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 Historical content remains viewable.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

Where are folks posting these days?

29 views
Skip to first unread message

Dr. Rich Staats

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 12:58:43 PM7/14/04
to
It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...

Where are folks posting/communicating these days?

Rich

htt://www.geocities.com/dr_games

Stephenls

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 5:22:48 PM7/14/04
to
Dr. Rich Staats wrote:

> It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...

> Where are folks posting/communicating these days?

Online forums, mostly. http://www.rpg.net/ and http://www.enworld.org/
are two of the bigger ones (though the latter is d20 specific).
--
Stephenls
Geek
"I'm as impure as the driven yellow snow." -Spike

CARRIER LOST

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 5:31:34 PM7/14/04
to
In rec.games.frp.dnd, Dr. Rich Staats <sta...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...

everything is dying a slow death, entropy is funny that way.

> Where are folks posting/communicating these days?

geez, if i said, all the loosers would post there, too.

--
.-----.
|l~~~l| dr...@visi.com (CARRIER LOST) <http://www.visi.com/~drow/>
|l___l| -----------------------------------------------------------------
/+++++\ "The first 90% of a project takes 90% of the available time.
~~~~~~~ The remaining 10% takes another 90%."

Leon Workman

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 6:17:16 PM7/14/04
to
sta...@alum.mit.edu (Dr. Rich Staats) wrote in message news:<b8b82bf5.04071...@posting.google.com>...

There are so many sites and boards all over the internet these days
that we are being scattered to the wind. I still prefer newsgroups,
though.

Perhaps enworld.org or wizards.com have more active forums...dunno.

Leon

mcv

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 7:28:10 PM7/14/04
to
In rec.games.frp.misc Stephenls <step...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> Dr. Rich Staats wrote:
>
>> It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
>
>> Where are folks posting/communicating these days?
>
> Online forums, mostly. http://www.rpg.net/ and http://www.enworld.org/
> are two of the bigger ones (though the latter is d20 specific).

But why? usenet is far more accessible than webfora. But I admit, even I
am a regular of several webfora nowadays.

rec.fames.frp.gurps is still reasonably active, though. More than .misc,
at least.


mcv.

Stephenls

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 8:03:16 PM7/14/04
to
mcv wrote:

> But why? usenet is far more accessible than webfora.

No, it's not. Most people online nowadays don't even know how to set up
a newsreader program or connect to a USENET provider. Everybody online
knows how to type in URLs.

Ralph Glatt

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 8:08:45 PM7/14/04
to
sta...@alum.mit.edu (Dr. Rich Staats) wrote in message news:<b8b82bf5.04071...@posting.google.com>...
> It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
>
> Where are folks posting/communicating these days?

There are so many web based forums, people don't even think of looking
for usenet anymore. In fact, I'm inclined to think that most people
online today have never even *heard* of usenet. I remember being in a
class at college when one girl said "The web *IS* the internet!" I
really wanted to smack her, but I didn't. She was too young to
remember what it was like before html.


Ralph Glatt

Member, Old Farts Club

Jasin Zujovic

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 8:09:23 PM7/14/04
to
Stephenls <step...@shaw.ca> wrote:

> > But why? usenet is far more accessible than webfora.
>
> No, it's not. Most people online nowadays don't even know how to set up
> a newsreader program or connect to a USENET provider. Everybody online
> knows how to type in URLs.

Which is a shame, really.


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzuj...@inet.hr

Wayne Shaw

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 8:52:14 PM7/14/04
to
On 14 Jul 2004 23:28:10 GMT, mcv <mcv...@xs1.xs4all.nl> wrote:

>rec.fames.frp.gurps is still reasonably active, though. More than .misc,
>at least.

.misc always suffers from the fact any system-specific topic interests
only a tiny part of the users.

Brent

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 9:20:10 PM7/14/04
to
On 7/14/04 8:08 PM, in article
