How about splitting this newsgroup up?

Peter Oliphant

I was thinking it might be a good idea to split this newsgroup into
different newsgroups, depending on the version of VS C++.NET being
discussed. Thus, there would be 2002, 2003, and 2005 newsgroups instead of
just one for all. This would at least end any confusion if someone asks a
question and doesn't state which version they are using (which of course can
change the answer to such questions).

Just a thought...

[==P==]

Feb 2 '06 #1

Bruno van Dooren

I don't think that would be a good idea.
first of all, there are already hundreds if not thousands of newsgroups on
msnews. splitting them up would at least quintuple (is this a word?) this
number. (versions of IE, versions of SQL server, versions of exchange, ....
, 32 and 64 bit)

That would mean that people who browse the lists to answer posts would have
to monitor an incredible amount of lists, and people posting questions would
have to post in several newsgroups if an issue is not related to a specific
compiler, like a general programming question.

I think this would end in confusion and frustration.
People just have to be precise in stating their problem.

kind regards,
Bruno.
"Peter Oliphant" <po*******@RoundTripInc.com> wrote in message
news:OF**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

I was thinking it might be a good idea to split this newsgroup into
different newsgroups, depending on the version of VS C++.NET being
discussed. Thus, there would be 2002, 2003, and 2005 newsgroups instead of
just one for all. This would at least end any confusion if someone asks a
question and doesn't state which version they are using (which of course
can change the answer to such questions).

Just a thought...

[==P==]

Feb 2 '06 #2

Peter Oliphant

> That would mean that people who browse the lists to answer posts would

have to monitor an incredible amount of lists, and people posting
questions would have to post in several newsgroups if an issue is not
related to a specific compiler, like a general programming question.

I think this would end in confusion and frustration.
People just have to be precise in stating their problem.
Ok, I can see that point of view. Then I would make the claim that people
need to be more tolerant about posting in newsgroups that aren't the
'perfect' one do post in. I don't know how many times I've seen "don't post
that here, there is a more specific one for that", when the newsgroup at
least looked like the appropriate place.

Part of the problem is that some subjects cross newsgroups (can't be fully
discussed in just one), and some apply to more than one (is appropriate in
more than one). For example, why can't I post ANY question about C++ in
'microsoft.public.msdn.general'? It is the reference for it, right?

So, if there isn't going to be a splitting of these newsgroups into mutually
exclusive ones where every subject is appropriate in one and only one of
these, I think anyone who replies "post that elsewhere" in cases where it is
easy to see why the poster would assume they were in the right place is just
rude, and itself should be a repremanded behavior...

[==P==]

"Bruno van Dooren" <br**********************@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:O7**************@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...I don't think that would be a good idea.
first of all, there are already hundreds if not thousands of newsgroups on
msnews. splitting them up would at least quintuple (is this a word?) this
number. (versions of IE, versions of SQL server, versions of exchange,
.... , 32 and 64 bit)

That would mean that people who browse the lists to answer posts would
have to monitor an incredible amount of lists, and people posting
questions would have to post in several newsgroups if an issue is not
related to a specific compiler, like a general programming question.

I think this would end in confusion and frustration.
People just have to be precise in stating their problem.

kind regards,
Bruno.
"Peter Oliphant" <po*******@RoundTripInc.com> wrote in message
news:OF**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

I was thinking it might be a good idea to split this newsgroup into
different newsgroups, depending on the version of VS C++.NET being
discussed. Thus, there would be 2002, 2003, and 2005 newsgroups instead of
just one for all. This would at least end any confusion if someone asks a
question and doesn't state which version they are using (which of course
can change the answer to such questions).

Just a thought...

