About googlegroupers
Roger Johansson
I would like to remind you that usenet is threatened by stagnation.
Few people even know that usenet exists, and it is mainly populated by old
people who have used usenet for many years, and they know how to set up a
newsgroup reader.
There are few ways for usenet to introduce new people, as most ISP's no
longer supply a newsserver with a new internet account.
Groupsgoogle is one of the few, maybe the only, way for new users to
discover and start using usenet.
Instead of attacking newcomers as some people do and critizise them for
every little mistake we should welcome new users, and make sure that the
atmosphere in the newsgroup does not scare newcomers away even before they
make their first post.
Remember that a lot of children get access to internet and they are easily
scared off by foul language and bad attitudes.
And remember that the englishspeaking newsgroups are global and english is
the new world language.
Especially US-american act like they are having a shouting contest with
their closest neighbor in a white trash trailer park.
How do you think well-behaved children from Thailand, Poland, Mongolia,
etc.. react to this kind of atmosphere?
I wrote emails to many swedish web forum groups a year ago and suggested
that they could get more involved at a global plane, as most swedish
youngsters speak very good english.
The replies I got showed that a lot of youngsters around the age of 20
think usenet is an unpleasant environment, too much foul language and to
many flame wars.
And these youngster were not beginners in internet, they are very active in
web forums.
For usenet to survive we need to be more tolerant to newcomers and keep the
atmosphere civilized and be nice to each other.
If it is not in your nature you can at least fake it.
--
Roger J.
Mike Easter
> Some people are very hostile to people posting from Google.
You cannot characterize 'people posting from google' as a single entity.
For shorthand, I'll use the term 'GGer'.
o GGers may be newbies looking for information
o they may be old usenet pros who have discovered and are using a new
anonymizing tool
o they may be experienced users who are using GG to access because they
are behind a corporate firewall or otherwise impaired about accessing
with a newsreader because they aren't on their own computer system.
o they may be usenet spammers, trolls, or flamers
o they may be of intermediate experience whose provider has ceased
providing newsservice and they haven't yet learned how to use free
newsservers
> Instead of attacking newcomers as some people do and critizise them
> for every little mistake we should welcome new users, and make sure
> that the atmosphere in the newsgroup does not scare newcomers away
> even before they make their first post.
Usenet has been a combination of a helpful environment and a sometimes
harsh one for a very long time, even before GGers populated the scene;
and composed of many different kinds of people all mixed together.
> For usenet to survive we need to be more tolerant to newcomers and
> keep the atmosphere civilized and be nice to each other.
I agree with that concept.
And those who are new to the environment also need to learn how to
adjust to its nature to avoid the rough stuff they don't like while
communicating effectively about what they are thinking.
--
Mike Easter
Why Tea
Hej Roger, I have visited Sweden many times. I must say it's a nice
country
and the people are very polite.
What can you do about the bad behavior and foul languages here? That's
who
they are, and the Web provides an ideal place to hide and behave as
badly as
they want. As the experts might tell you, some of them had a bad
childhood
who grew up with foul languages, etc. This place has become a
sanctuary for
some of those people. The intention of reaching out was good, but I
believe it's
a lost cause.
Kulgan
> are behind a corporate firewall or otherwise impaired about accessing
> with a newsreader because they aren't on their own computer system.
If anyone cares, this is me! I use GG because I access my newsgroups
from several different machines based on where I am working on a given
day.
I find GG pretty good. Occasionally it gives incorrect information
about the last time groups were posted to and sometimes it insists I
have not read things I have read, but on the whole it's a good
solution for me.
Kulgan (who has a GG profile and is no anonymous).
harper 01
> Some people are very hostile to people posting from Google.
> And remember that the english speaking newsgroups are global and english is
> the new world language.
> Especially US-american act like they are having a shouting contest with
> their closest neighbor in a white trash trailer park.
We're their closest neighbour and we don't live in a white trash trailer
park and on behalf of all the Canucks in this NG,
I resent the implication.
