bryce@hoser.berkeley.edu (Bryce Nesbitt) (12/16/87)
I'm sure this idea must have been proposed before, but since I have not
read anything, I'll propose it again:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The facility of the news software that allows cross-posting is great. Too
great. Let's face it... some groups just don't have anything to say to
each other. Or perhaps that's "should not say anything to each other".
The suggestion is a centrally controlled "barrier" system to disable
cross-posting for hostile groups. Feasibility studies will, of course, be
left up to those in a position to implement it.
Some initial barriers I suggest are:
(alt.flame vs. -anything else-)
(rec.audio vs. sci.electronics)
(comp.sys.amiga vs. comp.sys.atari.st)
(talk.* vs. -anything not in talk-)
In the rare cases where an "illegal" cross-post would actually be
appropriate, the net will need to absorb the burden of two messages. This
will probably be insignificant compared to the savings (can you say "Mercury
filled speaker cables"?).
So, how about it?
** I apologize if this message was cross-posted inappropriately :-|.
|\ /| . Ack! (NAK, SOH, EOT)
{o O} . bryce@hoser.berkeley.EDU -or- ucbvax!hoser!bryce
(") Hoser is in danger... try "cogsci" if it fails.
Uwebber@brandx.rutgers.edu (Webber) (12/17/87)
In article <22198@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>, bryce@hoser.berkeley.edu (Bryce Nesbitt) writes: > ... > Some initial barriers I suggest are: > > (alt.flame vs. -anything else-) > (rec.audio vs. sci.electronics) > (comp.sys.amiga vs. comp.sys.atari.st) > (talk.* vs. -anything not in talk-) This is absolutely silly. Crossposting to alt.flame (and redirection of followups to same) is the only decent way to handle the flammage that ideas such as the above inevitably generate. ----- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)
page@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu (Bob Page) (12/18/87)
I like the idea of 'barriers' but thing they should be advisory, so the posting software will ask them if they really want to cross post to these groups. A suggestion I've made in the past for rn/vn/vnews/readnews/notes/etc is to make replies and followups do the same thing at first, and once the user has finished the message, THEN ask "Reply, Broadcast or Both?" with default to Reply. It gives the user a chance to cool down, and if they choose Both, the flame will get to the user via email first (usually), which will have the effect of putting the argument into email. Also, "Broadcast" is better than "Followup" since it connotes a very wide distribution. ..Bob -- Bob Page, U of Lowell CS Dept. page@ulowell.edu ulowell!page "I've never liked reality all that much, but I haven't found a better solution." --Dave Haynie, Commodore-Amiga