TALK: Cross-posting

In article <2t7gum$si...@gagme.wwa.com>,
N M Miners  <N.M...@durham.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>Look, I know many people said they would cross-post articles from
>rec.arts.ascii to alt.ascii-art, but I don't think I've seen a single
>article in r.a.a. that hasn't also appeared in a.a-a.  When I logged on
>today, for example, there were 22 unread articles in a.a-a and 10 in
>r.a.a.  However, when I had read the 22 a.a-a articles, there were none
>left in r.a.a. 
>
>I was not particularly biased in either direction when the vote was taken
>as to whether r.a.a. should go ahead, but I do feel that unless some
>articles are exclusive to it, it becomes a bit of a waste of time. 
>
>Does anyone else have any feelings on this?
>
>
>  88
>88888888  888   888   .d8888b   888 o8o.
>  88       88    88   88'  `88   888" ""
>  88       88    88   88    88   88
>  88.  .o  88.  .88.  88.  .88   88
>  `V888V'  `V888V'88  `V8888V'  88888
>
>                 N.M...@durham.ac.uk


   There are basically two ways people feel about this.

   One is that the alt groups should be dumped and r.a.a used since it 
has so much more exposure (or will end up with more exposure).

   The other is that all the groups should be allowed to exist.  This way 
there are many roads that will lead people to ASCII art.

   I feel all the groups are OK.  As to cross-posting to them all, I 
think that's OK too.  Remember, even if the same things appear in r.a.a 
that appear in the a.a-a and a.b.p.a, they will be seen be people who 
would not have otherwise seen them.

   BTW, since there will be new ASCII people on r.a.a, you should see 
some things on r.a.a that you don't see elsewhere.  And I'll be posting 
goodies from all of the back issues of the Scarecrow's ASCII Art 
Archives, so if you missed any of that lot, check it out.

--
 ######\ #####\ ######\ #######\ ######\ #####\#######\  ######\ ###| ###| ###|
###(    ###/   ###/ ###|###| ###|###|   ###/   ###| ###|###| ###|###| ###| ###|
 #####\ ##|    ########|#######/ #####| ##|    #######/ ###| ###|###| ###| ###|
    ###|###\   ###| ###|###|###\ ###|   ###\   ###|###\ ###| ###|###| ###| ###|
#######|######/###| ###|###| ###/######/######/###| ###/########|#############|
 #####/  ####/ ###| ###|###| ##/ #####/  ####/ ###| ##/  ######/  ###########/

Jay B. Parker (jbp...@Ra.MsState.Edu) wrote:

: +--- N M Miners  <N.M...@durham.ac.uk> writes:
: | 
: | Look, I know many people said they would cross-post articles from
: | rec.arts.ascii to alt.ascii-art, but I don't think I've seen a single
: | article in r.a.a. that hasn't also appeared in a.a-a.
:
: [some Q&A deleted]
:
: Anyway, I'm more than happy with the way things seem to be going... and 
: expect the trend to be toward improvement.  Of course, I'm only one of 
: many people reading this... anyone else have an opinion?

For me, at least, the answer's easy.  I can't get alt.ascii-art, so the
new group gives me access to something I couldn't get otherwise.
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Larry Pendergraft   (lpe...@.spd.dsccc.com)   I said it, DSC didn't.  |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+