PM S Harper
Bear Bottoms
wrote:
I agree with much of this and appreciate any effort to make usenet more
agreeable. Travel will moderate your tendency to single out or target any
specific group. Human are humans regardless of where they are from. Even
moderated forums get involved in team mentality regardless of labels. I
would like to center thoughts on this group and the current behavior and
specifically behavior towards relatively new posters to this group. The
group of so called regulars here immediately started on me when I first
arrived here. I do not have 'thin skin' therefore I pushed back. I have
seen many newcomers simply leave. Folks, this is a unmoderated freeware
newsgroup with room for everyone. The team mentality that has established
itself as dominant here is the cause of this groups troubles. The regulars
should be leaders not bosses. HB's recent signature about this is a good
model to think about. Put your agendas aside and think about what Roger is
saying about growth. The more people who come here and enjoy the
experience, the greater the group and more will come.
--
Bear Bottoms
Freeware website http://bearbottoms1.com
Bear Bottoms
> Hej Roger, I have visited Sweden many times. I must say it's a nice
> country
> and the people are very polite.
>
> What can you do about the bad behavior and foul languages here? That's
> who
> they are, and the Web provides an ideal place to hide and behave as
> badly as
> they want. As the experts might tell you, some of them had a bad
> childhood
> who grew up with foul languages, etc. This place has become a
> sanctuary for
> some of those people. The intention of reaching out was good, but I
> believe it's
> a lost cause.
>
I don't think this group is a lost cause. When you see newcomers getting
bashed, support them. When you see positive attempts to participate,
support them and kindly suggest improvements which everyone occasionally
can benefit from though every error does not need correction. The longer a
poster participates the more he learns. Give them time. Who makes the
worst mistake, someone making a Usenet protocol error or the like, or
regulars bashing responses to them. The participants here can improve this
experience. We have to stymie the agendas and not support that.
Bear Bottoms
Well said.
Bear Bottoms
You are welcome here. GG'rs are welcome here. The topic is freeware and
posts about freeware are welcome here regardless of who what or where.
Many of this groups discussions involve topics not directly related to
freeware, though are still beneficial to the group. Support those who want
to particpate in a fun way, regardless of who what or where.
nospam
>Some people are very hostile to people posting from Google.
>
>I would like to remind you that usenet is threatened by stagnation.
usenet is more threatened by abuse by non-contributors who restrict their
usenet use to search results and reading responses to questions they
posted.
A practice which google facilitates. I understand it will even send you an
email when some mug posts to your thread.
usenet has value because people read it and provide answers. A large
proportion of googlegropers only provide questions, they treat it with as
much respect as a search engine with the few mugs that still bother to read
usenet acting as unpaid human interpreters of their frequently dumb
queries.
--
Ron May
> Some people are very hostile to people posting from Google.
(...)
With all due respect, Roger, it's not about being hostile, attacking
newcomers, or being intolerant of top posting, use of caps, excessive
quoting and other minor issues. For me, probably starting with Dr.
Jai, I realized that a major portion of the spam flood comes from
googlegroups. Virtually every post that touts "get rich quick" or
porn, or a "click through" scheme originates from their interface.
Check it out for yourself if you like.
I "whitelist" a few regulars here who post from Google, and about once
a week or so, I change my message view to scan the subject lines and
authors to see if I need to add someone to the whitelist, but I find I
miss very little of any value by filtering googlespam.
Right now, googlespam is lost in the flood of trash generated by BB,
HB, their sock puppets, and those who feed the trolls. After they go
away, it'll be easier to see that the signal to noise ration of
googlegroups posts makes filtering a common sense choice.
--
Ron M.
(I filter Googlegroups posts)
Franklin
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 02:17:06 -0700, Mike Easter wrote:
>
>> Roger Johansson wrote:
>>> Some people are very hostile to people posting from Google.
>>
> <snippage>
>>
>> Usenet has been a combination of a helpful environment and a
>> sometimes harsh one for a very long time, even before GGers
>> populated the scene; and composed of many different kinds of
>> people all mixed together.
>>
>>> For usenet to survive we need to be more tolerant to newcomers
>>> and keep the atmosphere civilized and be nice to each other.
