news
Ted Ehlers
Blinky the Shark
> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:03:44 -0500, "Ted Ehlers" <ehl...@pldi.net>
> wrote:
>
><Nothing>
>
> Indeed.
Not that he's posting from Google Groups, but since he's *emulating* a
Groper, allow me to take this space to annc the opening of my new
dedicated kill-GG site. See sig for the location of the new baby. :)
--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://improve-usenet.org <----------- New Site Aug 28
The Old Sourdough
>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:03:44 -0500, "Ted Ehlers" <ehl...@pldi.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>><Nothing>
>>
>> Indeed.
>
> Not that he's posting from Google Groups, but since he's *emulating* a
> Groper, allow me to take this space to annc the opening of my new
> dedicated kill-GG site. See sig for the location of the new baby. :)
>
>
I've been zapping GGers for quite a while, but like you, I don't kill
the whole thread for the same reasons you don't. Besides, there are
times when I need a good laugh.
--
The Old Sourdough
No Microsoft products were used in any way for the creation of this message.
If you are using a Microsoft product to view it, BEWARE! - I'm not
responsible for any harm you might encounter as a result.
Mara
>Evan Platt wrote:
>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:03:44 -0500, "Ted Ehlers" <ehl...@pldi.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>><Nothing>
>>
>> Indeed.
>
>Not that he's posting from Google Groups, but since he's *emulating* a
>Groper, allow me to take this space to annc the opening of my new
>dedicated kill-GG site. See sig for the location of the new baby. :)
Very nice. :) I especially liked the "Underlying Issue" page.
You know, on another mailing list I was on, it was discovered that an outside
site was archiving posts from the list and DMCA notices were posted to make them
remove posts. I would think the same principle would apply here, wouldn't it?
We'd (tinw) all have to post our own, but I think that if we did the web portals
would have no legal choice other than remove the posts or be subject to a
lawsuit/lawsuits?
--
People in the computer industry use the word "user", which to them
means "idiot". -Dave Barry
The Old Sourdough
Might be a bit of a thorny issue, there. IANAL, but it seems that a mailing
list might be considered "private", and subject to different protections,
but Usenet, being public, is another ballgame. Interesting thought, though.
I'm sure you could stir up a regular firestorm of opinions on that one. :-)
Blinky the Shark
> On 2007-08-30, in 24hoursupport.helpdesk, Blinky the Shark waxed
> eloquently:
>> Evan Platt wrote:
>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:03:44 -0500, "Ted Ehlers" <ehl...@pldi.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>><Nothing>
>>>
>>> Indeed.
>>
>> Not that he's posting from Google Groups, but since he's *emulating*
>> a Groper, allow me to take this space to annc the opening of my new
>> dedicated kill-GG site. See sig for the location of the new baby.
>> :)
>
> I've been zapping GGers for quite a while, but like you, I don't kill
> the whole thread for the same reasons you don't. Besides, there are
> times when I need a good laugh.
Right on. First is that, as I've mentioned, I won't empower them to
poision a whole subthread; and yeah -- I certainly have nothing against
reading the justifiable ridicule they incur from others. :)
Blinky the Shark
> On 30 Aug 2007 04:17:36 GMT, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>Evan Platt wrote:
>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:03:44 -0500, "Ted Ehlers" <ehl...@pldi.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>><Nothing>
>>>
>>> Indeed.
>>
>>Not that he's posting from Google Groups, but since he's *emulating* a
>>Groper, allow me to take this space to annc the opening of my new
>>dedicated kill-GG site. See sig for the location of the new baby. :)
>
> Very nice. :) I especially liked the "Underlying Issue" page.
Thanks, Mara. I hope you saw the new header graphics I put up late (my
time) yesterday. The first header (light blue) was a quickie to get
things rolling. The new one (dark blue and much better image and text)
has a "Usenet feel" of its own (should be evident on viewing). :)
I also created a "NO GG" badge for the footer (and put it on Blinkynet,
as well, linking to the new site) in the mode of the other badges from
other outfits that I already had there. :)
Last night, with some prompting as well as having thought about it a lot
myself, I went to work on a page on filtering with specific news
clients. I'm trying to keep page lengths down on this site; on
Blinkynet I tend to get too-long rolls-of-paper-towel-type pages. I took
a break from the proposed filters page when I got to the end of what
would be the second page and by the time I'd laid the background on
filtering first I'd only got to *one* newsclient. I may have to rethink
this and drop the exposition, but starting in the middle isn't how I
like to work. If you're interested, while this isn't linked on the site
and is very much a tentative pair of pages, very incomplete and
unproofed, here's what I've got so far. It will probably mostly
disappear. :) http://improve-usenet.org/filters1.html
> You know, on another mailing list I was on, it was discovered that an
> outside site was archiving posts from the list and DMCA notices were
> posted to make them remove posts. I would think the same principle
> would apply here, wouldn't it? We'd (tinw) all have to post our own,
> but I think that if we did the web portals would have no legal choice
> other than remove the posts or be subject to a lawsuit/lawsuits?
