New ASP.NET 2.0 Terminology: "CROSSPOST" is a very BAD name to use

Discussion in 'ASP .Net' started by anon, Jan 4, 2004.

  1. anon

    anon Guest

    Dear Microsoft:

    In your new ASP.NET 2.0 page model of being able to crosspost to another
    page, it would seem that if you were to type that word in Google,
    "crosspost" or "cross post", you will get endless amount of results from the
    newsgroup police complaining about posters cross posting to many newsgroups
    as this very message is doing.

    So to those at Microsoft, and since posting your form results to another
    page is very very important in a web site, and probably a big big part of
    why .NET is so difficult, I recommend you find a better name than "cross
    post".

    Otherwise, when you do that Google or Yahoo search for "cross post" when
    trying to learn how to post to another page, you will get endless results
    from the newsgroup police. There is no let up in the newsgroup police
    complaining about cross posting, so don't think when ASP.NET comes out
    Google or whatever will be able to tell the difference as the "cross
    posting" complaints are never ending and are always current. If you do that
    in newsgroups or in the Web, you will also get the same etiquette complaints
    or web pages as well.

    You, Microsoft, are essentially choosing the exact same name as the
    newgroups police do in their complaints and will only confuse people more.

    Perhaps, you should using something on the lines of the "Post Back"
    name....how about "Post Forward"? or something of the like...but definately
    NOT the word, "cross post".
    anon, Jan 4, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. anon

    clintonG Guest

    I have to agree that verbiage is not well thought out.


    --
    <%= Clinton Gallagher
    A/E/C Consulting, Web Design, e-Commerce Software Development
    Wauwatosa, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin USA
    NET
    URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/

    "anon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Dear Microsoft:
    >
    > In your new ASP.NET 2.0 page model of being able to crosspost to another
    > page, it would seem that if you were to type that word in Google,
    > "crosspost" or "cross post", you will get endless amount of results from

    the
    > newsgroup police complaining about posters cross posting to many

    newsgroups
    > as this very message is doing.
    >
    > So to those at Microsoft, and since posting your form results to another
    > page is very very important in a web site, and probably a big big part of
    > why .NET is so difficult, I recommend you find a better name than "cross
    > post".
    >
    > Otherwise, when you do that Google or Yahoo search for "cross post" when
    > trying to learn how to post to another page, you will get endless results
    > from the newsgroup police. There is no let up in the newsgroup police
    > complaining about cross posting, so don't think when ASP.NET comes out
    > Google or whatever will be able to tell the difference as the "cross
    > posting" complaints are never ending and are always current. If you do

    that
    > in newsgroups or in the Web, you will also get the same etiquette

    complaints
    > or web pages as well.
    >
    > You, Microsoft, are essentially choosing the exact same name as the
    > newgroups police do in their complaints and will only confuse people more.
    >
    > Perhaps, you should using something on the lines of the "Post Back"
    > name....how about "Post Forward"? or something of the like...but

    definately
    > NOT the word, "cross post".
    >
    >
    clintonG, Jan 4, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Don't cross post to so many groups! (oops, added to the FUD) ;->

    While the idea certainly has merit, consider filtering to the ASP.NET group
    and you will get fewer responses than dotnet alone. It is difficult to go to
    another page in ASP.NET using the built in crud ... until Whidbey. You can
    still use the same methodology as old ASP (ie, pull from the Response
    object), but you lose some of the benefits. ViewState is another
    possibility, as it is passed to the new page. Watch the ViewStateMac
    settings, as it has to follow exact encoding, or you will get ViewState
    corrupt.

    NOTE: Yes, it is a pain. Much better in Whidbey.

    --
    Gregory A. Beamer
    MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

