my discussions are sometimes being transferred to other forums?

[swimm...@yahoo.co.uk]

I've started some thread recently and after a few replies I can't find them anymore...tough, one thread reappeared after a few days?!
As I've just found out, my latest thread is now listed on DIYbanter (I've never joned that forum) and I wonder why is this happening...is this a way for certain forums to gather new members? (Forcing me to enter yet another forum?)
Surely I've plenty to do than trying to open a new membership somewhere else - we got plenty of accounts and passwords to remember - I don't need a new one.
Please bring back the thread where was originally started (thanks).

[Andy Burns]

swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> I've started some thread recently and after a few replies I can't find them anymore...tough, one thread reappeared after a few days?!

You need to understand that you're using a web front-end (google groups)
to a usenet group, you'll get a better experience if you use a usenet
client, e.g. Agent, Thunderbird, even Outlook Express and talk to the
group direct ...

> As I've just found out, my latest thread is now listed on DIYbanter (I've never joned that forum) and I wonder why is this happening...

DIYbanter is another web front-end to usenet, it sucks most of its
content from there, but makes it look like it's a forum

> Surely I've plenty to do than trying to open a new membership somewhere else -

I suggest you get *one* extra account, for a proper news server, which
will give you tens of thousands of groups, rather than the one account
per forum approach.

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Usenet

[alan]

On 20/10/2012 14:06, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> I've started some thread recently and after a few replies I can't find them anymore...tough, one thread reappeared after a few days?!

For most of us using Newsreading software the length of time an article
is retained is down to settings on our own computers. You are probably
using some other method to access the Usenet and are limited by the
server that you are connected to. You sometimes see the thread
reappearing because someone else keeps articles for, say, 14 days and
has replied after your copy has expired from the server.


--
mailto:news{at}admac(dot}myzen{dot}co{dot}uk

[fred]

In article <0703dd49-6b77-464d...@googlegroups.com>,
swimm...@yahoo.co.uk writes

Good answers already, just to add:

Google is an excellent archiving resource, they earned the right to
archive our posts following their take over of the archives of the
original Deja-vu usenet archive and I welcome their continuing service.

They are however a flawed interface for posting, breaking the format of
replies and, as you have found, losing posts. As others have suggested,
there are better ways to talk to usenet.

DIYbanter and the other branches of banter portal do nothing to further
the concept of usenet and have done nothing to earn the right to archive
content. In my view they are a third rate rip off of usenet, presenting
the content as their own and earning revenue from ads along side our
posts, thieves pure and simple.

Maybe try one of the alternate methods of access, it doesn't need to
cost anything.
--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .

[Martin Brown]

On 20/10/2012 14:13, Andy Burns wrote:
> swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
>> I've started some thread recently and after a few replies I can't find
>> them anymore...tough, one thread reappeared after a few days?!
>
> You need to understand that you're using a web front-end (google groups)
> to a usenet group, you'll get a better experience if you use a usenet
> client, e.g. Agent, Thunderbird, even Outlook Express and talk to the
> group direct ...

You should always be able to find thread on Google groups though (at
least in principle). In practice they have seriously broken the indexing
from way back so post that I know I have made are inaccessible. But this
is years back I have never seen modern ones vanish although you do see
parasitic sites harvest content from Usenet.

>
>> As I've just found out, my latest thread is now listed on DIYbanter
>> (I've never joned that forum) and I wonder why is this happening...
>
> DIYbanter is another web front-end to usenet, it sucks most of its
> content from there, but makes it look like it's a forum

DIYbanter is a parasitic copy of a Usenet group just like GardenBanter
and a host of others. Denizens of uk.rec.gardening have been known to be
quite sharp with folk from gb who don't understand where they are.

>
>> Surely I've plenty to do than trying to open a new membership
>> somewhere else -
>
> I suggest you get *one* extra account, for a proper news server, which
> will give you tens of thousands of groups, rather than the one account
> per forum approach.
>
> http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Usenet

To dip a toe in the water there are various free servers of mildly
annoying characteristics of which AOIE is probably worth a try.

I use Teranews which for text groups is a one time registration fee of
$5 and refusing their invitations to upgrade once a year.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Murmansk]

Inspired by this thread I've just had a go at setting up Thunderbird to
read newsgroups rather than using Google Groups.

I've set it up with Plusnet's news server and I can't find a group
called UK.Telecom that I sometimes look at.

Presumably some servers are better than others. Is Plusnet's known to be
inferior?

[Adrian]

In message <eNWdnclXWtNxkh7N...@brightview.co.uk>, Murmansk
writes

>Presumably some servers are better than others. Is Plusnet's known to
>be inferior?

Try eternal-september


Adrian
--
To Reply :
replace "bulleid" with "adrian" - all mail to bulleid is rejected
Sorry for the rigmarole, If I want spam, I'll go to the shops
Every time someone says "I don't believe in trolls", another one dies.

[Nick Odell]

On Sat, 20 Oct 2012 21:54:28 +0100, Murmansk <""newsgroup\"@mm.st make
the word newsgroup plural to reply"> wrote:

>Inspired by this thread I've just had a go at setting up Thunderbird to
>read newsgroups rather than using Google Groups.
>
>I've set it up with Plusnet's news server and I can't find a group
>called UK.Telecom that I sometimes look at.
>
>Presumably some servers are better than others. Is Plusnet's known to be
>inferior?

I'm reading and writing to usenet from plusnet and I've just checked.
All the uk.telecom groups appear to be there. I'm on the
usenet.plus.net server. I don't know how Thunderbird works (I'm using
paid-for Agent) but if it is case-sensitive, try searching for
uk.telecom instead of the capitalised version.

Nick

[John Williamson]

In the "Manage Newsgroup Subscriptions" dialogue box, available when you
open an account in the left hand column, just type in however much of
the name you can remember, and it will find all occurrences of that
string in real time. In TB2, it's not case sensitive.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[swimm...@yahoo.co.uk]

I haven't read all messages but someone mentioned that some discussions aren't kept in certain archives...
The point is that the last discussion was nicked after a couple of days! I can find threads I started 5-6 years ago - these are peppered all over the internet (including UKDiy site) - but I can't stand the fact that brand new discussions are hijacked somewhere else!!
I don't even know if I can reply to my own discussion in DIYbanter or other sites using the same account - simply, don't want to give in to this form of extortion...I'm familiar with the UKdiy format and I don't see why I should enter another page with another format.

Funny, this thread is still running here...I might have found a way - just put something like: "DIYBANTER ARE A BUNCH OF SCAMMERS" in my signature (surely they aren't dumb enough to take this sort of messages on their site).

[polygonum]

I suspect you are completely wrong. The DIY Banter garbage web interface
will be 100% automatic and no-one who has anything to do with them will
know or care what you put in your sig.

--
Rod

[swimm...@yahoo.co.uk]

Someone's got the message...the discussion in question (the one I couldn't find on UKDIY) is now listed on Groups.google.com - I've used exactly the same criteria as in the past. Go figure...
I'm not an expert (as many have understood by now) but I've been using UKDIY for ages and never come across this sort of problems before...

[swimm...@yahoo.co.uk]

Good then....I'll use an anti DIYBANTER signature and it will be listed on their site!!
The system is automated for sure but there are filters and some messages simply don't register.