>
> That's rubbish. Usenet has been around for close to thirty years
> and if Google and all the other Web to Usenet gateways disappeared
> into a black hole tomorrow Usenet would continue with the
> technically competent continuing to benefit from it.
>
>>
>> I agree with that concept.
>>
>> And those who are new to the environment also need to learn how to
>> adjust to its nature to avoid the rough stuff they don't like
>> while communicating effectively about what they are thinking.
>
> Here's a good summary of what's bad about Google Groups and similar
> Web to Usenet gateways (from Wikipedia)
>
> "One of many concerns that have been expressed about the Google
> interface is that novices may have difficulty realising that they
> are participating in a Usenet newsgroup rather than in a web forum
> hosted by Google. Google Groups is not very outspoken about the
> fact and doesn't make it very clear in the web interface that some
> of the groups at Google Groups are Usenet groups, while others are
> local Google-only groups.
>
> Other concerns are:
>
> Web-to-Usenet gateways provide a service for e-mail spammers, since
> a spammer's web spider can now also extract e-mail addresses from
> Usenet postings without any additional effort. Before such
> gateways, an e-mail spammer would have to use a separate tool to
> gain access to a news feed (as Usenet spammers do). Since 2005,
> Google Groups tries to prevent e- mail address harvesting by
> scrambling the display of e-mail addresses on their web pages.
>
> Web-to-Usenet gateways often hide the fact from users that they are
> actually on Usenet, and that it would be a good idea to learn and
> follow Usenet customs and established rules. They further hide the
> fact that Usenet is still at its core a decentralized
> store-and-forward system and, therefore, articles do not simply
> appear "everywhere" once they have been posted. This typically
> leads to multiple posts with the same contents and/ or expressed
> dissatisfaction about why there are no answers within minutes
> and/or why there are multiple answers which essentially say the
> same thing.
>
> Web-to-Usenet gateways often cut away or hide "overhead"
> information (e.g. header information like message IDs) or, even
> worse, signatures. This leaves Web-users puzzled about what people
> are talking about when they write things like "See my sig" or "See
> msgid ...".
>
> Web-to-Usenet gateways typically provide fewer features than
> conventional News Reader software. For example, the ability to
> filter (users, subject lines, etc.), to sort threads in multiple
> ways, draft articles, etc., is typically missing.
>
> Web-to-Usenet gateways are often very badly policed. Post 2006,
> this is typical not only of such gateways, but also many feed
> providers. Abusive behavior from the Web-to-Usenet gateway users in
> some newsgroups is now legendary, and the operators have not yet
> mustered the will and/or resources to effectively keep a lid on
> abusive users. Automated complaint systems seldom result in any
> action.
>
> Web-to-Usenet gateways enable less technically savvy people to
> enter Usenet. These people tend to be less familiar with the Usenet
> system and Usenet etiquette, and can cause annoyance for other
> users.
>
> Web-to-Usenet gateways lower the entry barrier to Usenet. The
> slightly higher entry requirements, and the degree of obscurity
> Usenet possesses required users to have a higher level of knowledge
> and capability and as such tended to exclude those who were not at
> least mildly computer savvy, which in turn had the effect of
> tending to guarantee at least a minimum level of education, which
> in turn, overall, tended to ensure at least a minimum level of
> decency in behaviour. This is not an iron rule of course, but
> merely a tendency overall, which of course when applied to millions
> of people, had a profound effect on the overall culture of Usenet.
>
> Web-to-Usenet gateways often offer a searchable archive. One of the
> advantages of Usenet was that posters knew their material was only
> being read by the readership of their group and would, in a week or
> two, have disappeared forever. This particular type of semi-public,
> semi-private conversation was unusual and very useful."
>
> Regards
> Gordon
Gordon, these are all good points. Of course we must not say that
all Google Groupers do what your list says.
The problem is not all black or all white.
The problem is that there is a greater probability of getting that
sort of behavior from a Google grouper then from one who uses NNTP-
Usenet.
If you assess that probability as sufficiently high and the downside
(from not seeing Google Grouper's messages as sufficiently small)
then you wouldbe happy to killfile them.
