New SMAC newsgroup!
SnowFire
Guido den Broeder
<01be3777$78d4cb00$cddd...@worldnet.att.net>...
> alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, check it out!
I know it exists, but I can't subscribe :(
Mark Asher
I wish there wasn't such a rush to create alt groups for games. I'd rather
wait until the game is out a couple of months, and if traffic is heavy
enough still, then create the alt group and move the conversation. What's
the point of csipgs if we create an alt group for every strategy title? Are
we merely here to discuss BC3K then?
Mark Asher
K. Laisathit
>Guido den Broeder wrote in message <01be37fc$ac877f80$0100007f@localhost>...
>
>wait until the game is out a couple of months, and if traffic is heavy
>enough still, then create the alt group and move the conversation. What's
>the point of csipgs if we create an alt group for every strategy title? Are
>we merely here to discuss BC3K then?
Heh... Mark, when was the last time you *don't* see a call for
a new newsgroup formation when a big game arrives? Heck, SMAC
hasn't even arrived yet, officially that is. You're right
though, it's pointless to go through it only to see the group
wither within a few months time because of the lack of traffic.
Later...
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
K I R A T I L A I S A T H I T kir...@u.washington.edu
Mark Asher
>In article <3690e...@news.primary.net>, Mark Asher <ma...@cdmnet.com>
wrote:
>>Guido den Broeder wrote in message
<01be37fc$ac877f80$0100007f@localhost>...
>>
>>I wish there wasn't such a rush to create alt groups for games. I'd rather
>>wait until the game is out a couple of months, and if traffic is heavy
>>enough still, then create the alt group and move the conversation. What's
>>the point of csipgs if we create an alt group for every strategy title?
Are
>>we merely here to discuss BC3K then?
>
>Heh... Mark, when was the last time you *don't* see a call for
>a new newsgroup formation when a big game arrives? Heck, SMAC
>hasn't even arrived yet, officially that is. You're right
>though, it's pointless to go through it only to see the group
>wither within a few months time because of the lack of traffic.
Yeah, I know. Sometimes I enjoy engendering a sense of futility. <g>
There are really only a handful of games that can sustain an alt group more
than a few months after a game's release. SMAC might be one of them, but I'd
prefer that the initial discussion be here and then shifted to an alt group
eventually.
The dumb thing is that most of the messages get crossposted anyway.
Mark Asher
Grifman
wrote:
>Guido den Broeder wrote in message <01be37fc$ac877f80$0100007f@localhost>...
>>SnowFire <snowball...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
>><01be3777$78d4cb00$cddd...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>> alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, check it out!
>>
>>I know it exists, but I can't subscribe :(
>
>
>I wish there wasn't such a rush to create alt groups for games. I'd rather
>wait until the game is out a couple of months, and if traffic is heavy
>enough still, then create the alt group and move the conversation. What's
>the point of csipgs if we create an alt group for every strategy title? Are
>we merely here to discuss BC3K then?
>
>Mark Asher
I agree, I just think it is done in most cases by newbies who want to
say "Hey, I'm kewl, I just created a newsgroup for this game . . "
Grifman
Grifman
wrote:
>Grifman <sg...@concentric.net> wrote in article
>> >I wish there wasn't such a rush to create alt groups for games. I'd
>rather
>> >wait until the game is out a couple of months, and if traffic is heavy
>> >enough still, then create the alt group and move the conversation.
>What's
>> >the point of csipgs if we create an alt group for every strategy title?
>Are
>> >we merely here to discuss BC3K then?
>> >
>> >Mark Asher
>>
>> I agree, I just think it is done in most cases by newbies who want to
>> say "Hey, I'm kewl, I just created a newsgroup for this game . . "
>>
>> Grifman
>
>Well, it was created by Firaxis. And the demo is very playable, it will
>certainly last until the full game is out (don't underestimate us
>civvies!!). Furthermore, they want our comments to help making the first
>patch.
>
>Regards,
> Guido
Firaxis, yeah I know that. But alt groups don't get propagated very
much. And you can give Firaxis your comments here . . . I'm not
knocking the game - I love it and have played the demo half a dozen
times already. I just think setting up another group for an
individual game is dumb.
Grifman
Brian Reynolds
But we're happy to post there as well if there are ongoing discussions
about the game.
Brian Reynolds
Alpha Centauri Designer
FIRAXIS Games
Guido den Broeder
has lasted a lot longer than a mere few months!).
Kevin B. O'Brien
said (on Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:35:27 -0600):
>I wish there wasn't such a rush to create alt groups for games. I'd rather
>wait until the game is out a couple of months, and if traffic is heavy
>enough still, then create the alt group and move the conversation. What's
>the point of csipgs if we create an alt group for every strategy title? Are
>we merely here to discuss BC3K then?
It gives some people delusions of adequacy when they can create a
newsgroup.
It won't propagate very far anyway, since there was no discussion in
alt.config.
--
Kevin B. O'Brien TANSTAAFL
ko...@ix.netcom.com
"I still believe in liberalism today as much as I ever did, but, oh,
there was a happy time when I believed in liberals..."
