Thank you the jewelry group
Jessica
jewelry making and looking for help. I got plenty good advice from the
group members. Now I'm doing well.
I want to thank the members of this group.
I do have a question for the group: lately there are fewer and fewer
posts on this group. Are you moving to other sites or groups? I like
this group and hope it will grow.
Peter W. Rowe
<jessica...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>I do have a question for the group: lately there are fewer and fewer
>>posts on this group. Are you moving to other sites or groups? I like
>>this group and hope it will grow.
Not so much moving, but moved.
This group used to be MUCH busier in years past (like ten years ago). But over
the last decade, the Orchid mail list, hosted by the Ganoksin.com web site has
come to pretty much dominate the area of jewelry and jewelry related
discussions. It's by far the most active discussion forum online for people
interested in jewelry, gems, art metal, etc, from professional to hobbyist. That
list currently has well over 10 thousand active subscribers, and gets usually
around 50 new messages per day. I would be surprised if this newsgroup has more
than a dozen or two people who read it on a regular basis at this point.
The big reasons for the move away from this group are that for one, Orchid (has
nothing to do with flowers) is hosted by a web site. People know about the web.
Many newer users of the internet don't even know there IS such a thing as usenet
or newsgroup, much less how to access them. Plus, even knowing that newsgroups
exist, mail lists are easier to access. You subscribe, and they come in email,
which people already have set up. To access a newsgroup, you have to configure
your software to do that, and more than a few people don't know, or won't bother
to do it. Or, alternatively, you access newsgroups via some web service like
Google groups, which isn't ideal. there's a time delay there, it's slow, and
not all types of groups or posts are supported. Plus, for usenet groups,
meaning those that are not specifically unique to Google, there are then extra
steps to jump through to find them, since Google would prefer you read it's
exclusive groups instead of going through them to read the more universal usenet
groups...
Anyway, this group still exists. I still moderate it. But frankly, I've been
doing this for almost 14 years now, and would prefer at this point to find
someone else to moderate the group. Any takers? It seems to serve little
purpose at this point other than being there for those few readers who don't
want to bother with the volume of messages on the Orchid list. So don't expect
this group to grow. It's been doing the opposite for some time now.
Peter Rowe
moderator
rec.crafts.jewelry
Chilla
> Anyway, this group still exists. I still moderate it. But frankly, I've been
> doing this for almost 14 years now, and would prefer at this point to find
> someone else to moderate the group. Any takers? It seems to serve little
> purpose at this point other than being there for those few readers who don't
> want to bother with the volume of messages on the Orchid list. So don't expect
> this group to grow. It's been doing the opposite for some time now.
>
> Peter Rowe
> moderator
> rec.crafts.jewelry
I check this list on occasion, and I do appreciate the work you do to
keep the level of spam to zero.
I frequent the Orchid list more, and thank you for the tips with setting
the black star, I sort of know what to do now.
Regards Charles
Goat Boy < Baaaaaaa!
about Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:39:36 -0700 , when Peter W. Rowe
<rec.craft...@earthlink.net> fucked everything up by saying:
>On Thu, 14 Oct 2010 09:27:54 -0700, in rec.crafts.jewelry Jessica
><jessica...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>I do have a question for the group: lately there are fewer and fewer
>>>posts on this group. Are you moving to other sites or groups? I like
>>>this group and hope it will grow.
>
>Not so much moving, but moved.
>
>This group used to be MUCH busier in years past (like ten years ago). But over
>the last decade, the Orchid mail list, hosted by the Ganoksin.com web site has
>come to pretty much dominate the area of jewelry and jewelry related
>discussions. It's by far the most active discussion forum online for people
>interested in jewelry, gems, art metal, etc, from professional to hobbyist. That
>list currently has well over 10 thousand active subscribers, and gets usually
>around 50 new messages per day. I would be surprised if this newsgroup has more
>than a dozen or two people who read it on a regular basis at this point.
