From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Apr 19 19:28:50 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 856EC14DB4 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 19:28:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA08063; Mon, 19 Apr 1999 19:25:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) To: Greg Lehey Cc: Amancio Hasty , Marius Bendiksen , Bill Swingle , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Cross Posting... In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 20 Apr 1999 10:53:36 +0930." <19990420105336.B40482@lemis.com> Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 19:25:52 -0700 Message-ID: <8061.924575152@zippy.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > In fact, cross posting is good. The bad thing is that people on both > lists get multiple copies, and that's a mail implementation issue. I think you're ignoring human nature here - one cross-posted message invariably (and I mean almost *always*) leads to every single reply which follows it going also to multiple lists. For really contraversial threads, you can also count on the cross-posting fest to eventually mutate to the point where the messages being cross posted have nothing to do with *any* of the lists they're being posted to, making hash out of the "relevance" argument. And don't say it doesn't happen because I've probably chewed you out as much as anyone for ignoring inappropriate cc lines in your own replies. :-) When you're dealing with hundreds of emails, the predilection for simply replying without ever even looking at the cc lines is very strong indeed. - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message