-- G. K. Chesterton
Help fight SPAM. Join CAUCE. http://www.cauce.org/
Guido den Broeder
rather
> >wait until the game is out a couple of months, and if traffic is heavy
> >enough still, then create the alt group and move the conversation.
What's
> >the point of csipgs if we create an alt group for every strategy title?
Are
> >we merely here to discuss BC3K then?
> >
Andrew R. Gillett
> Actually Firaxis didn't create the group; I have no idea who did.
Presumably the group was created by the poster known as Mr Tolver, who
also created the huge and incredibly stupid
alt.games.microprose/microsoft/lucas-arts hierarchies (which are full of
obsolete and duplicate groups).
--
Andrew Gillett http://argnet.fatal-design.com/ ICQ: See homepage
"Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahh." - Richard Herring
Guido den Broeder
<369191F3...@firaxis.com>...
> Actually Firaxis didn't create the group; I have no idea who did.
That's funny! I would think that people aren't allowed to use a company's
name without permission.
> But we're happy to post there as well if there are ongoing discussions
> about the game.
Thanks. Now if only I could subscribe (sigh)
Regards,
Guido
Peter Coleman
put down others....
Especially when they're net snobs. I don't give a toss about alt.config.
If a group addresses a subject I'm interested in, I'll join, and if it
features people who know what they're talking about I'll stay. The group
will be carried by most decent News Servers and will grow if the demand
is there.
I don't wish to wade through loads of posts concerning the latest C&C
clone, or even about Civ2 any longer. agfac suits me fine at the moment.
If you join that may change.
Kevin B. O'Brien wrote in message
<36916e50...@nntp.best.ix.netcom.com>...
AcK!
(Kevin B. O'Brien)'s computer and wrote:
>For the benefit of Mr. Kite, "Mark Asher" <ma...@cdmnet.com> kindly
>said (on Mon, 4 Jan 1999 10:35:27 -0600):
>
>>I wish there wasn't such a rush to create alt groups for games. I'd rather
>>wait until the game is out a couple of months, and if traffic is heavy
>>enough still, then create the alt group and move the conversation. What's
>>the point of csipgs if we create an alt group for every strategy title? Are
>>we merely here to discuss BC3K then?
>
>It gives some people delusions of adequacy when they can create a
>newsgroup.
>
>It won't propagate very far anyway, since there was no discussion in
>alt.config.
As if discussion in alt.config guarantees the viability of a group...
TTYL
... HTML in newsgroups is the tool of the devil!
krup...@yahoospa.com
remove "spa" to email
AcK!
<bro...@bart.nl>'s computer and wrote:
>A lot of the discussion on SMAC is going on in the civ2 newsgroup (which
>has lasted a lot longer than a mere few months!).
I'm just echoing you Guido. An SMAC newsgroup won't spell the death of csipgs as MA
suggests...
AcK!
(Grifman)'s computer and wrote:
>Firaxis, yeah I know that. But alt groups don't get propagated very
>much. And you can give Firaxis your comments here . . . I'm not
>knocking the game - I love it and have played the demo half a dozen
>times already. I just think setting up another group for an
>individual game is dumb.
Ah, the diehard 'let's keep all strategy game related discussions in this NG alone'
cabal. :)
Pinochet
Guido den Broeder wrote in message <01be38bb$f23741e0$0100007f@localhost>...
>Brian Reynolds <brey...@firaxis.com> wrote in article
><369191F3...@firaxis.com>...
>> Actually Firaxis didn't create the group; I have no idea who did.
>That's funny! I would think that people aren't allowed to use a company's
>name without permission.
Well, considering the nature of Usenet, it would be almost impossible
for a company to get its trademarks enforced. It's not a matter of one
or two webservers, but hundreds, if not thousands of newservers which
one would have to get to comply with any legal order....assuming one
got one granted, of course.
>> But we're happy to post there as well if there are ongoing discussions
>> about the game.
>Thanks. Now if only I could subscribe (sigh)
Keep begging your news admin for it.
Mark Asher
>04 Jan 1999 19:24:00 PST was when a million monkeys took over
sg...@concentric.net
>(Grifman)'s computer and wrote:
>
>>Firaxis, yeah I know that. But alt groups don't get propagated very
>>much. And you can give Firaxis your comments here . . . I'm not
>>knocking the game - I love it and have played the demo half a dozen
>>times already. I just think setting up another group for an
>>individual game is dumb.
>
>Ah, the diehard 'let's keep all strategy game related discussions in this
NG alone'
>cabal. :)
Nothing so draconian, but it's nice to have a catch-all group for strat
titles when they first come out. Plus, alt group propagation is a real
issue. My ISP doesn't carry the SMAC newsgroup, for instance.
On top of that, why create an alt group and then crosspost to csipgs anyway?
Isn't that rather stupid?
Mark Asher
Andrew R. Gillett
> Nothing so draconian, but it's nice to have a catch-all group for strat
> titles when they first come out. Plus, alt group propagation is a real
> issue. My ISP doesn't carry the SMAC newsgroup, for instance.
Then ask them to add it.
> On top of that, why create an alt group and then crosspost to csipgs anyway?
> Isn't that rather stupid?