Some of us read both but as you can see by my time stamps, not too
often.
>
>The big reasons for the move away from this group are that for one, Orchid (has
>nothing to do with flowers) is hosted by a web site. People know about the web.
>Many newer users of the internet don't even know there IS such a thing as usenet
>or newsgroup, much less how to access them. Plus, even knowing that newsgroups
>exist, mail lists are easier to access. You subscribe, and they come in email,
>which people already have set up. To access a newsgroup, you have to configure
>your software to do that, and more than a few people don't know, or won't bother
>to do it.
Yeah, only geeks mess with usenet.
> Or, alternatively, you access newsgroups via some web service like
>Google groups, which isn't ideal. there's a time delay there, it's slow, and
>not all types of groups or posts are supported. Plus, for usenet groups,
>meaning those that are not specifically unique to Google, there are then extra
>steps to jump through to find them, since Google would prefer you read it's
>exclusive groups instead of going through them to read the more universal usenet
>groups...
>
>
>Anyway, this group still exists. I still moderate it. But frankly, I've been
>doing this for almost 14 years now, and would prefer at this point to find
>someone else to moderate the group. Any takers?
Why don't you set it up to moderate itself?
You know, like alt.hackers?
> It seems to serve little
>purpose at this point other than being there for those few readers who don't
>want to bother with the volume of messages on the Orchid list. So don't expect
>this group to grow. It's been doing the opposite for some time now.
>
:-(
>Peter Rowe
>moderator
>rec.crafts.jewelry
noman
Peter W. Rowe
<Goa...@REMOVEhalebobb.com> wrote:
>>
>>Yeah, only geeks mess with usenet.
And even that gets harder, since with windows 7, finding software that will do
it means using software that is more and more outdated.
>>Why don't you set it up to moderate itself?
>>You know, like alt.hackers?
To do that, for one thing, would be to assume posters would know how, since for
alt.hackers, last I checked, posters had to know how to bypass the moderation
scheme. That is'nt so much any special setup for the group, as it is a change
in the moderation policy to make such auto-approval allowed. The group as it
is now, along with many other moderated groups, is not hard to bypass if one
knows which headers to modify and how, but most usual jewelry group posters
don't have their email or news readers set up to make this possible. So it's
simple for me, but would pretty much kill any remaining posters ability to post.
The other way to do it, would be to set up a web site based moderation scheme
which could make it self moderating, (usually simply a method to block obvious
spam and not much more) but doing that means someone, like me, would then have
to not only set up the web site and code, but pay for the site as well. I'm not
interested in doing that.
What I AM interested in doing is finding another moderator. I've done it now
for 15 years. Enough already. Either someone who just wants the "honor" of
moderating a mostly dead group, or who could take it and somehow build upon it,
such as linking it to some useful web site. The obvious choice there would be
to see if Hanuman, owner and operator of the Ganoksin web site and orchid list,
would like to also be the moderator of this newsgroup. That sort of
consilidation might make sense if nobody has any major objections. But I've not
yet asked Hanuman if he wants to bother doing it. Given the activity level of
the group, I don't see any big rush.
Peter Rowe
moderator (yawn)
rec.crafts.jewelry
Janet_of_all_trades
I like this group over Orchid. I find it difficult to get around in
Orchid.
Peter W. Rowe
This group certainly takes up less of your time, what with something like one or
two meaningful messages every few months, and only about half of them ever
getting a reasonably useful answer in a similar time period.
The trouble is that when you need an answer, you have little guarantee that
anyone who answers actually knows what they're talking about, since many of the
reply posts over the last two years have been little more than thinly veiled
spam, and a fair percentage of answers have been pretty much from members of the
interested but untrained public. Not a good way to get technical help.
Getting around in the Ganoksin web site can be daunting because of it's sheer
size, it's true. But the Orchid mail list itself can be manageable. Rather
than read the thing on the web site itself (which also can be somewhat
cumbersome if you've a slow connection especially), actually subscribe to the
list so you get the messages in your email.
