According to GG this group has 11128 members

[Gus]

alt.fan.cecil-adams
"The brother Douglas Adams never talks about."
11128 members

How do you get stats on how many active members? Such as unique posters in
the last 30 days, or 180 days?

Does GG have info on who started group, and when?

[Mac]

On Fri, 3 May 2013 09:05:12 -0400, "Gus" <gus.o...@geemail.com>
wrote:

>alt.fan.cecil-adams
>"The brother Douglas Adams never talks about."
>11128 members

Yeah, but at least 128 of them are George.

[Snidely]

On May 3, 6:05 am, "Gus" <gus.over...@geemail.com> wrote:

(I hate it when a draft disappears into n-space)

> alt.fan.cecil-adams
> "The brother Douglas Adams never talks about."
> 11128 members
>
> How do you get stats on how many active members?   Such as unique posters in
> the last 30 days, or 180 days?

Patience. The Stats Creep has a busy weekend, so don't expect a
posting for the 2nd half of April before Monday night. Ummm, it looks
like TSC owes the first half of April, too. The most recent posting
was
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.cecil-adams/browse_frm/thread/
0f3def8b683a8435?hl=en#>

Note that TSC usually only gives us the top 20 posters, but these days
that's a plurality if not a majority. You were only #4 in the above
report.

> Does GG have info on who started group, and when?

Quite possibly, but for messages that long ago, GG needs careful
stroking. There was a thread about it in the last year, IIRC, and the
topic comes up from time to time. And I'm pretty sure some members
have a private archive of the original message.

/dps

--
"Did I miss something? The last posting from the AFCA Stats Creep
covered, I believe, thru 10/31.
Did he formally go bye-bye or something, or did he get a life or a
girlfriend or whatever? "
(Andrew Gore, AFCA)

[Nick Spalding]

Snidely wrote, in
<4124f9dc-c340-492b...@d3g2000pbs.googlegroups.com>
on Fri, 3 May 2013 10:48:32 -0700 (PDT):

> On May 3, 6:05 am, "Gus" <gus.over...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> (I hate it when a draft disappears into n-space)
>
> > alt.fan.cecil-adams
> > "The brother Douglas Adams never talks about."
> > 11128 members
> >
> > How do you get stats on how many active members?   Such as unique posters in
> > the last 30 days, or 180 days?
>
> Patience. The Stats Creep has a busy weekend, so don't expect a
> posting for the 2nd half of April before Monday night. Ummm, it looks
> like TSC owes the first half of April, too. The most recent posting
> was
> <http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.cecil-adams/browse_frm/thread/
> 0f3def8b683a8435?hl=en#>
>
> Note that TSC usually only gives us the top 20 posters, but these days
> that's a plurality if not a majority. You were only #4 in the above
> report.
>
> > Does GG have info on who started group, and when?
>
> Quite possibly, but for messages that long ago, GG needs careful
> stroking. There was a thread about it in the last year, IIRC, and the
> topic comes up from time to time. And I'm pretty sure some members
> have a private archive of the original message.

It doesn't contain that but the following may be interesting to some:
<http://www.google.com/googlegroups/archive_announce_20.html>
Posted a day or two ago in aue by Berkeley Brett.
--
Nick Spalding

[art...@yahoo.com]

I'm George and so is my wife.

[Gus]

"Snidely" <snide...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4124f9dc-c340-492b...@d3g2000pbs.googlegroups.com...

Note that TSC usually only gives us the top 20 posters, but these days
that's a plurality if not a majority. You were only #4 in the above
report.

---

I'm not sure of the ethics of this, but if I killfile all other posters--
then will I ascede to #1?

[Hactar]

In article <km18na$htf$1...@dont-email.me>, Gus <gus.o...@geemail.com> wrote:
> "Snidely" <snide...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:4124f9dc-c340-492b...@d3g2000pbs.googlegroups.com...
>
>> Note that TSC usually only gives us the top 20 posters, but these days
>> that's a plurality if not a majority. You were only #4 in the above
>> report.
>

> I'm not sure of the ethics of this, but if I killfile all other posters--
> then will I ascede to #1?

