交叉发布与多发帖（两者都* APPEAR *被广泛接受） [英] cross posting vs. multi posting ( both *APPEAR* to be widely accepted )
问题描述
但取决于集团：
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e。 ..TF-8％26hl％3Den
....我会发布更多例子但是...
....在谷歌搜索交叉发布与多发帖之后
它不仅取决于组，而且在服务器上？任何一种方式都是
* NOT *被广泛接受它似乎有些声称因为pro和
都喜欢飞它是垃圾邮件横幅证明他们的立场
交叉发布和/或多发帖子（他们更喜欢）...
....我的立场得到了纠正！ ！
....但是，如果有人没有我的OP的答案，那么简单地这样说或
更好，只是忽略帖子！ !!
2004年4月28日07:34:42 -0700，* ProteanThread *< os ***** @ yahoo.com> ;写道：
...但是，如果有人没有我的OP的答案然后简单地这么说或
更好，只要忽略帖子！ !!
我们不能自由地讨论切线？这是您的24小时服务台，还是
Usenet？
* ProteanThread *写道：
...在谷歌搜索交叉发布与多发帖子之后
它不仅取决于组，还取决于服务器？任何一种方式都不被广泛接受，似乎有些声称。因为赞成和赞成飞行它是垃圾邮件横幅证明他们在交叉发布和/或多发帖子（他们更喜欢）的位置......
...我的立场得到纠正!!!
...但是如果有人没有得到我的OP的答案那么只是这么说或
更好，只是忽略帖子!!!
请不要交叉。
;-)
-
马克。
http://tranchant.plus.com/
" * ProteanThread *" < OS ***** @ yahoo.com>在消息中写道
news：de ************************* @ posting.google.co m ... < blockquote class =post_quotes>但取决于集团：
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
这个说有很多人喜欢交叉发帖到多个帖子，而且有些ISP也不喜欢多个帖子-posting。
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e .. .TF-8％26hl％3Den
这个是由一个人承认交叉发布可以是适当的b $ b，谁是谁也承认多发帖*存在*。
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8% 26hl％3Den
这个没有说任何关于交叉与
多重发布的相对优点。他回应的人认为，如果海报每次改变措辞让他们更多
为每个群体提供主题，那么多次发布是合理的，但是这是一个似是而非的推理：毕竟，向每个新闻组发送基本相同的广告
，每个新闻组都有特别的主题
措辞，这仍然是一种滥用行为。 />
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
这个并不表达作者自己的观点，只是同样的观点
你有一些团体喜欢一个，有些人更喜欢另一个。仅仅一个人对某种情况有一种特殊看法的事实不应该让你有同样的看法。毕竟，如果这个人错了，那么你也会这么做。
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
这个承认存在的规则涵盖了两种发布的问题，并且没有说明各自的优点或
赤字。
...我会发布更多例子但是...
...在谷歌搜索交叉发布vs之后多发帖子
它不仅取决于群组，还取决于服务器？任何一种方式都不被广泛接受，似乎有些声称。因为赞成和赞成飞行它是垃圾邮件横幅证明他们在交叉发布和/或多发帖子（他们更喜欢）的位置......
你引用的帖子中没有一个表明任何人都喜欢
多发帖子。逻辑表明这没有意义。
but depends upon the clique:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
....I''d post more examples but...
....after doing a google search for "cross posting vs. multi posting"
it not only depends upon the group but upon the server? either way is
*NOT* widely accepted it seems as some "claim" because both pro and
con like to fly the "it is spam" banner to justify their position on
cross posting and or multi posting (which either they prefer)...
....I stand corrected!!!
....BUT if anyone didn''t have the answer to my OP then simply say so or
better, just ignore the post!!!
On 28 Apr 2004 07:34:42 -0700, * ProteanThread * <os*****@yahoo.com> wrote:
...BUT if anyone didn''t have the answer to my OP then simply say so or
better, just ignore the post!!!
We''re not free to discuss tangentally? Is this your 24-hour help desk, or
Usenet?
* ProteanThread * wrote:
...after doing a google search for "cross posting vs. multi posting"
it not only depends upon the group but upon the server? either way is
*NOT* widely accepted it seems as some "claim" because both pro and
con like to fly the "it is spam" banner to justify their position on
cross posting and or multi posting (which either they prefer)...
...I stand corrected!!!
...BUT if anyone didn''t have the answer to my OP then simply say so or
better, just ignore the post!!!
Please don''t crosspost.
;-)
--
Mark.
http://tranchant.plus.com/
"* ProteanThread *" <os*****@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:de*************************@posting.google.co m...but depends upon the clique:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
This one says that there are a number of people who prefer cross-posting to
multi-posting, and that some ISPs also don''t like multi-posting.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
This one is by a person who acknowledges that cross-posting can be
appropriate, and who acknowledges as well that multi-posting *exists*.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
This one doesn''t say anything about the relative merits of cross- versus
multi-posting. The person he was responding to felt that multi-posting was
justified if the poster changed the wording each time to "make them more
topical for each group", but that''s specious reasoning: after all, sending
essentially the same advertisement to 5,000 newsgroups, with special topical
wording in each one, is still an abuse.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
This one doesn''t express the writer''s own opinion, just the same perception
you have that some groups prefer one and some prefer the other. The mere
fact that a person has a particular perception about a situation shouldn''t
lead you to have the same perception. After all, if the person is wrong,
then you will be too.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...TF-8%26hl%3Den
This one acknowledges the existence of rules that cover the issues of both
kinds of posting, and says nothing about their respective merits or
deficits.
...I''d post more examples but...
...after doing a google search for "cross posting vs. multi posting"
it not only depends upon the group but upon the server? either way is
*NOT* widely accepted it seems as some "claim" because both pro and
con like to fly the "it is spam" banner to justify their position on
cross posting and or multi posting (which either they prefer)...
Not one of the posts you cited indicates a preference by anyone for
multi-posting. Logic indicates that that wouldn''t make sense.
这篇关于交叉发布与多发帖（两者都* APPEAR *被广泛接受）的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