There are two ways to do it.
With both, it's usually best to set up your email program with a special folder
labeled Orchid (or your choice of names) specifically for incoming messages from
the list. If you subscribe to the list in "digest" format, you get one long
message every day. That's manageable. But it can be a slog reading that long
digest since you can't just skip to message headers of interest.
What I do is to subscribe to the list in it's traditional form, which means
individual messages. I have my email filters set up so all messages from the
list go into that folder, and nothing else goes there. That means my regular
email doesn't get mixed in, which would be a mess. My email program allows me
to set properties for the folder that say messages will be kept there for only
two weeks and then deleted. Any messages that contain any info I might want to
keep get flagged as such (which makes the filter not delete it), or I can move
it to another folder to keep.
Most email programs allow you to specify how you want incoming email sorted,
such as by date, by topic, author, etc. Those options let you set it up (and
switch as desired) so you can intellegently follow ongoing single discussions
but not all the other topics that don't interest you.
Well, I'm getting too wordy here. The point is that Orchid/Ganoksin is indeed
"huge", and can be a bit daunting and unweildy until you figure out how to use
it. But the fact remains that it is currently one of the most valuable places
for people in this field to share and discuss needs, questions, topics, etc.
Nothing else like it exists on the web for our field. Not even close. If
Ganoksin and Orchid are a bit harder to get around, it's still worth learning
to do so.
This group, by contrast, may make you feel good to know you're keeping in touch,
but these days, frankly, there's just not much to keep in touch with.
Janet, if you're a fan of this group, would you be interested in taking over as
moderator? Anyone else want to do it? Maybe someone else could figure out how
to turn it into something useful again.
Cheers
Peter Rowe
moderator
rec.crafts.jewelry
Jack Schmidling
>
> What I AM interested in doing is finding another moderator. I've done it now
> for 15 years.
I have been reading newsgroups for over 25 years and this is the only
moderated group I have ever been on and all it does is barf it up by
waiting for the moderator to bless it.
I would much rather wade through garbage then deal with moderation.
Jack
--
Astronomy, Beer, Cheese, Fiber, Gems,
Nature, Radio, Sheep, Sausage, Silver
noman
<rec.craft...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 16 Jan 2011 17:26:51 -0800, in rec.crafts.jewelry "Goat Boy < Baaaaaaa!"
><Goa...@REMOVEhalebobb.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>Yeah, only geeks mess with usenet.
>
>And even that gets harder, since with windows 7, finding software that will do
>it means using software that is more and more outdated.
I don't have Windows 7...yet...but this PC is running XP-Pro x64 using
Agent 2.0 and it works.
>
>>>Why don't you set it up to moderate itself?
>>>You know, like alt.hackers?
>
>To do that, for one thing, would be to assume posters would know how, since for
>alt.hackers, last I checked, posters had to know how to bypass the moderation
>scheme.
You could just poast instructions in a FAQ every so often or let the
faithful do it.
> That is'nt so much any special setup for the group, as it is a change
>in the moderation policy to make such auto-approval allowed. The group as it
>is now, along with many other moderated groups, is not hard to bypass if one
>knows which headers to modify and how, but most usual jewelry group posters
>don't have their email or news readers set up to make this possible. So it's
>simple for me, but would pretty much kill any remaining posters ability to post.
It's not that difficult with the right software.
>The other way to do it, would be to set up a web site based moderation scheme
>which could make it self moderating, (usually simply a method to block obvious
>spam and not much more) but doing that means someone, like me, would then have
>to not only set up the web site and code, but pay for the site as well. I'm not
>interested in doing that.
I'll give you space on my server. You'd just have to pay for the
domain name ($20 a year including whois privacy.)
I won't build the site for you but I will give you a FTP.