As you said, not everyone has a.g.f.a-c yet, so I crosspost to
c.s.i.p.g.s. When more people start coming here, I will start posting
stuff here only.
--
Andrew Gillett http://argnet.fatal-design.com/ ICQ: See homepage
"No mustard? You dare to insult me with a mustard-less pizza? You will die
for this!" - Michelangelo, Starship Losers
Kevin B. O'Brien
newsadmin who won't add alt.* groups willy-nilly, so I guess I'll
have to decline.
For the benefit of Mr. Kite, "Peter Coleman"
<plc...@globalnet.co.uk> kindly said (on Tue, 5 Jan 1999 19:54:25
-0000):
>It also purely gives some people delusions of importance when they can
>put down others....
>
>Especially when they're net snobs. I don't give a toss about alt.config.
>If a group addresses a subject I'm interested in, I'll join, and if it
>features people who know what they're talking about I'll stay. The group
>will be carried by most decent News Servers and will grow if the demand
>is there.
>
>I don't wish to wade through loads of posts concerning the latest C&C
>clone, or even about Civ2 any longer. agfac suits me fine at the moment.
>If you join that may change.
>
>Kevin B. O'Brien wrote in message
><36916e50...@nntp.best.ix.netcom.com>...
>>
>>It gives some people delusions of adequacy when they can create a
>>newsgroup.
>>
>>It won't propagate very far anyway, since there was no discussion in
>>alt.config.
>
--
Kevin B. O'Brien TANSTAAFL
ko...@ix.netcom.com
"There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're
talking about." -- John von Neumann
Mark Asher
>In alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, Mark Asher wrote:
>> Nothing so draconian, but it's nice to have a catch-all group for strat
>> titles when they first come out. Plus, alt group propagation is a real
>> issue. My ISP doesn't carry the SMAC newsgroup, for instance.
>
>Then ask them to add it.
Why? The game isn't even out yet. Why not just discuss it here in Strategic?
What value is there in moving discussion to an alt group that not everyone
will get and from which messages tend to be propogated more slowly? Plus,
why should the onus be on me to get my ISP to carry a group when there's a
perfectly fine forum for discussing SMAC that my ISP already gets?
>> On top of that, why create an alt group and then crosspost to csipgs
anyway?
>> Isn't that rather stupid?
>
>As you said, not everyone has a.g.f.a-c yet, so I crosspost to
>c.s.i.p.g.s. When more people start coming here, I will start posting
>stuff here only.
"Here" is csipgs for me. I don't get the SMAC group.
Mark Asher
Mark Asher
Bob Roland
> Why? The game isn't even out yet. Why not just discuss it here in Strategic?
> why should the onus be on me to get my ISP to carry a group when there's a
> perfectly fine forum for discussing SMAC that my ISP already gets?
Well, I think the point is rather moot to be honest. There *is* a group
for SMAC, and I for one will be posting there rather than csipgs. Why?
Because I have the distinct feeling from playing the demo that i won't
be playing any other strategy game for months and months. Moses could
come down from the mount with a game that god has promised to be the
best ever, and I'll just ignore it.
(sorry, after playing the demo, I'm hooked. It's like when Civ2 came
out.)
SMAC, being the sucessor of the greatest strat game ever, deserves it's
own group for no other reason than it's proud lineage and it's creators.
This alt. group is pretty comfortable. Let's move in.
What I don't quite understand is your objection. I mean, almost all
ISPs are willing to add new newsgroups by a customer request. Having a
seperate group seems like a win/win situation for all involved. Those
who don't want to hear about SMAC don't have to, and those who will be
absorbed in SMAC won't wish to read about other games.
Just my 2 energy credits.
Bob
Dave Richardson
<snowball...@worldnet.att.net> writes
>alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, check it out!
Ok, but this is not necessarily good.
Some people cross post, and some don't. This means that some postings
are only in one group or the other. It also means some postings are in
both.
I therefore have to spend more time and money downloading duplicated
identical postings. This cost becomes significant over a year.
I have to spend (much) more time following SMAC arguments on the Usenet
because I have to read through large numbers of identical postings on
two separate newsgroups to avoid missing the postings which are not
cross posted. This is irritating.
--
Dave Richardson
Bill Faust
says...
<..>
> Thanks. Now if only I could subscribe (sigh)
Greetings!
You could always try to add the following public server:
They have a very good set of sci-fi type NGs and the SMAC one is rather
active as well.
BTW: Brian, if you send me a signed copy of SMAC by the production crew
there is a FREE flight around the island of Oahu in it for you; if you
ever come to Hawaii. Please feel free to contact me for billing and
shipping information.
-
Peace; Love & Joy,
Bill Faust
Citizen of the World
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"The ability to realize one's goals does not depend solely on technical
knowledge or factual accuracy. A great part relies on the strength of
one's vision and the courage and determination to solidify dreams." - Wm
Faust
"He who conquers others is strong, He who conquers himself is mighty." -
Lao Tzu
"Evil must be in order to allow for the heroic." - Wm Faust
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Email - fa...@aloha.net, fa...@makanikai.com, wfa...@hawaii.edu
UIN - 3464668
Addy - POB 1438, Honolulu, Hawaii 96806-1438
Phone/fax - (808)848.5111
WebPager - http://wwp.mirabilis.com/3464668
Website - http://makanikai.com
Wayne Sheppard
Mark Asher wrote in message <3692d...@news.primary.net>...