I dunno. I hate web portals in general, not just Google Goofs. Stop me
if I've mentioned this, but one of them we discovered in - I think it
was - alt.www.webmaster was selling keywords. If your message included,
for example, the word "spam", then in their gateway version of the
newsgroup that would become a link to whatever anti-spam software vendor
had bought it. That's *really* abusive.
Mara
>On 2007-08-30, in 24hoursupport.helpdesk, Mara waxed eloquently:
>> On 30 Aug 2007 04:17:36 GMT, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>Evan Platt wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:03:44 -0500, "Ted Ehlers" <ehl...@pldi.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>><Nothing>
>>>>
>>>> Indeed.
>>>
>>>Not that he's posting from Google Groups, but since he's *emulating* a
>>>Groper, allow me to take this space to annc the opening of my new
>>>dedicated kill-GG site. See sig for the location of the new baby. :)
>>
>> Very nice. :) I especially liked the "Underlying Issue" page.
>>
>> You know, on another mailing list I was on, it was discovered that an outside
>> site was archiving posts from the list and DMCA notices were posted to make them
>> remove posts. I would think the same principle would apply here, wouldn't it?
>> We'd (tinw) all have to post our own, but I think that if we did the web portals
>> would have no legal choice other than remove the posts or be subject to a
>> lawsuit/lawsuits?
>>
>
>Might be a bit of a thorny issue, there. IANAL, but it seems that a mailing
>list might be considered "private", and subject to different protections,
>but Usenet, being public, is another ballgame. Interesting thought, though.
>I'm sure you could stir up a regular firestorm of opinions on that one. :-)
I would think that since there's an implied copyright on the posts you made to
the group you ought to be able to specify who gets to copy them AFA web
"portals,", but IANAL either.
Doesn't matter much to me either way. I'm sure they all know by now that I think
they're thieving pieces of shit that aren't worth pissing on if they were on
fire. :)
Mara
>Mara wrote:
>> On 30 Aug 2007 04:17:36 GMT, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Evan Platt wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:03:44 -0500, "Ted Ehlers" <ehl...@pldi.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>><Nothing>
>>>>
>>>> Indeed.
>>>
>>>Not that he's posting from Google Groups, but since he's *emulating* a
>>>Groper, allow me to take this space to annc the opening of my new
>>>dedicated kill-GG site. See sig for the location of the new baby. :)
>>
>> Very nice. :) I especially liked the "Underlying Issue" page.
>
>Thanks, Mara. I hope you saw the new header graphics I put up late (my
>time) yesterday. The first header (light blue) was a quickie to get
>things rolling. The new one (dark blue and much better image and text)
>has a "Usenet feel" of its own (should be evident on viewing). :)
It's very easy on the eyes, which is something I appreciate.
>I also created a "NO GG" badge for the footer (and put it on Blinkynet,
>as well, linking to the new site) in the mode of the other badges from
>other outfits that I already had there. :)
It works well with the others, IMHO.
>Last night, with some prompting as well as having thought about it a lot
>myself, I went to work on a page on filtering with specific news
>clients. I'm trying to keep page lengths down on this site; on
>Blinkynet I tend to get too-long rolls-of-paper-towel-type pages. I took
>a break from the proposed filters page when I got to the end of what
>would be the second page and by the time I'd laid the background on
>filtering first I'd only got to *one* newsclient. I may have to rethink
>this and drop the exposition, but starting in the middle isn't how I
>like to work. If you're interested, while this isn't linked on the site
>and is very much a tentative pair of pages, very incomplete and
>unproofed, here's what I've got so far. It will probably mostly
>disappear. :) http://improve-usenet.org/filters1.html
I think you should do it, and here's why:
Based on just my own past experience, I would guess that 99% of google-groupers
are using it because they seem to be the type of posters who can't learn
anything at all (or at least don't want to) unless it's done the hard way, with
*real* experience. If you continue with the filters page, then more people will
come to find out how to filter Gropers, Gropers will gradually get fewer and
fewer replies, and ultimately will more or less *have* to get a real news client
in order to get any sort of reliable response at all - and perhaps, along the
way, they're even learn a little about usenet and what to expect before they
start using their Genuine Shiny New Client.
