Honda Car Forum

"Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:dBM3g.3554$DT5.572@newsread3.news.pas.earthli nk.net...
>
> We disagree.

Now there's a surprise!

On 4/26/06 10:14 AM, in article Xns97B1727031AF2tegger@207.14.113.17,
"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:

> "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
> news:VhL3g.1302$Vn.1228@newsread4.news.pas.earthli nk.net:
>
>> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote
>
>>
>> This second post (to a different Honda newsgroup) obviously
>> was intended to cover more audience.
>>
>> It's simply not a big deal to post to one newsgroup and
>> then, a day or more later, post the same query to another
>> newsgroup.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> He posted this identical message independently to at least three groups
> simultaneously. That's both bad etiquette and a cheat on the readers of the
> other groups.

Just because you lurk in every group that says Honda on it, doesn't mean
everyone else does. This is an un-moderated group, so by definition, no one
is empowered to police it.

What's next, criticism of every top-poster and anyone who has the audacity
to ask about the maintenance light? Your postings and your website have
been very useful to a lot of people, but lately you seem to be descending
more and more frequently into the etiquette policeman trap. Maybe its time
to take a short break before it all drives you nuts.

On 4/26/2006 5:54 PM E Meyer spake these words of knowledge:

> On 4/26/06 10:14 AM, in article Xns97B1727031AF2tegger@207.14.113.17,
> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>
>> "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
>> news:VhL3g.1302$Vn.1228@newsread4.news.pas.earthli nk.net:
>>
>>> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote
>>
>>>
>>> This second post (to a different Honda newsgroup) obviously
>>> was intended to cover more audience.
>>>
>>> It's simply not a big deal to post to one newsgroup and
>>> then, a day or more later, post the same query to another
>>> newsgroup.
>>>
>>
>> He posted this identical message independently to at least three groups
>> simultaneously. That's both bad etiquette and a cheat on the readers of the
>> other groups.
>
> Just because you lurk in every group that says Honda on it, doesn't mean
> everyone else does. This is an un-moderated group, so by definition, no one
> is empowered to police it.
>
> What's next, criticism of every top-poster and anyone who has the audacity
> to ask about the maintenance light? Your postings and your website have
> been very useful to a lot of people, but lately you seem to be descending
> more and more frequently into the etiquette policeman trap. Maybe its time
> to take a short break before it all drives you nuts.

Personally, I think it's absurd to point out to someone voicing their
opinion about someone else's posts (in this case Tegger) that this is
usenet, and people can say whatever they want.

I mean, reading your post, it looks like you're taking Tegger to task
for his posting, which was taking someone to task for their posting.

Whatever. After all, this is usenet, and you can be as silly as you
want to be. Just don't expect other people not to notice.


RFT!!!
Dave Kelsen
--
Bill Brasky hated Mexicans. And he was half Mexican. And he hated irony.

E Meyer wrote:
> On 4/26/06 10:14 AM, in article Xns97B1727031AF2tegger@207.14.113.17,
> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>
>
>>"Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
>>news:VhL3g.1302$Vn.1228@newsread4.news.pas.earth link.net:
>>
>>
>>>"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote
>>
>>>This second post (to a different Honda newsgroup) obviously
>>>was intended to cover more audience.
>>>
>>>It's simply not a big deal to post to one newsgroup and
>>>then, a day or more later, post the same query to another
>>>newsgroup.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>He posted this identical message independently to at least three groups
>>simultaneously. That's both bad etiquette and a cheat on the readers of the
>>other groups.
>
>
> Just because you lurk in every group that says Honda on it, doesn't mean
> everyone else does. This is an un-moderated group, so by definition, no one
> is empowered to police it.
>
> What's next, criticism of every top-poster and anyone who has the audacity
> to ask about the maintenance light? Your postings and your website have
> been very useful to a lot of people, but lately you seem to be descending
> more and more frequently into the etiquette policeman trap. Maybe its time
> to take a short break before it all drives you nuts.
>
well /i/ think tegger's request is perfectly reasonable - it saves a
bunch of messing about. i may "donate" time for free, but that doesn't
mean it has no value and that i like wasting it on multiple independent
posts.

On 4/26/06 9:36 PM, in article
K-mdneupN8uls83ZnZ2dnUVZ_tqdnZ2d@speakeasy.net, "jim beam"
<nospam@example.net> wrote:

> E Meyer wrote:
>> On 4/26/06 10:14 AM, in article Xns97B1727031AF2tegger@207.14.113.17,
>> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> "Elle" <honda.lioness@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote in
>>> news:VhL3g.1302$Vn.1228@newsread4.news.pas.earthli nk.net:
>>>
>>>
>>>> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote
>>>
>>>> This second post (to a different Honda newsgroup) obviously
>>>> was intended to cover more audience.
>>>>
>>>> It's simply not a big deal to post to one newsgroup and
>>>> then, a day or more later, post the same query to another
>>>> newsgroup.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> He posted this identical message independently to at least three groups
>>> simultaneously. That's both bad etiquette and a cheat on the readers of the
>>> other groups.
>>
>>
>> Just because you lurk in every group that says Honda on it, doesn't mean
>> everyone else does. This is an un-moderated group, so by definition, no one
>> is empowered to police it.
>>
>> What's next, criticism of every top-poster and anyone who has the audacity
>> to ask about the maintenance light? Your postings and your website have
>> been very useful to a lot of people, but lately you seem to be descending
>> more and more frequently into the etiquette policeman trap. Maybe its time
>> to take a short break before it all drives you nuts.
>>
> well /i/ think tegger's request is perfectly reasonable - it saves a
> bunch of messing about. i may "donate" time for free, but that doesn't
> mean it has no value and that i like wasting it on multiple independent
> posts.