ce9c44dd.04071...@posting.google.com, "Ralph Glatt"
<juli...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Wow. And it was only 1986 when I first became aware of the NG's - seems
like yesterday....

Been watching VH1's "I love the '90's" feeling old.

Staring at my collection of c. 1981 games and feeling old as well....

Went into a game store when I was in Corning and asked about "Ars Magica"
and the kid behind the counter had *no idea* what I was talking about.
Wow....

Sea Wasp

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 9:47:16 PM7/14/04
to
Dr. Rich Staats wrote:
> It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
>

I haven't noticed that.


> Where are folks posting/communicating these days?

I'm still here. I also am seen on LiveJournal and Baen's Bar.


>
> Rich
>
> htt://www.geocities.com/dr_games

--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/seawasp/

Downtym

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 9:50:34 PM7/14/04
to
In rec.games.frp.dnd Ralph Glatt wrote:

: There are so many web based forums, people don't even think of looking


: for usenet anymore. In fact, I'm inclined to think that most people
: online today have never even *heard* of usenet. I remember being in a
: class at college when one girl said "The web *IS* the internet!" I
: really wanted to smack her, but I didn't. She was too young to
: remember what it was like before html.

Hey, I'm only in my early 20's and I remember the days of BBS'ing around
and posting on FidoNet.

--
Jeff Stewart | "Princess Di is wearing a new dress."
Email: gte...@mail.gatech.edu | - Matt Alexander stating THE TRUTH
|

Indiana Joe

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 9:59:42 PM7/14/04
to
In article <b8b82bf5.04071...@posting.google.com>,

sta...@alum.mit.edu (Dr. Rich Staats) wrote:

> It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
>
> Where are folks posting/communicating these days?

rec.gambling.poker :-)

OK, they aren't talking about RPGs, but there have been over 2000
messages since Monday. :-)

--
Joe Claffey | "Make no small plans."
india...@comcast.net | -- Daniel Burnham

Dirk Collins

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 11:21:45 PM7/14/04
to
Dr. Rich Staats wrote:

> It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
>
> Where are folks posting/communicating these days?


I think that USENET and e-mail have taken a tremendous blow,
especially over the last 36 months or so.

The incessant spam e-mails launched into both are wasting so much
time, that people are losing interest, and turning to other more
creative activities. Others are taking their communications into
private enclaves, so that communications are untainted by unwanted
advertising, and protected from the greed of stupid criminals.

I have probably 200 different kinds of filters on my e-mail that
siphon messages containing specific text strings, and if any
message has a subject line that is irrelevant to my personal
interests, it's gone as well. Just about everyone I know has set
up, or is part of, a private mailing list, often multiple mailing
lists.

Secure communications are the future since open communications are
abused to the extent they have been.

With Regards,
Dirk Collins

Rupert Boleyn

unread,
Jul 14, 2004, 11:32:45 PM7/14/04
to
On 14 Jul 2004 17:08:45 -0700, juli...@hotmail.com (Ralph Glatt)
carved upon a tablet of ether:

I'd have gone with "So what's email", but with all the web-based email
services that probably wouldn't have worked either.

--
Rupert Boleyn <rbo...@paradise.net.nz>
"Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
should be free."

Sea Wasp

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 12:04:36 AM7/15/04
to
Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> On 14 Jul 2004 17:08:45 -0700, juli...@hotmail.com (Ralph Glatt)
> carved upon a tablet of ether:
>
>
>>sta...@alum.mit.edu (Dr. Rich Staats) wrote in message news:<b8b82bf5.04071...@posting.google.com>...
>>
>>>It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
>>>
>>>Where are folks posting/communicating these days?
>>
>>There are so many web based forums, people don't even think of looking
>>for usenet anymore. In fact, I'm inclined to think that most people
>>online today have never even *heard* of usenet. I remember being in a
>>class at college when one girl said "The web *IS* the internet!" I
>>really wanted to smack her, but I didn't. She was too young to
>>remember what it was like before html.
>
>
> I'd have gone with "So what's email", but with all the web-based email