Within your insular world, yes.

--
-eben QebWe...@vTerYizUonI.nOetP royalty.mine.nu:81
LIBRA: A big promotion is just around the corner for someone
much more talented than you. Laughter is the very best medicine,
remember that when your appendix bursts next week. -- Weird Al

[Alan J Rosenthal]

"Gus" <gus.o...@geemail.com> writes:
>alt.fan.cecil-adams
>"The brother Douglas Adams never talks about."

I don't believe that that's the correct description.

>Does GG have info on who started group, and when?

Google Groups has nothing to do with alt.fan.cecil-adams. Google Groups is
just one participant in the world-wide usenet network.

Also, usenet newsgroups don't have "members". They are groups of news,
not groups of people. Similar to how the listeners of a radio station
aren't "members" of the radio station, and don't need to register to listen.
Of course, you might be a member of some club of listeners to a particular
radio station (analogous to being a member of some google groups thing), but
other people can listen without contacting your unofficial organization.

The official "who started group and when" information is at
ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/control/alt/alt.fan.cecil-adams.gz
Note that those "control" messages antedate the incorporation of Google.

[BillTurlock]

On 4 May 2013 13:05:52 GMT, fl...@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal)
wrote:

>
>The official "who started group and when" information is at
>ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/control/alt/alt.fan.cecil-adams.gz
>Note that those "control" messages antedate the incorporation of Google.

Indeed, the very _existance_ of Google.

[Lesmond]

On Fri, 03 May 2013 21:28:28 +0100, Nick Spalding wrote:

>
>It doesn't contain that but the following may be interesting to some:
><http://www.google.com/googlegroups/archive_announce_20.html>
>Posted a day or two ago in aue by Berkeley Brett.

Leroy's there!

--
If there's a nuclear winter, at least it'll snow.

[Gus]

"Lesmond" <les...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:yrfzbaqirevmbaar...@192.168.0.6...

> Leroy's there!

And Bernie... Who retracted a few days later...



"And me!
--Bernie"


"Sorry, I misunderstood. DO NOT put me on the list...
--Bernie Roehl"

[Snidely]

Alan J Rosenthal scribbled something on Saturday the 5/4/2013:

> "Gus" <gus.o...@geemail.com> writes:
>> alt.fan.cecil-adams
>> "The brother Douglas Adams never talks about."
>
> I don't believe that that's the correct description.
>
>> Does GG have info on who started group, and when?
>
> Google Groups has nothing to do with alt.fan.cecil-adams. Google Groups is
> just one participant in the world-wide usenet network.

That's like saying your local library has nothing to do with the New
York Times. It's true your local library is just one participant in
the world-wide subscription base, but it is a convenient place to go
look for back issues, thanks to the investments of your neighbors.

Likewise, Google Groups is a convenient place to look for back issues
of large portions of Usenet, thanks to the investments of Google
Corporation, Deja News before them, and certain key people (such as
Henry Spencer at utzoo).

So pardon me while I thumb my nose at your reply to Gus.

/dps

--
I have always been glad we weren't killed that night. I do not know
any particular reason, but I have always been glad.
_Roughing It_, Mark Twain

[Gus]

"Snidely" <snide...@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:mn.25227dd57ef8c5d8.127094@snitoo...

> Alan J Rosenthal scribbled something on Saturday the 5/4/2013:
>> "Gus" <gus.o...@geemail.com> writes:
>>> alt.fan.cecil-adams
>>> "The brother Douglas Adams never talks about."
>>
>> I don't believe that that's the correct description.
>>
>>> Does GG have info on who started group, and when?
>>
>> Google Groups has nothing to do with alt.fan.cecil-adams. Google Groups
>> is
>> just one participant in the world-wide usenet network.
>
> That's like saying your local library has nothing to do with the New York
> Times. It's true your local library is just one participant in the
> world-wide subscription base, but it is a convenient place to go look for
> back issues, thanks to the investments of your neighbors.
>
> Likewise, Google Groups is a convenient place to look for back issues of
> large portions of Usenet, thanks to the investments of Google Corporation,
> Deja News before them, and certain key people (such as Henry Spencer at
> utzoo).
>
> So pardon me while I thumb my nose at your reply to Gus.