I think Tegger's request is simply ridiculous and I just can't imagine why
he thinks he should have to respond in each group where he sees a question.
Who ever said you have to answer the same post independently in each
newsgroup? If someone takes the time to post the same question individually
to different groups, a reasonable expectation is that they are looking for
different responses from different people.

I just hate to see this stuff start. I've been lurking/participating in
some of these groups for over a decade and I've seen this happen a number of
times. Once the etiquette postings start, usefulness stops. I have a
number of ID's in the kill file of formerly intelligent and helpful people
who burned out and descended into nonsensical rants about top-posting and/or
the infamous "Maintenance required" light. I am hoping Tegger doesn¹t
become one of them.

E Meyer wrote:
<snip>

>I have a
> number of ID's in the kill file of formerly intelligent and helpful people
> who burned out and descended into nonsensical rants about top-posting and/or
> the infamous "Maintenance required" light. I am hoping Tegger doesn¹t
> become one of them.

what a bunch of passive-aggressive bullshit. if you want to killfile
someone, either just do it or shut up. ranting with this, "i'm writing
to you, but my /real/ intended audience is tegger" crap is /so/ ****ing
juvenile.

E Meyer <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote in
news:C075643E.F8381%epmeyer50@msn.com:


>
> What's next, criticism of every top-poster and anyone who has the
> audacity to ask about the maintenance light? Your postings and your
> website have been very useful to a lot of people, but lately you seem
> to be descending more and more frequently into the etiquette policeman
> trap. Maybe its time to take a short break before it all drives you
> nuts.
>


Suppose a question was asked in several groups, each with different viewer
bases. Suppose in ONE of those groups the question was answered correctly.
The viewers in the other groups would be completely unaware of the answer
since they are not aware of the question having been asked in the other
group. This means that those who read for edification remain uneducated.
A cheat on them, as I said.

Crossposting is the cure for such informational disconnects.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

jim beam <nospam@example.net> wrote in
news:xq6dnba-F7Fs3s3ZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@speakeasy.net:

> E Meyer wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>I have a
>> number of ID's in the kill file of formerly intelligent and helpful
>> people who burned out and descended into nonsensical rants about
>> top-posting and/or the infamous "Maintenance required" light. I am
>> hoping Tegger doesn¹t become one of them.
>
> what a bunch of passive-aggressive bullshit. if you want to killfile
> someone, either just do it or shut up. ranting with this, "i'm
> writing to you, but my /real/ intended audience is tegger" crap is
> /so/ ****ing juvenile.
>


Come on jim, stop holding back and tell us what you *really* think!



--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

On 4/26/06 11:09 PM, in article
xq6dnba-F7Fs3s3ZnZ2dneKdnZydnZ2d@speakeasy.net, "jim beam"
<nospam@example.net> wrote:

> E Meyer wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> I have a
>> number of ID's in the kill file of formerly intelligent and helpful people
>> who burned out and descended into nonsensical rants about top-posting and/or
>> the infamous "Maintenance required" light. I am hoping Tegger doesn¹t
>> become one of them.
>
> what a bunch of passive-aggressive bullshit. if you want to killfile
> someone, either just do it or shut up. ranting with this, "i'm writing
> to you, but my /real/ intended audience is tegger" crap is /so/ ****ing
> juvenile.

Boy, you sure turned into an asshole!

I was trying to make the point that attempting to police the groups is
futile and can turn into exactly the sort of crap you just descended to.
Thanks for making my point.

On 4/27/06 6:48 AM, in article Xns97B24F7045855tegger@207.14.113.17,
"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:

> E Meyer <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote in
> news:C075643E.F8381%epmeyer50@msn.com:
>
>
>>
>> What's next, criticism of every top-poster and anyone who has the
>> audacity to ask about the maintenance light? Your postings and your
>> website have been very useful to a lot of people, but lately you seem
>> to be descending more and more frequently into the etiquette policeman
>> trap. Maybe its time to take a short break before it all drives you
>> nuts.
>>
>
>
> Suppose a question was asked in several groups, each with different viewer
> bases. Suppose in ONE of those groups the question was answered correctly.
> The viewers in the other groups would be completely unaware of the answer
> since they are not aware of the question having been asked in the other
> group. This means that those who read for edification remain uneducated.
> A cheat on them, as I said.
>
> Crossposting is the cure for such informational disconnects.

I don't disagree, but my (personal) experience has been that when I have
cross posted my question, that one correct answer is almost never cross
posted to all those same groups. On one occasion that the answer I needed
was cross posted, the answerer was flamed on at least one of the groups for
excessive cross posting. I just don't think you can win trying to fix these
things & even making the attempt just causes frustration (and seems to bring
out Jim Beam's true personality...).