> services that probably wouldn't have worked either.
>

I would have laughed, mocked her publicly, crushed her self esteem
and spirit, and left her, broken and sobbing, before the entire classroom.

If I was feeling kind, that is.

Marcq

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 12:18:06 AM7/15/04
to
ds.com/ophir

"mcv" <mcv...@xs1.xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:40f5c18a$0$37789$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...


> In rec.games.frp.misc Stephenls <step...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > Dr. Rich Staats wrote:
> >
> >> It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
> >
> >> Where are folks posting/communicating these days?
> >
> > Online forums, mostly. http://www.rpg.net/ and http://www.enworld.org/
> > are two of the bigger ones (though the latter is d20 specific).
>
> But why? usenet is far more accessible than webfora. But I admit, even I
> am a regular of several webfora nowadays.

I wouldn't be surprised if many posters prefered environments like Enworld's
"no *sshole"-land. This forum can be pretty harsh on both neophytes and
those who post "unapproved opinions". Yeah, you can say usenet is all about
the unfettered exchange of ideas but it may come with a price, like
declining relevance.

Marc

--

World of Ophir at:
http://www.four-han


Rupert Boleyn

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 12:49:58 AM7/15/04
to
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 04:04:36 GMT, Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> carved

upon a tablet of ether:

> I would have laughed, mocked her publicly, crushed her self esteem

> and spirit, and left her, broken and sobbing, before the entire classroom.
>
> If I was feeling kind, that is.

Living up to your nick, I see.

sNOm...@sonic.net

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 12:59:24 AM7/15/04
to
In rec.games.frp.misc Brent <bromo_REMOVE_@_remove_ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Went into a game store when I was in Corning and asked about "Ars Magica"
> and the kid behind the counter had *no idea* what I was talking about.

If it ain't d20 and it ain't Palid Wild Canine, most gamestore employees
have *no* idea. IMHO/IME, anyhow. In one shop, the KBtC had never heard
of Ars Magica & went to ask the more-knowlegable owner. "Oh, yeah. They
stopped publishing that game about 5 years ago," I was told. Lest y'all
think this info is *accurate*, I'll observe that the 4th edition is still
available from the publisher and from (some) FLGS's, and that the 5th
edition is entering the final round(s) of playtest. Atlas Games has been
producing several supplements every year, and plans to continue that as
the new edition comes out.

FWIW, _most_ "smaller" games seem to have the same phenomenon. Most of
the FLGS's I've visited have *NO* idea what "Nobilis" is, for (another)
example.

Umm... Y'know, I *used* to think that when you went to a specialty store,
you could reasonably expect 'em to be reasonably conversant with their
specialty... more than just the 1-3 highest-profile slots. <sigh>

The truth is, fans of particular games usually are *MUCH* better informed
about those games, because they have the time to follow the game-specific
mailing-lists, the game-developers blogs, the publisher-sponsored forum,
etc. There are too many games, from too many publishers, for the average
FLGS to keep up with. Sad, but true.


--

Steve Saunders
to de-spam me, de-capitalize me

mcv

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 7:40:13 AM7/15/04
to
In rec.games.frp.misc Stephenls <step...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> mcv wrote:
>
>> But why? usenet is far more accessible than webfora.
>
> No, it's not. Most people online nowadays don't even know how to set up
> a newsreader program or connect to a USENET provider. Everybody online
> knows how to type in URLs.

That's not usenet's fault, but the fault of OS distributions. They tend to
come with a free, ready-to-use browser, but if you want a newsreader, you've
got to work on it. Once set up, however, the newsreader allows you direct
access to thousands of newsgroups, while every webforum has its own URL
you need to type, you're bound to a single, often very crummy, interface,
and you need to register and log in seperately for each forum. And webfora
are fragmenting the user group for the discussions; many games have several
forums, and if you want to read everything about that game, you have to
follow several groups. And then there's the mailinglists...