[==P==]

Feb 2 '06 #3

Bruno van Dooren

Ok, I can see that point of view. Then I would make the claim that people
need to be more tolerant about posting in newsgroups that aren't the
'perfect' one do post in. I don't know how many times I've seen "don't
post that here, there is a more specific one for that", when the newsgroup
at least looked like the appropriate place. Tolerance is a good thing, though i have to say i haven't seen 'get lost'
posts here.
Part of the problem is that some subjects cross newsgroups (can't be fully
discussed in just one), and some apply to more than one (is appropriate in
more than one). For example, why can't I post ANY question about C++ in
'microsoft.public.msdn.general'? It is the reference for it, right. as long as your question is MSDN related. otherwise this newsgroup would be
much more appropriate.
So, if there isn't going to be a splitting of these newsgroups into
mutually exclusive ones where every subject is appropriate in one and only
one of these, I think anyone who replies "post that elsewhere" in cases
where it is easy to see why the poster would assume they were in the right
place is just rude, and itself should be a repremanded behavior...
In some cases, advising them to post the question elsewhere can be good
advice.
the chances of getting an answer to an MFC question are greater in the MFC
newsgroup. MFC programmers are much more likely to see your post there.
Also, asking a C++ question on windows.newbies is kind of pointless.

I agree with your statement that posts should not be rude, but I must say
that I haven't seen any rude posts on languages.dotnet.vc or vc.languages,
apart from that 'discussion' about a 'bug' a week or 2 ago.

Basic etiquette applies to all communications.

kind regards,
Bruno.

[==P==]

"Bruno van Dooren" <br**********************@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:O7**************@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

I don't think that would be a good idea.
first of all, there are already hundreds if not thousands of newsgroups
on msnews. splitting them up would at least quintuple (is this a word?)
this number. (versions of IE, versions of SQL server, versions of
exchange, .... , 32 and 64 bit)

That would mean that people who browse the lists to answer posts would
have to monitor an incredible amount of lists, and people posting
questions would have to post in several newsgroups if an issue is not
related to a specific compiler, like a general programming question.

I think this would end in confusion and frustration.
People just have to be precise in stating their problem.

kind regards,
Bruno.
"Peter Oliphant" <po*******@RoundTripInc.com> wrote in message
news:OF**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

I was thinking it might be a good idea to split this newsgroup into
different newsgroups, depending on the version of VS C++.NET being
discussed. Thus, there would be 2002, 2003, and 2005 newsgroups instead
of just one for all. This would at least end any confusion if someone
asks a question and doesn't state which version they are using (which of
course can change the answer to such questions).

Just a thought...

[==P==]

Feb 2 '06 #4

William DePalo [MVP VC++]

"Peter Oliphant" <po*******@RoundTripInc.com> wrote in message
news:O3**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

Ok, I can see that point of view. Then I would make the claim that people
need to be more tolerant about posting in newsgroups that aren't the
'perfect' one do post in. I don't know how many times I've seen "don't
post that here, there is a more specific one for that", when the newsgroup
at least looked like the appropriate place.

There is a fine line to walk here.

On the one hand, these groups are about giving help and it is not much help
to say "take a hike" as is the norm in usenet groups.

On the other, I for one would hate to see more than a little discussion here
of, say, COM or VB (two of _my_ least favorite topics) except of course for
questions on how to make use of them with my favorite language.

And questions on some topics - say extending an Office application with a
C++ widget - are likely to go unanswered here.

So, I try to point the OP gently to a more appropriate group when there is
one and offer a pointer to an online help topic if I have any clue so that
he doesn't go away empty handed.

And I keep the safety on my flame thrower _until_ I feel some heat. :-)

Just by the way, the group

microsoft.public.vc.languange

has a really eclectic bunch of regulars. The probability is high if there is
anything that you want to do in a C++ application that someone there has
already done it. It's not a bad place to throw the Hail Mary pass when you
have no other option. :-)

Regards,
Will

Feb 3 '06 #5

Roman

Peter Oliphant wrote:

That would mean that people who browse the lists to answer posts would
have to monitor an incredible amount of lists, and people posting
questions would have to post in several newsgroups if an issue is not
related to a specific compiler, like a general programming question.

I think this would end in confusion and frustration.
People just have to be precise in stating their problem.

Ok, I can see that point of view. Then I would make the claim that people
need to be more tolerant about posting in newsgroups that aren't the
'perfect' one do post in. I don't know how many times I've seen "don't post
that here, there is a more specific one for that", when the newsgroup at
least looked like the appropriate place.

I find this group quite tolerating compared to other related groups
where posters correct each other's spelling, accuse people of posting
their homework, mentoring to learn to quote ... too much irrelevant
noise ... just like this post of mine :)

Feb 3 '06 #6