[Andy Burns]

Murmansk wrote:

> I've just had a go at setting up Thunderbird to
> read newsgroups rather than using Google Groups.

What version?

> I've set it up with Plusnet's news server and I can't find a group
> called UK.Telecom that I sometimes look at.

Are you just scrolling through the group list, or typing the name of the
group(s) you're trying to subscribe to? If the latter try a partial
search for "k.teleco" without the quotes, rather than "uk.telecom" in
full - this bug affected older versions.

> Presumably some servers are better than others. Is Plusnet's known to be
> inferior?

No, plusnet's is actually outsourced to giganews, if certainly carries
uk.telecom.

[Brian Gaff]

Are you talking forums or newsgroups?
Newsgroups like where I'm writing this have the ability to be able to send
replies off to other groups. Often this happens if someone thinks those on
that group could help or benefit. However the reverse is also true in that
people can trim the list of groups, and if they trim it to groups it did not
start on and take away the original one then no replies go there any more.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
<swimm...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:0703dd49-6b77-464d...@googlegroups.com...

[Martin Brown]

On 20/10/2012 23:19, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> I haven't read all messages but someone mentioned that some discussions aren't kept in certain archives...
> The point is that the last discussion was nicked after a couple of days! I can find threads I started 5-6 years ago - these are peppered all over the internet (including UKDiy site) - but I can't stand the fact that brand new discussions are hijacked somewhere else!!

You can't stop that happening though.

Anything posted on Usenet is easily grabbed by these parasitic sites and
although they mostly rebroadcast the contributions of their members back
to Usenet the ones that don't end up with threads that you have
contributed to going in an entirely different direction.

They steal posts from Usenet as pretend content and usually wrap it with
adverts and click based revenue generating schemes.

> I don't even know if I can reply to my own discussion in DIYbanter or other sites using the same account - simply, don't want to give in to this form of extortion...I'm familiar with the UKdiy format and I don't see why I should enter another page with another format.

Actually posting through Google groups you are actually in a different
place just like DIYbanter that harvests Usenet and allows postings both
ways. They took over the DejaNews archive many moons ago. They are legit
but their posting interface is hopelessly broken and they are a conduit
for spammers and scammers which means posting through there will get you
ignored by a proportion of old hands.

If you were posting from @gmail for instance I would not be responding
as I do not normally see any @gmail posts - too many copy watch UGG
boots spams are injected that way.

> Funny, this thread is still running here...I might have found a way - just put something like: "DIYBANTER ARE A BUNCH OF SCAMMERS" in my signature (surely they aren't dumb enough to take this sort of messages on their site).

Try it and see. My impression is that *YES* they are that dumb.

Your complaints are mild compared to the violent beating about the head
that some poor denizens of GardenBanter get for posting in
uk.rec.gardens and talking about "this forum".

I do object to my content being hijacked by these parasitic sites but
there isn't anything realistically that can be done about it.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Martin Brown]

That is because the search function on Google groups is defective and
has been for about two years now. Existing posts might or might not be
found depending on the way the wind is blowing and position of the
planets when you hit return. Basically they wrecked it.

It is just as likely to spontaneously vanish from the search results
again tomorrow. It is fairly rare problem but by no means unknown.
Mostly I see it looking for archived posts to use msgid links.

I haven't seen it on newish posts but then I avoid posting through
Google groups if at all possible. Nothing goes missing if you have your
own local copies of subscribed newsgroups and update by NNTP.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[alan]

On 20/10/2012 23:19, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> these are peppered all over the internet (including UKDiy site)

There is no uk.d-i-y site - the Usenet doesn't work that way.

I subscribe to the uk.d-i-y group on a news server provided by my ISP.
When I post my ISP puts a copy on its own server and then propagates a
copy to other servers maintained by other ISPs or other organisations.
These in turn proaogate the post onwards, potentially to every news
server in the world that wishes to carry the news group.
The posts in the group don't exist in any one place at any one time.

Each of the servers that carry the group will have different policy with
regards retention times. Some servers may delete articles after a few
days, some after a few months and some after a few years. UK.d-i-y being
a text only group often means that the servers can keep copies for a
significant amount of time, unlike groups that allow pictures and eat up
expensive storage space. However, an individual has the option of
downloading posts to their own computer where the length of time an
article is keep is a configuration option in the software configured by
the user.

At one time it was possible to find posts 10+ years old the news
archives but since Google took them over and F***** them up this is now
an unreliable.

Web interfaces such as "banter" just leach the information from the
Usenet to add advertising.

[swimm...@yahoo.co.uk]

I must admit I haven't fully grasped the idea of Usenet...
Anyhow...what was happening recently was that in certain cases when replying to some messages I was being notified that my email was going public and had an option to go ahead or cancel.
Now, if I see the same dialogue box I'll check the message to be replied and simply delete the line showing my email address - that way the dialogue box doesn't appear anymore and no discussions are being "stolen" (even temporarily).
I don't think this is the right solution but so far so good...
(when I find the time I'll find out a bit more on how the Usenet works).

[alan]

On 21/10/2012 17:16, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> I must admit I haven't fully grasped the idea of Usenet...
> Anyhow...what was happening recently was that in certain cases when replying to some messages I was being notified that my email was going public and had an option to go ahead or cancel.
> Now, if I see the same dialogue box I'll check the message to be replied and simply delete the line showing my email address - that way the dialogue box doesn't appear anymore and no discussions are being "stolen" (even temporarily).
> I don't think this is the right solution but so far so good...
> (when I find the time I'll find out a bit more on how the Usenet works).
>

The Usenet is not email. In general you do not reply via an email - you
reply to the newsgroup and everyone can see the reply. There may be
instances where you may want to take something to personal email but
this is very rare. In any case, many posters to the usenet do not give a
valid reply address (because of the vast amount of spam it can attracts
) and any email you send stands a good chance of disappearing into thin air.

[hugh]

In message <aegl30...@mid.individual.net>, John Williamson
<johnwil...@btinternet.com> writes

Is there a newsgroups for TB support? I have looked in the past but
never found one.
--
hugh

[polygonum]

I assume that alt.fr.outil.thunderbird doesn't meet your requirements? :-)

--
Rod

[John Rumm]

Plusnet now subcontract their news service to giganews, who are one of
the top providers.

(uk.telecom is there, btw!)

--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

[Andy Burns]

hugh wrote:

> Is there a newsgroups for TB support? I have looked in the past but
> never found one.

mozilla.support.thunderbird

However the group is only carried on the server news.mozilla.org (even
though that is outsourced to giganews).

[John Rumm]

On 20/10/2012 23:19, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> I haven't read all messages but someone mentioned that some
> discussions aren't kept in certain archives... The point is that the
> last discussion was nicked after a couple of days! I can find threads
> I started 5-6 years ago - these are peppered all over the internet
> (including UKDiy site) - but I can't stand the fact that brand new
> discussions are hijacked somewhere else!!

You are fundamentally misunderstanding usenet. Its a distributed system
with multiple severs spread all over the world. That is the way its
supposed to work - you post to one, it is replicated on all the others.

> I don't even know if I can
> reply to my own discussion in DIYbanter or other sites using the same
> account - simply, don't want to give in to this form of
> extortion...I'm familiar with the UKdiy format and I don't see why I
> should enter another page with another format.