Yeah, it's just a dream, but it's *my* dream.
If it's more than you think you want to handle yourself, I'm sure that there are
people in n.s.r and probably a few here that would be more than willing to help
out. It *is* for the worthiest of causes, after all. Please, don't give up on
it.
I never have gotten nFilter to work with Supernews yet, but I haven't had much
time to try.
>> You know, on another mailing list I was on, it was discovered that an
>> outside site was archiving posts from the list and DMCA notices were
>> posted to make them remove posts. I would think the same principle
>> would apply here, wouldn't it? We'd (tinw) all have to post our own,
>> but I think that if we did the web portals would have no legal choice
>> other than remove the posts or be subject to a lawsuit/lawsuits?
>
>I dunno. I hate web portals in general, not just Google Goofs. Stop me
>if I've mentioned this, but one of them we discovered in - I think it
>was - alt.www.webmaster was selling keywords. If your message included,
>for example, the word "spam", then in their gateway version of the
>newsgroup that would become a link to whatever anti-spam software vendor
>had bought it. That's *really* abusive.
Yes, it is.
I know of a site that publishes a Hall of Shame for software that requires Admin
rights to run. If these "web portal" lamers feel it's ok to steal *our*(tino)
words and claim them as their own, or in fact claim them at all without our
permission, why couldn't you put up a "Portal Hall of Shame" and start a list?
I'll bet posters would contribute to that, too - and word about unethical
bidnizmen can get around the 'net surprisingly fast.
Something to consider. :)
Blinky the Shark
> On 30 Aug 2007 17:47:14 GMT, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>Mara wrote:
>>> On 30 Aug 2007 04:17:36 GMT, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Evan Platt wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:03:44 -0500, "Ted Ehlers" <ehl...@pldi.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>><Nothing>
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed.
>>>>
>>>>Not that he's posting from Google Groups, but since he's *emulating*
>>>>a Groper, allow me to take this space to annc the opening of my new
>>>>dedicated kill-GG site. See sig for the location of the new baby.
>>>>:)
>>>
>>> Very nice. :) I especially liked the "Underlying Issue" page.
>>
>>Thanks, Mara. I hope you saw the new header graphics I put up late
>>(my time) yesterday. The first header (light blue) was a quickie to
>>get things rolling. The new one (dark blue and much better image and
>>text) has a "Usenet feel" of its own (should be evident on viewing).
>>:)
>
> It's very easy on the eyes, which is something I appreciate.
I also keep the dial-up user in mind. Like Blinkynet, the idea is
"fast". I appreciate that myself, so I design for it.
>>Last night, with some prompting as well as having thought about it a
>>lot myself, I went to work on a page on filtering with specific news
>>clients. I'm trying to keep page lengths down on this site; on
>>Blinkynet I tend to get too-long rolls-of-paper-towel-type pages. I
>>took a break from the proposed filters page when I got to the end of
>>what would be the second page and by the time I'd laid the background
>>on filtering first I'd only got to *one* newsclient. I may have to
>>rethink this and drop the exposition, but starting in the middle isn't
>>how I like to work. If you're interested, while this isn't linked on
>>the site and is very much a tentative pair of pages, very incomplete
>>and unproofed, here's what I've got so far. It will probably mostly
>>disappear. :) http://improve-usenet.org/filters1.html
>
> I think you should do it, and here's why:
>
> Based on just my own past experience, I would guess that 99% of
> google-groupers are using it because they seem to be the type of
> posters who can't learn anything at all (or at least don't want to)
> unless it's done the hard way, with
Right. Don't want to learn.
> *real* experience. If you continue with the filters page, then more
> people will come to find out how to filter Gropers, Gropers will
> gradually get fewer and fewer replies, and ultimately will more or
> less *have* to get a real news client in order to get any sort of
> reliable response at all - and perhaps, along the way, they're even
> learn a little about usenet and what to expect before they start using
> their Genuine Shiny New Client.
Yes. But here's what I also think, that dilutes for me the idea of
spending much ink on the actual mechanics of filtering: the people who
are most likely to want to filter Gropers once the idea gets to them
(via my campaign or another vector) are the ones that probably already
know how[1] to filter in general. The only thing else they might need
to know is that it's the MID that they should be filtering on, which I
already have covered on the Particaping page (as I did on Blinkynet).
The people who don't know how to filter at all are that way because
"it's all good <drool>" to them and/or they don't care about learning
how to make their software work for them.