You could tell people about mail-to-news gateways and have 'em post
via email and read on Google Froups. (But filling in a header is sure
easier)
>
>What I AM interested in doing is finding another moderator. I've done it now
>for 15 years. Enough already. Either someone who just wants the "honor" of
>moderating a mostly dead group, or who could take it and somehow build upon it,
>such as linking it to some useful web site.
That's the thing, man. The future of the internets is http.
This old way is, well, old.
Jack Schmidling
>
> What I AM interested in doing is finding another moderator. I've done it now
> for 15 years.
I have been reading newsgroups for over 25 years and this is the only
Janet_of_all_trades
wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 00:56:34 -0800, in rec.crafts.jewelry Janet_of_all_tr=
ades
>
> <janetalexande...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>I like this group over Orchid. I find it difficult to get around in
> >>Orchid.
>
one or
> two meaningful messages every few months, and only about half of them eve=
r
> getting a reasonably useful answer in a similar time period.
>
at
> anyone who answers actually knows what they're talking about, since many =
of the
> reply posts over the last two years have been little more than thinly vei=
led
> spam, and a fair percentage of answers have been pretty much from members=
of the
> interested but untrained public. =A0Not a good way to get technical help.
>
> Getting around in the Ganoksin web site can be daunting because of it's s=
heer
> size, it's true. =A0But the Orchid mail list itself can be manageable. =
=A0Rather
> than read the thing on the web site itself (which also can be somewhat
the
> list so you get the messages in your email.
>
> There are two ways to do it.
>
folder
> labeled Orchid (or your choice of names) specifically for incoming messag=
es from
> the list. =A0If you subscribe to the list in "digest" format, you get one=
long
> message every day. =A0That's manageable. =A0But it can be a slog reading =
that long
> digest since you can't just skip to message headers of interest.
>
ns
> individual messages. =A0I have my email filters set up so all messages fr=
om the
> list go into that folder, and nothing else goes there. =A0That means my r=
egular
> email doesn't get mixed in, which would be a mess. =A0My email program al=
lows me
> to set properties for the folder that say messages will be kept there for=
only
> two weeks and then deleted. =A0Any messages that contain any info I might=
want to
> keep get flagged as such (which makes the filter not delete it), or I can=
move
> it to another folder to keep. =A0
>
> Most email programs allow you to specify how you want incoming email sort=
ed,
> such as by date, by topic, author, etc. =A0Those options let you set it u=
p (and
> switch as desired) so you can intellegently follow ongoing single discuss=
ions
> but not all the other topics that don't interest you.
>
indeed
> "huge", and can be a bit daunting and unweildy until you figure out how t=
o use
> it. =A0But the fact remains that it is currently one of the most valuable=
places
> for people in this field to share and discuss needs, questions, topics, e=
tc.
> Nothing else like it exists on the web for our field. =A0Not even close. =
=A0If
> Ganoksin and Orchid are a bit harder to get around, =A0it's still worth l=
earning
> to do so. =A0
>
> This group, by contrast, may make you feel good to know you're keeping in=
touch,
> but these days, frankly, there's just not much to keep in touch with.
>
ver as
> moderator? =A0Anyone else want to do it? =A0Maybe someone else could figu=
re out how
> to turn it into something useful again.
>
> Cheers
>
> Peter Rowe
> moderator
> rec.crafts.jewelry
I am already moderating thejewelryclassroom, a metal clay group, and
three facebook pages. I am swamped. Your writing shows how tired you
are of this group. Maybe it is time to pull the plug? I've only been a
part of this group for a year and have enjoyed reading some of the
topics. You've done a great job Peter!
Peter W. Rowe
<janetale...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>I am already moderating thejewelryclassroom, a metal clay group, and
>>three facebook pages. I am swamped. Your writing shows how tired you
>>are of this group.