DIYbanter is nothing to do with the group beyond the fact that it acts
as a web based front end to scrape content from it.

> Funny, this thread is still running here...I might have found a way -
> just put something like: "DIYBANTER ARE A BUNCH OF SCAMMERS" in my
> signature (surely they aren't dumb enough to take this sort of
> messages on their site).

"They" is a bit of software, you think it cares?

[John Rumm]

On 21/10/2012 17:16, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> I must admit I haven't fully grasped the idea of Usenet...

Have a look at:

http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Newsgroup_access_tips

and for details of how usenet itself works:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet

[Jeremy Nicoll - news posts]

Andy Burns <usenet....@adslpipe.co.uk> wrote:

>mozilla.support.thunderbird
>
>However the group is only carried on the server news.mozilla.org (even
>though that is outsourced to giganews).

Traffic is also visible on a mailling list though. See a list of all the
mozilla mail lists, at: https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo

The TB-specific one can be joined via options at:
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-thunderbird

--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to newsre...@wingsandbeaks.org.uk replacing "aaa" by "284".

[Martin Brown]

On 21/10/2012 17:16, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>

If your email address is swimmydeepo at a well known ISP that sounds
something like an American cowboy shout then it already is very public.

> Now, if I see the same dialogue box I'll check the message to be replied and simply delete the line showing my email address - that way the dialogue box doesn't appear anymore and no discussions are being "stolen" (even temporarily).
> I don't think this is the right solution but so far so good...
> (when I find the time I'll find out a bit more on how the Usenet works).

Download Thunderbird and subscribe directly via AOIE (provided you don't
want to post to uk.rec.gardens - for reasons that are completely
incomprehensible to me that group is blocked for posting from AOIE).

Oh and use a posting identity that is sacrificial for Usenet postings or
one day you will wake up to find 1GB/day of hostile emails arriving in
your inbox. That happened to me in the great Swenfest of 2003.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swen

Even on broadband and deleting on headers GB/day spam rates are
challenging to deal with and we are overdue another such incident.

BTW Google groups now also screws up the line breaks and double spaces
everything quoted which does not endear you to denizens of Usenet.

Defects all left in place as a protest against Google's incompetence.
Their share price deserves to go through the floor.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[swimm...@yahoo.co.uk]

guess what? this very thread disappeared from UKDiy for a while (since this early afternoon) - I googled a bit and found it in another site - this time it wasn't DIYBanter but homeownershub.com...now, I find it again on the right site (where I started it).
Our threads (or those of too relaxed fellas like myself) are just public properties (ok, no damage there) - so public that not even us the "authors" can access them as we wish...

HOMEOWNERSHUB STOLE MY THREAD

let's see which site is next to add to the "name and shame" list...

[Arfa Daily]

<swimm...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:d5e6ab8e-1d4d-483e...@googlegroups.com...

I don't really understand what the problem is here. The 'net by its very
nature is basically an open global public service. The only reason that
usenet has been somewhat 'private' to date, is that the average computer Joe
doesn't even know it exists, or if they do know, haven't a clue how to
access it. In recent years, that has changed by virtue of web-based access
engines such as Google groups and DIY banter. There are many others that
trawl their content from usenet as well. I am very active on an electronics
repair group, and have engaged in many posts regarding Bose equipment
repair, and repair of a particular CD changer mechanism from Sanyo. I get
private emails all the time from all over the world from people who have
tried to research repairing these items using the web, and have turned up my
usenet posts on all sorts of web forums that I've never even heard of, let
alone contributed to.

However, far from having a problem with this, I'm actually quite pleased
that these people have found my posts, and take the trouble to contact me to
either thank me for them being helpful in getting a fix on their equipment,
or to ask for further help and advice. At the end of the day, when I made
the posts to a newsgroup, I placed the material knowingly on something that
is in the public domain, so if it gets found by web-based scrapers, and ends
up elsewhere, then sobeit.

Or am I missing something here ?

Arfa

[Martin Brown]

On 21/10/2012 22:57, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> guess what? this very thread disappeared from UKDiy for a while (since this early afternoon) - I googled a bit and found it in another site - this time it wasn't DIYBanter but homeownershub.com...now, I find it again on the right site (where I started it).
> Our threads (or those of too relaxed fellas like myself) are just public properties (ok, no damage there) - so public that not even us the "authors" can access them as we wish...
>
> HOMEOWNERSHUB STOLE MY THREAD

They haven't *STOLEN* it they have taken a copy of it. Your original
thread is still where you put it. Although you don't seem to have the
first clue where that is and you don't seem to be learning either.

>
> let's see which site is next to add to the "name and shame" list...

I don't think you have yet grasped the idea of how Usenet works.

It is an almost prehistoric system from the dawn of the Internet and
originally intended for text based academic discussions. There are
servers all over the world that shuffle the messages to every corner.
You post to one and eventually it goes everywhere. ISPs don't like it
because it is resource intensive and now a minority interest (ie they
cannot make any money from it).

These days there are also a lot of people like you that have never heard
of anything but the World Wide Web and to cater for that market various
parasitic organisations scrape content from Usenet groups and present it
in a web based interface to generate money for themselves.

Most of us on Usenet dislike this practice, but there is nothing that
can be done about it. Some take their frustration out on people who
innocently post to Usenet via GardenBanter and refer to a "forum".

If you read the following thread you might gain some insight:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!search/garden$20banter$20forum$20rec.$2Fgardening/uk.rec.gardening/f0AyBMlPldk/ohNPdyqOEPwJ


--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[swimm...@yahoo.co.uk]

>
>
>
> I don't really understand what the problem is here. The 'net by its very
>
> nature is basically an open global public service. The only reason that
>
> usenet has been somewhat 'private' to date, is that the average computer Joe
>
> doesn't even know it exists, or if they do know, haven't a clue how to
>
> access it. In recent years, that has changed by virtue of web-based access
>
> engines such as Google groups and DIY banter. There are many others that
>
> trawl their content from usenet as well. I am very active on an electronics
>
> repair group, and have engaged in many posts regarding Bose equipment
>
> repair, and repair of a particular CD changer mechanism from Sanyo. I get
>
> private emails all the time from all over the world from people who have
>
> tried to research repairing these items using the web, and have turned up my
>
> usenet posts on all sorts of web forums that I've never even heard of, let
>
> alone contributed to.
>
>
>
> However, far from having a problem with this, I'm actually quite pleased
>
> that these people have found my posts, and take the trouble to contact me to
>
> either thank me for them being helpful in getting a fix on their equipment,
>
> or to ask for further help and advice. At the end of the day, when I made
>
> the posts to a newsgroup, I placed the material knowingly on something that
>
> is in the public domain, so if it gets found by web-based scrapers, and ends
>
> up elsewhere, then sobeit.
>
>
>
> Or am I missing something here ?
>
>
>
> Arfa

You have missed the main point...I don't mind if my messages are spread all over the web...what bothers me is that I don't find my threads (let alone single messages) where I started them....why is it that I start a discussion using UKDiy then, after a few hours/days the thread disappear from the same site but is found on another site (e.g. DIYBanter or else)...then the same thread reappears mysteriously on UKdiy....it looks I've no control of my own discussions somehow.
Those who say "they haven't stolen your threads" are wrong...or maybe they haven't checked at the right time. I use the same keyword on the UKDiy site(fairly simple as my nickname is quite unique) and a long list of past threads appears - I opt to sort by date (so I get the latest first) and I don't see my latest....so I google to find that missing thread on the web and bingo, I find it, but not on the UKDiy site! (that's really annoying).
Now, since my thread are so public you can try by yourselves and find that out.
As I've already mentioned, I've been using UKDiy for ages and only recently I'm having this problems.

