Question about cross-posting

[gerryhatrick]

If a piece of news/information is posted within another topic, and a member then takes that news and makes a new (and original) topic out of it, is that considered cross posting?

Thanks.

[Greg]

If a piece of news/information is posted within another topic, and a member then takes that news and makes a new (and original) topic out of it, is that considered cross posting?

Cross posting is simply posting the identical posting in multiple areas of the Internet or in this forum.

What you are refering to is ok - so long as the new thread isn't identical to the original thread. Every attempt should be made to ensure that a thread - dealing with each topic - does not already exist. Multiple threads on the same topic just clutter up the forums.

[Greg]

Please note, if you see two threads that are identical (in topic), please report the two threads to me and I can merge the two (or more) threads together.

[gerryhatrick]

If a piece of news/information is posted within another topic, and a member then takes that news and makes a new (and original) topic out of it, is that considered cross posting?

Cross posting is simply posting the identical posting in multiple areas of the Internet or in this forum.

What you are refering to is ok - so long as the new thread isn't identical to the original thread. Every attempt should be made to ensure that a thread - dealing with each topic - does not already exist. Multiple threads on the same topic just clutter up the forums.

Thakyou Greg.

Just to be clear, if a POST (not a thread) refers to a news event, for example, and then I start a THREAD concerning that news event, that's not cross posting?

[geoffrey]

I think it would depend on whether that news story was about something considerably different then the original topic. I have some issue with your constant posting of similar issues Gerry, like on Global Warming where each story is just a slight variation of the previous topic. I don't know if this is compliant with the rules, but perhaps Greg could tighten up that definition a little to prevent what we have in the "Federal Politics" forum... where 3 topics have many threads.

For example, two threads on Garth Turner being turfed. Not good. 3 topics on global warming. Not good. 3 topics on Afghanistan. Not good. You see what I mean?

Generally most posts can fit under one thread IMO. It would make the forum much cleaner and less name calling as people get the impression that some are merely anti-Harper or anti-Muslim when they constantly post new high profile threads with the same topics over and over.

[gerryhatrick]

I think it would depend on whether that news story was about something considerably different then the original topic.

You misunderstand. I have been accused of cross posting for posting a topic that was based upon the same news that was presented in a post. The accusations continued unabated over this particular situation, although I repeatedly pointed out I was posting a new topic and the existance of a similar post WITHIN an unrelated topic did not constitute cross-posting. The complainer stuck with the accusation in spite of the explanation and would not take his complaint to the admin (whom he thinks are part of a leftist conspiracy) so I was forced to ask the question here.

Post and topic, two different things for this conversation.

To answer your comment though, I think it's subjective. You have to judge the topics as being new and unique news or not. It's not enough, for example, to say there are two Garth Turner topics, therefore it's cross-posting. One of them deals specifically with him being "turfed", the other with quotes from his blog. Very different topics based upon different news pieces.

As the admin says, cross-posting is an IDENTICAL thread.

[geoffrey]

As the admin says, cross-posting is an IDENTICAL thread.

Right, but squeezing through the rules and making reasonable choices are too different things. I think you could easily cut down on the thread count, and still get your points across. Your the leading thread starter in the Federal Politics forum, three topics on global warming and the current legislation at hand. It's excessive. Your by no means the worst over all (I'm thinking our "Muslims are coming, muslims are coming" friend), but less multiple threads on the same topic would clean up the forum and help everyone keep track of the debate a little better.

[gerryhatrick]

As the admin says, cross-posting is an IDENTICAL thread.

Right, but squeezing through the rules and making reasonable choices are too different things. I think you could easily cut down on the thread count, and still get your points across. Your the leading thread starter in the Federal Politics forum, three topics on global warming and the current legislation at hand. It's excessive.

Global Warming is a rather large issue, don't you think? As with the war in Afghanistan (another large issue) there is ongoing news that is related in terms of the larger issue but is unique in terms of news deserving of a new thread. Do you consider topics concerning assorted news/opinion on the war in Afghanistan topics to be bending the rules?

I have been accused of starting too many Global Warming threads before, usually by those who think Global Warming isn't a big deal or perhaps that it's not even happening. Catch my drift?

I'm not "squeezing through the rules" at all in the topics I post, and if I'm the leading thread starter in the forum then so be it. Someone has to be. My topics are usually backed up with a news item link and are relavent to our federal political discourse. You're welcome to beat me to it.

This topic is not about me and my postings though. If you have a complaint you can report, but of course I have "special status" here, so it won't do you any good.