So I'm still undecided. But I don't think it's worth the four-or-five
pages that I think it would take to do it right.[1] Again, I'm not
convinced that people who haven't bothered learned filtering (the ones
for which computers are like expensive toasters) are going to start
caring now.
[1] And I don't want to do it half-assed, if I do it.
> Yeah, it's just a dream, but it's *my* dream.
>
> If it's more than you think you want to handle yourself, I'm sure that
> there are people in n.s.r and probably a few here that would be more
> than willing to help out. It *is* for the worthiest of causes, after
> all. Please, don't give up on it.
I can *handle* it. :)
> I never have gotten nFilter to work with Supernews yet, but I haven't
> had much time to try.
Wouldn't run, here. So I went with Hamster Playground.
>>> You know, on another mailing list I was on, it was discovered that
>>> an outside site was archiving posts from the list and DMCA notices
>>> were posted to make them remove posts. I would think the same
>>> principle would apply here, wouldn't it? We'd (tinw) all have to
>>> post our own, but I think that if we did the web portals would have
>>> no legal choice other than remove the posts or be subject to a
>>> lawsuit/lawsuits?
>>
>>I dunno. I hate web portals in general, not just Google Goofs. Stop
>>me if I've mentioned this, but one of them we discovered in - I think
>>it was - alt.www.webmaster was selling keywords. If your message
>>included, for example, the word "spam", then in their gateway version
>>of the newsgroup that would become a link to whatever anti-spam
>>software vendor had bought it. That's *really* abusive.
>
> Yes, it is.
>
> I know of a site that publishes a Hall of Shame for software that
> requires Admin rights to run. If these "web portal" lamers feel it's
> ok to steal *our*(tino) words and claim them as their own, or in fact
> claim them at all without our permission, why couldn't you put up a
> "Portal Hall of Shame" and start a list? I'll bet posters would
> contribute to that, too - and word about unethical bidnizmen can get
> around the 'net surprisingly fast.
> Something to consider. :)
Will do. Thanks.
Mara
<snip>
>> I think you should do it, and here's why:
>>
>> Based on just my own past experience, I would guess that 99% of
>> google-groupers are using it because they seem to be the type of
>> posters who can't learn anything at all (or at least don't want to)
>> unless it's done the hard way, with
>
>Right. Don't want to learn.
Or maybe they just don't know how. In a lot of cases they *are* complete
newbies. They know somewhat less than nothing about usenet and how it really
works, and google doesn't help that. How about some links on a page for newbies
to learn about it? A "Now that you've found usenet, here's what you need to
know" sort of thing.
>> *real* experience. If you continue with the filters page, then more
>> people will come to find out how to filter Gropers, Gropers will
>> gradually get fewer and fewer replies, and ultimately will more or
>> less *have* to get a real news client in order to get any sort of
>> reliable response at all - and perhaps, along the way, they're even
>> learn a little about usenet and what to expect before they start using
>> their Genuine Shiny New Client.
>
>Yes. But here's what I also think, that dilutes for me the idea of
>spending much ink on the actual mechanics of filtering: the people who
>are most likely to want to filter Gropers once the idea gets to them
>(via my campaign or another vector) are the ones that probably already
>know how[1] to filter in general. The only thing else they might need
>to know is that it's the MID that they should be filtering on, which I
>already have covered on the Particaping page (as I did on Blinkynet).
>The people who don't know how to filter at all are that way because
>"it's all good <drool>" to them and/or they don't care about learning
>how to make their software work for them.
Not necessarily. Some people are like me - they would love to do it but just
don't have the time to sit down and work it out. There are a lot of days when
I'm working from about 6am until about 10 pm and am online for work reasons and
just drop in here incidentally while working on other things.
There's also the possibility of having friends mirror that site. That gets the
word out better.
>So I'm still undecided. But I don't think it's worth the four-or-five
>pages that I think it would take to do it right.[1] Again, I'm not
>convinced that people who haven't bothered learned filtering (the ones
>for which computers are like expensive toasters) are going to start
>caring now.
Some might not now, but they will. Google Groups is the Plague of usenet, and
the trend to ostracize them is growing.
Some people don't grasp the concept of what filters are really for. They aren't
just for filtering people you don't want to read - they're for cleaning up the
general noise so that you can get to the information you want. DipSlime is a
prime example of this. Without filters it would be impossible to read nanae when
they're pumping the sewage in.
It's a bit of a stretch to compare google groupers to DipSlime, but taken as a
group it's pretty close, and getting closer every day.
