References: <n~3P6.+'=.1@miakinen.net> <v7nelk$g37$1@cabale.usenet-fr.net>
 <v7p59g$4t3s$1@news.usenet.ovh> <20240724.004328.92387ba5@mixmin.net>
 <c199c8a9-0331-1fee-05b8-90db58ceac05@Strand_in_London.Gov.UK>
 <20240724.155857.8331bef9@mixmin.net>
 <88d29faa-def6-d3e6-b2a3-12005239d809@Strand_in_London.Gov.UK>
Subject: Re: Canal+ crash - Re: Annulation : Crosspost excessif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20240724.191405.f8956a01@mixmin.net>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 19:14:05 +0100
From: D <noreply@mixmin.net>
Newsgroups: news.admin.net-abuse.usenet
Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!alphared!sewer!news.dizum.net!not-for-mail
Organization: dizum.com - The Internet Problem Provider
X-Abuse: abuse@dizum.com
Injection-Info: sewer.dizum.com - 2001::1/128
Bytes: 4029
Lines: 57

On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 17:42:51 +0200, Nicolas Paul Colin de Glocester <Master_Fontaine_is_dishonest@Strand_in_London.Gov.UK> wrote:
>On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, D wrote:
>"thank you for your reply . . ."
>
>Thanks likewise for replying politely.
>
>On Wed, 24 Jul 2024, D wrote:
>"cross-posting to the usenet newsgroups may have seemed like a
>good idea at the time, but the mondation of '93 aka "eternal september"
>flooded usenet into the meslee; one or two cross-posted newsgroups may
>seem reasonable to some, but posting articles separately, one group at
>a time i.e. without cross-posting, makes better sense, irrespective of
>what some have called "multi-posting" because not all usenet newsgroup
>subscribers, contributors, lurkers, etc., are actually reading in more
>than one of those included newsgroups; anyone can assign "follow-up to"
>when replying to articles that were posted in one newsgroup to another
>newsgroup (etiquette to announce follow-up in body of reply), so there
>was never any need for the inherently awkward praxis of "cross-posting""
>
>Dict.cc and WWW.Merriam-Webster.com and a dictionary failed to explain 
>"mondation" to me and I did not look up "meslee".

it's archaic, e.g. l'vniuerselle mondation, l'vniuersel deluge, in
reference to the worldwide inundation better known as noah's flood;
plenty of old dictionaries on-line, for old french i've used these:

thresor de la langue (1606):
https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Thresor_de_la_langue_fran%C3%A7oise
https://artfl.atilf.fr/dictionnaires/TLF-NICOT/index.htm
e.g., look up the word "meslee" from the main page:
http://portail.atilf.fr/cgi-bin/dico1look.pl?strippedhw=meslee

dictionarium latinogallicum (1552):
https://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Liber:Dictionarium_latinogallicum_-_Estienne,_1552,_A-Ins.djvu
https://artfl.atilf.fr/dictionnaires/ESTIENNE/index.htm

>Thanks for appreciating that I do not attempt to annoy you. I am in the 
>space industry as an ex-employee of the European Space Agency where we 
>believe that redundancy (backups) is an essential policy. I continue 
>during more than twenty years of USENET to think that cross-posting is 
>good. I rarely do it, because most USENET articles by me are suited for a 
>small number of newsgroups. For an example of a person who disagrees with 
>me, cf. a Java programmer many years ago.
>Eternal September does not permit cross-posting to more than 3 newsgroups, 
>which I recently find to be too restrictive. But hey! Eternal September is 
>gratis and good. Not all USENET servers carry the same newsgroups. 
>Following upto just 1 newsgroup can deprive readers (who read the start of 
>a thread) of important contributions to a thread.
>I refer you to the last paragraph of
>news:0f0dc30e-a92d-364f-ed16-1247fb220b57@Strand_in_London.Gov.UK
>With best regards,
>N. C. P. de G.

probably myriads of usenet newsgroup subscribers have saved and shared
cherry-picked articles and perhaps entire archives from their favorite
newsgroups over these decades since usenet became popular . . . surely
governments do these things routinely, thus redundancy is to the nines