Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Cannot find soc.culture.cuba
28 views
Skip to first unread message
The Coca Cola Kid
May 10, 2012, 10:36:27 PM5/10/12
to
When trying to pull up an old Usenet post that I made (via Google) many
years ago, I get this message:
"Cannot find soc.culture.cuba
"The group named soc.culture.cuba has been removed because it violated
Google's Terms Of Service."
What the frak? When did this happen?
years ago, I get this message:
"Cannot find soc.culture.cuba
"The group named soc.culture.cuba has been removed because it violated
Google's Terms Of Service."
What the frak? When did this happen?
Adam H. Kerman
May 11, 2012, 3:47:36 AM5/11/12
to
I'd love to know how you don't manage to violate terms of service wherever
you are.
Google Guy
May 11, 2012, 8:16:00 AM5/11/12
to
The Coca Cola Kid wrote:
> "Cannot find soc.culture.cuba
> "The group named soc.culture.cuba has been removed because it
> violated Google's Terms Of Service."
>
> What the frak? When did this happen?
=================
> "Cannot find soc.culture.cuba
> "The group named soc.culture.cuba has been removed because it
> violated Google's Terms Of Service."
>
> What the frak? When did this happen?
http://www.freag.net/en/t/4c52q/cubaverdad_=_pa
"CubaFAQ" 12.02.2012 - 18:41
Early last year, Paul Lamot's cheap imitation cubafaq site was shut down
for abusive violation of the host's terms of service. On January 13 this
year, none other than Google Groups shut down its own archive of
soc.culture.cuba postings, also citing violations of terms of service!
What's the connection, if any?
Does Paul Lamot (or his, ahem... "associates") own SCC? Did Google
finally get fed up with his abuse, too? We will probably never know for
sure.
At the beginning of this month, Paul Lamot began posting again, not from
his ISP as before, but from a special usenet service news.albasani.net,
a free German-based service. I guess he was not no longer able to access
SCC through his ISP in his own country. (This information is readily
available from the headers on every newsgroup posting.)
I had been using Google Groups for years. When they shut down SCC, I,
too, was forced to sign up with another usenet service.
A few days later, a "new" user with the handle "Cubaverdad" also began
posting here from news.albasani.net. "Cubaverdad" is a handle
long-associated with Paul Lamot himself in other forums for well over a
decade. As such, I am certain these are also postings from Paul Lamot as
well.
I can't imagine why Paul Lamot would deliberately want to establish two
different handles at the same time in the same forum. Pure desperation
maybe? Maybe he thinks he can make himself look more popular with an
imaginary friend? All his former SCC sidekicks are long gone, no doubt
fed up with his embarrassing antics here.
Dan
==================
If you want to search for archived posts to soc.culture.cuba, you might
want to look here:
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Soc/soc.culture.cuba/
PL
May 11, 2012, 8:26:57 AM5/11/12
to
On 11/05/2012 14:16, Google Guy wrote:
> The Coca Cola Kid wrote:
>
>> "Cannot find soc.culture.cuba
>> "The group named soc.culture.cuba has been removed because it
>> violated Google's Terms Of Service."
>>
>> What the frak? When did this happen?
>
> =================
> http://www.freag.net/en/t/4c52q/cubaverdad_=_pa
>
> "CubaFAQ" 12.02.2012 - 18:41
(snip)
> The Coca Cola Kid wrote:
>
>> "Cannot find soc.culture.cuba
>> "The group named soc.culture.cuba has been removed because it
>> violated Google's Terms Of Service."
>>
>> What the frak? When did this happen?
>
> =================
> http://www.freag.net/en/t/4c52q/cubaverdad_=_pa
>
> "CubaFAQ" 12.02.2012 - 18:41
> Does ***** (or his, ahem... "associates") own SCC? Did Google
> finally get fed up with his abuse, too? We will probably never know for
> sure.
Slander by Dan Christensen whose constant violations of privacy, lies
> sure.
and threats provoked a ton of complaints to Google.
Any and all abuse in soc.culture.cuba actually came from him with his
constant lies, insults, threats, violations of privacy, slander, spam,
... in reply to factual posts about Cuba he could not refute.
If anyone had a motive to try to get soc.culture.cuba off the Google
list it is Dan Christensen and his associates apologists of the Castro
regime to limit the spread of information about Cuba and to attempt to
remove the proof of their abuses that had already landed one of them in
jail for 6 months based on his statements in Usenet groups
Ernesto Hernandez
May 11, 2012, 10:54:16 AM5/11/12
to
On May 11, 12:16 pm, Google Guy <Goo...@Guy.com> wrote:
> The Coca Cola Kid wrote:
>
> > "Cannot find soc.culture.cuba
> > "The group named soc.culture.cuba has been removed because it
> > violated Google's Terms Of Service."