If you find their contibution is highly valuable and the problems
they bring are, in your view, small then you will want to read posts
rom Google Groupers.
A larger than expected proportion of spoofs and sockpuppets in ACF
(such as those posted by Hummingbird and Mr Bottoms as well as
others) make use of Google Groups either as a return email or as a
posting facility.
Franklin
> Hej Roger, I have visited Sweden many times. I must say it's a nice
> country and the people are very polite.
>
> What can you do about the bad behavior and foul languages here?
> That's who they are, and the Web provides an ideal place to hide
> and behave as badly as they want. As the experts might tell you,
> some of them had a bad childhood who grew up with foul languages,
> etc. This place has become a sanctuary for some of those people.
> The intention of reaching out was good, but I believe it's a lost
> cause.
Why Tea, this group is more tolerant of abusive newcomers than many
other groups on the Usenet. These newcomers sometimes arrive with an
intention to damage the group (for example, Mr Bottoms or
Hummingbird) and I feel there may be good reason to put in place
responses to deal with such anti-social posters.
Of course, these destructive deviants are not anti-social for 100% of
the time. Like schoolyard bullies, these anti-social posters are
very quick to be on their very best behavior when they see it is to
their advantage. Some bullies are very charming.
It is the charm of these paticular bullies which makes them all the
more destructive because their hard-to-believe explanations and
excuses may actually be accepted at face value by more credulous
listeners who may even go on to defend these "poor little" bullies
from attack! Of course the bullies keep as straight a face as they
can when this happens.
Franklin
One side has "mugs" and other side makes "dumb enquiries".
That's disrespectful of both sides.
Bear Bottoms
> Right now, googlespam is lost in the flood of trash generated by BB,
> HB, their sock puppets, and those who feed the trolls. After they go
> away, it'll be easier to see that...
LOL...in your dreams bud. You guys made a serious mistake...admit it. Only
when/if you and yours start behaving will the noise settle down.
--
Bear Bottoms
Freeware website http://bearbottoms1.com
ACF freeware: http://freeware.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
Bear Bottoms
> Now BB, you sounded like an elder statesman!
Ew
--
Bear Bottoms
Freeware website http://bearbottoms1.com
ACF freeware: http://freeware.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
Bear Bottoms
It was a mistake on his part to label as such. Humans are humans no matter
where they are. We all make mistakes.
Bear Bottoms
wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 06:23:54 -0400 'harper 01'
> posted this onto alt.comp.freeware:
> I think you misinterpreted Roger's reference to "closest neighbour".
> I'm 99.9% certain he was not referring to Canucks ...
>
Of course not. It is too easy to target the United States. The truth is,
I've been to most all countries and find the humans are all very similar.
The governments are not.
yif
there is a lot of nastiness on here which as stated will put people
off coming back, but it doesnt matter which group or forum you go on
you will get small minded people who think its funny to have a go at
someone because they think they are an expert and the people asking
the question are below contempt and thick. But remember we have all
been there, we all knew nothing about computers and software at
onetime, so lighten up and make everybody Welcome.
yif
http://www.yesitsfree.co.uk
http://www.security4free.co.uk
Bear Bottoms
I agree with you.
Franklin
Ron, whitelisting seems a good idea. I must remember to do that more
often but there can't be many GooGroupers who would easily qualify
for inclusion.
HummingChris and Mr Bottoms seem fully occupied by this group as they
are now no longer are able to post to their old regular groups.
HummingChris was once very busy trolling and flaming in political
newsgroups but got so disheartened by the put-downs that he stopped.
Mike Easter
<my cite>
>> o they may be experienced users who are using GG to access because
>> they are behind a corporate firewall or otherwise impaired about
>> accessing with a newsreader because they aren't on their own
>> computer system.
>
> If anyone cares, this is me! I use GG because I access my newsgroups
> from several different machines based on where I am working on a given
> day.
There was a recent lengthy discussion in the ng news.software.readers
about the subject of using GG as one option to other options when
'traveling' creates the problems of not having one's own normal access.
Many of the participants of that group filter out all GGers and are
quite happy with that arrangement. Others find ways to 'poke holes' in
their GGer filters to allow a few GG posts to be seen.
