding to a post on a
newsgroup, I got an error message saying that I could only post to one
newsgroup at a time. If I am wrong to blame Thunderbird, let me say
that my ISP and newsserver do allow multiple posts because I have been
with them for awhile. Is this Thunderbird's doing and is there any way
around it? I tried posting this now to more than one group and it is
not working.

On Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:00:51 -0800, in message <bGUwh.214639$>,
Tim Howard wrote:

> I just recently set up Thunderbird. When responding to a post on a
> newsgroup, I got an error message saying that I could only post to one
> newsgroup at a time.

Thunderbird certainly allows cross-posting. See this message for an example.

Do you know how many groups was your message being posted to?
And does your ISP's news server carry all of these groups?

> If I am wrong to blame Thunderbird, let me say
> that my ISP and newsserver do allow multiple posts because I have been
> with them for awhile.

Now I am confused. Are you multi-posting, or are you cross-posting?
Multiple posts are where you post the message multiple times, each time
to one group. Each post will have only one newsgroup in the header.
Cross-posts are where you post the message once, with multiple
newsgroups in the header.


> Is this Thunderbird's doing and is there any way
> around it?

I don't believe that it is Thunderbird's doing.
This message is cross-posted with Thunderbird.

> I tried posting this now to more than one group and it is
> not working.

--
Cheers
Ralph Fox

Tim Howard wrote:
> I just recently set up Thunderbird. When responding to a post on a
> newsgroup, I got an error message saying that I could only post to one
> newsgroup at a time. If I am wrong to blame Thunderbird, let me say
> that my ISP and newsserver do allow multiple posts because I have been
> with them for awhile. Is this Thunderbird's doing and is there any way
> around it? I tried posting this now to more than one group and it is
> not working.


I wish Thunderbird had that feature, but alas it doesnt.

That is a function of the news server you were on, not Thunderbird

Please do not Crosspost

> Please do not Crosspost

If appropriate, one should cross-post

http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/xpost.html
"Why Crosspost"

Problem has been that people do not reply to cross-posts into a single
group.

Makhno wrote:

>> Please do not Crosspost
>
> If appropriate, one should cross-post
>
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/xpost.html
> "Why Crosspost"
>
> Problem has been that people do not reply to cross-posts into a single
> group.


I would not have as much of a problem with crossposting as I do if
people would, 1) make note of the crosspost in the body of the message,
and 2) set a followup for the desired newsgroup in which discussion is
to take place. If everyone did this, it would not be such an issue.

Lee

Makhno wrote:
>> Please do not Crosspost
>
> If appropriate, one should cross-post

No.

> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/xpost.html
> "Why Crosspost"

His opinion. Definitely not the consensus here.

> Problem has been that people do not reply to cross-posts into a single
> group.

No, problem is usenet does not work like most people would have liked.
If you crosspost, you bring together people who quite often don't like
each other or play nice together. Flame wars erupt. Insults are
common. Threads go more topical in one group than the other, often for
eons. Spamming has gotten so bad, a large percentage of people mark
threads read if there is a comma in groups header.

The only one crossposting helps is the OP. Easier for him/her.
Crossposting sucks.

On 2007-02-03, Makhno <root@127.0.0.1> wrote:

>> Please do not Crosspost
>
> If appropriate, one should cross-post
>
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/xpost.html
> "Why Crosspost"
>
> Problem has been that people do not reply to cross-posts into a single
> group.

Crossposting (posting a message in multiple groups with the same
Message-ID) to a limited number of pertinent groups is acceptable, as
once read. properly designed newsreader software will mark the message
as "read" in all groups to which it was crossposted. What is
objectionable is *multiposting* -- posting identical messages in
multiple groups but with a different Message-ID in each group. This
breaks proper newsreader functionality and requires the user to
individually mark each instance of the message as "read" in each group
in which it appears. Spammers like to do this to increase exposure to
their messages, so don't do it unless you want to be identified with
spammers.

--

John ()

On 2007-02-04, sticks <> wrote:

> Spamming has gotten so bad, a large percentage of people mark
> threads read if there is a comma in groups header.

Crossposting to a limited number of pertinent groups is appropriate.
Filter on multiple commas instead; e.g. dump anything with more than,
say, 5 commas in the Newsgroups: header line.

--

John ()

Makhno <root@127.0.0.1> wrote in news:
_:

> If appropriate, one should cross-post

Not any more. Crossposting is almost exclusively used these days by trolls
trying to start multi-group flame wars. Things have changed.

--
A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?

Makhno <root@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>> Please do not Crosspost

> If appropriate, one should cross-post
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/xpost.html
> "Why Crosspost"

Wrong interpretation and impression. It is primarily about why one
should not multi-post when posting to several newsgroups is for some
reason necessary. A comparison of two techniques, not a recommendation.

All the best, Timo

--
Prof. Timo Salmi ftp & http://garbo.uwasa.fi/ archives 193.166.120.5
Department of Accounting and Business Finance ; University of Vaasa
private.php?do=newpm&u= <http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/> ; FIN-65101, Finland
Timo's FAQ materials at http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/tsfaq.html