This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
One way to deal with this page would be to trim it down and move it to Wiktionary. Thoughts? Regards, Ben Aveling 07:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Where has my cleanup message vanished to? Wikipedia:Cleanup/November just redirects to a page claiming to be now empty.
The whole point I was making is that it blurs an important distinction: that between crossposting and multiposting.
"Crossposting is the act of posting verbatim copies of one message". On Usenet (and NNTP-based newsgroups in general), crossposting is posting only one copy, addressed to multiple newsgroups simultaneously. OTOH if you post multiple copies, it's multiposting. There are also a number of webpages, e.g. [1] [2] that go into more detail on the significance of this distinction and the rights and wrongs.
Of course, on other kinds of message board systems, which don't support crossposting in the NNTP sense, the distinction probably isn't made on these terms. There may also be some systems on which a user can address a message to multiple forums simultaneously, but once they are on the server they are indistinguishable from messages posted manually as separate copies (except that the timestamp may match to the second). But this doesn't affect the fact that whatever we do, we should make the distinction that does exist clear. -- Smjg 17:03, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Both http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crosspost and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-post exist. They should be combined. 82.163.24.100 ( talk) 22:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that the newer article Cross-post be merged with this one, as they clearly cover the same topic - there is no need for two articles. Terraxos ( talk) 05:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
The article states that multi-posting is preferred, but personally I can't see the advantage in this, and there are certainly references which prefer multi-posting: http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm Boardhead ( talk) 14:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Both of the references that you quote state a preference for crossposting rather than multi-posting. 86.7.30.217 ( talk) 20:55, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
This article says "Crossposting is the act of posting the same message to multiple information channels; forums, mailing lists, or newsgroups. Crossposting is perceived as inconsiderate[1], poor etiquette[2] and is banned from Usenet newsgroups and virtually all email lists.[3][4] This is distinct from multiposting, which is the posting of separate identical messages, individually, to each channel, (a forum, a newsgroup, an email list, or topic area)."
Those sound like exactly the same thing. Whether one posts items automatically or individually is simply a matter of method, not of substance. Why the distinction? Particularly since cross-posting between journaling/blogging sites such as LiveJournal, DreamWidth, InsaneJournal and so on are more and more commonly accepted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookgrrl ( talk • contribs) 04:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
The leader para currently contains the following:
Crossposting is perceived by whom? as inconsiderate [1], poor etiquette [2] and is banned from virtually all email lists. [3] [4]
- ^ "Mailing List Etiquette". The FreeBSD Documentation Project. Retrieved August 31, 2011.
- ^ Hambridge, S. (October 1995). RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines (Report). The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Retrieved August 31, 2011.
- ^ "Mailing list guidelines". fedoraproject.org. 11 October 2010. Retrieved August 31, 2011.
- ^ "Forum Rules, Mozillazine". mozillazine.org. Retrieved August 31, 2011.
The first reference quoted does not even mention crossposting. The second (IETF document) states that crossposting (in its Usenet context) is preferred to multiposting. The third and fourth refer only to specific mailing lists. This entire sentence needs to be rewritten and properly cited. 86.7.30.217 ( talk) 14:43, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
Given the misrepresentations of the cited documents, I'm removing this sentence (I've preserved it and its citations, above). If someone else wants to fix it and put it back I'm fine with that. 86.7.30.217 ( talk) 14:51, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
This statement was clearly incorrect, and I fixed it. -- Beroal ( talk) 18:08, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
One way to deal with this page would be to trim it down and move it to Wiktionary. Thoughts? Regards, Ben Aveling 07:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Where has my cleanup message vanished to? Wikipedia:Cleanup/November just redirects to a page claiming to be now empty.
The whole point I was making is that it blurs an important distinction: that between crossposting and multiposting.
"Crossposting is the act of posting verbatim copies of one message". On Usenet (and NNTP-based newsgroups in general), crossposting is posting only one copy, addressed to multiple newsgroups simultaneously. OTOH if you post multiple copies, it's multiposting. There are also a number of webpages, e.g. [1] [2] that go into more detail on the significance of this distinction and the rights and wrongs.
Of course, on other kinds of message board systems, which don't support crossposting in the NNTP sense, the distinction probably isn't made on these terms. There may also be some systems on which a user can address a message to multiple forums simultaneously, but once they are on the server they are indistinguishable from messages posted manually as separate copies (except that the timestamp may match to the second). But this doesn't affect the fact that whatever we do, we should make the distinction that does exist clear. -- Smjg 17:03, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Both http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crosspost and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-post exist. They should be combined. 82.163.24.100 ( talk) 22:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that the newer article Cross-post be merged with this one, as they clearly cover the same topic - there is no need for two articles. Terraxos ( talk) 05:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
The article states that multi-posting is preferred, but personally I can't see the advantage in this, and there are certainly references which prefer multi-posting: http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm http://oakroadsystems.com/genl/unice.htm Boardhead ( talk) 14:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Both of the references that you quote state a preference for crossposting rather than multi-posting. 86.7.30.217 ( talk) 20:55, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
This article says "Crossposting is the act of posting the same message to multiple information channels; forums, mailing lists, or newsgroups. Crossposting is perceived as inconsiderate[1], poor etiquette[2] and is banned from Usenet newsgroups and virtually all email lists.[3][4] This is distinct from multiposting, which is the posting of separate identical messages, individually, to each channel, (a forum, a newsgroup, an email list, or topic area)."
Those sound like exactly the same thing. Whether one posts items automatically or individually is simply a matter of method, not of substance. Why the distinction? Particularly since cross-posting between journaling/blogging sites such as LiveJournal, DreamWidth, InsaneJournal and so on are more and more commonly accepted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookgrrl ( talk • contribs) 04:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
The leader para currently contains the following:
Crossposting is perceived by whom? as inconsiderate [1], poor etiquette [2] and is banned from virtually all email lists. [3] [4]
- ^ "Mailing List Etiquette". The FreeBSD Documentation Project. Retrieved August 31, 2011.
- ^ Hambridge, S. (October 1995). RFC 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines (Report). The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Retrieved August 31, 2011.
- ^ "Mailing list guidelines". fedoraproject.org. 11 October 2010. Retrieved August 31, 2011.
- ^ "Forum Rules, Mozillazine". mozillazine.org. Retrieved August 31, 2011.
The first reference quoted does not even mention crossposting. The second (IETF document) states that crossposting (in its Usenet context) is preferred to multiposting. The third and fourth refer only to specific mailing lists. This entire sentence needs to be rewritten and properly cited. 86.7.30.217 ( talk) 14:43, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
Given the misrepresentations of the cited documents, I'm removing this sentence (I've preserved it and its citations, above). If someone else wants to fix it and put it back I'm fine with that. 86.7.30.217 ( talk) 14:51, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
This statement was clearly incorrect, and I fixed it. -- Beroal ( talk) 18:08, 13 September 2013 (UTC)