Some of the participants in that group feel that there is never a reason
to use GG; they feel that some strategy can be developed no matter what
kind of computer access you have behind what kind of firewall.
I use GG 'all the time' for searching for information; but I severely
dislike the GG interface and its weaknesses and limitations for posting
to newsgroups, so I would almost never use GG for newsgroup posting.
However I can imagine some very limited circumstances in which GG
reading and posting would be better than some alternate solution.
I would wager that your own usage of GG to post to newsgroups could be
replaced by some other strategy of using a 'portable' newsreader.
> I find GG pretty good. Occasionally it gives incorrect information
> about the last time groups were posted to and sometimes it insists I
> have not read things I have read, but on the whole it's a good
> solution for me.
Do you have any experience with using a real newsreader on a real
newsserver?
--
Mike Easter
Mister Charlie
"Mike Easter" <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote in message
news:46bc2cfd$0$97270$892e...@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
> Roger Johansson wrote:
>> Some people are very hostile to people posting from Google.
>
> For shorthand, I'll use the term 'GGer'.
>
> o GGers may be newbies looking for information
> o they may be old usenet pros who have discovered and are using a new
> anonymizing tool
> are behind a corporate firewall or otherwise impaired about accessing
> with a newsreader because they aren't on their own computer system.
> o they may be of intermediate experience whose provider has ceased
> providing newsservice and they haven't yet learned how to use free
> newsservers
>
>> Instead of attacking newcomers as some people do and critizise them
>> for every little mistake we should welcome new users, and make sure
>> that the atmosphere in the newsgroup does not scare newcomers away
>> even before they make their first post.
>
> harsh one for a very long time, even before GGers populated the scene;
> and composed of many different kinds of people all mixed together.
>
>> For usenet to survive we need to be more tolerant to newcomers and
>> keep the atmosphere civilized and be nice to each other.
>
>
> And those who are new to the environment also need to learn how to
> adjust to its nature to avoid the rough stuff they don't like while
> communicating effectively about what they are thinking.
>
experience, not confined to Usenet. Any forum or web based posting place or
social network is JUST as obnoxious as Usenet. Probably more, considering
at least here there are no binaries (except, of course, in alt.binaries).
So the advice is sound, behave like adults, and googlegroup user bashing is
as ridiculous as AOL user bashing used to be. Yes, AOL sucks and google is
used for much mayhem but you simply can't assume everyone who uses either
service is a moron or a malcontent.
Mike Easter
> "Mike Easter"
>> Roger Johansson wrote:
>>> Some people are very hostile to people posting from Google.
>>
>> You cannot characterize 'people posting from google' as a single
>> entity.
> So the advice is sound, behave like adults, and googlegroup user
> bashing is as ridiculous as AOL user bashing used to be. Yes, AOL
> sucks and google is used for much mayhem but you simply can't assume
> everyone who uses either service is a moron or a malcontent.
Among other things, I'm not 'recommending' GGer bashing. However....
The business of 'marginalizing' GGers is both commonplace and 'sound'.
That is, there are more arguments for filtering out all GGers than for
reading all GGers. There is also an argument for filtering out some
GGers but not others.
Here are several examples besides those I gave earlier and which were
also given in the citations from the wiki article.
Some posters who are otherwise helpful in newsgroups get extremely
frustrated by the newbies who can't provide sufficient background for a
question and who are notorious for 'drive by' questions of
non-participation and who try to newsgroup communicate by top posting.
So, they would rather help the newbies who can do better than that.
Some others who filter out GGers try to do so by strategies which enable
them to see some GGers but not others. Some of the same people who
would filter out mail2news anonymizers filter out GGers as part of their
anti-anonymizer strategy.
So, part of what I try to say to GGers is that it is a very poor posting
interface and that the newbie who is using GG to try to communicate and
learn should also learn how to:
-1- get a newsreader and a newsserver so that their posting won't be
filtered out by a lot of people who can be helpful
-2- get nntp connxn so that they can filter out a lot of the garbage
that GGers so often complain about
-3- get nntp connxn for the many many other advantages of a newsreader
over a GG interface
-4- learn how to ask questions properly and reply in an acceptable
usenet format
--
Mike Easter
Mike Easter
> 'Mike Easter'
>> Some of the participants in that group feel that there is never a
>> reason to use GG; they feel that some strategy can be developed no
>> matter what kind of computer access you have behind what kind of
>> firewall.