>Andrew R. Gillett wrote in message ...
>>In alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, Mark Asher wrote:
>>> Nothing so draconian, but it's nice to have a catch-all group for strat
>>> titles when they first come out. Plus, alt group propagation is a real
>>> issue. My ISP doesn't carry the SMAC newsgroup, for instance.
>>
>>Then ask them to add it.
>
>Why? The game isn't even out yet.
The demo is out. Many people are duscussing the demo in agfac.
> Why not just discuss it here in Strategic?
You can discuss it in csipgs as well.
>What value is there in moving discussion to an alt group that not everyone
>will get and from which messages tend to be propogated more slowly?
Some people don't like to wade thru a newsgroup that has close to 300
messages a day. Some people would prefer a seperate newsgroup that just
carried messages about the game they are interested.
> Plus, why should the onus be on me to get my ISP to carry a group when
there's a
>perfectly fine forum for discussing SMAC that my ISP already gets?
My ISP picks up all the alt newsgroups automatically. But if your ISP
doesn't, you can ask them or get another ISP. You can also use one of the
free news servers out there, or use dejanews to read alt newsgroups.
Andrew R. Gillett
> Andrew R. Gillett wrote in message ...
> >In alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, Mark Asher wrote:
> >> Nothing so draconian, but it's nice to have a catch-all group for strat
> >> titles when they first come out. Plus, alt group propagation is a real
> >> issue. My ISP doesn't carry the SMAC newsgroup, for instance.
> >
> >Then ask them to add it.
>
> What value is there in moving discussion to an alt group that not everyone
> why should the onus be on me to get my ISP to carry a group when there's a
> perfectly fine forum for discussing SMAC that my ISP already gets?
There seems to be this mentality with some people in c.s.i.p.g.s that ALL
strategy game discussions should be held there, and individual games
shouldn't have their own groups.
But if you compare c.s.i.p.g.s with, say, alt.games.x-com, you notice
that the two groups are very different. Discussions on individual games
in csipgs tend to go on for maybe a month or two before the next great
thing comes along, and the group then gets swamped by discussions on that
instead. In a specialist group like a.g.x-com, discussions are slower
paced and often more detailed. These groups attract hardcore fans and
people who want to talk about the game but don't have the time to deal
with csipgs, which is a fairly high volume group. Also, perhaps most
importantly, because the group is smaller, you get a much better sense of
community and make more friends. To me, there are very few familiar faces
in csipgs - because there are SO MANY faces.
greg...@xmission.com
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Craig S. Richardson
<Da...@curverconsumer.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <01be3777$78d4cb00$cddd...@worldnet.att.net>, SnowFire
><snowball...@worldnet.att.net> writes
>>alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, check it out!
>
>Ok, but this is not necessarily good.
Definitely not, but since it has already happened, we might as well
adjust to the reality, as reality never adjusts to us.
>Some people cross post, and some don't. This means that some postings
>are only in one group or the other. It also means some postings are in
>both.
>
>I therefore have to spend more time and money downloading duplicated
>identical postings. This cost becomes significant over a year.
I use Agent for newsreading, and it does automatic crosspost filtering
(at the cost of a little extra CPU time). For those of us lucky
enough not to be billed for local phone calls or have non-metered ISP
accounts, at least. There is another issue.
>I have to spend (much) more time following SMAC arguments on the Usenet
>because I have to read through large numbers of identical postings on
>two separate newsgroups to avoid missing the postings which are not
>cross posted. This is irritating.
And we'll have crossposted messages that spawn separate but equal
discussions partitioned by newsgroup, since (a) people will naturally
tend to find c.s.i.p.g.s. first, and (b) since the alt group was added
without following the accepted procedure, propagation will be *very*
spotty. It will end up, as it always does, increasing the total
traffic, and making things harder on people who try (and are able) to
keep up with both groups, while keeping information away from people
who don't (or more importantly can't).
--Craig
Craig S. Richardson - crichar...@worldnet.att.net
NEW! Innumeracy in action! "If ya want to look at stats,
back it up! There was only a mention of walks/OBA and
slg pct..." --ghosts...@my-dejanews.com
Peter Coleman
Kevin B. O'Brien wrote in message
<3692a512...@nntp.best.ix.netcom.com>...
Jeff George
pain in the ass. It'd be like having to watch different tv channels to see
all the news because one carried only sports, one carried only
entertainment, etc. In c.s.i.p.g.s I can see info on most everything I'm
interested in at one shot.
--
Jeff George
Bob Roland wrote in message <3692FD26...@tci.com>...
>Mark Asher wrote:
>
>> Why? The game isn't even out yet. Why not just discuss it here in
Strategic?
>
>> why should the onus be on me to get my ISP to carry a group when there's
a
>> perfectly fine forum for discussing SMAC that my ISP already gets?
>
Colen 'Not Colin' McAlister
>Some people cross post, and some don't. This means that some postings
>are only in one group or the other. It also means some postings are in
>both.