[polygonum]

On 22/10/2012 10:47, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
<>
>
> You have missed the main point...I don't mind if my messages are
> spread all over the web...what bothers me is that I don't find my
> threads (let alone single messages) where I started them....why is it
> that I start a discussion using UKDiy then, after a few hours/days
> the thread disappear from the same site but is found on another site
> (e.g. DIYBanter or else)...then the same thread reappears
> mysteriously on UKdiy....it looks I've no control of my own
> discussions somehow. Those who say "they haven't stolen your threads"
> are wrong...or maybe they haven't checked at the right time. I use
> the same keyword on the UKDiy site(fairly simple as my nickname is
> quite unique) and a long list of past threads appears - I opt to sort
> by date (so I get the latest first) and I don't see my latest....so I
> google to find that missing thread on the web and bingo, I find it,
> but not on the UKDiy site! (that's really annoying). Now, since my
> thread are so public you can try by yourselves and find that out. As
> I've already mentioned, I've been using UKDiy for ages and only
> recently I'm having this problems.
>

You are right - many of us seem to have missed your point. Probably
because we do not know what you mean by "UKDiy site".

This Usenet group is actually called uk.d-i-y. And I cannot readily find
somewhere called UKDiy.

--
Rod

[John]

swimm...@yahoo.co.uk expressed precisely :

Swimmydeepo, you still haven't quite grasped what's going on have you,
so I'll try to explain.

"The Internet" has been around for many years but in the early days it
was all text-based. In 1989, Tim Berners-Lee invented the World Wide
Web (that's the www that you see in front of Internet addresses such as
www.bbc.co.uk) and that gave us a way to use graphics and pictures and
clickable buttons and all sorts of useful things.

To use the World Wide Web, you need something called a "web browser" -
popular browsers include Microsoft's Internet Explorer, Mozilla
Firefox, and Google Chrome for instance.

Now, when you use a web browser to look at, say, www.bbc.co.uk, all the
text, all the pictures, all the content of the website www.bbc.co.uk is
created by, and belongs to, the BBC (I know that that's not quite
correct but for the sake of my simplistic explanation let's just say
that it is) and is held on the BBC's web servers.

The most important thing to remember is that we're talking about the
World Wide WEB and WEB SITES.

USENET is not part of the World Wide WEB and does not use WEBSITES.

Usenet is a different system altogether and runs in parallel with the
web. Usenet (for the purposes of this explanation) is 'old-fashioned'
and text-based, it does not use websites and you cannot read, see or
post any usenet content with a web browser. Instead, you have to use a
'newsgroup reader' or 'news client' such as Mesnews, Microsoft's
Outlook Express, Forte Agent or Mozilla Thunderbird, to name but a few.

Just like a web browser connects to a web server so that you can see,
read and even post to web sites, a news client or newsgroup reader
connects to usenet servers for similar functionality. A usenet server
holds 'newsgroups' that can be seen by news clients/newsgroup readers.

My ISP (BT Internet) provides a usenet server (called
news.btinternet.com) that my newsreader (Mesnews) connects to, and I'm
currently replying to your thread in the uk.d-i-y newsgroup held on
that server.

You, however, are NOT using a usenet server or a news reader. You are
using a web browser and you are looking at a website called
www.diybanter.com. This is considered to be "a bad thing" because the
people behind DIYBanter are copying all the content of the usenet
newsgroup uk.d-i-y, pasting it into their website and claiming it as
their own.

Everything you read on the 'forum' website www.diybanter.com has been
sucked up from the usenet group uk.d-i-y and everything you post into
the forum website www.diybanter.com gets deposited into the usenet
group uk.d-i-y. Websites like diybanter.com are called 'parasitic web
interfaces' to usenet and there are many more of them besides just
diybanter.com, but all are just interfaces or gateways to usenet.

Webservers (again, for this simplistic explanation at least) will hold
their content in one place. For instance, in our example case of the
BBC, the website www.bbc.co.uk will be held on the BBC's webservers in,
say, London, and that's it. If anyone, anywhere in the world, opens up
their web browser and types www.bbc.co.uk into the address bar, they
will be taken to the BBC's webservers in London. Usenet servers
however, work quite differently.

When I've finished this message and hit the "Send" button, it will go
to my ISP's news server at news.btinternet.com, but then it will begin
to propogate to all usenet servers around the world that carry the
group uk.d-i-y - so it could end up on some Outer Mongolian equivalent
of diybanter.com.

My explanation may have some inaccuracies and is simplistic so no flame
wars please folks, I just hope Mr Swimmy now understands ;o)

[swimm...@yahoo.co.uk]

Thanks you all for all your efforts to make me understand all about Usenet, News etc.

My point is very simple - is the point of view from a user of the internet...
This is what I do step by step:
1) I got a diy issue I want to solve so I decide to gather more opinions to make up my mind - yes, let's use UKDiy - now, you are saying this isn't a website...dunno, and it doesn't really matter to me (the user)...I just have a few bookmarks that links me to UKDiy (since I've used it in the past)...now I believe this bookmark bring me to a certain IP number lets' call it 1.2.3.4 (a fake one - obviously) which is associated with UKDiy.
Now, I post my message (after signing in) then I log out and turn off my computer...
Later on, I turn on my computer to check if someone come up with something interesting which might solve my diy problem...I use the same bookmarks which is linked to that same IP address 1.2.3.4 (which is associated to UKdiy) - I don't see my thread on top (clearly some newer threads have been generated which pushed mine downwards) so, I decide to search for my thread using "swimmydeepo", but my latest thread isn't listed. I can see all my thread there but not the latest one - (at this point I have to point out that failing to find my thread using "swimmydeepo" I use other clues...still no sight of my thread).
As I know some of my threads are all over the web, I decide to check if other "sites" have a copy of my thread...so I google and there you are, I find my thread on another "site" (in brackets, as you say it isn't a site)...
Now, I don't know exactly what you mean by "site" - the only issue that bothers me is that now I can see my thread on IP adress 4.3.2.1 (a fake IP for DIYbanter) and not on IP address 1.2.3.4 where it was originally started (and is bookmarked from my computer)...most frustratingly, someone answered my message and it seems I'm being forced to enter my message on IP 4.3.2.1 instead of 1.2.3.4 - I haven't tried but probably I can used both in a similar way (signing-in in the same way without registering), but I don't particularly like that other "site" format nor like the fact that my discussion is now only on 4.3.2.1...and not on 1.2.3.4 anymore (then, I've found out this is only temporarily).
Clearly, IP 4.3.2.1 is gaining from 1.2.3.4 (and wasting my time too). Maybe the 2 IP addresses are linked (as I've understood from your comments about Usenet), but still, me (the user) is having some issue of USABILITY...(I've been posting on UKdiy for more than 10 years by now...this problem has been noticed only in recent months).
I believe some have found a sneaky and parasitic way to increase "clicks" and "bookmarks" on certain IP addresses rather than others...