> There's also another point that some Googlers possibly
> don't realise which is that it adds a header with their IP address in.
From the perspective of helping or hindering identity sleuthing, GG
posting stamps has advantages and disadvantages.
On the one hand, GG causes the poster's login From address and IP to be
stamped.
On the other hand, any individual meatspace persona can have an
unlimited number of login From addresses and can use proxy strategies to
mask their true IP.
On the 3rd hand ;-) any two GG posts with a given GG login address have
to belong to the same login password (assumed same meatspace persona) so
that NPH NNTP-Posting-Host lines can be compared or contrasted.
--
Mike Easter
Craig
> hummingbird wrote:
>> 'Mike Easter'
>
>>> Some of the participants in that group feel that there is never a
>>> reason to use GG; they feel that some strategy can be developed no
>>> matter what kind of computer access you have behind what kind of
>>> firewall.
>
>> There's also another point that some Googlers possibly
>> don't realise which is that it adds a header with their IP address in.
>
> On the 3rd hand ;-) any two GG posts with a given GG login address have
> to belong to the same login password (assumed same meatspace persona) so
> that NPH NNTP-Posting-Host lines can be compared or contrasted.
>
thx,
-Craig
Mike Easter
> Mike Easter wrote:
>> On the 3rd hand ;-) any two GG posts with a given GG login address
>> have to belong to the same login password (assumed same meatspace
>> persona) so that NPH NNTP-Posting-Host lines can be compared or
>> contrasted.
>>
> "meatspace." Great term. I appreciate the discussion.
Meatspace being real person with geographic location, ISP provider
account, in US socialsecurity number, credit rating, such as that -- as
opposed to a cyberspace persona which we are to each other 'as we speak'
like this.
And then there's the concept of 'meat' which is a cute story "They're
Made Out of Meat"
^1 http://www.electricstory.com/stories/story.aspx?title=meat/meat
"They're Made Out of Meat" from the collection Bears Discover Fire and
Other Stories - by Terry Bisson
--
Mike Easter
Mister Charlie
"Mike Easter" <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote in message
about the spam.
If killfiling googlegroups to avoid spam is what one wants to do, fine. I
doubt there would be too many posts they'd miss of great value.
But as to view of a 'proper' newsserver/newsreader, while it would be
advantageous for the newbie as well as the usenet groups to do so it still
smacks to me of a vague elitism.
And as to netiquette, while it should always be recommended to every user,
it's not the gateway but poster who is the determinant in this.
Personally I find people who go nuts over top posting way too anal about it.
That's just me. But most other netiquette is just common sense and
respectfulness. Unfortunately, this (US anyway) society as a whole is not
inclined towards it.
Franklin
> Craig wrote:
>> Mike Easter wrote:
>
>>> On the 3rd hand ;-) any two GG posts with a given GG login
>>> address have to belong to the same login password (assumed same
>>> meatspace persona) so that NPH NNTP-Posting-Host lines can be
>>> compared or contrasted.
>>>
>> "meatspace." Great term. I appreciate the discussion.
>
> Meatspace being real person with geographic location, ISP provider
> account, in US socialsecurity number, credit rating, such as that
> -- as opposed to a cyberspace persona which we are to each other
> 'as we speak' like this.
>
> And then there's the concept of 'meat' which is a cute story
> "They're Made Out of Meat"
>
> http://www.electricstory.com/stories/story.aspx?title=meat/meat
>
> "They're Made Out of Meat"
> from the collection Bears Discover Fire and Other Stories -
> by Terry Bisson
>
This sweet story you link to ends by saying:
"Imagine how unbearably, how unutterably cold
the Universe would be if one were all alone . . . ”
and explains why Mr Bottoms and HummingChris are so much drawn
together. Without one another they would feel 'unutterably cold' and
'lonely'.