>
>I therefore have to spend more time and money downloading duplicated
>identical postings. This cost becomes significant over a year.
The kill file is your friend. Trust the kill file.
Skrills for the Skrill God!&%$# SKREEEEEEEEEEEEE!&*!%$!#@
--
Colen 'Not Colin' McAlister, UIN 13168333 <brother...@geocities.com>
Colen's Warhammer Page: <http://surf.to/colen/> DiaChronos Software:
<http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arena/4368/programs/>
GOD IS REAL ... Unless declared integer.
Will Moeller
Mark Asher wrote:
> Andrew R. Gillett wrote in message ...
> >In alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, Mark Asher wrote:
> >> Nothing so draconian, but it's nice to have a catch-all group for strat
> >> titles when they first come out. Plus, alt group propagation is a real
> >> issue. My ISP doesn't carry the SMAC newsgroup, for instance.
> >
> >Then ask them to add it.
>
> Why? The game isn't even out yet. Why not just discuss it here in Strategic?
> What value is there in moving discussion to an alt group that not everyone
> will get and from which messages tend to be propogated more slowly? Plus,
> why should the onus be on me to get my ISP to carry a group when there's a
> perfectly fine forum for discussing SMAC that my ISP already gets?
>
I asked, plus the demo is out anyway.
>
> >> On top of that, why create an alt group and then crosspost to csipgs
> anyway?
> >> Isn't that rather stupid?
> >
> >As you said, not everyone has a.g.f.a-c yet, so I crosspost to
> >c.s.i.p.g.s. When more people start coming here, I will start posting
> >stuff here only.
>
> "Here" is csipgs for me. I don't get the SMAC group.
>
You really should ask for it.
Will Moeller
The Alpha Centauri Nexus
http://sidgames.com/ac
Will Moeller
Craig S. Richardson wrote:
>
> And we'll have crossposted messages that spawn separate but equal
> discussions partitioned by newsgroup, since (a) people will naturally
> tend to find c.s.i.p.g.s. first, and (b) since the alt group was added
> without following the accepted procedure, propagation will be *very*
> spotty. It will end up, as it always does, increasing the total
> traffic, and making things harder on people who try (and are able) to
> keep up with both groups, while keeping information away from people
> who don't (or more importantly can't).
>
I disagree. I usually find more centered groups (IE
alt.games.wing-commander) before more open groups (like that
something..something.something.something.space-sim)
AcK!
<ma...@cdmnet.com>'s computer and wrote:
>>Ah, the diehard 'let's keep all strategy game related discussions in this
>NG alone'
>>cabal. :)
>
>Nothing so draconian, but it's nice to have a catch-all group for strat
>titles when they first come out. Plus, alt group propagation is a real
>issue. My ISP doesn't carry the SMAC newsgroup, for instance.
Ask them to add it. Interlog (my ISP) added it in less than 48 hours.
>On top of that, why create an alt group and then crosspost to csipgs anyway?
>Isn't that rather stupid?
Only as stupid as using kindling to start a fire. If you're camping in the woods it's
not stupid at all...
The analogy's point is that message are being crossposted here and in alt.games.civ2
in order to help generate traffic in the a-c newsgroup. By the time the game's out
there won't be so much crossposting (I hope <g>).
TTYL
... "Food goes in here!" - Homer Jr. "It sure does..." - Homer
AcK!
<ma...@cdmnet.com>'s computer and wrote:
>>> Nothing so draconian, but it's nice to have a catch-all group for strat
>>> titles when they first come out. Plus, alt group propagation is a real
>>> issue. My ISP doesn't carry the SMAC newsgroup, for instance.
>>
>>Then ask them to add it.
>
>Why? The game isn't even out yet. Why not just discuss it here in Strategic?
alt.games.tiberian-sun has been operational since last Spring. 'Nuff said on the
topic of "it isn't even out yet."
TTYL
... A mind is a terrible thing to ugh... I forgot...
Wayne Sheppard
Jeff George wrote in message <770p4g$drl$1...@remarQ.com>...
>Personally, I just hate the idea of having to read multiple groups. It's a
>pain in the ass. It'd be like having to watch different tv channels to see
>all the news because one carried only sports, one carried only
>entertainment, etc. In c.s.i.p.g.s I can see info on most everything I'm
>interested in at one shot.
Lets just eliminate all newsgroups except one and have everyone post their
message in the one newsgroup. This way it will be easy for all ISP's to
carry the one newsgroup. Also everyone won't have to read multiple
newsgroups. And we wouldn't have to worry about crossposting NOT!
But seriously, I've was reading usenet back when there was only
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games and no sub-groups. The number of posts just kept
growing and growing in this one group. Finally it got broken out into 5 (?)
sub groups. Now there are 12 sub-groups. Some people resisted this as
well. They didn't want to have multiple groups to read.
Personally I don't have time to wade through 500 posts a day to look for
SMAC posts. It on;y makes sense to have groups for games that will generate
large volumes of traffic.
Peter Coleman
pennies.
Dave Richardson wrote in message
<0o+hcAAR...@curverconsumer.demon.co.uk>...
