# Post Crossing



## Moogey

Is it really necessary to say "Sorry for crossing"? This happens a whole lot in IE. I don't see a problem in it-- and it's not intentional. I think every user's input is valuable!

If you don't know of this terminology in your forum category, it's when two users start responding at the same time and the second user who posts last realizes that somebody posted before him/her, so he/she goes to edit it saying "Sorry for crossing!"

-M


----------



## brian

I agree...it's a bit cumbersome.  But at the same time we can't exactly have a rule or sticky regulating/preventing it, can we? 

Perhaps this question would be better asked in the Cultural Discussions forum.  (Much like the famous _Thanks in Advance_ thread.)


b. (Like how I switched over to one-letter signatures like all the cool kids??  )


----------



## Moogey

Heh thanks Brian. Well I started this thread to see if we can all agree to stop apologizing for it! Hopefully they'll read it!

Unless somebody wants to keep the idea of apologizing around. I don't see any problem with it at all.

-M


----------



## brian

Well, if you want my opinion, I _usually_ do an edit that will have some sort of mention of crossing, but more importantly it says something about whether I agree with the person or not.

That is, more often I say something like:

_EDIT: Scusa l'incrocio, XXX.  Ma sono d'accordo con te, e blablabla.._
_(EDIT: Excuse the cross, XXX.  But I do agree with you, and blablabla...)

__EDIT: Scusami, X, non ti ho visto!  Non sono completamente d'accordo con la tua risposta.  Dici che...
(EDIT: Excuse me, X, didn't see you!  I'm don't completely agree with your response.  You say that...)_

So I try not to make an edit just for apology's sake.  I think it's important to say whether you agree with the other person or not because I've often seen two responses, each with a different translation, but no mention by either of them whether they agreed with the other's response.  It makes it tough for the thread-starter to judge which is better or if they're both even acceptible.  And so I figure, while I'm agreeing or disagreeing in my edit, I may as well make mention that we crossed so that others know why I'm editing.

That's my take.


----------



## brian

C, that was quite a delightful exchange among the letters of the alphabet, but I noticed that neither M nor C appeared, yet B did......what exactly are you trying to say?

I'm just kidding of course.  Thank you for the post!


b/

:eagerly awaiting a "you're welcome" so that I know my thanks were noticed and appreciated:


----------



## ireney

In defence of my neighbours I have to say that it's only by showing considerable restrain that I am not doing the same (plus, the fact that  Greeks don't have/need our own forum so that we can thank each other endlessly helps) so I find it rather natural and only polite of them to go on and on (and on and on and on)

 I think it's practically impossible for them to stop doinf it as modywoop already pointed out.


----------



## Moogey

Hmm, I think there's some confusion here.

I wasn't talking about gratitude at all 

I am talking about getting rid of this:



> Edit: Sorry for crossing!



-M


----------



## brian

I suppose Carlo's idea was that they're all intertwined into what he called the _complimenti_ (sounds like a philosophical treatise):

_Sorry for crossing!  Oh no problem!  great thanks!  Any time, it's a pleasure!  Oh the pleasure's all mine!  Oh that's so kind of you, thank you!  You're welcome, but thank you!   ....._

You get the idea.  It's very much a cultural (or something) thing--all of it is.  This is why I suggested Cultural Discussions!


----------



## ireney

Well (sorry for crossing) is part of the gratitude-politeness thing and that's why I didn't mention it separately. I think the Med mothers have something to do with the almost compulsive need to apologise, thank profusely etc so yeah maybe it should go to Cultural Discussion.

Mind you I only lurk in IE so it's a bit different for me.


----------



## Moogey

Well I don't see a need for apologies either. Do you realize it's the equivalent of apologizing for posting after someone else has posted (at the same time)?

Only one person can reply at a given time? Silly.

That's how I see it anyway.

*Edited for spelling mistakes!*

-M


----------



## Jana337

I never acknowledge cross-posting. If you cannot help it, pleeeeeeeeeeeease edit your former post instead of submitting a new one just to say "sorry Carlo, we crossed". 

Jana


----------



## DAH

But, that's how you get your posts number jacked up to the thousands.


----------



## Jana337

DAH said:
			
		

> But, that's how you get your posts number jacked up to the thousands.