[geoffrey]

Haha gerry you should know by now that despite the fact we'll never agree on anything, I'm not against you. I was just offering some constructive criticism. I think your case would be better made by one very well developed and cited thread than covering many similar stories on many topics.

[gerryhatrick]

If a piece of news/information is posted within another topic, and a member then takes that news and makes a new (and original) topic out of it, is that considered cross posting?

Cross posting is simply posting the identical posting in multiple areas of the Internet or in this forum.

What you are refering to is ok - so long as the new thread isn't identical to the original thread. Every attempt should be made to ensure that a thread - dealing with each topic - does not already exist. Multiple threads on the same topic just clutter up the forums.

Thakyou Greg.

Just to be clear, if a POST (not a thread) refers to a news event, for example, and then I start a THREAD concerning that news event, that's not cross posting?

Bump for Greg.

[theloniusfleabag]

This topic is not about me and my postings though. If you have a complaint you can report, but of course I have "special status" here, so it won't do you any good.

You mean 'you're the troll with a million IP addresses'?

[Riverwind]

Just to be clear, if a POST (not a thread) refers to a news event, for example, and then I start a THREAD concerning that news event, that's not cross posting?

If you have to ask then the answer is 'yes it is cross posting'.

[gerryhatrick]

Just to be clear, if a POST (not a thread) refers to a news event, for example, and then I start a THREAD concerning that news event, that's not cross posting?

If you have to ask then the answer is 'yes it is cross posting'.

I have to ask because I've been harassed by a some posters over the matter. I have explained to them the simple logic of it, but I fear the motive is less to do with rules and more to do with partisan trolling.

So if you don't mind I'll ask my question.

[geoffrey]

Here is an example of rather annoying cross-posting:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=6816

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=6852

Two posts, within 3 days of each other, about Bob Rae leading in two different polls. It's unreasonable not to just have posted under the original thread. Just adds to the clutter.

Gerry, it's not about skirting the edges of the rules and claiming you didn't do any wrong. It's about being a reasonable member of the forum community and not being an annoyance to the hundreds of others that enjoy the board with extremely similiar postings on extremely similar topics within sometimes a day of each other.

[gerryhatrick]

Here is an example of rather annoying cross-posting:

I disagree with you there because #1 the polls are by different companies and asking different questions giving different results.

The Liberal leadership race looms rather large on the federal political scene at the moment, making a new poll worthy of a new topic. There is no rule that all polls need to be wrapped up into a single topic.

Definitely not cross posting in my view, but if you want to solicit gregs opinion by all means....

[gerryhatrick]

If a piece of news/information is posted within another topic, and a member then takes that news and makes a new (and original) topic out of it, is that considered cross posting?

Cross posting is simply posting the identical posting in multiple areas of the Internet or in this forum.

What you are refering to is ok - so long as the new thread isn't identical to the original thread. Every attempt should be made to ensure that a thread - dealing with each topic - does not already exist. Multiple threads on the same topic just clutter up the forums.

Thakyou Greg.

Just to be clear, if a POST (not a thread) refers to a news event, for example, and then I start a THREAD concerning that news event, that's not cross posting?

greg I'm bumping this down again so you don't miss it behind the rest of the comments that have come up.

thx.

[theloniusfleabag]

but of course I have "special status" here

Hopefully that status is a place at the top of 'the must remove soon' list. Care to explain this delusional status? (and why it can't get an answer to your question?...coudn't just PM Greg?) Otherwise, time to go. Then again, I bet you can't.

[theloniusfleabag]

Shall we bump this until we get an answer too?

[gerryhatrick]

Shall we bump this until we get an answer too?

Or until you understand sarcasm?

[Greg]

Here is an example of rather annoying cross-posting:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=6816

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=6852

This is borderline, and it could go either way. There are a lot of threads on similar topics, and I rarely merge threads.

However, in the future, lets do our best to keep topics like this together. Perhaps the best thing to do is send me a note through the report this post feature if you see two or more threads of similar topics. I have the ability to merge the topics together and change the overall thread title.

[gerryhatrick]

Greg, can I trouble you for an answer to my follow up question in post 4? thx.

[Greg]

Just to be clear, if a POST (not a thread) refers to a news event, for example, and then I start a THREAD concerning that news event, that's not cross posting?

No, it's not cross-postings, so long as there is not already a thread discussing this news event. If the original thread, where the new topic was raised is of a completely different issue, then it is in the best interest of the forum to begin another thread concerning the new topic.