Peter Coleman
they have a problem. And what would you search on if looking for help on
ALPHA Centauri? In fact if looking for Strategy games would you think to
use the word StartegIC? It's just gotta be full of old farts. ;)
Will Moeller wrote in message <36940FE1...@sidgames.com>...
Will Moeller
Dave Richardson wrote:
> Ok, but this is not necessarily good.
>
Yes it is
> I therefore have to spend more time and money downloading duplicated
> identical postings. This cost becomes significant over a year.
>
That only happens if your newsgroup reader sucks.
>
> I have to spend (much) more time following SMAC arguments on the Usenet
> because I have to read through large numbers of identical postings on
> two separate newsgroups to avoid missing the postings which are not
> cross posted. This is irritating.
>
Your newsgroup reader probibly does suck. I use NS4.x and it shows
crossposts that have been read, as read.
Guido den Broeder
<MPG.10fd06543...@news.aloha.net>...
> You could always try to add the following public server:
>
> news.sff.net
>
> They have a very good set of sci-fi type NGs and the SMAC one is rather
> active as well.
How can I add a server?
Fortunately the problem is solved! My provider was nice enough to add this
nsg to the list today :):):)
Regards,
Guido den Broeder
David Short
>Guido den Broeder wrote in message
>>SnowFire <snowball...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
>><01be3777$78d4cb00$cddd...@worldnet.att.net>...
>>> alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, check it out!
>>I know it exists, but I can't subscribe :(
>
>I wish there wasn't such a rush to create alt groups for games. I'd rather
>wait until the game is out a couple of months, and if traffic is heavy
>enough still, then create the alt group and move the conversation. What's
>the point of csipgs if we create an alt group for every strategy title? Are
>we merely here to discuss BC3K then?
I agree that the rush to create alt groups is misguided, but we've
been headed in that direction for some time now. For some time
the discussion in csipgs has revolved around the worth of the
game that is the current flavor of the month (SUX/RULZ) and
industry issues. Few games get much discussion of strategy
tips here.
I would hasten to add that web based message boards can be
a more permenant solution than alt groups. I recognize they
can be a real pain to use. The Antares group still has some
moo2 discussion and I would hold that group up as a model.
The Caesar3 boards are also pretty sharp and of course
Firaxis has its own boards for smac.
There is good and bad in having discussion fragmented
on so many forums. The good of sticking with something
like csipgs is that you get a good quick read on the game.
Of course the flame wars and inbreeding of csipgs
can make it overwhelming. More focused groups
allow a more focused discussion. The trouble with
more focused groups is that islands that don't reach
a self-sustaining critical mass just implode and information
and interest just disolve.
With real apologies to our overseas cousins who have to
pay outrageous phone bills no matter which side of this
fence things land on.
dfs
Peter Coleman
Will Moeller wrote in message <36953113...@sidgames.com>...
Will Moeller
David Short wrote:
> I would hasten to add that web based message boards can be
> a more permenant solution than alt groups. I recognize they
> can be a real pain to use. The Antares group still has some
> moo2 discussion and I would hold that group up as a model.
> The Caesar3 boards are also pretty sharp and of course
> Firaxis has its own boards for smac.
>
Newsgroups can be a lot better than web boards though, and not because they can
be easier to use.
>
> There is good and bad in having discussion fragmented
> on so many forums. The good of sticking with something
> like csipgs is that you get a good quick read on the game.
> Of course the flame wars and inbreeding of csipgs
> can make it overwhelming. More focused groups
> allow a more focused discussion. The trouble with
> more focused groups is that islands that don't reach
> a self-sustaining critical mass just implode and information
> and interest just disolve.
>
There can be a lot of flaming on web boards too.
>
> With real apologies to our overseas cousins who have to
> pay outrageous phone bills no matter which side of this
> fence things land on.
>
Newsgroups are better for people who have to pay per minute bills than web
boards :)
Hopefully the spammer mutation will prove to be an evolutionary
>>It won't propagate very far anyway, since there was no discussion in
>>alt.config.
>As if discussion in alt.config guarantees the viability of a group...
> krup...@yahoospa.com
> remove "spa" to email
Exactly. As if I give a damn how far it propagates, since it's clearly
already available to my ISP. As it is to anyone who's posting here.
Sounds to me as if it's the persons in alt.config who are desperate to
feel "validated". ;)
Cynic
"Why are there so many people in the world who are happier minding my
business than their own?"
Adam Saunders
<snip>
> There is good and bad in having discussion fragmented
> on so many forums. The good of sticking with something
> like csipgs is that you get a good quick read on the game.
> Of course the flame wars and inbreeding of csipgs
> can make it overwhelming. More focused groups
> allow a more focused discussion. The trouble with
> more focused groups is that islands that don't reach
> a self-sustaining critical mass just implode and information
> and interest just disolve.
<snip>
> dfs
I don't think lack of interest for SMAC is going to be a problem. There
are already sufficient messages to justify this groups' existence
(agfa-c) and once the demo appears on the front of magazines (and is
then finally released) I think this news group will probably be
inundated with messages. Considering the nature of the game, I think
this news group is going to be here for a while!!!
Adam Saunders
jn...@my-dejanews.com
"David Short" <dsh...@nova.wright.edu> wrote:
> Mark Asher wrote in message <3690e...@news.primary.net>...