[sm_jamieson]

On Monday, October 22, 2012 2:03:06 PM UTC+1, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> Thanks you all for all your efforts to make me understand all about Usenet, News etc.
>
>
>
> My point is very simple - is the point of view from a user of the internet...
>
> This is what I do step by step:
>
> 1) I got a diy issue I want to solve so I decide to gather more opinions to make up my mind - yes, let's use UKDiy - now, you are saying this isn't a website...dunno, and it doesn't really matter to me (the user)...I just have a few bookmarks that links me to UKDiy (since I've used it in the past)...now I believe this bookmark bring me to a certain IP number lets' call it 1.2.3.4 (a fake one - obviously) which is associated with UKDiy.
>
> Now, I post my message (after signing in) then I log out and turn off my computer...
>
> Later on, I turn on my computer to check if someone come up with something interesting which might solve my diy problem...I use the same bookmarks which is linked to that same IP address 1.2.3.4 (which is associated to UKdiy) - I don't see my thread on top (clearly some newer threads have been generated which pushed mine downwards) so, I decide to search for my thread using "swimmydeepo", but my latest thread isn't listed. I can see all my thread there but not the latest one - (at this point I have to point out that failing to find my thread using "swimmydeepo" I use other clues...still no sight of my thread).
>
> As I know some of my threads are all over the web, I decide to check if other "sites" have a copy of my thread...so I google and there you are, I find my thread on another "site" (in brackets, as you say it isn't a site)...
>
> Now, I don't know exactly what you mean by "site" - the only issue that bothers me is that now I can see my thread on IP adress 4.3.2.1 (a fake IP for DIYbanter) and not on IP address 1.2.3.4 where it was originally started (and is bookmarked from my computer)

The bookmark link to "UKdiy" on your computer (represented by 1.2.3.4) is a link to where ?
Please post the actual thing that appears in your browser address bar when you click on this link, whether that is an IP address or a URL.
Everyone here (unless they've got bored by now !) is wondering what on earth you mean by "UKdiy".

Simon.

[Martin Brown]

On 22/10/2012 14:03, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> Thanks you all for all your efforts to make me understand all about Usenet, News etc.
>
> My point is very simple - is the point of view from a user of the internet...

Take it up with UKDIY then! It is their broken interface to a working
Usenet system that is giving you this grief. Your choices are simple -
do it properly or live with the limitations of their parasitic feed.

No. All that is happening is that the gateway "site" you have chosen is
unreliable.

You should also be able to see everything you posted on Google Groups
however that doesn't seem to be the case. Google is not indexing a fair
proportion of your posts. Blame UKDIY ofr Google groups for that!

https://groups.google.com/groups/profile?hl=en-GB&enc_user=zd5pXBcAAACRKx1-9gnKiimcDJJ50B5NrgpihaiNRG9UNxXUBjH4rw

Or go to GG and look at your posting profile directly.
They reckon you have only posted four times this year.

The thread is on there but the index doesn't have it listed!

https://groups.google.com/group/uk.d-i-y/browse_thread/thread/6f8d7105b646ce80?hl=en-GB#

So maybe the XXXbanter sites are actually backdoors onto the Google
gropes database ... I find it very hard to understand how both services
should have identical search indexing errors in their databases.

(though xxxBanter might be using defective Google tools)

Although swimmydeepo is clueless there is something pretty weird and
crazy going on here with postings that seem not to exist.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[John]

swimm...@yahoo.co.uk brought next idea :

> Thanks you all for all your efforts to make me understand all about Usenet,
> News etc.
>
> My point is very simple - is the point of view from a user of the internet...
> This is what I do step by step:
> 1) I got a diy issue I want to solve so I decide to gather more opinions to
> make up my mind - yes, let's use UKDiy - now, you are saying this isn't a
> website...dunno, and it doesn't really matter to me (the user)

But that's the whole point - yes, it does matter! As I said, the WEB is
different and parallel to usenet.

...I just have
> a few bookmarks that links me to UKDiy (since I've used it in the past)...now

No, you haven't. Bookmarks only exist in WEB BROWSERS for looking at
the World Wide WEB. You cannot bookmark uk.d-i-y as it is a usenet
newsgroup, not a website.

> I believe this bookmark bring me to a certain IP number lets' call it 1.2.3.4
> (a fake one - obviously) which is associated with UKDiy. Now, I post my
> message (after signing in) then I log out and turn off my computer... Later
> on, I turn on my computer to check if someone come up with something
> interesting which might solve my diy problem...I use the same bookmarks which
> is linked to that same IP address 1.2.3.4 (which is associated to UKdiy) - I
> don't see my thread on top (clearly some newer threads have been generated
> which pushed mine downwards) so, I decide to search for my thread using
> "swimmydeepo", but my latest thread isn't listed. I can see all my thread
> there but not the latest one - (at this point I have to point out that
> failing to find my thread using "swimmydeepo" I use other clues...still no
> sight of my thread). As I know some of my threads are all over the web, I
> decide to check if other "sites" have a copy of my thread...so I google and
> there you are, I find my thread on another "site" (in brackets, as you say it
> isn't a site)... Now, I don't know exactly what you mean by "site" - the only
> issue that bothers me is that now I can see my thread on IP adress 4.3.2.1 (a
> fake IP for DIYbanter) and not on IP address 1.2.3.4

This is due to the nature of parasitic web interfaces or gateways to
usenet. As I said above, this whole thread may end up in Russia or
Outer Mongolia on their regional equivalent of diybanter.com or google
groups.

where it was originally
> started (and is bookmarked from my computer)...most frustratingly, someone
> answered my message and it seems I'm being forced to enter my message on IP
> 4.3.2.1 instead of 1.2.3.4

You may have posted your original question on diybanter.com but it has
been picked up by google groups and someone has replied from there (or
the equivalent).

- I haven't tried but probably I can used both in
> a similar way (signing-in in the same way without registering), but I don't
> particularly like that other "site" format nor like the fact that my
> discussion is now only on 4.3.2.1...and not on 1.2.3.4 anymore (then, I've
> found out this is only temporarily). Clearly, IP 4.3.2.1 is gaining from
> 1.2.3.4 (and wasting my time too). Maybe the 2 IP addresses are linked (as
> I've understood from your comments about Usenet), but still, me (the user) is
> having some issue of USABILITY

Then PLEASE use a proper usenet news reader and stop posting into a
usenet group through a web interface. I can't make it any clearer - the
web sites (diybanter.com, googlegroups.com etc) are NOT uk.d-i-y

[robgraham]

On Oct 20, 2:13 pm, Andy Burns <usenet.aug2...@adslpipe.co.uk> wrote:

> swimmyde...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> > I've started some thread recently and after a few replies I can't find them anymore...tough, one thread reappeared after a few days?!
>

> You need to understand that you're using a web front-end (google groups)
> to a usenet group, you'll get a better experience if you use a usenet
> client, e.g. Agent, Thunderbird, even Outlook Express and talk to the
> group direct ...