mcv.

Sea Wasp

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 8:30:23 AM7/15/04
to
Rupert Boleyn wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 04:04:36 GMT, Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> carved
> upon a tablet of ether:
>
>
>> I would have laughed, mocked her publicly, crushed her self esteem
>>and spirit, and left her, broken and sobbing, before the entire classroom.
>>
>> If I was feeling kind, that is.
>
>
> Living up to your nick, I see.
>

Well, no. If I was, I'd simply kill her. Within 30 seconds to a
few minutes. Admittedly of screaming agony, but still, it'd be over quick.

Sherm Pendley

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 9:52:45 AM7/15/04
to
mcv wrote:

> come with a free, ready-to-use browser, but if you want a newsreader,
> you've got to work on it.

Not true - The most popular messaging clients, Outlook Express and Mozilla,
include newsreaders by default.

sherm--

--
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Hire me! My resume: http://www.dot-app.org

Joseph Teller

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 11:19:53 AM7/15/04
to
On 14 Jul 2004 09:58:43 -0700, sta...@alum.mit.edu (Dr. Rich Staats)
wrote:


Livejournal has a number of roleplaying related communities, that's
where you'll find me. There's also a number of Yahoo related mailing
lists.

The drop off of USENET is because so many ISP's no longer offer
newsgroups, or when they do such a limited number of specific groups,
that folks aren't exposed to them.

--------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Teller joet...@mindspring.com
www.fantasylibrary.com

Wayne Shaw

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 12:06:35 PM7/15/04
to
On 15 Jul 2004 11:40:13 GMT, mcv <mcv...@xs1.xs4all.nl> wrote:

>In rec.games.frp.misc Stephenls <step...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>> mcv wrote:
>>
>>> But why? usenet is far more accessible than webfora.
>>
>> No, it's not. Most people online nowadays don't even know how to set up
>> a newsreader program or connect to a USENET provider. Everybody online
>> knows how to type in URLs.
>
>That's not usenet's fault, but the fault of OS distributions. They tend to
>come with a free, ready-to-use browser, but if you want a newsreader, you've
>got to work on it. Once set up, however, the newsreader allows you direct

Not the only reason; many providers, especially smaller ones, don't
even bother to have a USENET feed anymore.

>access to thousands of newsgroups, while every webforum has its own URL

With bookmarking, this is hardly a serious issue for most people.

>you need to type, you're bound to a single, often very crummy, interface,

I tend to agree with this.

>and you need to register and log in seperately for each forum. And webfora

Uhm, not all fora require registration, you know. Relatively few do
just for reading.

>are fragmenting the user group for the discussions; many games have several
>forums, and if you want to read everything about that game, you have to
>follow several groups. And then there's the mailinglists...

Actually, I tend to prefer mailing lists to _either_ USENET or
webgroups.

Ralph Glatt

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 2:25:43 PM7/15/04
to
Sea Wasp <sea...@wizvax.net> wrote in message news:<40F60259...@wizvax.net>...

I leave my classmates to do that, with the other stupid things she
says. It's amazing how really ignorant she is. I have to wonder how
she got into college in the first place.

Tetsubo

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 2:49:42 PM7/15/04
to
Joseph Teller wrote:

>On 14 Jul 2004 09:58:43 -0700, sta...@alum.mit.edu (Dr. Rich Staats)
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
>>
>>Where are folks posting/communicating these days?
>>
>>Rich
>>
>>htt://www.geocities.com/dr_games
>>
>>
>
>
>Livejournal has a number of roleplaying related communities, that's
>where you'll find me. There's also a number of Yahoo related mailing
>lists.
>
>The drop off of USENET is because so many ISP's no longer offer
>newsgroups, or when they do such a limited number of specific groups,
>that folks aren't exposed to them.
>

When Comcast swallowed my old ISP I discovered that they would be
having a third party handle their newsgroups. I'm limited to a set
amount of downloads/uploads per month for "free". After that I would
need to "upgrade" my service for an addition charge. I was not thrilled
to find this out. I am still not thrilled. If there were another cable