> >Guido den Broeder wrote in message
> <01be37fc$ac877f80$0100007f@localhost>...
> >>SnowFire <snowball...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
> >><01be3777$78d4cb00$cddd...@worldnet.att.net>...
> >>> alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, check it out!
> >>I know it exists, but I can't subscribe :(
> >
> >I wish there wasn't such a rush to create alt groups for games. I'd rather
> >wait until the game is out a couple of months, and if traffic is heavy
> >enough still, then create the alt group and move the conversation. What's
> >the point of csipgs if we create an alt group for every strategy title? Are
> >we merely here to discuss BC3K then?
>
> I agree that the rush to create alt groups is misguided, but we've
> been headed in that direction for some time now. For some time
> the discussion in csipgs has revolved around the worth of the
> game that is the current flavor of the month (SUX/RULZ) and
> industry issues. Few games get much discussion of strategy
> tips here.
>
The SMAC had to established this quick because it was overloading
the Civ II newsgroup. I'm surprized there's not a Sid Meier's
Gettysburg newsgroup seeing how good that game is.
> I would hasten to add that web based message boards can be
> a more permenant solution than alt groups. I recognize they
> can be a real pain to use. The Antares group still has some
> moo2 discussion and I would hold that group up as a model.
> The Caesar3 boards are also pretty sharp and of course
> Firaxis has its own boards for smac.
>
In the ideal world, the same data posted at a web board would
be sent to the same place as the alt.group for it so that
they'd just be different views of the same data. I don't
see any technical problems preventing this from happening now.
> There is good and bad in having discussion fragmented
> on so many forums. The good of sticking with something
> like csipgs is that you get a good quick read on the game.
> Of course the flame wars and inbreeding of csipgs
> can make it overwhelming. More focused groups
> allow a more focused discussion. The trouble with
> more focused groups is that islands that don't reach
> a self-sustaining critical mass just implode and information
> and interest just disolve.
>
We could use some more intermediate newsgroups. IPCS is too
general, but some games wouldn't have enough traffic for their
own newsgroup, what we need are newsgroups like
alt.games.ssi.historicalwargames which cover many SSI games and
and.games.computer.nflfootball for all the NFL football games
there are.
> With real apologies to our overseas cousins who have to
> pay outrageous phone bills no matter which side of this
> fence things land on.
>
I imagine even if cable modems came avaiable overseas, they'd
still be paying an outrageous ammount like being charged per
kb downloaded in places they now have to pay per minute for
local phone calls.
Jon Nunn
Friends Don't Let Friends Do Cobol
Colen 'Not Colin' McAlister
>I would hasten to add that web based message boards can be
>a more permenant solution than alt groups. I recognize they
>can be a real pain to use. The Antares group still has some
>moo2 discussion and I would hold that group up as a model.
>The Caesar3 boards are also pretty sharp and of course
>Firaxis has its own boards for smac.
Web based message boards are horrific for those who have to pay for
phone charges. I'd have thought a mailing list would be more
appropriate...
Skrills for the Skrill God!&%$# SKREEEEEEEEEEEEE!&*!%$!#@
--
Colen 'Not Colin' McAlister, UIN 13168333 <brother...@geocities.com>
Colen's Warhammer Page: <http://surf.to/colen/> DiaChronos Software:
<http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arena/4368/programs/>
Logic is a systematic method of coming to the wrong conclusion with confidence.
David Short
Colen 'Not Colin' McAlister wrote in message ...
>One fine day in the middle of the night, David Short spoke:
>
>>I would hasten to add that web based message boards can be
>>a more permenant solution than alt groups. I recognize they
>>can be a real pain to use. The Antares group still has some
>>moo2 discussion and I would hold that group up as a model.
>>The Caesar3 boards are also pretty sharp and of course
>>Firaxis has its own boards for smac.
>
>Web based message boards are horrific for those who have to pay for
>phone charges. I'd have thought a mailing list would be more
>appropriate...
Agreed. Yes, they are. Web based message boards are
also a TREMENDOUS pain in the ... to use compared
to Usenet. I AGREE with you that web based boards
are not an optimal choice.
but.... I have lots of friends who can fire up a browser
and point it to a web site, and very few friends who
know what usenet is. Even fewer who would request
an ISP carry a new alt group.
dfs
Colen 'Not Colin' McAlister
>>Web based message boards are horrific for those who have to pay for
>>phone charges. I'd have thought a mailing list would be more
>>appropriate...
>
>
>Agreed. Yes, they are. Web based message boards are
>also a TREMENDOUS pain in the ... to use compared
>to Usenet. I AGREE with you that web based boards
>are not an optimal choice.
>
>but.... I have lots of friends who can fire up a browser
>and point it to a web site, and very few friends who
>know what usenet is. Even fewer who would request
>an ISP carry a new alt group.
Get some new friends. :-D
Failing that, teach them about Dejanews.
Skrills for the Skrill God!&%$# SKREEEEEEEEEEEEE!&*!%$!#@
--
Colen 'Not Colin' McAlister, UIN 13168333 <brother...@geocities.com>
Colen's Warhammer Page: <http://surf.to/colen/> DiaChronos Software:
<http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Arena/4368/programs/>
"Hey, nice toupee!" is never a compliment.
antony brian west
<dsh...@nova.wright.edu> wrote:
<snip>:
>>
>>>I would hasten to add that web based message boards can be
>>>a more permenant solution than alt groups. I recognize they
>>>can be a real pain to use. The Antares group still has some
>>>moo2 discussion and I would hold that group up as a model.
>>>The Caesar3 boards are also pretty sharp and of course
>>>Firaxis has its own boards for smac.
>>
>>phone charges. I'd have thought a mailing list would be more
>>appropriate...
>
>
>Agreed. Yes, they are. Web based message boards are
>also a TREMENDOUS pain in the ... to use compared
>to Usenet. I AGREE with you that web based boards
>are not an optimal choice.
>
>but.... I have lots of friends who can fire up a browser
>and point it to a web site, and very few friends who
>know what usenet is. Even fewer who would request
>an ISP carry a new alt group.
I loathe web message boards with a passion. I find following a thread is next
to impossible, that compared to downloading the posts from my news server it
takes forever to get anywhere - click on message, wait for it to load, read
it, click on next message, wait for it to load...
Searching for old threads is also a major problem - most web board archives
that I have come across only allow searching the title of the message or by
the name of the person who wrote it.
When I download my newsgroups, I do so in one big hit, and read offline -
which you cannot do with web based boards. You cannot also download all the
articles for the day/week/forever - and searching the archives for what you
want is impossible (see above).
While it is true that with newsgroups your news server has to carry the group,
for a text only newsgroup with something of a following there is a good chance
that you can ask/demand/bribe/blackmail the appropriate sysadmin to carry it.
As to those who can't use usenet because of ignorance, once someone has
grasped the idea of a world wide web, the jump to usenet is not as far as one
would think.
<rant mode off>
westyX
jn...@my-dejanews.com
> Searching for old threads is also a major problem - most web board archives
> that I have come across only allow searching the title of the message or by
> the name of the person who wrote it.
>
Searching for most usenet servers for old articles is also a problem, since
they often don't keep messages for more than 30 days. The best place to go
for searching old threads is dejanews, they appear to keep messages forever.
Zan Thrax
> > Searching for old threads is also a major problem - most web board archives
> > that I have come across only allow searching the title of the message or by
> > the name of the person who wrote it.
> >
> Searching for most usenet servers for old articles is also a problem, since
> they often don't keep messages for more than 30 days. The best place to go
> for searching old threads is dejanews, they appear to keep messages forever.
Mine keeps them for a mere week.
Will Moeller
Zan Thrax wrote:
It depends on the amount of messages for my server. If a newsgroup is very busy,
like over 3000, messages would only be up for about a week. In a newsgroup like
agfac, its 9 days.
antony brian west
wrote:
snip some stuff
in some ways provide a more continous record of the discussion. However, in
practice, i have found personally (and since i do not like web boards, stay
away from them like the plague, and as such would not know of the good ones)
that most web boards are very hard to search, and while for a limited amount
of posts in a short/long time frame are good when searching for articles by
title, if the web board is a busy one (say as busy as this newsgroup), then
often the first page contains only a few days at most of posting. The postings
are most times ordered by thread (this is good). However, how do you download
the whole page's worth of posts? How many web boards have you seen that
provide a single .zip file containing all the week's posts for offline
browsing? the month's posts? god forbid, the entire history of the web board?
This is where newsgroups (and dejanews) excel - they allow easy offline
browsing, and dejanews allows searching of old posts.
I am not saying web boards suck totally. I am also not saying that newsgroups
are the be all and end all for the purpose of turn based (as opposed to real
time talk such as IRC) talk. I am just saying that once the discussion goes
beyond a week, and that people want to read the discussion offline, and you
want to easily search previous posts, that newsgroups are better than web
boards.
I see alot of need for impovement in both newsgroup readers and web boards
that would make life alot easier for all concerned (as to the newsgroup
readers, i use news Xpress exclusively (and as such are way behind the state
of the art technology) - i tried free agent, but found the interface user
unfriendly, and found that i could not intuitively do the things i used to do
with news express (read as i searched the manual for what i wanted to do,
couldn't find anything that i could understand, and gave up)).
Things like dynamic zipping and downloading of current and past posts (i.e. i
go to the web board, use my cookie to tell the web board server the last time
i visited the board, and what my killfile is, and then it dynamically searches
the posts, saving and zipping into one file the posts concerned, and then
sending it to me).
I've also just realised something else - how do you make offline posts to web
boards? With newsgroups you hit follow up, type the post, save it, and then
send it when you connect next.
westyx
Guido den Broeder
<01be37fc$ac877f80$0100007f@localhost>...
> SnowFire <snowball...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in article
> <01be3777$78d4cb00$cddd...@worldnet.att.net>...
> > alt.games.firaxis.alpha-centauri, check it out!
>
> I know it exists, but I can't subscribe :(
Hmm, my server is getting weirder by the day. This was a message from
december or so posted in I think alt.games.civ2 .....
AcK!
Yeah, I noticed that. <shrug>
TTYL
... All sentences that seem true should be questioned.