>
> > As I've just found out, my latest thread is now listed on DIYbanter (I've never joned that forum) and I wonder why is this happening...
>

> DIYbanter is another web front-end to usenet, it sucks most of its
> content from there, but makes it look like it's a forum

>
> > Surely I've plenty to do than trying to open a new membership somewhere else -
>

> I suggest you get *one* extra account, for a proper news server, which
> will give you tens of thousands of groups, rather than the one account
> per forum approach.
>
> http://wiki.diyfaq.org.uk/index.php?title=Usenet

No just go with Google Groups. I've tried a number of the
alternatives and none of them provide the ease of use of this format -
and the 'new' Google format is just as bad.

Google Groups comes in for some stick but the ability to slide up and
down a thread so that each contribution can be viewed immediately just
does not exist elsewhere that I can find. The ability to have ten
posts open at anyone time and view them with a slider is GG's major
attribute IMO.
Rob

[Jeremy Nicoll - news posts]

swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> 1) I got a diy issue I want to solve so I decide to gather more opinions
> to make up my mind - yes, let's use UKDiy - now, you are saying this isn't
> a website...dunno, and it doesn't really matter to me (the user)...

It DOES matter to you, because the problems you're describing have nothing
to do with usenet, but are caused by the specific website you're using.

> Now, I post my message (after signing in) then I log out and turn off my
> computer...

When you say you "post a message" what you've actually done is send its
content to the web server that's running that website.

The webserver is presumably then posting the content to usenet (if it didn't
do that then other parasitic websites will never be able to scrape it off
any usenet server).

Presumably the webserver also keeps a copy for you to read later. But it
might not do; it might rely on scraping a copy of the publically-distributed
post off a usenet server later.

Whatever it does is no concern of anyone on uk.d-i-y.

> Later on, I turn on my computer to check if someone come up with something
> interesting which might solve my diy problem...I use the same bookmarks
> which is linked to that same IP address 1.2.3.4 (which is associated to
> UKdiy) - I don't see my thread on top (clearly some newer threads have
> been generated which pushed mine downwards) so, I decide to search for my
> thread using "swimmydeepo", but my latest thread isn't listed. I can see
> all my thread there but not the latest one - (at this point I have to
> point out that failing to find my thread using "swimmydeepo" I use other
> clues...still no sight of my thread).

This is a problem you need to take up with the people who run the website.
It has nothing to do with us.

> As I know some of my threads are all over the web, I decide to check if
> other "sites" have a copy of my thread...so I google and there you are, I
> find my thread on another "site" (in brackets, as you say it isn't a
> site)...

No, if you're using the part of google that searches websites then you will
have found a copy of your post that's on a website. Remember that google
doesn't see every website change instantly though.

But all these websites are not usenet.

>Now, I don't know exactly what you mean by "site"

A website - something you access with a browser via a URL like http://...

> Maybe the 2 IP addresses are linked (as I've understood from your comments
> about Usenet),

Any number of websites, that's to say webservers (computers) can grab
content from usenet servers and re-present it via their own look & feel
webpages to anyone.

But the information they are presenting on these sites is not theirs.

> but still, me (the user) is having some issue of USABILITY...(I've been
> posting on UKdiy for more than 10 years by now...this problem has been

So complain to the webmaster of the site you are using.

And, as a matter of interest, where is the thing that you call "UKdiy"?

What URL is showing in your browser?

[Martin Brown]

Google groups is itself screwed though. This thread does not show up in
a search on Google groups at least when I try it from my machine.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[The Natural Philosopher]

swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> Thanks you all for all your efforts to make me understand all about
> Usenet, News etc.
>

<snip irrelevant expostulation about ill understood facts>

Usenet is not a single server based protocol. It is a mesh of peer to
peer servers using multiple communication technologies some of which
existed before the internet was born, to distribute posts to a
multiplicity of servers all of whom carry all the posts - eventually, in
theory.

That web servers can provide a front end top that mesh is a fact, and
they do.

If that side effect is exploited by others and misunderstood by noobs is
simply the way it is.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <ZfidnTSxGp_0rxjN...@bt.com>,

> John <n...@telling.com> wrote:
>
>> The most important thing to remember is that we're talking about the
>> World Wide WEB and WEB SITES.
>>
>> USENET is not part of the World Wide WEB and does not use WEBSITES.
>

> True but both the web and usenet are *applications* that use the
> Internet. So is email, for that matter.

Usenet and email do not have to use the internet.

And in the ordinary course of
> events you'd use different applications on your computer to access those
> applications of the Internet. So, f'rinstance, I might use:
>
> Safari for the web
> MT-NewsWatcher for Usenet
> Apple Mail for email
>
> You might use different applications altogether,, of course.

[Jonathan]

+1

Jonathan

[swimm...@yahoo.co.uk]

Someone pointed out that I should complain where the problem started...that's exactly what I've done....for all my posts/replies I've used a similar link to this one:

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/uk.d-i-y

Some of you have verified that some of my threads sometimes cannot be found (thanks for bothering)...or can be found at certain times (like someone is switching them on/off at will?)...so I guess something is wrong with Google Groups.

This is a link related to UKDiy:
http://www.diyfaq.org.uk/
as far as I know UKdiy existed long before Google Groups (correct me if I'm wrong).

This is a link to this very thread from my PC:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/uk.d-i-y/b41xBbZGzoA

Normally I don't link to certain threads directly (I just use a link I've used from past I land on GoogleGroups-UKDiy.

[The Natural Philosopher]

swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> Someone pointed out that I should complain where the problem started...that's exactly what I've done....for all my posts/replies I've used a similar link to this one:
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/uk.d-i-y
>
> Some of you have verified that some of my threads sometimes cannot be found (thanks for bothering)...or can be found at certain times (like someone is switching them on/off at will?)...so I guess something is wrong with Google Groups.
>
> This is a link related to UKDiy:
> http://www.diyfaq.org.uk/
> as far as I know UKdiy existed long before Google Groups (correct me if I'm wrong).
>

Indeed. Google bought dejanews IIRC.

> This is a link to this very thread from my PC:
> https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/uk.d-i-y/b41xBbZGzoA
>

so?

> Normally I don't link to certain threads directly (I just use a link I've used from past I land on GoogleGroups-UKDiy.

You cant really link to a usenet post directly anyway since it doesn't
have a unique URL.

[John]

swimm...@yahoo.co.uk was thinking very hard :

*stop* *using* *googlegroups,* *diybanter* *or* *any* *of* *the*
*other* *web-based* *offerings* *and* *use* *a* *proper* *usenet*
*newsreader* *FFS!!*

[John Rumm]

On 22/10/2012 10:47, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:

> You have missed the main point...I don't mind if my messages are
> spread all over the web...what bothers me is that I don't find my
> threads (let alone single messages) where I started them....why is it
> that I start a discussion using UKDiy then, after a few hours/days

For clarification would you explain what you mean by UKDiy?

What web site are you looking at?

Do you understand that most of us don't even use a web browser for
reading and writing these messages?

> the thread disappear from the same site but is found on another site
> (e.g. DIYBanter or else)...then the same thread reappears
> mysteriously on UKdiy....it looks I've no control of my own
> discussions somehow. Those who say "they haven't stolen your threads"
> are wrong...

No offence, but I think you are not grasping the mechanism here.