>
> > What the frak? When did this happen?
>
> =================http://www.freag.net/en/t/4c52q/cubaverdad_=_pa
> The Coca Cola Kid wrote:
>
> > "Cannot find soc.culture.cuba
> > "The group named soc.culture.cuba has been removed because it
> > violated Google's Terms Of Service."
>
> > What the frak? When did this happen?
>
>
> "CubaFAQ" 12.02.2012 - 18:41
(snip)
> "CubaFAQ" 12.02.2012 - 18:41
How can you be so dumb to post this crap? Please remove your post. You
are just copying lies, slander and violations of privacy in to more
groups.
Dan Christensen is a Castro apologist and blackmailer that harasses
people that post news about Cuba by violating their privacy (use of
names, addresses, work info, ...) and by posting slanderous lies.
The Wordpress Dan Christensen refers to is owned by Cubafaq (the man
whose identity he used here to get away from his own discredited name.
Dan Christensen previously posted as DChris, DCPROOF, Dan ... under
which he has been frequently exposed for what he is only to hide
behind the name of Cubafaq.
All his crap are lies and are in fact irrelevant.
The only one that knows why the group was removed is Google.
What is true is that lots of people have been complaining about the
spam lies and insults that Dan Christensen kept vomiting in this
newsgroup.
That was in fact the only "abuse" going on in that group.
Compay Libre
The Coca Cola Kid
May 11, 2012, 7:30:24 PM5/11/12
to
"PL" wrote in message news:joj0if$sak$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
Either way, it does not make any sense. Regardless of who was spamming, or
slandering, or whatever, why would Google 'remove' an entire usenet group in
the soc.culture.* hierarchy from public view for all of eternity? I could
see them removing specific posts if they were libelous or illegal in some
other way, but again... what the frak?
slandering, or whatever, why would Google 'remove' an entire usenet group in
the soc.culture.* hierarchy from public view for all of eternity? I could
see them removing specific posts if they were libelous or illegal in some
other way, but again... what the frak?
PL
May 12, 2012, 6:42:52 AM5/12/12
to
slander and violations of privacy.
The Coca Cola Kid
May 12, 2012, 3:27:21 PM5/12/12
to
"PL" wrote in message news:jolerd$8f1$2...@news.albasani.net...
it had been brought up before, related to either this or any other group.
Like it or not, Google has had a profound effect on the shape of usenet,
ever since it took over the largest public archive and became the highest
traffic web interface. I would have thought that the censoring of any
legitimate Big-8 newsgroup by them would be of interest to people here...
>
>On 12/05/2012 1:30, The Coca Cola Kid wrote:
>> "PL" wrote in message news:joj0if$sak$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
>>>
>On 12/05/2012 1:30, The Coca Cola Kid wrote:
>> "PL" wrote in message news:joj0if$sak$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
>>>
>>> Slander by Dan Christensen whose constant violations of privacy, lies
>>> and threats provoked a ton of complaints to Google.
>>> Any and all abuse in soc.culture.cuba actually came from him with his
>>> constant lies, insults, threats, violations of privacy, slander, spam,
>>> ... in reply to factual posts about Cuba he could not refute.
>>> If anyone had a motive to try to get soc.culture.cuba off the Google
>>> list it is Dan Christensen and his associates apologists of the Castro
>>> regime to limit the spread of information about Cuba and to attempt to
>>> remove the proof of their abuses that had already landed one of them
>>> in jail for 6 months based on his statements in Usenet groups
>>
>> Either way, it does not make any sense. Regardless of who was spamming,
>> or slandering, or whatever, why would Google 'remove' an entire usenet
>> group in the soc.culture.* hierarchy from public view for all of
>> eternity? I could see them removing specific posts if they were libelous
>> or illegal in some other way, but again... what the frak?
>
>The only one that can answre that is Google, but please don't repeat
>slander and violations of privacy.
I just thought that people here might know something about it, especially if
>>> and threats provoked a ton of complaints to Google.
>>> Any and all abuse in soc.culture.cuba actually came from him with his
>>> constant lies, insults, threats, violations of privacy, slander, spam,
>>> ... in reply to factual posts about Cuba he could not refute.
>>> If anyone had a motive to try to get soc.culture.cuba off the Google
>>> list it is Dan Christensen and his associates apologists of the Castro
>>> regime to limit the spread of information about Cuba and to attempt to
>>> remove the proof of their abuses that had already landed one of them
>>> in jail for 6 months based on his statements in Usenet groups
>>
>> Either way, it does not make any sense. Regardless of who was spamming,
>> or slandering, or whatever, why would Google 'remove' an entire usenet
>> group in the soc.culture.* hierarchy from public view for all of
>> eternity? I could see them removing specific posts if they were libelous
>> or illegal in some other way, but again... what the frak?
