1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. NEWS.MISC

  • netiquette: taking Usenet material to e-mail

    From Bill Evans@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 13 17:12:46 2015
    BCopy: wje@acm.org (Bill Evans)

    I know it's against netiquette to quote e-mail in a Usenet
    article without the permission of the author, but what about
    the reverse?

    That is to say, is it against netiquette to take a matter of
    public discussion in a Usenet newsgroup and spin off a
    private discussion in e-mail with one participant?

    --
    Bill Evans / Box 1224 / Mariposa, CA 95338 / (209)742-4720
    Mail-To: wje@acm.org -- PGP encrypted mail preferred. -- pgpkey.mariposabill.com for public key. Key #: 8D8B521B
    PGPprint: 0A9C 3545 8FFF 7501 6265 1519 40FF 76F9 8D8B 521B

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marius Gavrilescu@21:1/5 to Bill Evans on Mon Sep 14 11:43:27 2015
    wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) writes:

    That is to say, is it against netiquette to take a matter of
    public discussion in a Usenet newsgroup and spin off a
    private discussion in e-mail with one participant?

    No idea about netiquette, but my line of thinking goes like this:

    It shouldn't be, as public discussion in a Usenet newsgroup is, as you
    said, public. The email recipient would have been able to stumble upon
    the discussion without outside help.

    Furthermore, as the private discussion is between you and somebody who
    wasn't involved in the discussion you are quoting, there's nobody to
    chastise you for quoting it.
    --
    Marius Gavrilescu

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bill Evans@21:1/5 to Marius Gavrilescu on Mon Sep 14 04:34:01 2015
    BCopy: wje@acm.org (Bill Evans)

    Marius Gavrilescu <marius@ieval.ro> wrote:
    wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) writes:

    That is to say, is it against netiquette to take a matter of
    public discussion in a Usenet newsgroup and spin off a
    private discussion in e-mail with one participant?

    No idea about netiquette, but my line of thinking goes like this:

    It shouldn't be, as public discussion in a Usenet newsgroup is, as you
    said, public. The email recipient would have been able to stumble upon
    the discussion without outside help.

    Furthermore, as the private discussion is between you and somebody who
    wasn't involved in the discussion you are quoting, there's nobody to
    chastise you for quoting it.

    The situation I had in mind was not to discuss the topic
    with someone who was not following the newsgroup; it was to
    start a related discussion with someone who was already
    following the main discussion. Perhaps I needed background
    information that the other person might be able to provide,
    where others in the discussion already knew the answer.
    Perhaps it might be something related to the original
    discussion, but was of a delicate nature, or something where
    a certain amount of discretion or privacy was desired.

    --
    Bill Evans / Box 1224 / Mariposa, CA 95338 / (209)742-4720
    Mail-To: wje@acm.org -- PGP encrypted mail preferred. -- pgpkey.mariposabill.com for public key. Key #: 8D8B521B
    PGPprint: 0A9C 3545 8FFF 7501 6265 1519 40FF 76F9 8D8B 521B

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Marius Gavrilescu@21:1/5 to Bill Evans on Mon Sep 14 21:39:44 2015
    wje@acm.org (Bill Evans) writes:

    The situation I had in mind was not to discuss the topic
    with someone who was not following the newsgroup; it was to
    start a related discussion with someone who was already
    following the main discussion.

    Oh. This is only a problem if the discussion should have been public
    and it isn't. One (common) such example is when somebody asks a
    question and somebody else provides an answer privately. If the answer
    is instead posted publicly, others can benefit from it.

    Perhaps I needed background information that the other
    person might be able to provide, where others in the
    discussion already knew the answer.

    In this case there is no reason why you would have posted it publicly.
    You aren't depriving anyone of information. Thus, you aren't violating
    any nettiquette rule (or at least that's what *I* think).

    Perhaps it might be something related to the original
    discussion, but was of a delicate nature, or something where
    a certain amount of discretion or privacy was desired.

    Even more so in this situation. The other party will (hopefully)
    understand the delicateness of the message (or you can point it out
    explicitly if need), so they won't ask you to repeat it in public.
    --
    Marius Gavrilescu

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)