company in my area that offered access I'd switch. Don't you just love a
monopoly?

>
>--------------------------------------------------------
>Joseph Teller joet...@mindspring.com
> www.fantasylibrary.com
>
>


--
Tetsubo
My page: http://home.comcast.net/~tetsubo/
--------------------------------------
If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.
-- Anatole France

Malachias Invictus

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 3:50:35 PM7/15/04
to

"Jasin Zujovic" <jzuj...@inet.hr> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b5fe999f...@news.iskon.hr...

> Stephenls <step...@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
> > > But why? usenet is far more accessible than webfora.
> >
> > No, it's not. Most people online nowadays don't even know how to set up
> > a newsreader program or connect to a USENET provider. Everybody online
> > knows how to type in URLs.
>
> Which is a shame, really.

Which is? Most people online not knowing how to set up a newsreader, or
everybody knowing how to type in URLs?

Personally, I think the requirement of setting up a newsreader is acting as
an idiot filter. Granted, it is far from perfect...

--
^v^v^Malachias Invictus^v^v^

It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishment the scroll,
I am the Master of my fate:
I am the Captain of my soul.

from _Invictus_, by William Ernest Henley


Richard Wingrove

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 4:01:44 PM7/15/04
to

"Tetsubo" <tet...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XLmdnSueetl...@comcast.com...

> Joseph Teller wrote:
>
> >On 14 Jul 2004 09:58:43 -0700, sta...@alum.mit.edu (Dr. Rich Staats)
> >wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
> >>
> >>Where are folks posting/communicating these days?
> >>
> >>Rich
> >>
> >>htt://www.geocities.com/dr_games
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Livejournal has a number of roleplaying related communities, that's
> >where you'll find me. There's also a number of Yahoo related mailing
> >lists.
> >
> >The drop off of USENET is because so many ISP's no longer offer
> >newsgroups, or when they do such a limited number of specific groups,
> >that folks aren't exposed to them.
> >
> When Comcast swallowed my old ISP I discovered that they would be
> having a third party handle their newsgroups. I'm limited to a set
> amount of downloads/uploads per month for "free". After that I would
> need to "upgrade" my service for an addition charge. I was not thrilled
> to find this out. I am still not thrilled. If there were another cable
> company in my area that offered access I'd switch. Don't you just love a
> monopoly?

There's plenty of good, free news servers out there. I don't use my ISPs
one, I use news.individual.net. You have to register, but that's it. Carries
loads of groups, but not binaries.

Rich


Stephenls

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 4:03:07 PM7/15/04
to
Tetsubo wrote:

> When Comcast swallowed my old ISP I discovered that they would be
> having a third party handle their newsgroups. I'm limited to a set
> amount of downloads/uploads per month for "free". After that I would
> need to "upgrade" my service for an addition charge. I was not thrilled
> to find this out. I am still not thrilled. If there were another cable
> company in my area that offered access I'd switch. Don't you just love a
> monopoly?

http://www.individual.com/

Completely free and quite reliable news server. I've been using it for
years, now.

Stephenls

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 4:04:26 PM7/15/04
to
Stephenls wrote:

> http://www.individual.com/

Drat. Richard Wingrove has it right. I use http://www.individual.net/.
I don't think they're the same...

Robert Singers

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 5:01:58 PM7/15/04
to
Out from under a rock popped mcv and said

> That's not usenet's fault, but the fault of OS distributions. They
> tend to come with a free, ready-to-use browser, but if you want a
> newsreader, you've got to work on it.

Sorry but every version of Windows and *NIX that I've installed for years
now has come with both.

--
Rob Singers
"All your Ron are belong to us"
Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere

Leszek Karlik

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 6:18:08 PM7/15/04
to
On 14 Jul 2004 09:58:43 -0700, Dr. Rich Staats <sta...@alum.mit.edu>
disseminated foul capitalist propaganda:

> It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
> Where are folks posting/communicating these days?