"I don't have much use for lowering the bar; people need encouragement
to be smart, not dumb; they readily exhibit the latter trait, as you must
know if you've ever worked a tech support desk." --JA
>[1] And I don't want to do it half-assed, if I do it.
Don't blame you there.
>> Yeah, it's just a dream, but it's *my* dream.
>>
>> If it's more than you think you want to handle yourself, I'm sure that
>> there are people in n.s.r and probably a few here that would be more
>> than willing to help out. It *is* for the worthiest of causes, after
>> all. Please, don't give up on it.
>
>I can *handle* it. :)
>
>> I never have gotten nFilter to work with Supernews yet, but I haven't
>> had much time to try.
>
>Wouldn't run, here. So I went with Hamster Playground.
I haven't had time to play with anything, so I'll probably just end up using
SuSE with leafnode now that I have my box back.
<snip>
>> I know of a site that publishes a Hall of Shame for software that
>> requires Admin rights to run. If these "web portal" lamers feel it's
>> ok to steal *our*(tino) words and claim them as their own, or in fact
>> claim them at all without our permission, why couldn't you put up a
>> "Portal Hall of Shame" and start a list? I'll bet posters would
>> contribute to that, too - and word about unethical bidnizmen can get
>> around the 'net surprisingly fast.
>
>> Something to consider. :)
>
>Will do. Thanks.
YW. :)
Blinky the Shark
> On 30 Aug 2007 23:35:59 GMT, Blinky the Shark <no....@box.invalid>
> wrote:
>
><snip>
>>> I think you should do it, and here's why:
>>>
>>> Based on just my own past experience, I would guess that 99% of
>>> google-groupers are using it because they seem to be the type of
>>> posters who can't learn anything at all (or at least don't want to)
>>> unless it's done the hard way, with
>>
>>Right. Don't want to learn.
>
> Or maybe they just don't know how. In a lot of cases they *are*
> complete newbies. They know somewhat less than nothing about usenet
> and how it really works, and google doesn't help that. How about some
> links on a page for newbies to learn about it? A "Now that you've
> found usenet, here's what you need to know" sort of thing.
Others may do that as they wish; my page isn't *for* Gropers; there are
already help-for-Gropers pages online. Because I don't kill stuff
*below* Gropers' posts (i.e., I don't kill on their MIDs in References
headers), I see people trying to educate them all of the time. I
personally don't think the odds of that happening are good, from the few
Groper responses (few because most of them can't find their way back to
see replies) to those extended hands I've seen.
>>> *real* experience. If you continue with the filters page, then more
>>> people will come to find out how to filter Gropers, Gropers will
>>> gradually get fewer and fewer replies, and ultimately will more or
>>> less *have* to get a real news client in order to get any sort of
>>> reliable response at all - and perhaps, along the way, they're even
>>> learn a little about usenet and what to expect before they start
>>> using their Genuine Shiny New Client.
>>
>>Yes. But here's what I also think, that dilutes for me the idea of
>>spending much ink on the actual mechanics of filtering: the people who
>>are most likely to want to filter Gropers once the idea gets to them
>>(via my campaign or another vector) are the ones that probably already
>>know how[1] to filter in general. The only thing else they might need
>>to know is that it's the MID that they should be filtering on, which I
>>already have covered on the Particaping page (as I did on Blinkynet).
>>The people who don't know how to filter at all are that way because
>>"it's all good <drool>" to them and/or they don't care about learning
>>how to make their software work for them.
>
> Not necessarily. Some people are like me - they would love to do it
> but just don't have the time to sit down and work it out. There are a
> lot of days when I'm working from about 6am until about 10 pm and am
> online for work reasons and just drop in here incidentally while
> working on other things.
I know about that pattern. I see the rest of your posts.
> There's also the possibility of having friends mirror that site. That
> gets the word out better.
Links do the same thing.
>>So I'm still undecided. But I don't think it's worth the four-or-five
>>pages that I think it would take to do it right.[1] Again, I'm not
>>convinced that people who haven't bothered learned filtering (the ones
>>for which computers are like expensive toasters) are going to start
>>caring now.
>
> Some might not now, but they will. Google Groups is the Plague of
> usenet, and the trend to ostracize them is growing.
As it should. :)
> Some people don't grasp the concept of what filters are really for.
> They aren't just for filtering people you don't want to read - they're
> for cleaning up the general noise so that you can get to the
> information you want. DipSlime is a prime example of this. Without
> filters it would be impossible to read nanae when they're pumping the
> sewage in.
Ayup.