It's not so much that I'm tired of the group, but rather that I no longer feel
it serves any significant useful purpose. It's been a very long time since
anyone actually thanked me for doing this (which is totally voluntary, pays
nothing, but isn't free for me to do, either in time or money). Instead, I get
responses such as today's spew from Jack Schmidling, who calls what I do
"barfing it up". The main reason I haven't just stopped is that doing that
means essentially the group is dead, since then the only posts would be from
those who've both figured out why posts don't go through (if I stop doing it,
they end as dead emails to the submission address), and have also figured out
how to hack the moderation process. (not hard, IF you have software that allows
you to add and/or modify message headers. Outlook express and similar software
doesn't do that.) So I still do it simply because, way back when, I naively
agreed to do it. But back then, the group was busy, with lots of participants,
lively pertinant discussions, and a reason to exist. Now, there's not really
any such excuse for the thing, and with changes to software and my computer, I'm
now in a position where actually doing this is rather a major fuss and bother to
do. But unless I find someone else to do it, or some free way to make it
automatic, I will simply let it go. It's been long enough, I think.
>> Maybe it is time to pull the plug? I've only been a
>>part of this group for a year and have enjoyed reading some of the
>>topics. You've done a great job Peter!
Well, thanks. But as I've said, this last year or three, the group has, at
least compared to what it was, pretty much died. And don't say I've done a
great job. There really isn't much to do beyond the mechanical operation of
processing posts. I used to need to do this twice a day. Now it's more like
twice a week, and even then, many times I check it and there are no new real
messages, just a few more spams selling chinese knockoff sneakers or some new
porn site.
If you feel I've done such a great job, then please tell me, at what? other
than blocking the spam, I don't do much beyond acting as a bit of a bottleneck
and delay...
Peter
Peter W. Rowe
<ja...@schmidling.com> wrote:
>>On 1/16/2011 7:37 PM, Peter W. Rowe wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> What I AM interested in doing is finding another moderator. I've done it now
>>> for 15 years.
>>
>>I have been reading newsgroups for over 25 years and this is the only
>>moderated group I have ever been on and all it does is barf it up by
>>waiting for the moderator to bless it.
barf it up? Love ya too, Jack. Had a bad day, didja? And I'm an atheist,
especially when it comes to any suggestion that I have any ability to bless
anything. The only things I ever do is block spam, and make some modest attempt
to see that posts are at least somewhere within shooting range of what the group
charter (which I did NOT write, readers did) requires. That is what I was
asked to do back in '96, and what I agreed to do. Anything else would make
the whole notion of moderation (which was also NOT my idea) pointless. Anyone
who thinks I've done this out of some sort of power trip simply doesn't know me
at all. I was asked by multiple other readers of the group, when moderation
was being promoted and discussed, if I'd be willing to do the job. In
innocence, not fully understanding what I was signing on to, I agreed. That may
have been dumb, but I've tried since then to abide by my commitment. It's
aggrevating, then, when people have turned me into their enemy because I wasn't
willing to let them willy nilly rewrite the rules into their own private
versions of how they wanted the rules to read. And though I've been willing
enough to take my own time and money to keep the group alive and when
appropriate, willing too to share of my not inconsiderable experience and
knowledge of the field, it's also been a somewhat one sided affair. Not much
thanks coming back this way, nor often any useful information I needed. And
then to get posts like yours calling what I do (not much any more, i admit)
"barfing it up". How the hell do you think that makes me feel, Jack?
By the way, one reason there are so few moderated groups is that it's somewhat
difficult to find volunteers to moderate groups, even when the vast majority of
a group's readership would like a group to become moderated. The difficulty is
simply that most sane folks don't want to have to endure the slings and arrows
of armchair critics (like your above comment) who don't themselves wish to
actually help, but are happy to gripe.
>>
>>I would much rather wade through garbage then deal with moderation.
>>
OK, so why are you here? Do you somehow feel like you're adding to this group?
Or do you feel you get something from it?
Something, I mean, that you can't get from garbage?
If garbage is better, why did you even check this group to find the message
you've just responded to?
Peter
Peter W. Rowe
<notm...@REMOVEthatswaytoomuch.info> wrote:
>>
>>I don't have Windows 7...yet...but this PC is running XP-Pro x64 using
>>Agent 2.0 and it works.