Pyramid fora, which are just like UseNet (since they are accessible
through NNTP) but without spammers and a higher signal-to-noise
ratio.

[And even Peter Knutsen is a bit more civil there. <grin>]

> Rich
Leslie
--
Sol-Earthsa Leszek Leslie Karlik dam Posen; leslie @ ideefixe . pl
Drone, Offensive; Special Circumstances, Contact Section.
GH/L/S/O d- s+:- a26 C++ UL+ P L++ E W-() N+++* K w(---) M- PS+(+++) PE
Y+ PGP++ !t---(++) 5++ X- R+++*>$ !tv b++++ DI+ D--- G-- e>+ h- r% y+*

Jasin Zujovic

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 6:30:53 PM7/15/04
to
Malachias Invictus <capt_ma...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > > > But why? usenet is far more accessible than webfora.
> > >
> > > No, it's not. Most people online nowadays don't even know how to set up
> > > a newsreader program or connect to a USENET provider. Everybody online
> > > knows how to type in URLs.
> >
> > Which is a shame, really.
>
> Which is? Most people online not knowing how to set up a newsreader, or
> everybody knowing how to type in URLs?

The former.

> Personally, I think the requirement of setting up a newsreader is acting as
> an idiot filter. Granted, it is far from perfect...

That is a benefit, sometimes, but it also filters out many people it
shouldn't and doesn't filter out many it should. That's makes in a not
very good filter.


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzuj...@inet.hr

Tetsubo

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 6:57:40 PM7/15/04
to
Richard Wingrove wrote:

Which is why I am sticking with Comcast. I post sketches and photos
to a number of groups.

Ralph Glatt

unread,
Jul 15, 2004, 7:31:40 PM7/15/04
to
Joseph Teller <fantas...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<l18df0hgm8ftpd068...@4ax.com>...

> On 14 Jul 2004 09:58:43 -0700, sta...@alum.mit.edu (Dr. Rich Staats)
> wrote:
>
> >It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
> >
> >Where are folks posting/communicating these days?
> >
> >Rich
> >
> >htt://www.geocities.com/dr_games
>
>
> Livejournal has a number of roleplaying related communities, that's
> where you'll find me. There's also a number of Yahoo related mailing
> lists.
>
> The drop off of USENET is because so many ISP's no longer offer
> newsgroups, or when they do such a limited number of specific groups,
> that folks aren't exposed to them.

Well, in a way, I can understand having a limited number of groups,
not so much for the bandwidth, but because a lot of piracy goes on in
the binary newsgroups.

RJH

unread,
Jul 16, 2004, 1:39:52 PM7/16/04
to
Stephenls <step...@shaw.ca> wrote in message news:<2llvu2F...@uni-berlin.de>...

> No, it's not. Most people online nowadays don't even know how to set up
> a newsreader program or connect to a USENET provider. Everybody online
> knows how to type in URLs.

You don't even need a news reader these days -- just go to the Google
Groups section. The only thing you don't get are all the copyrighted
binary images, but who needs those anyway? :-)

--
Bob

www.docsblog.com

unread,
Jul 17, 2004, 4:45:05 PM7/17/04
to
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 04:18:06 GMT, "Marcq" <ma...@four-hands.com> wrote:

>ds.com/ophir
>
>"mcv" <mcv...@xs1.xs4all.nl> wrote in message
>news:40f5c18a$0$37789$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...

>I wouldn't be surprised if many posters prefered environments like Enworld's
>"no *sshole"-land. This forum can be pretty harsh on both neophytes and
>those who post "unapproved opinions". Yeah, you can say usenet is all about
>the unfettered exchange of ideas but it may come with a price, like
>declining relevance.
>
>Marc

A lot of folks (like myself) have indeed moved to both forums (like
ENWorld, the Forge, RPGNet, and others), and individual weblogs
(blogs) to share ideas / information.

Ones I read fluctuate, as the signal-to-noise ratio of each rises and
falls. I don't always agree with moderated groups (i.e. ENWorld), but
it's refreshing not to have to deal with high volumes of complete
drivel :)

There are so many different communication channels now, including IM
groups, IRC groups, and the above-mentioned forum-based groups that
it's hard to keep track of where all the good info hides.

I periodically post things like lists of free RPG e-zines, games, etc
on my weblog (http://www.docsblog.com). You folks have got me
thinking (drat that silly brain's at it again) that I should post an
updated list of "where to find RPG discussions". I have listed free