    **********************************************************************
    Think Outside the Box!
    **********************************************************************
    "anon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Dear Microsoft:
    >
    > In your new ASP.NET 2.0 page model of being able to crosspost to another
    > page, it would seem that if you were to type that word in Google,
    > "crosspost" or "cross post", you will get endless amount of results from

    the
    > newsgroup police complaining about posters cross posting to many

    newsgroups
    > as this very message is doing.
    >
    > So to those at Microsoft, and since posting your form results to another
    > page is very very important in a web site, and probably a big big part of
    > why .NET is so difficult, I recommend you find a better name than "cross
    > post".
    >
    > Otherwise, when you do that Google or Yahoo search for "cross post" when
    > trying to learn how to post to another page, you will get endless results
    > from the newsgroup police. There is no let up in the newsgroup police
    > complaining about cross posting, so don't think when ASP.NET comes out
    > Google or whatever will be able to tell the difference as the "cross
    > posting" complaints are never ending and are always current. If you do

    that
    > in newsgroups or in the Web, you will also get the same etiquette

    complaints
    > or web pages as well.
    >
    > You, Microsoft, are essentially choosing the exact same name as the
    > newgroups police do in their complaints and will only confuse people more.
    >
    > Perhaps, you should using something on the lines of the "Post Back"
    > name....how about "Post Forward"? or something of the like...but

    definately
    > NOT the word, "cross post".
    >
    >
    Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\), Jan 5, 2004
    #3
  4. anon

    anon Guest

    see what I mean....all you get in the search results is those from the
    newsgroup police....




    "Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <> wrote in
    message news:%232910$...
    > Don't cross post to so many groups! (oops, added to the FUD) ;->
    >
    > While the idea certainly has merit, consider filtering to the ASP.NET

    group
    > and you will get fewer responses than dotnet alone. It is difficult to go

    to
    > another page in ASP.NET using the built in crud ... until Whidbey. You can
    > still use the same methodology as old ASP (ie, pull from the Response
    > object), but you lose some of the benefits. ViewState is another
    > possibility, as it is passed to the new page. Watch the ViewStateMac
    > settings, as it has to follow exact encoding, or you will get ViewState
    > corrupt.
    >
    > NOTE: Yes, it is a pain. Much better in Whidbey.
    >
    > --
    > Gregory A. Beamer
    > MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA
    >
    > **********************************************************************
    > Think Outside the Box!
    > **********************************************************************
    > "anon" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Dear Microsoft:
    > >
    > > In your new ASP.NET 2.0 page model of being able to crosspost to another
    > > page, it would seem that if you were to type that word in Google,
    > > "crosspost" or "cross post", you will get endless amount of results from

    > the
    > > newsgroup police complaining about posters cross posting to many

    > newsgroups
    > > as this very message is doing.
    > >
    > > So to those at Microsoft, and since posting your form results to another
    > > page is very very important in a web site, and probably a big big part

    of
    > > why .NET is so difficult, I recommend you find a better name than "cross
    > > post".
    > >
    > > Otherwise, when you do that Google or Yahoo search for "cross post" when
    > > trying to learn how to post to another page, you will get endless

    results
    > > from the newsgroup police. There is no let up in the newsgroup police
    > > complaining about cross posting, so don't think when ASP.NET comes out
    > > Google or whatever will be able to tell the difference as the "cross
    > > posting" complaints are never ending and are always current. If you do

    > that
    > > in newsgroups or in the Web, you will also get the same etiquette

    > complaints
    > > or web pages as well.
    > >
    > > You, Microsoft, are essentially choosing the exact same name as the
    > > newgroups police do in their complaints and will only confuse people

    more.
    > >
    > > Perhaps, you should using something on the lines of the "Post Back"
    > > name....how about "Post Forward"? or something of the like...but

    > definately
    > > NOT the word, "cross post".
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    anon, Jan 5, 2004
    #4
  5. anon

    Cor Guest

    Hi Anon,

    This written from the dotnet.languages.vb newsgroup,
    Some of us active in this newsgroup are so happy in this newsgroup that we
    do not have anymore a newsgroup police.

    Please do not activate them again?
    :))

    Cor
    Cor, Jan 5, 2004
    #5
  6. Old Netiquettte Principle: Crossposting to newsgroups is a very BAD practice
    to use

    --
    HTH,
    Kevin Spencer
    ..Net Developer
    Microsoft MVP
    Big things are made up
    of lots of little things.