Over my dead body! I merge them mercilessly.  Well, just cross-posting acknowledgements, not the thank you - figurati stuff.

Carlo, thanks for the enlightening cultural explanation. I feel better now that I know that it is a part of your _italienità_. 

Jana


----------



## Saoul

Guys, what's so wrong about writing things like "scusa l'incrocio"?
It's just a polite three words thing. As long as they are written using the edit button, I really can't see why this might be considered an issue. 
Some people like to be over polite, some other don't. 
There's nothing wrong with that.


----------



## Moogey

Saoul: I'm just wondering why it exists in the first place because I don't understand it. I'm wondering, IS it polite? I don't know. I never thought of it as a polite 3 words to ward of a potentially rude act (because I never thought of it as rude, nor can I see how someone can possibly think that).

-M


----------



## Saoul

Moogey, I think it something like when you get out of the restaurant door, and you bump into someone. No harm done, it was not intentional, nothing rude, but you go: "Mi scusi" anyway.
Same thing here. You can be polite with just one word, if you mean to 
I agree with you, "l'incrocio" is not rude, or offensive or whatever. But instinctively, I feel the need to apologize.


----------



## brian

I'm trying not to take sides here, but I can't help playing devil's advocate every now and then.

Moogey - When you bump into someone on the street, or as you turn a corner, or as you open a door, neither of you are being rude, but do you politely say _'Scuse me!_ ?

EDIT: I appear to have just opened the restaurant door right into Saoul's face.


----------



## lsp

This is when I feel it's the right thing to do: If someone posts while I am doing so, and when I hit submit and find the other post before mine, saying almost the same thing, it seems polite to say that I simply didn't notice the post, that I'm not trying to take credit, or suggest that my own validation is required. And you can tell - there's usually a minute or two between posts (depending how long it took poster #2). Besides, who cares about post counts? If you really look for it, Moogey, there are a lot of unnecessary posts that might be attributed to post-count-padding, not just these polite acknowledgments/corroboration of another's post. And you might also say, it's a language forum - you ask for a translation, you get one, so why throw in all those  "thank you" and you're welcome" posts? Can't stop people from trying to bump up their post totals. And why try to stop people from doing what they believe is polite?


----------



## TrentinaNE

brian8733 said:
			
		

> I suppose Carlo's idea was that they're all intertwined into what he called the _complimenti_ (sounds like a philosophical treatise):
> 
> _Sorry for crossing!  Oh no problem!  great thanks!  Any time, it's a pleasure!  Oh the pleasure's all mine!  Oh that's so kind of you, thank you!  You're welcome, but thank you!  ....._


No, you must be Don Francisco's sister!

[That won't make sense unless you've seen Woody Allen's _Love and Death_ -- which you should!  ]

Elisabetta


----------



## Saoul

moodywop said:
			
		

> On my part, I'll just stop apologizing for crossing in future and I'm sure no one will think me rude because of that.


...and I would like to go on apologizing for crossing in the future being sure no one will consider me rude, "compulsive apologizer", co-apologizer, or anything in this "profiling system", because of that.

I repeat what I wrote in my previous post. As long as we use the edit button, I see no real problem in excusing. 
If the majority of the foreros think it is useless those who are "frequent users" may apply to this custom, but I really see no way to stop anybody else doing it, so... you know... er... tempo perso...


----------



## french4beth

I don't see anything wrong with it - although I don't use the term crossing.  As a matter of fact, several times over the past couple of days, I would post to a thread - a couple of hours later, someone would post _the exact same information_ that I had just posted! And I don't mean within a couple of minutes, either... I find it somewhat annoying to get a post containing the exact same information that I posted hours earlier (I was even contemplating opening up a thread on this...).

I'd rather see people being overly polite rather than insensitive & ignorant.


----------



## lsp

french4beth said:
			
		

> I don't see anything wrong with it - although I don't use the term crossing.  As a matter of fact, several times over the past couple of days, I would post to a thread - a couple of hours later, someone would post _the exact same information_ that I had just posted! And I don't mean within a couple of minutes, either... I find it somewhat annoying to get a post containing the exact same information that I posted hours earlier (I was even contemplating opening up a thread on this...).
> 
> I'd rather see people being overly polite rather than insensitive & ignorant.