>
>The only one that can answre that is Google, but please don't repeat
>slander and violations of privacy.
it had been brought up before, related to either this or any other group.
Like it or not, Google has had a profound effect on the shape of usenet,
ever since it took over the largest public archive and became the highest
traffic web interface. I would have thought that the censoring of any
legitimate Big-8 newsgroup by them would be of interest to people here...
Google Guy
May 12, 2012, 4:53:20 PM5/12/12
to
The Coca Cola Kid wrote:
> > The only one that can answre that is Google, but please don't
> > repeat slander and violations of privacy.
Someone using the identity "PL" (pl.n...@pandora.be) is pretty much
> > The only one that can answre that is Google, but please don't
> > repeat slander and violations of privacy.
the only patron of soc.culture.cuba, and seems to post mostly
copyrighted material to the group.
> > but please don't repeat slander and violations of privacy.
> I just thought that people here might know something about it,
> especially if it had been brought up before, related to either
> this or any other group.
usenet presence.
Google has pretty much done the worst possible job with their
acquisition of deja 10 years ago. They've royally screwed up the search
interface, and have turned google-gropes into a platform for spammers to
use to inject garbage into usenet.
> Like it or not, Google has had a profound effect on the shape of
> usenet,
> I would have thought that the censoring of any legitimate Big-8
> newsgroup by them would be of interest to people here...
google is doing with respect to usenet, because google has shown that it
has no coherent policy for their usenet offering or presence, nor do
they have anything resembling a point-of-contact, a person, or a group
that can respond and speak for Google in this regard.
PL
May 13, 2012, 5:22:01 AM5/13/12
to
lying attack, but you did an it is still in Google via other groups.
You can cancel it.
As far as calling the group "big-8". It had about a thousand
subscribers" and was a great source of information. It still is.
It was being polluted by people like Dan Christensen, a Canadian
Stalinist, that used lies, blackmail and threats in an attempt to
destroy the group. Most people ignored him and the discussion of the
items in fact went on via other channels. Some wanted to get back at
him by giving him some of hos own medicine. I have always succeeded in
dissuading them. Using the same tactics as this slanderous blackmailer
just is not the correct way to react.
Unlike most people I have years of news items stored on my PC. The
effect of not being on Google is that older archives are no longer
accessible.
Some posts are always available at other sources if you are looking for
information on Cuba.
From 2000:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaVerdad/
Also see a collaboration between various people to break down the data
by topic:
http://www.impela.net
Note that lots of the people that are truly interested in news about
Cuba have found their way to the group via other readers (even free ones).
The problem is retention. Most readers only have "900 days" or "3 to 5
year" retention.
While a lot of slander lies, blackmail, violations of privacy, ... have
disappeared (scc attacked the filthiest of the Castro apologist
community as they feared the information power it had - one was
sentenced to 6 months for his statements online), lots of great posts by
"old timers" are no longer accessible to lots of people.
It was one of the most polluted groups in that sense with thousands of
identical slanderous posts by Dan Christensen and people like him.
Google isn't the issue for me. An archive with full retention (as Deja
now Google was) would be nice. Any idea where I might find that?
Note though that Usenet was a bit web 0.1.
It was a great source of information about Cuba. Even one of the few.
Today there are lots of sources on the web.
PS: I use a program / server that requires a "follow up" to post. Sorry.
PL
May 13, 2012, 5:48:11 AM5/13/12
to
On 12/05/2012 22:53, Google Guy wrote:
(snip)
Enough insults here.
Usenet is loaded with the redistribution of news.
Lots of sources like Cubanet and others are very well aware of that and
tolerate it.
In fact: a series of news outlets used SCC.
Yes, I have consistently posted in SCC and have been consistently
slandered and blackmailed to stop posting (see Dan Christensen's posts).
Beyond the actions of idiots like him there has never been any complaint.
>> I just thought that people here might know something about it,
>> especially if it had been brought up before, related to either
>> this or any other group.
>
> Nobody knows what Google is doing, has done or wants to do with their
> usenet presence.
I think they are considering it a bit "pasé"
> Google has pretty much done the worst possible job with their
> acquisition of deja 10 years ago.
agreed.
> They've royally screwed up the search
> interface,
That was a couple of years ago.
Utterky screwed up rendering the large database and its long retention
useless for all intents of purpose.
> and have turned google-gropes into a platform for spammers to
> use to inject garbage into usenet.
agreed.
No remedy possible.
Slander, lies, insults, ... all was allowed and only after a legal
compliant and court order would they remove anything.
It had become a free for all abusers and spammers.
