[OT] Google Groups might as well be dead
Jolly Roger
<http://ejohn.org/blog/google-groups-is-dead/>
--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.
JR
Linda Hungerford
Well, I am still using it, subject to education regarding alternatives
to sources of usenet groups.
ttfn.....
Linda H.
Tom Harrington
<b9847eef-f537-416e...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
Linda Hungerford <tallgras...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Oct 28, 12:17�pm, Jolly Roger <jollyro...@pobox.com> wrote:
> > Preach on, brother!:
> >
> > <http://ejohn.org/blog/google-groups-is-dead/>
>
> Well, I am still using it, subject to education regarding alternatives
> to sources of usenet groups.
That page actually has nothing to do with Usenet access.
--
Tom "Tom" Harrington
Independent Mac OS X developer since 2002
http://www.atomicbird.com/
D Finnigan
> > In article
> <b9847eef-f537-416e...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
> Linda Hungerford <tallgras...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 28, 12:17�pm, Jolly Roger <jollyro...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> > Preach on, brother!:
>> >
>> > <http://ejohn.org/blog/google-groups-is-dead/>
>>
>> Well, I am still using it, subject to education regarding alternatives
>> to sources of usenet groups.
>
> That page actually has nothing to do with Usenet access.
That's what I thought too at first, but it's still relevant because GG is
letting spam into the Usenet groups.
Barry Margolin
Tom Harrington <t...@pcisys.no.spam.dammit.net> wrote:
> In article
> <b9847eef-f537-416e...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
> Linda Hungerford <tallgras...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 28, 12:17�pm, Jolly Roger <jollyro...@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > Preach on, brother!:
> > >
> > > <http://ejohn.org/blog/google-groups-is-dead/>
> >
> > Well, I am still using it, subject to education regarding alternatives
> > to sources of usenet groups.
>
> That page actually has nothing to do with Usenet access.
Right. He's talking about using it as a platform for a public forum,
instead of running a forum on your own server using something like phpBB.
--
Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
Jolly Roger
dog...@macgui.com (D Finnigan) wrote:
Exactly. That's why I filter Google Groups posts out.
Tim McNamara
<b9847eef-f537-416e...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
Linda Hungerford <tallgras...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Ah, using a real newsreader is so much better than Google's Web
interface. For this to work, you need (1) a newsreader and (2) an
account with a news server.
http://www.newsreaders.com has extensive resources for newsreaders for
every platform
Earthlink has unfortunately killed its news servers some time ago. I
think they referred people to GigaNews for a time, but I think Usenet is
just no longer included as one of the services available to Earthlink
customers under the fee they pay.
http://kb.earthlink.net/case.asp?article=4459#q3
You can google around for "free usenet servers" which are also out
there. And there are some very good subscription servers at reasonable
prices. Most of these do some spam filtering- the one provided by my
ISP kills most of the spam and I see a fraction of the stuff others
complain about. Much of the spam comes through Google Groups,
unfortunately.
Good luck!
AV3
> In article
> <b9847eef-f537-416e...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
> Linda Hungerford <tallgras...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 28, 12:17 pm, Jolly Roger <jollyro...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>> Preach on, brother!:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
> Earthlink has unfortunately killed its news servers some time ago. I
> think they referred people to GigaNews for a time, but I think Usenet is
> just no longer included as one of the services available to Earthlink
> customers under the fee they pay.
>
> http://kb.earthlink.net/case.asp?article=4459#q3
>
> http://www.giganews.com/
Actually, we long-time earthlink users get no-cost access to all or most
of giganews as a legacy service under nntp.earthlink.net It has all I
need, but I don't know the commercial rate for this service. If I
remember rightly, low-cost freenet has been praised here.
>
> ...
>
--
++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====++
||Arnold VICTOR, New York City, i. e., <arvi...@Wearthlink.net> ||
||Arnoldo VIKTORO, Nov-jorkurbo, t. e., <arvi...@Wearthlink.net> ||
||Remove capital letters from e-mail address for correct address/ ||
|| Forigu majusklajn literojn el e-poŝta adreso por ĝusta adreso ||
++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====++
Jolly Roger
<b9847eef-f537-416e...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
Linda Hungerford <tallgras...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Your reply post included my entire signature, which would have been
omitted automatically by a *real* news reader. But sure, keep on using
that toy...
Jolly Roger
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> In article
> <b9847eef-f537-416e...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
> Linda Hungerford <tallgras...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 28, 12:17�pm, Jolly Roger <jollyro...@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > Preach on, brother!:
> > >
> > > <http://ejohn.org/blog/google-groups-is-dead/>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
> > > E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
> > > filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
> > > messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
> > > Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.
> > >
> > > JR
> >
> > Well, I am still using it, subject to education regarding alternatives
> > to sources of usenet groups.
>
> Your reply post included my entire signature, which would have been
> omitted automatically by a *real* news reader. But sure, keep on using
> that toy...
...not that I think you will ever be back to read this. Google Groups
noobs rarely ever actually return to read responses to their own posts.
Quite silly.
dorayme
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Google Groups
> noobs rarely ever actually return to read responses to their own posts.
Never a truer word was said...
--
dorayme
Király
> ...not that I think you will ever be back to read this. Google Groups
> noobs rarely ever actually return to read responses to their own posts.
> Quite silly.
It's quite true that they don't return to *acknowledge* posts made by
others, nor do they seem to post any sort of followup or "thanks for
the help", but how can you know that they don't return to *read* the
responses?
--
K.
Lang may your lum reek.
Jolly Roger
m...@home.spamsucks.ca (Kir�ly) wrote:
My own experiential evidence suggests it's very unlikely most will
return. I don't have direct factual evidence to support it, but then I
don't feel I really need to prove it either.