>On Feb 4, 11:44, Brad Knowles wrote:
>} Subject: Re: FAQs and crossposting policies
>} <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> said:
>}
>} > Is there anything that FAQ authors as a group can or should do about this?
>} > Or should we just accept it as life in the nineties, and revise our own
>} > working habits to fit within such policies? Maybe the crosspost policies
>} > for news.answers need to be rethought.
>} Post the FAQs once a day, separately to each newsgroup (instead
>} of cross-posting them).
>Then they'd be spam.
By the BI & BI2 indexes (via the 45-day window), yes... as currently
formulated. This obviously means that the BI & BI2 indexes should be revised
to not include moderated groups in the total. (After all, a non-mechanical
solution to spam (moderation), especially given that the moderator(s) can
place limits on crossposting by themselves, means that the rigid/mechanical
limits can be removed.) Otherwise, I suspect that the news.answers moderation
team would be more than slightly irritated to find duly approved articles
being cancelled... an irritation that (with its resulting actions) would be
completely justified.
Now, if ISPs such as netcom can be convinced that rigid
anti-crossposting policies are foolish, then a considerably lower number of
FAQs are likely to be affected (i.e., those going across many groups that are
posted on a very frequent basis, such as for alt.binaries.*)... but I suspect
that at some point an FAQ is going to come up that will exceed the BI2>20 limit
even on a normal basis.
-Allen
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved