Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

COME ON MICROSOFT - CLEAN THIS NEWSGROUP - IT'S BECOMING UNUSABLE !!!!!!!

2 views
Skip to first unread message

Pete Kane

unread,
Apr 7, 2008, 5:19:16 AM4/7/08
to
XXX

Cor Ligthert [MVP]

unread,
Apr 7, 2008, 6:51:00 AM4/7/08
to
Be aware that they were still sleeping when you wrote this.

So important is this not, as it started in the weekend.

Just my opinion.

Cor


Pete Kane

unread,
Apr 7, 2008, 11:22:55 AM4/7/08
to
COME ON MICROSOFT - CLEAN THIS NEWSGROUP - IT'S BECOMING UNUSABLE !!!!!!!

Mythran

unread,
Apr 7, 2008, 11:46:28 AM4/7/08
to

"Pete Kane" <pjksol...@uku.co.uk> wrote in message
news:j%qKj.34852$%N1.1...@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net...


> COME ON MICROSOFT - CLEAN THIS NEWSGROUP - IT'S BECOMING UNUSABLE !!!!!!!

They must have cleaned it, for I don't see any erroneous posts except from
last week.

:)

Mythran

Chris Nahr

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 3:00:30 AM4/8/08
to
Microsoft doesn't seem to care about these newsgroups. The MSDN
Forums are generally higher quality and better policed, including the
C# sections: http://forums.microsoft.com/msdn/default.aspx?siteid=1

RobinS

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 3:40:06 AM4/8/08
to

"Chris Nahr" <diog...@kynosarges.de> wrote in message
news:4s5mv3tl8elsq2kvq...@4ax.com...

> Microsoft doesn't seem to care about these newsgroups. The MSDN
> Forums are generally higher quality and better policed, including the
> C# sections: http://forums.microsoft.com/msdn/default.aspx?siteid=1

Microsoft uses many of these newsgroups to answer questions for people with
MSDN subscriptions.

And you can go hang out in the Forums, if you have all day to read through
the messages. The MSDN Forums are so slow it's enough to make your eyes roll
back in your head and drool to form on your chin. It takes much, much longer
to read through the messages than it does in the newsgroups.

RobinS.

Pete Kane

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 5:18:23 AM4/8/08
to
there are new ones now

Pete Kane

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 5:24:40 AM4/8/08
to

Peter Duniho

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 11:32:33 AM4/8/08
to
On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 02:24:40 -0700, Pete Kane <pk...@uku.co.uk> wrote:

> [empty message body]

For what it's worth, since I added a filter to remove messages with
"paypal" and "www" in the subject, I see very little of the spam anymore.

Also, you have posted multiple messages with the same theme, and frankly
if I don't start filtering you too, they are going to be more clutter than
the spam that remains after my filters do their work.

In other words: please stop posting the same thing over and over again.
It's not constructive.

Pete

Charles Calvert

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 1:29:41 PM4/8/08
to
On Tue, 08 Apr 2008 09:00:30 +0200, Chris Nahr
<diog...@kynosarges.de> wrote in
<4s5mv3tl8elsq2kvq...@4ax.com>:

>Microsoft doesn't seem to care about these newsgroups. The MSDN
>Forums are generally higher quality and better policed, including the
>C# sections: http://forums.microsoft.com/msdn/default.aspx?siteid=1

Unmoderated newsgroups (such as this one) can't be policed. Usenet is
a distributed system; microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp exists
on hundreds if not thousands of servers across the world. Even if MS
had the resources to read through all of the messages and determine
which ones were off-topic, abusive, etc., there is no reliable way for
them to get such posts removed from all of those servers.

The forums are different because they exist only on Microsoft's
server(s) and can be controlled in a way that Usenet cannot.
--
Charles Calvert | Software Design/Development
Celtic Wolf, Inc. | Project Management
http://www.celticwolf.com/ | Technical Writing
(703) 580-0210 | Research

Norman Diamond

unread,
Apr 8, 2008, 9:02:23 PM4/8/08
to
> Also, you have posted multiple messages with the same theme,

For Pete's sake, the other thread was started by a third party with the same
first name.


"Peter Duniho" <NpOeS...@nnowslpianmk.com> wrote in message
news:op.t9atg...@petes-computer.local...

Willy Denoyette [MVP]

unread,
Apr 9, 2008, 8:45:52 AM4/9/08
to
"Norman Diamond" <ndia...@newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
news:OK3qh1dm...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>> Also, you have posted multiple messages with the same theme,
>
> For Pete's sake, the other thread was started by a third party with the
> same first name.
>

I guess Pete means "posted multiple messages" to this thread.

Willy.

Peter Duniho

unread,
Apr 9, 2008, 12:36:29 PM4/9/08
to
On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 05:45:52 -0700, Willy Denoyette [MVP]
<willy.d...@telenet.be> wrote:

> "Norman Diamond" <ndia...@newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
> news:OK3qh1dm...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Also, you have posted multiple messages with the same theme,
>>
>> For Pete's sake, the other thread was started by a third party with the
>> same first name.
>>
>
> I guess Pete means "posted multiple messages" to this thread.

No, I meant what I wrote. I just assumed Norman was trying to make some
sort of joke, possibly related to the fact that Pete Kane and I share a
first name. Kane did in fact start multiple threads with the same
subject, and it was to that which I was referring.

If Norman wasn't making a joke, then his post really just doesn't make
sense. If I'm the first party and Pete Kane is the second party, then
there is no third party who started the other threads. Kane started them
all.

Pete

Willy Denoyette [MVP]

unread,
Apr 9, 2008, 1:15:24 PM4/9/08
to
"Peter Duniho" <NpOeS...@nnowslpianmk.com> wrote in message
news:op.t9cq2...@petes-computer.local...


Oh, must have missed the other threads then, I'm only seeing this one thread
started by Pete Kane. Should check my spam filter settings I guess ;-)

Willy.

Norman Diamond

unread,
Apr 9, 2008, 8:17:44 PM4/9/08
to
"Peter Duniho" <NpOeS...@nnowslpianmk.com> wrote in message
news:op.t9cq2...@petes-computer.local...

> On Wed, 09 Apr 2008 05:45:52 -0700, Willy Denoyette [MVP]
> <willy.d...@telenet.be> wrote:
>> "Norman Diamond" <ndia...@newsgroup.nospam> wrote in message
>> news:OK3qh1dm...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>> Also, you have posted multiple messages with the same theme,
>>>
>>> For Pete's sake, the other thread was started by a third party with the
>>> same first name.
>>
>> I guess Pete means "posted multiple messages" to this thread.
>
> No, I meant what I wrote. I just assumed Norman was trying to make some
> sort of joke, possibly related to the fact that Pete Kane and I share a
> first name.

66% correct. Peter Bromberg started the other thread.

Pete Kane

unread,
Apr 15, 2008, 7:57:06 AM4/15/08
to

Hi All , I am the much mentioned Pete Kane and I certainly did not
intentionally start multiple threads

Charles Calvert

unread,
Apr 18, 2008, 1:56:52 PM4/18/08
to
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:57:06 +0100, Pete Kane <pk...@uku.co.uk> wrote
in <OX0YU$unIHA...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>:

You've started two other threads with more or less the same topic,
both on 4/7. I think that's what Peter Duniho is talking about.

<http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp/msg/0797684dd6c4fe64>

<http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp/msg/495431d386385914>


BTW, did you see my reply to your first post? If not, read it here:
<http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp/msg/7fb69efa6c0f72c5>.
It explains why MS can't control the messages posted to this group.
Also see <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet>.

0 new messages