In
imhotep said:
Yes, it was a type-o...funny one though...
Listen, this statement is not true. I do not have problems when
people use this technique...I have not tested other newsclients so I
can not comment further...
One writes to communicate, no? And a good communicator uses techniques
designed for the audience in question.
This is not a software issue. It's to do with the way you are *using* your
software. Gawd, you know that most of the people you're going to be
interacting with in these newsgroups are probably not even using a
newsreader, they're using the awful CDO interface. Whether you like it or
not, this is a fact....and
So, if you want to get the message to them, so they can learn something, you
need to send your posts in a manner that they will actually be able to
follow. When I want to reply to one of your messages, it's annoying to have
to go in to your original message & copy & paste the group names in to my
new message....that's the core issue here. You're annoying people with this
technique and it has no benefit to anyone, except you - and I can't even see
the true benefit to you, myself.
As I stated before. The problem I had was poeple were replying
incorrectly to a post that I sent to numerous groups. They would
reply to one but not all.
Well, that's their problem! You're not making things any better.
Frequently, I did not read the reply for
many days later. Now, I do not have time to checkout every newsgroup
like I used to. There are just to many. So, I set the Followup-to to
a group that I do check frequently.
But many people do not subscribe to that group. And in fact, it may not even
be carried on the news servers they're using. I don't think this is an
appropriate use of 'followup to'. If you want to stick to one group, stick
to one group. Otherwise,
Now, if you are replying but not
to me, set your headers any way you wish....
Why would I want to do anything other than reply to the thread in all the
groups to which you posted it?
If I can read *your* replies I am pretty sure *other* people can
too...
Right. I'm manually copying and pasting the group names into my
message....so *everyone* who is following this in any of the groups *you*
chose to post to, can read the same thing.
Oh, come on, that's the response of a twelve year old. You're better than
that!
Listen, I can honestly say that what I am doing is perfectly "legal"
in the sense of the protocol.
"Just because you *can* doesn't mean you *should,* as some wag once noted.
I can honestly say, that it *should*
work on your and everyone else's newsclients...
Dude, you are not getting it.
Your "followup to" *does* work properly in the literal sense. In that, when
someone replies to one of your posts, their client dutifully follows *your*
settings, and wants to send said reply only to that one group.
That is not the issue.
The issue is, when you post to multiple groups, it is presumed that's
because you want to cast a wide net - and I would hope that would cover
replies, as well. If the rest of us want to reply in what seems a perfectly
logical manner (i.e., to all the groups *you* chose), why should you make
more work for us by making us copy and paste the list of *original* groups
into our clients?
Why don't one of you try to describe the problem so at least I
understand what your problem is?
Does the above make it any clearer?
See, this whole "issue" started by a
couple of people accusing me of using a broken newsreader, etc, etc.
I don't think your newsreader is broken.
Now, fair is fair, if anyone starts a conversation with such rudeness
I am really not going to take them very seriously, especially when it
*is* their newsclient after all...
This is not a technological issue; it's a behavioral one.
Pax,
LW
