In news:ejumh2lb7r9760q84e1vapu2rpqo5u3758@4ax.com Sir Frederick
<mmcneill@fuzzysys.com> wrote:

On 28 Sep 2006 02:02:44 GMT, Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote:

In news:1159404582.882640.138770@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com
"California Poppy" <GoldenStatePoppy@aol.com> wrote:

I don't know from which of this groups these postings originate, but
we don't want them in soc.retirement.

A cross-posted article doesn't "originate" in any single newsgroup;
it's sent to all of them at the same time.

Your model (map) of reality is very much more in error than is
Connie's.

Then please take this opportunity to explain.

Cross posting is a sloth, a troll, an effort for
mass attention without consideration.
Serious posting in NGs as they are, today, requires
individual NG postings,

And how is this different from cross posting?

so that individual followup responses may be given attention. Cross
posting is similar to mass email.

As is multiple individual posting.

In fact, multiple individual posts are far worse than cross-posts. Any
competent newsreader will present you with a cross-posted article
exactly once, and then mark it as read in every other newsgroup to which
it was posted.

For multiple individual posts, you'll see the article in each and every
newsgroup to which it was posted. Multiple individual posts will get you
rightly branded as a spammer.