games and ezines, but never compiled a list of the actual underlying
discussion forums. Thanks for the idea!

Doc

Duane VanderPol

unread,
Jul 18, 2004, 3:30:39 PM7/18/04
to

"mcv" <mcv...@xs1.xs4all.nl> wrote in message
news:40f66d1d$0$49711$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...

> In rec.games.frp.misc Stephenls <step...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> > mcv wrote:
> >
> >> But why? usenet is far more accessible than webfora.
> >
> > No, it's not. Most people online nowadays don't even know how to set up
> > a newsreader program or connect to a USENET provider. Everybody online
> > knows how to type in URLs.
>
> That's not usenet's fault, but the fault of OS distributions. They tend to
> come with a free, ready-to-use browser, but if you want a newsreader,
you've
> got to work on it. Once set up, however, the newsreader allows you direct

You seem to have missed the point. People don't know or care to set up a
newsreader. They use web forums because they know how to access the web.
It's not that setting up to read Usenet is HARD, or that web forums are
faster, more efficient to use, etc. - it's just that going to the net is
EASIER. It also requires knowledge that Usenet even exists and I'd risk
saying that the vast majority of internet users do not.


Peter Knutsen

unread,
Jul 18, 2004, 10:18:07 PM7/18/04
to

Duane VanderPol wrote:
[...]

> You seem to have missed the point. People don't know or care to set up a
> newsreader. They use web forums because they know how to access the web.
> It's not that setting up to read Usenet is HARD, or that web forums are
> faster, more efficient to use, etc. - it's just that going to the net is
> EASIER. It also requires knowledge that Usenet even exists and I'd risk
> saying that the vast majority of internet users do not.

I don't think the real problem is that people don't know that
Usenet exists. It's that they don't know what Usenet means. They
assume that Usenet is "just another discussion forum", failing
to realize the *centrality* of it: One forum per topic. So that
you get all the debate on (e.g.) GURPS in one place, instead of
fragmented into five or twenty or eight hundred different fora.

--
Peter Knutsen

Wayne Shaw

unread,
Jul 19, 2004, 12:58:02 PM7/19/04
to
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004 04:18:07 +0200, Peter Knutsen <pe...@knutsen.dk>
wrote:

>I don't think the real problem is that people don't know that
>Usenet exists. It's that they don't know what Usenet means. They
>assume that Usenet is "just another discussion forum", failing
>to realize the *centrality* of it: One forum per topic. So that
>you get all the debate on (e.g.) GURPS in one place, instead of
>fragmented into five or twenty or eight hundred different fora.

But of course it _is_ just another forum these days. You'll probably
see at least as much discussion of D&D on the Wizards webforums or
ENWorld as here (and yes, I know I'm understating) and at least as
much discussion of GURPS on Pyramid as in r.g.f.g.

Ubiquitous

unread,
Jul 29, 2004, 9:45:48 PM7/29/04
to
In article <b8b82bf5.04071...@posting.google.com>,
sta...@alum.mit.edu wrote:

>It looks like the USENET is dying a slow death, ...
>Where are folks posting/communicating these days?

Far, far, far too many web forums, mailing lists, and newsfroups
to ever catch up on all of them.

--
======================================================================
ISLAM: Winning the hearts and minds of the world, one beheading at a
time.

Ubiquitous

unread,
Jul 29, 2004, 9:50:04 PM7/29/04
to

> When Comcast swallowed my old ISP I discovered that they would be
>having a third party handle their newsgroups. I'm limited to a set
>amount of downloads/uploads per month for "free". After that I would
>need to "upgrade" my service for an addition charge. I was not thrilled
>to find this out. I am still not thrilled.

Ohh, let me guess -- Supernews?

--
======================================================================
ISLAM: Winning the hearts and minds of the world, one bomb at a time.

Ubiquitous

unread,
Jul 29, 2004, 10:02:40 PM7/29/04
to
In article <2lo6a5F...@uni-berlin.de>, step...@shaw.ca wrote:
>Stephenls wrote:
>
>> http://www.individual.com/
>
>Drat. Richard Wingrove has it right. I use http://www.individual.net/.
> I don't think they're the same...

Right you are, Ken!

--
======================================================================
Kenny: "Look! They're trying to force through the back-door against her will!"
Vic: "That's usually how it goes, Ken."

0 new messages