Reminds me of Bokonon.

AJ was a bit strident I thought... I do wonder where the description comes
from that GG shows. Most groups do not have one, but some do. Usually
something snarky... I also wonder where the members number comes from, but
not much. Doesn't really matter. And is obviously nowhere near accurate.

[BillTurlock]

On Sat, 04 May 2013 23:44:12 -0400 (EDT), "Lesmond"
<les...@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 03 May 2013 21:28:28 +0100, Nick Spalding wrote:
>
>>
>>It doesn't contain that but the following may be interesting to some:
>><http://www.google.com/googlegroups/archive_announce_20.html>
>>Posted a day or two ago in aue by Berkeley Brett.
>
>Leroy's there!

Seems like someone here posted that just recently...

And, according to the page info, it was posted "Sunday, April 01, 2012
7:13:37 PM".

Ha ha very funny

Google lies

[Alan J Rosenthal]

Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> writes:
>Alan J Rosenthal scribbled something on Saturday the 5/4/2013:

>> Google Groups has nothing to do with alt.fan.cecil-adams. Google Groups is
>> just one participant in the world-wide usenet network.
>
>That's like saying your local library has nothing to do with the New
>York Times.

Yep. If people started assuming that the local library in Podunk was
the origin of and best representative of the New York Times, people
at the New York Times would get cranky. If they heard about all this.
Which they wouldn't. But somehow we've all heard of Google Groups.

>It's true your local library is just one participant in
>the world-wide subscription base, but it is a convenient place to go
>look for back issues, thanks to the investments of your neighbors.

Sure. But if you have to sign up for a membership at your local library
to be able to read the New York Times, then the other readers of the New
York Times (outside Podunk) are going to get cranky when you confidently
state (in your letter to the editor, I suppose) that the New York Times
has 128 members.

>So pardon me while I thumb my nose at your reply to Gus.

"You can thumb your nose, and you can thumb your friends, but you can't
nose your friends"

[Snidely]

Alan J Rosenthal wrote on 5/5/2013 :
> Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> writes:
>> Alan J Rosenthal scribbled something on Saturday the 5/4/2013:
>>> Google Groups has nothing to do with alt.fan.cecil-adams. Google Groups is
>>> just one participant in the world-wide usenet network.
>>
>> That's like saying your local library has nothing to do with the New
>> York Times.
>
> Yep. If people started assuming that the local library in Podunk was
> the origin of and best representative of the New York Times, people
> at the New York Times would get cranky. If they heard about all this.
> Which they wouldn't. But somehow we've all heard of Google Groups.

Thre may not be as many people who have heard of the library in Podunk
as have heard of the New york Times, but there is a a very large number
of people who have heard of (and done) going to the _a_ library to read
the New York Times. Including libraries in New York City, I'm willing
to wager.

/dps

--
Killing a mouse was hardly a Nobel Prize-worthy exercise, and Lawrence
went apopleptic when he learned a lousy rodent had peed away all his
precious heavy water.
_The Disappearing Spoon_, Sam Kean

[Alan J Rosenthal]

Snidely <snide...@gmail.com> writes:
>Thre may not be as many people who have heard of the library in Podunk
>as have heard of the New york Times, but there is a a very large number
>of people who have heard of (and done) going to the _a_ library to read
>the New York Times.

Yes, and _everyone_ uses a news server to read usenet news. But almost
all of them aren't Google Groups, and most of them don't have "members".

[Snidely]

Shrug. The difference between "Respected Regulars" and "members" is
more lexical than semantic. You're just being grouchy.

/dps "AFCA is a good place for that, so's AUE"

--
Ieri, oggi, domani