Groups are polluted by people posting about products, sexual fantasies
and other completely unrelated stuff (see TDNY with his anti American
and anti Israel crap as an example in SCC)
Cross posting is another of the crappy shit here.
People hiding behind anonymizers vomiting their crap in tens of
newsgroups (see the "psychiatry guy in SCC).
>> Like it or not, Google has had a profound effect on the shape of
>> usenet,
>
> Google has been a nuisance to usenet.
It has contributed for years by spreading it to a wider audience but has
thereby contributed to its pollution.
>> I would have thought that the censoring of any legitimate Big-8
>> newsgroup by them would be of interest to people here...
>
> Nobody that is hard-core into usenet gives a flying fuck about what
> google is doing with respect to usenet, because google has shown that it
> has no coherent policy for their usenet offering or presence, nor do
> they have anything resembling a point-of-contact, a person, or a group
> that can respond and speak for Google in this regard.
Correct.
They just used it as a way to make Google more interesting, to attract
people to Google.
They are clearly not interested in the product as such and no real
investment and innovation has come from Google.
I think that to them it is just another source of information they can
use to "target" their ads.
Its "create a group" feature is a joke. They have no policy statement
and no support for the product.
Usenet gives them, with surfing behavior and other sources, a better
idea what to target you with in Google ads.
A funny story about that are the lies of Dan Christensen who claimed
that Cubafaq (the man whose handle he copied and of course claimed was
in fact me) was sleazy as he put "pornographic ads" on a Wordpress site
he had moved from Wordpress (blocking access to the name Cubafaq at
Wordpress in a clever way frustrating Dan).
In fact Dan Christensen was the only one that kept seeing "pornographic
ads" on that site that had Google ads on it. What the idiot didn't
realize was that by stating that over and over again he was in fact
telling everyone a lot about his other activities on the web.
Usenet for Google is not a product, it is a source of information to
target ads.
(snip)
Enough insults here.
Usenet is loaded with the redistribution of news.
Lots of sources like Cubanet and others are very well aware of that and
tolerate it.
In fact: a series of news outlets used SCC.
Yes, I have consistently posted in SCC and have been consistently
slandered and blackmailed to stop posting (see Dan Christensen's posts).
Beyond the actions of idiots like him there has never been any complaint.
>> I just thought that people here might know something about it,
>> especially if it had been brought up before, related to either
>> this or any other group.
>
> Nobody knows what Google is doing, has done or wants to do with their
> usenet presence.
> Google has pretty much done the worst possible job with their
> acquisition of deja 10 years ago.
> They've royally screwed up the search
> interface,
Utterky screwed up rendering the large database and its long retention
useless for all intents of purpose.
> and have turned google-gropes into a platform for spammers to
> use to inject garbage into usenet.
No remedy possible.
Slander, lies, insults, ... all was allowed and only after a legal
compliant and court order would they remove anything.
It had become a free for all abusers and spammers.
Groups are polluted by people posting about products, sexual fantasies
and other completely unrelated stuff (see TDNY with his anti American
and anti Israel crap as an example in SCC)
Cross posting is another of the crappy shit here.
People hiding behind anonymizers vomiting their crap in tens of
newsgroups (see the "psychiatry guy in SCC).
>> Like it or not, Google has had a profound effect on the shape of
>> usenet,
>
> Google has been a nuisance to usenet.
thereby contributed to its pollution.
>> I would have thought that the censoring of any legitimate Big-8
>> newsgroup by them would be of interest to people here...
>
> Nobody that is hard-core into usenet gives a flying fuck about what
> google is doing with respect to usenet, because google has shown that it
> has no coherent policy for their usenet offering or presence, nor do
> they have anything resembling a point-of-contact, a person, or a group
> that can respond and speak for Google in this regard.
They just used it as a way to make Google more interesting, to attract
people to Google.
They are clearly not interested in the product as such and no real
investment and innovation has come from Google.
I think that to them it is just another source of information they can
use to "target" their ads.
Its "create a group" feature is a joke. They have no policy statement
and no support for the product.
Usenet gives them, with surfing behavior and other sources, a better
idea what to target you with in Google ads.
A funny story about that are the lies of Dan Christensen who claimed
that Cubafaq (the man whose handle he copied and of course claimed was
in fact me) was sleazy as he put "pornographic ads" on a Wordpress site
he had moved from Wordpress (blocking access to the name Cubafaq at
Wordpress in a clever way frustrating Dan).
In fact Dan Christensen was the only one that kept seeing "pornographic
ads" on that site that had Google ads on it. What the idiot didn't
realize was that by stating that over and over again he was in fact
telling everyone a lot about his other activities on the web.
Usenet for Google is not a product, it is a source of information to
target ads.
0 new messages