If you post to some web based forum that also interacts with usenet,
then this is pretty much the experience you should expect.

> or maybe they haven't checked at the right time. I use
> the same keyword on the UKDiy site(fairly simple as my nickname is
> quite unique) and a long list of past threads appears - I opt to sort
> by date (so I get the latest first) and I don't see my latest....so I
> google to find that missing thread on the web and bingo, I find it,
> but not on the UKDiy site! (that's really annoying).

But entirely predictable....

You are dealing with a distributed messaging system - it takes a while
for messages to propagate from one system to another.

> Now, since my
> thread are so public you can try by yourselves and find that out. As
> I've already mentioned, I've been using UKDiy for ages and only
> recently I'm having this problems.

Past performance is no prediction of the future and all that...


--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

[John Rumm]

On 22/10/2012 14:37, robgraham wrote:

> Google Groups comes in for some stick but the ability to slide up and
> down a thread so that each contribution can be viewed immediately just
> does not exist elsewhere that I can find.

Sounds like a bit of a faff compared to just hitting n for the next
unread message in the thread.

[Andy Burns]

robgraham wrote:

> just go with Google Groups.

I think you're swimming against the tide ... most people (there are
exceptions) using google groups seem to be either having problems, or
causing problems.

[The Natural Philosopher]

> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
Quod erat demonstrandum....

[alan]

On 21/10/2012 22:57, swimm...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> guess what? this very thread disappeared from UKDiy for a while (since this early afternoon)

Guess what - it didn't! I can still see the 60+ posts to this thread.
--
mailto:news{at}admac(dot}myzen{dot}co{dot}uk

[bert]

In message <aej3nc...@mid.individual.net>, polygonum
<rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> writes
>On 21/10/2012 20:56, hugh wrote:
>> In message <aegl30...@mid.individual.net>, John Williamson
>> <johnwil...@btinternet.com> writes
>>> Nick Odell wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 20 Oct 2012 21:54:28 +0100, Murmansk <""newsgroup\"@mm.st make
>>>> the word newsgroup plural to reply"> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Inspired by this thread I've just had a go at setting up Thunderbird
>>>>> to read newsgroups rather than using Google Groups.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've set it up with Plusnet's news server and I can't find a group
>>>>> called UK.Telecom that I sometimes look at.
>>>>>
>>>>> Presumably some servers are better than others. Is Plusnet's known
>>>>> to be inferior?
>>>> I'm reading and writing to usenet from plusnet and I've just checked.
>>>> All the uk.telecom groups appear to be there. I'm on the
>>>> usenet.plus.net server. I don't know how Thunderbird works (I'm using
>>>> paid-for Agent) but if it is case-sensitive, try searching for
>>>> uk.telecom instead of the capitalised version.
>>>>
>>> In the "Manage Newsgroup Subscriptions" dialogue box, available when
>>> you open an account in the left hand column, just type in however much
>>> of the name you can remember, and it will find all occurrences of that
>>> string in real time. In TB2, it's not case sensitive.
>>>
>> Is there a newsgroups for TB support? I have looked in the past but
>> never found one.
>
>I assume that alt.fr.outil.thunderbird doesn't meet your requirements? :-)
>
It might do now I've found it - I've changed server since I last looked
which might explain why I didn't see it.
--
hugh

[Arfa Daily]

<swimm...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a5166871-5b73-42f9...@googlegroups.com...

> guess what? this very thread disappeared from UKDiy for a while (since

> this early afternoon) - I googled a bit and found it in another site -
> this time it wasn't DIYBanter but homeownershub.com...now, I find it again
> on the right site (where I started it).
> Our threads (or those of too relaxed fellas like myself) are just public
> properties (ok, no damage there) - so public that not even us the
> "authors" can access them as we wish...
>
> HOMEOWNERSHUB STOLE MY THREAD
>
> let's see which site is next to add to the "name and shame" list...
>
>
>

Oh dear ...

Arfa

[Arfa Daily]

<swimm...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:65814624-f145-4594...@googlegroups.com...

Not wishing to be unkind but again, oh dear.

Bang, bang, bang (that's my head on the desk ...)

Arfa

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo <ZfidnTSxGp_0rxjN...@bt.com>, John
<n...@telling.com> escribió:

> I just hope Mr Swimmy now understands ;o)

I very much doubt he's capable of understanding anything.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo <x6WdnYxVH5O11hjN...@bt.com>, John
<n...@telling.com> escribió:

>But that's the whole point - yes, it does matter! As I said, the WEB is
>different and parallel to usenet.

Unfortunately, for many people the Web /is/ the Internet. That thick
twat Gove, our so-called Education Secretary, made this mistake last
week when he said Tim Berners-Lee was the inventor of the Internet.
Sigh.

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo <7edd4016-c014-46a3...@googlegroups.com>,
swimm...@yahoo.co.uk escribió:

>.so I guess something is wrong with Google
>Groups.

Yes, it's broken, as you have been told over and over and over again.

It's Google Groups that is broken, so go and whine at them and leave us
alone.

[bert]

No, the clue is in the "fr"
--
hugh

[bert]

In message <aKWdnQ3Y0qr4xBnN...@brightview.co.uk>, Andy
Burns <usenet....@adslpipe.co.uk> writes

>hugh wrote:
>
>> Is there a newsgroups for TB support? I have looked in the past but
>> never found one.
>

>mozilla.support.thunderbird
>
>However the group is only carried on the server news.mozilla.org (even
>though that is outsourced to giganews).
>
>
>
>
Thanks - I'll look it up.
--
hugh

[bert]

In message <a5166871-5b73-42f9...@googlegroups.com>,
swimm...@yahoo.co.uk writes

>guess what? this very thread disappeared from UKDiy for a while (since
>this early afternoon) - I googled a bit and found it in another site -
>this time it wasn't DIYBanter but homeownershub.com...now, I find it
>again on the right site (where I started it).
>Our threads (or those of too relaxed fellas like myself) are just
>public properties (ok, no damage there) - so public that not even us
>the "authors" can access them as we wish...
>
>HOMEOWNERSHUB STOLE MY THREAD
>
>let's see which site is next to add to the "name and shame" list...
>
>

The perceived problem with these forums which hijack threads is that
ultimately their aim is to kill the feeder news group.
--
hugh

[bert]

In message <mpro.mc9hqu...@wingsandbeaks.org.uk.invalid>, Jeremy
Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp....@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> writes

>Andy Burns <usenet....@adslpipe.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>mozilla.support.thunderbird
>>
>>However the group is only carried on the server news.mozilla.org (even
>>though that is outsourced to giganews).
>

>Traffic is also visible on a mailling list though. See a list of all the
>mozilla mail lists, at: https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo
>
>The TB-specific one can be joined via options at:
>https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-thunderbird
>
Noted - thanks. I'm still using Turnpike and am reluctant to give it up
but it isn't supported anymore and can only be run on W7 64 bit with
much fiddling with XP emulation or by regressing back to V5
--
hugh

[polygonum]

There is also the perceived problem that they are able to benefit by
getting clicks on advertisement-carrying pages due to our voluntary,
co-operative efforts.

Whether any do so is another matter - because I never visit them, I do
not know.

