>CAFE standards worse now than 15 years ago, etc etc etc. It would be >hard to find a better case for illustrating that all the wrong people >are calling all the wrong tunes for all the wrong reasons. > >>The more we all use the net to stay in touch with each other, the more >>transparent we can make this information, even if it gets a bit intricate. > >Indeed. It baffles me that some people take exception to >cross-posting, what nonsense. Sure, you have to be judicious about >it, but you have to be judicious with mailing lists anyway, don't >you? Nothing wrong with cross-posting, quite the opposite.
It sounds like you may have heard from some who don't like it. If I am doing it in a way that people don't like, then nobody has made me aware of this, recently. They could do so, politely, I think, in a way that might cause me to consider modifying some of it. What I have done over the years is, as you say, try to be judicious about it, basically giving things a relevancy test, and trying to BCC sometimes instead of cc'ing. The purpose of the BCC'ing in my view is to try not to develop too many incoherent conversations. Sometimes I forget to BCC, and this is when we see the crosspost, but lately I am moving more toward BCC'ing, but not to an absolute extent. Putting myelf in the position of the reader and not the poster, there are times when I find crossposting to some extent annoying, and times when I find it to some extent helpful. I sort of like to see, sometimes, for example, when it's a news post or a general initiation of a topic, where else the author is putting his thoughts. The times when I don't like it I guess might be when it becomes visually annoying with too many screwed up subject lines, and-or where the conversations do not connect to each other. In this particular instance, the scales were clearly tipped in favor of passing on the info, because it is so valuable to me (and I assume, some others) to get some of the low-down from far-away lands as to what is going on in these worldwide-relevant activities. But this particular case was a special instance, as I was specifically directing people to this (biofuel) group. The argument for crossposting is, I guess, partly the overall rule of erring on the side of getting the info out there to the people who might want to see it, even if it gets a bit sloppy sometimes and, in the opinion of some, uses a little too much bandwidth. But, that said, I do think there's a place for me and others to modify crossposting behaviour so that it conforms to principles that amount to good netiquette? I know that some folks hate crossposting and consider all crossposting poor netiquette. In that case, I'll just fail netiquette I guess. But I'll listen to or read contrary opinions, and give them consideration. MM ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70 http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biofuel/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