Agreed. I, too, don't care for the contribution that ignores what was written, or the contributor who does not bother to take the time to read a whole thread and acknowledge the contribution of another member. Upon discovering a post that was not there when I read and decided to respond in a thread, I like to edit (_or post_, if it makes more sense) an acknowledgement (even if the time of the posts speaks for itself), rather than delete my post. I never used to do so, it's a recent practice of mine, and I certainly gave up caring (if I ever did) about my post count. I'm well aware of the people who (in my opinion) are posting to post, and "Sorry for the cross" is hardly their most blatant or annoying way of doing it. 

I get what Moogey says, but I don't agree that a personal preference for this should make people change their "crossed-post" behavior because it is the pet peeve of _some_ foreros. And I shudder to think if each member adopted this grass-roots campaign approach with his/her own personal tastes. (There's a great pet-peeve thread somewhere - we all vented, nothing changed much.)


----------



## ElaineG

> I, too, don't care for the contribution that ignores what was written, or the contributor who does not bother to take the time to read a whole thread and acknowledge the contribution of another member.


 
This is the reason that I am fond of "sorry for crossing" (in an _edit_ if that's all that's to be said, in a post if something of substance is added).  I hate people (ok, ok, hate is too strong, pipe down, Carlo) who post to hear the sound of their own voice without reading and digesting what's come before.  As Brian said, subsequent posts at best acknowledge, confirm, or disagree as appropriate.

However, as Carlo and Jana have said, a several post string of pleasantries is quite annoying for those who receive e-mail updates.  

Common sense, not regulation, is, in my view, the answer.


----------



## panjandrum

If I post a reply and see that someone else has posted between my last look at the thread and my post I have a look at the new post.
If there is no real reason to say anything, I say nothing.
If we posted the same comment, or opposing views, I edit to add a comment that I hadn't seen XXX's post when I posted mine - I see we agree anyway, or - I see we disagreed, but lets hear from .... that kind of thing.
It would never occur to me either to start a new post to say this, or to automatically acknowledge such a message edited in by someone else.

One of the best ways to avoid the problem is to use Preview Post before posting. Always a good idea anyway to let you see what the actual post will look like, it lets you see new posts that arrived after you started to compose your reply.

(And, of course, it lets you see the posts 21-34 on a thread that you thought ended at #20 )


----------



## lsp

panjandrum said:


> ... use Preview Post before posting. Always a good idea anyway to let you see what the actual post will look like, it lets you see new posts that arrived after you started to compose your reply.


That doesn't work for me. I almost always preview posts before submitting. If it takes me long enough that one or more posts have been submitted while I'm composing mine, I still don't see them until I actually submit and return to the thread. The page doesn't refresh while I'm in it and so the posts below the text boxes where I'm writing and previewing don't update.


----------



## Jana337

lsp said:


> That doesn't work for me. I almost always preview posts before submitting. If it takes me long enough that one or more posts have been submitted while I'm composing mine, I still don't see them until I actually submit and return to the thread. The page doesn't refresh while I'm in it and so the posts below the text boxes where I'm writing and previewing don't update.


Weird. It should refresh. Other Mac users?

Jana


----------



## Alxmrphi

Here are my 3 cents...

a) Who cares if you cross post? another post just solidifies or contradicts the view of the previous poster, which are both good things.

b) No one is hurt, seeing someone else post after them, they aren't going to run to their bedroom and be emo.

c) As someone has said, if we have to take out all the "chat" in the threads so we are left with the main core of what the forum is about, language help, then I don't see the need for leaving apologies for post-crossing.

d) It's over-polite, and irritates me sometimes.


----------



## maxiogee

Alex_Murphy said:


> Here are my 3 cents...
> 
> a) Who cares if you cross post?



Well said that forer@!

If it appears that the last post doesn't take the second-last and third-last posts into account - big deal! Either the person who posted the last post didn't see them, doesn't believe them, or thinks they're not worthy of comment for whatever reason.

Too much politeness can be fatal!


----------



## Moogey

Thanks Alex! That's my way of thinking.

Also, I think you mean 4 cents  (Or to be really technical, 2 cents is usually used to describe one aspect, but since you've given 4, you're providing 8 cents!)

-M


----------



## Alxmrphi

It started off as three, and I just couldn't resist the last one.


----------