    "anon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Dear Microsoft:
    >
    > In your new ASP.NET 2.0 page model of being able to crosspost to another
    > page, it would seem that if you were to type that word in Google,
    > "crosspost" or "cross post", you will get endless amount of results from

    the
    > newsgroup police complaining about posters cross posting to many

    newsgroups
    > as this very message is doing.
    >
    > So to those at Microsoft, and since posting your form results to another
    > page is very very important in a web site, and probably a big big part of
    > why .NET is so difficult, I recommend you find a better name than "cross
    > post".
    >
    > Otherwise, when you do that Google or Yahoo search for "cross post" when
    > trying to learn how to post to another page, you will get endless results
    > from the newsgroup police. There is no let up in the newsgroup police
    > complaining about cross posting, so don't think when ASP.NET comes out
    > Google or whatever will be able to tell the difference as the "cross
    > posting" complaints are never ending and are always current. If you do

    that
    > in newsgroups or in the Web, you will also get the same etiquette

    complaints
    > or web pages as well.
    >
    > You, Microsoft, are essentially choosing the exact same name as the
    > newgroups police do in their complaints and will only confuse people more.
    >
    > Perhaps, you should using something on the lines of the "Post Back"
    > name....how about "Post Forward"? or something of the like...but

    definately
    > NOT the word, "cross post".
    >
    >
    Kevin Spencer, Jan 5, 2004
    #6
  7. anon

    anon Guest

    If use "back and forth", it matches the "back" and "forward" buttons on
    Internet Explorer and all the other browsers anyway.

    Crossposting and any variation of it will cause the same amount of confusion
    like C# did to the job boards and users shouldn't have to wait 3 years for
    the search engines to be modified to look for that # anyway and thus the
    same for cross posting.



    "Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <> wrote in
    message news:%232910$...
    > Don't cross post to so many groups! (oops, added to the FUD) ;->
    >
    > While the idea certainly has merit, consider filtering to the ASP.NET

    group
    > and you will get fewer responses than dotnet alone. It is difficult to go

    to
    > another page in ASP.NET using the built in crud ... until Whidbey. You can
    > still use the same methodology as old ASP (ie, pull from the Response
    > object), but you lose some of the benefits. ViewState is another
    > possibility, as it is passed to the new page. Watch the ViewStateMac
    > settings, as it has to follow exact encoding, or you will get ViewState
    > corrupt.
    >
    > NOTE: Yes, it is a pain. Much better in Whidbey.
    >
    > --
    > Gregory A. Beamer
    > MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA
    >
    > **********************************************************************
    > Think Outside the Box!
    > **********************************************************************
    > "anon" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Dear Microsoft:
    > >
    > > In your new ASP.NET 2.0 page model of being able to crosspost to another
    > > page, it would seem that if you were to type that word in Google,
    > > "crosspost" or "cross post", you will get endless amount of results from

    > the
    > > newsgroup police complaining about posters cross posting to many

    > newsgroups
    > > as this very message is doing.
    > >
    > > So to those at Microsoft, and since posting your form results to another
    > > page is very very important in a web site, and probably a big big part

    of
    > > why .NET is so difficult, I recommend you find a better name than "cross
    > > post".
    > >
    > > Otherwise, when you do that Google or Yahoo search for "cross post" when
    > > trying to learn how to post to another page, you will get endless

    results
    > > from the newsgroup police. There is no let up in the newsgroup police
    > > complaining about cross posting, so don't think when ASP.NET comes out
    > > Google or whatever will be able to tell the difference as the "cross
    > > posting" complaints are never ending and are always current. If you do

    > that
    > > in newsgroups or in the Web, you will also get the same etiquette

    > complaints
    > > or web pages as well.
    > >
    > > You, Microsoft, are essentially choosing the exact same name as the
    > > newgroups police do in their complaints and will only confuse people

    more.
    > >
    > > Perhaps, you should using something on the lines of the "Post Back"
    > > name....how about "Post Forward"? or something of the like...but

    > definately
    > > NOT the word, "cross post".
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    anon, Jan 8, 2004
    #7
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Raymond Arthur St. Marie II of III

    very Very VERY dumb Question About The new Set( ) 's

    Raymond Arthur St. Marie II of III, Jul 23, 2003, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    471
    Raymond Hettinger
    Jul 27, 2003
  2. shanx__=|;-

    very very very long integer

    shanx__=|;-, Oct 16, 2004, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    1,616
    Merrill & Michele
    Oct 19, 2004
  3. Abhishek Jha

    very very very long integer

    Abhishek Jha, Oct 16, 2004, in forum: C Programming
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    418
    jacob navia
    Oct 17, 2004
  4. rantingrick
    Replies:
    44
    Views:
    1,204
    Peter Pearson
    Jul 13, 2010
  5. Paul
    Replies:
    63
    Views:
    1,251
Loading...

Share This Page