Mike Easter
> "Mike Easter"
>> Among other things, I'm not 'recommending' GGer bashing. However....
> Personally I find people who go nuts over top posting way too anal
> about it. That's just me.
I don't want to launch into a top posting 'subthread' of a thread on
GGers which is actually OT compared to the concept of freeware, but...
In most newsgroup threads there is (going to be) a conversation of
indeterminate length going on for an indeterminate number of messages,
so trimming and maintaining the context and order of the conversation is
essential, as well as proper attribution.
Top posting does none of that and 'bottom posting' untrimmed
non-contextualized has almost as many problems, except that in such
'bad' bottom posting the order and attribution is maintained for someone
else to trim without having to restructure.
Before I stop on top posting, I would also note that in my experience,
almost all top posters also don't do a good job of reading exactly what
the post they are replying to said, and they also don't reply to the
previous post 'precisely' because their reading and replying doesn't
work the same way as the contextualizer. So that makes it /appear/ that
the top poster can't 'read or write' in addition to disrupting the
conversational order.
> But most other netiquette is just common
> sense and respectfulness.
I think that most top posters feel that it is an issue of 'blue is
prettier than green' or vice versa because in their mind it is an issue
of top posting versus untrimmed non-contextualized bottom posting. But,
the 'opposite' of top posting isn't such bottom posting, it is trimming
and contextualizing and attributing.
Rather than top posting, the person who doesn't want to trim and
contextualize and attribute should 'summarize' in their own words a
paraphrasing of what was said before and turn off their newsreader's
citing mechanism.
--
Mike Easter
Mister Charlie
"Mike Easter" <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote in message
> Mister Charlie wrote:
>> "Mike Easter"
>
>>> Among other things, I'm not 'recommending' GGer bashing. However....
>
>> Personally I find people who go nuts over top posting way too anal
>> about it. That's just me.
>
> I don't want to launch into a top posting 'subthread' of a thread on
> GGers which is actually OT compared to the concept of freeware, but...
I did not want to start a whole nuther argument on this topic, there's
nothing you could say that would change my mind as I've already heard all
the 'reasons' for not doing it.
>
> In most newsgroup threads there is (going to be) a conversation of
> indeterminate length going on for an indeterminate number of messages,
> so trimming and maintaining the context and order of the conversation is
> essential, as well as proper attribution.
Trimming is a totally different issue and I heartily endorse it.
>
>
> Before I stop on top posting, I would also note that in my experience,
> almost all top posters also don't do a good job of reading exactly what
> the post they are replying to said, and they also don't reply to the
> previous post 'precisely' because their reading and replying doesn't
> work the same way as the contextualizer. So that makes it /appear/ that
> the top poster can't 'read or write' in addition to disrupting the
> conversational order.
That is simply a generalization that has no basis except anecdotal. I both
top and bottom post depending on my mood and the content and I can read just
fine, thanks.
>
>> But most other netiquette is just common
>> sense and respectfulness.
>
> I think that most top posters feel that it is an issue of 'blue is
> prettier than green' or vice versa because in their mind it is an issue
> of top posting versus untrimmed non-contextualized bottom posting. But,
> the 'opposite' of top posting isn't such bottom posting, it is trimming
> and contextualizing and attributing.
Again, trimming is not the same as top posting. Many bottom posters also
leave two days worth of posts untrimmed just to say "LOL".
>
> Rather than top posting, the person who doesn't want to trim and
> contextualize and attribute should 'summarize' in their own words a
> paraphrasing of what was said before and turn off their newsreader's
> citing mechanism.
Not a bad idea, but again, top osting and trimming while sometimes done by
the same 'offender' are still two entirely different subjects. I do not top
post out of laziness just to jump in and out again. But I imagine on
occasion I do forget to trim (bottom -or- top post replies) and recently got
rightly nailed for it.
elaich
news:tn2vi.660$EK3...@fe107.usenetserver.com:
> Again, trimming is not the same as top posting. Many bottom posters
> also leave two days worth of posts untrimmed just to say "LOL".
Most top posters, and almost all non-trimmers are using Outlook Express.