Yeah, my old dinosour pc running xp pro died. The new one runs win 7, which
doesn't much like the software I used to use. I'm not about to back up to xp
pro on the new machine, since xp pro simply couldn't actually run this new
machine. too much memory, multi core processor, other stuff it simply wasn't
set up to run well.
>>
>>You could just poast instructions in a FAQ every so often or let the
>>faithful do it.
what faithful. Who, besides yourself, do you think both reads this group and
would bother to figure out hacking it? Only the spammers, and not many of them,
I think.
>>
>>It's not that difficult with the right software.
Yeah, I know. I showed you how, remember? but that doesn't mean people are
gonna go buy software just to read a dead newsgroup.
>>
>>I'll give you space on my server. You'd just have to pay for the
>>domain name ($20 a year including whois privacy.)
>>I won't build the site for you but I will give you a FTP.
I actually already have a domain name, not used, but registered. But I'm not a
good enough webmaster / programmer to know how to set up a site to automate the
group. The only software I know that will do it is STUMP, which itself is not
free either, last I checked. And setting it up isn't so simple.
>>
>>You could tell people about mail-to-news gateways and have 'em post
>>via email and read on Google Froups. (But filling in a header is sure
>>easier)
Posting to google groups does not bypass moderation. Those posts sent to Google
still come to me for approval.
>>
>>>
>>
>>That's the thing, man. The future of the internets is http.
>>This old way is, well, old.
yeah, I know. Like me. Like you too, pal. (oops, sorry. Just me. Not you.
Honest.)
Peter
>>
Jack Schmidling
> barf it up? Love ya too, Jack. Had a bad day, didja?
Good grief Peter, don't think it was me that had a bad day.
The most exciting thing that happened to me lately was to see my posting
go through. I have not been able to post here for several years.
My intent was to solve your problem, not to increase your blood pressure.
You may read what you wish into "barf it up" but what it means to me is
to have to wait for a moderator to approve of a posting before it goes
out and then wait till he approves of the answer before it goes out.
This means that if one wants to get an answer to a question it can take
days instead of minutes.
I read with great interest, just about everything you write but frankly,
I can't get through this one at all. It is totally off the wall and an
apology is really in order.
As we Atheists are and endangered species, our survival depends on
getting along.
Peter W. Rowe
<ja...@schmidling.com> wrote:
>>On 1/26/2011 1:54 AM, Peter W. Rowe wrote:
>>
>>> barf it up? Love ya too, Jack. Had a bad day, didja?
>>
>>Good grief Peter, don't think it was me that had a bad day.
Apparently I read into your message a tone which you did not intend. The image
of "vomit" as regarding the moderation process just didn't set well, even if you
didn't mean anything insulting by it. So I apologize for the tone of my reply.
>>
>>The most exciting thing that happened to me lately was to see my posting
>>go through. I have not been able to post here for several years.
Glad to see your ISP has worked things out. It may also be due to the fact that
there have been one or two additional moderators relay servers added to
moderated groups, which reduces the chance that some poorly connected ISP would
be sending posts to moderators but not having them arrive. There's no way to
know (at least not for me) what your problem has been, but perhaps it now is
better. One can hope. It may even indicate an improvement in your ISP's
overall connectivity too.
>>
>>My intent was to solve your problem, not to increase your blood pressure.
>>
>>You may read what you wish into "barf it up" but what it means to me is
>>to have to wait for a moderator to approve of a posting before it goes
>>out and then wait till he approves of the answer before it goes out.
Lets agree to use terms like "time delay" or "wait", can we? Barf just makes it
a bit too yucky, and makes it seem, at least to me, like this time delay is
something I intentionally add in just for the evil thrill of it or something...
We both know that isn't the case.