Not to introduce another sub-thread, but they are almost as bad as GGers.
How many of them take the time to use the newsreader properly?
--
A: Because it disturbs the logical flow of the message.
Q: Why is top posting frowned upon?
Bear Bottoms
> "Mister Charlie" <wid...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:tn2vi.660$EK3...@fe107.usenetserver.com:
>
>> Again, trimming is not the same as top posting. Many bottom posters
>> also leave two days worth of posts untrimmed just to say "LOL".
>
> Most top posters, and almost all non-trimmers are using Outlook Express.
> Not to introduce another sub-thread, but they are almost as bad as GGers.
> How many of them take the time to use the newsreader properly?
>
So many stupids in the way of your smarts. Hey, filter out everyone who
uses Outlook also. If my luck holds, you and yours filters will only allow
you to see your own posts. LOL.
Mister Charlie
"elaich" <a@b.c> wrote in message news:5i4oatF...@mid.individual.net...
> "Mister Charlie" <wid...@gmail.com> wrote in
> news:tn2vi.660$EK3...@fe107.usenetserver.com:
>
>> Again, trimming is not the same as top posting. Many bottom posters
>> also leave two days worth of posts untrimmed just to say "LOL".
>
> Most top posters, and almost all non-trimmers are using Outlook Express.
> Not to introduce another sub-thread, but they are almost as bad as GGers.
> How many of them take the time to use the newsreader properly?
>
Ron May
Reminds me of the axiom:
"All generalizations are false, including this one."
--
Ron M.
(I filter Googlegroups posts)
Ron May
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:28:10 +0100, Franklin <frank...@no.spam.com>
wrote:
> Ron, whitelisting seems a good idea. I must remember to do that more
> often but there can't be many GooGroupers who would easily qualify
> for inclusion.
Currently, I have six whitelisted authors who post to ACF either
occasionally or all the time via GG. I don't want to list their names
here, since I'd rather not encourage the use of googlegroups for
posting. Even my sig line (which I've just modified slightly) isn't
intended as a put down, but more of a suggestion to new GG posters
that, if they get few or no responses, it may be because a good number
of participants will never see what they write.
--
Ron M.
(I filter Googlespam)
sister2brother
> Some people are very hostile to people posting from Google.
>
> Few people even know that usenet exists, and it is mainly populated by old
> people who have used usenet for many years, and they know how to set up a
> newsgroup reader.
>
> There are few ways for usenet to introduce new people, as most ISP's no
> longer supply a newsserver with a new internet account.
>
> Groupsgoogle is one of the few, maybe the only, way for new users to
> discover and start using usenet.
>
> Instead of attacking newcomers as some people do and critizise them for
> every little mistake we should welcome new users, and make sure that the
> atmosphere in the newsgroup does not scare newcomers away even before they
> make their first post.
>
> scared off by foul language and bad attitudes.
> And remember that the englishspeaking newsgroups are global and english is
> the new world language.
> Especially US-american act like they are having a shouting contest with
> their closest neighbor in a white trash trailer park.
>
> etc.. react to this kind of atmosphere?
>
> I wrote emails to many swedish web forum groups a year ago and suggested
> that they could get more involved at a global plane, as most swedish
> youngsters speak very good english.
>
> The replies I got showed that a lot of youngsters around the age of 20
> think usenet is an unpleasant environment, too much foul language and to
> many flame wars.
>
> And these youngster were not beginners in internet, they are very active in
> web forums.
>
> For usenet to survive we need to be more tolerant to newcomers and keep the
> atmosphere civilized and be nice to each other.
>
>
> --
> Roger J.
Actually your post reminded me of way, way back when I used to know
how to create a new usenet group. Then I belonged to AOL and there
wasn't a need becuae AOL provided access to the Usenet groups. But
since AOL cancelled their access to the usenet groups I then used one
of the free servers to access the usenet groups. Then after the free
server went to a fee-based service that's when I "bit the bullet" and
signed up with Google's access to the Usenet group
My how time flies when you're having fun!
The Adsense Consultant
http://theadsenseconsultant.blogspot.com