I will admit, though, that recently I've not checked and processed new group
messages as frequently as I used to do. Time, energy, and the need to fire up
an old otherwise unused computer that I'd actually prefer to be able to just get
rid of, are to blame. When most days I check in only to find a few more spam
posts and nothing for real, it just doesn't seem imperative to check it multiple
times per day, or even every day, as I used to do when the group was more
active.
>>This means that if one wants to get an answer to a question it can take
>>days instead of minutes.
Well, just because moderation introduces a time delay doesn't mean you otherwise
would have gotten your reply in minutes. There still is whatever time delay is
involved in the right personal happening upon your question and taking the time
to answer. You may get some replies in minutes, but as often as not, the reply
with good info might take longer to arrive. Still, I'll admit that the delay
does toss a major impediment into a lively ongoing discussion.
But to remind you of why the group is moderated... It started as a normal
unmoderated group in (I think) '93 or so. While it quickly got busy, it also
quickly got flooded with junk. There were a bunch of stone dealers who felt it
was just fine to post their entire catalogs literally every day. Back then,
with 56K phone modems the norm, those several megabyte posts every day from
several people could tie up your modem for 20 minutes before you could do
anything. As time went on, these folks, who self rightiously announced that
they could do whatever they wished on the group even if large numbers of readers
objected loudly, were quickly joined by the folks who felt it appropriate to
post notices of every darn auction they were posting to Ebay for any jewelry or
jewelry related (and a fair number that had nothing to do with jewelry) item
they were trying to sell there. And yet more who were just spamming. Everything
from Nigerian scams to chain letters and more. Several dozen such posts per
day, such that they outnumbered the real discussions. In short, the group
became literally unusable for the folks who'd started the group and were trying
to make it a useful source of information exchange. So those same folks
proposed the idea of making the group moderated. This is/was unusual, since
usually, moderated groups are started in that form from the beginning, while
unmoderated ones are rarely changed. But it's possible to do, via the same
mechanism used to create a new group, and people did this. The vote in favor of
moderation won by a fairly large margin.
Of course, times have changed. High speed connections mean the spam takes up
space, but not so much download time any more. And of course the web grew by
leaps and bounds while usenet kind of died, in part because companies like
Microsoft just didn't build it prominantly into their software. Outlook Express
or Outlook could handle newsgroups, but many users didn't actually know it was
anything different from email, and that situation has only gotten worse. so new
readers of usenet groups are fewer and fewer every day.
The interesting thing is that while meaningful posts have greatly reduced, the
volume of spam has not slowed as much. There may be weeks without a meaningful
post, but not a day passes without at least a couple spam posts. And from what
little looking I've done, the rest of usenet is not immune to this either. One
of the stronger points about Google's otherwise limited and slow newsgroup
portal is that it does filter out a good deal of the spam, and especially, the
really objectionable porn stuff (I've nothing against porn for adults who choose
to look at it, but in newsgroups or email where it may arrive unannounced, to
readers of any age or lack of age, that's another matter altogether.)
But I ramble. The point is, there was a reason why readers of the group changed
the group to a moderated status, and these reasons remain valid today. The lack
of off topic junk, and the presence of a moderator, is one of the reasons that
the Orchid list IS as successful as it has become. Yes, you have to wait a day
or two for your answers (though some people email them direct), but then you get
a flood of good info from many people, enough info to actually be able to figure
out which of it has value. This group, even with moderation, has gotten so slow
that making that distinction has become difficult, especially for those
beginners or members of the general public who may not be able to tell good
expert opinion from junk.
>>
>>I read with great interest, just about everything you write but frankly,
>>I can't get through this one at all. It is totally off the wall and an
>>apology is really in order.
Yes, I guess you're right. I'm sorry. I took it differently from how you meant
it.
>>
>>As we Atheists are and endangered species, our survival depends on
>>getting along.
Amen. (grin)
I feel that most everybody I meet is actually an atheist, at least mostly. Most
of them reject all but one of the many gods and religions from which the world
chooses. I only reject one more than that... (another grin)
Peter