--
Rod

[Nick Odell]

Oh, I dunno. It depends what the other choices are, I suppose. I was
given a piece of complicated gubbins that I presume had been sourced
as a 'grey' import. The instructions were in three languages and the
French was, for me, much easier to understand than either Danish or
Polish.

Nick

[polygonum]

And I did post it knowingly, with a smiley - it was the only ng with
thunderbird in its name carried by news.individual.net.

--
Rod

[bert]

In message <aenaa3...@mid.individual.net>, polygonum
<rmoud...@vrod.co.uk> writes

Neither do I.
--
hugh

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo <NN1g5NCd...@nospam.co.uk>, bert <bert@[127.0.0.1]>
escribió:

>>I assume that alt.fr.outil.thunderbird doesn't meet your requirements? :-)
>>
>No, the clue is in the "fr"

The clue's in the smiley.

[alan]

On 23/10/2012 05:17, Mike Tomlinson wrote:

> Unfortunately, for many people the Web /is/ the Internet. That thick
> twat Gove, our so-called Education Secretary, made this mistake last
> week when he said Tim Berners-Lee was the inventor of the Internet.

Everyone else knows that it was Bill Gates.

[bert]

In message <50870e22$0$1138$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk>, alan
<ju...@admac.myzen.co.uk> writes

>On 23/10/2012 05:17, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, for many people the Web /is/ the Internet. That thick
>> twat Gove, our so-called Education Secretary, made this mistake last
>> week when he said Tim Berners-Lee was the inventor of the Internet.
>
>Everyone else knows that it was Bill Gates.
>
>

Quiz question - Name one original idea ever introduced by MickeSoft.
--
hugh

[John Rumm]

Clippit the paper clip?

[Jeremy Nicoll - news posts]

bert <hugh@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

>Quiz question - Name one original idea ever introduced by MickeSoft.

How about in Windows, the Registry?

How about the SQL-like interface to WMI?

--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to newsre...@wingsandbeaks.org.uk replacing "aaa" by "284".

[polygonum]

On 24/10/2012 23:11, John Rumm wrote:
> On 24/10/2012 21:52, bert wrote:
>> In message <50870e22$0$1138$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk>, alan
>> <ju...@admac.myzen.co.uk> writes
>>> On 23/10/2012 05:17, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, for many people the Web /is/ the Internet. That thick
>>>> twat Gove, our so-called Education Secretary, made this mistake last
>>>> week when he said Tim Berners-Lee was the inventor of the Internet.
>>>
>>> Everyone else knows that it was Bill Gates.
>>>
>>>
>> Quiz question - Name one original idea ever introduced by MickeSoft.
>
> Clippit the paper clip?
>
>

I suppose the challenge didn't say it had to be a good idea.

--
Rod

[bert]

In message <mpro.mcf479...@wingsandbeaks.org.uk.invalid>, Jeremy

Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp....@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> writes

>bert <hugh@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>
>>Quiz question - Name one original idea ever introduced by MickeSoft.
>
>How about in Windows, the Registry?
>

Windows wasn't the first interface of its type.

>How about the SQL-like interface to WMI?
>

That's an application of an idea not an idea in itself.
--
hugh

[John Rumm]

That would make it very much harder! (most of their big products they
bought from someone else initially)

[Jeremy Nicoll - news posts]

bert <bert@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

>In message <mpro.mcf479...@wingsandbeaks.org.uk.invalid>, Jeremy
>Nicoll - news posts <jn.nntp....@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> writes

>>How about in Windows, the Registry?
>>
>Windows wasn't the first interface of its type.

The registry's not "an interface" at all. It's a configuration database.

>>How about the SQL-like interface to WMI?
>>
>That's an application of an idea not an idea in itself.

FFS.

[polygonum]

On 25/10/2012 01:23, John Rumm wrote:
> On 24/10/2012 23:20, polygonum wrote:
>> On 24/10/2012 23:11, John Rumm wrote:
>>> On 24/10/2012 21:52, bert wrote:
>>>> In message <50870e22$0$1138$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk>, alan
>>>> <ju...@admac.myzen.co.uk> writes
>>>>> On 23/10/2012 05:17, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately, for many people the Web /is/ the Internet. That thick
>>>>>> twat Gove, our so-called Education Secretary, made this mistake last
>>>>>> week when he said Tim Berners-Lee was the inventor of the Internet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Everyone else knows that it was Bill Gates.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Quiz question - Name one original idea ever introduced by MickeSoft.
>>>
>>> Clippit the paper clip?
>>>
>>>
>> I suppose the challenge didn't say it had to be a good idea.
>
> That would make it very much harder! (most of their big products they
> bought from someone else initially)
>
>

Too true.

And I am most definitely NOT going to respond "Bob".

--
Rod

[Andy Burns]

Huge wrote:

> Jeremy Nicoll <jn.nntp....@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> wrote:

>
>> bert <hugh@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>>
>>> Name one original idea ever introduced by MickeSoft.
>>

>> How about the SQL-like interface to WMI?
>

> SQL wasn't MS's idea and WMI sounds like an extension to SNMP to me.

WMI is MS's implementation of the CIM and WBEM parts of DMTF, I've never
used any other implementations, but it looks like the SQLish query
language is part of the spec, don't know whether MS brought that to the
table or one of the other DMTF members. Yes, you can view it as doing
similar things to SNMP.

> In MS's defence (shock, horror), there's very little that's absolutely
> new in computing - most things are built on the back of other people's
> ideas.

Doesn't stop every man and his dog trying to patent their combination of
building blocks.

[Nick Odell]

On 25 Oct 2012 09:31:20 GMT, Huge <Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

>Troo. That and standing up in press conferences and product launches and
>pontificating about "innovation" when it's no such thing. TBH, I've
>not seen anything paradigm-shifting since I worked with Xerox PARC in the
>early 80's.

As a mere consumer and bystander my impression is that the last two
real innovations were parallel processing and the 32-bit
microprocessor and that everything we have now still stems from those.
Am I right? Are today's multi-core processors not just banks of 32-bit
technology, harnessed together? (Genuine question from the easily
dumbfounded)

Nick

[Martin Brown]

On 25/10/2012 10:43, Nick Odell wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2012 09:31:20 GMT, Huge <Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Troo. That and standing up in press conferences and product launches and
>> pontificating about "innovation" when it's no such thing. TBH, I've
>> not seen anything paradigm-shifting since I worked with Xerox PARC in the
>> early 80's.

I think the advent of cheap laser printers was a major paradigm shift.
The same is also true of inkjets - I still have a single small print
done on a prototype using a chinagraph clay coated paper somewhere.

> As a mere consumer and bystander my impression is that the last two
> real innovations were parallel processing and the 32-bit

These days they are mostly 64bit native processors and the OS has just
about caught up but not all the applications/drivers. 64bit isn't a
massive leap forward like the step up from 16bit was. 2^32 is already a
big enough number that most consumers won't notice the difference.

One place where it makes a big difference is magic bitboards for chess
engines which play on an 8x8 = 64 squares board. Few other applications
benefit to the same extent but you can address insane amounts of memory
and shuffle it about faster thanks to advances there.

> microprocessor and that everything we have now still stems from those.
> Am I right? Are today's multi-core processors not just banks of 32-bit
> technology, harnessed together? (Genuine question from the easily
> dumbfounded)

A rough guide is that there are true multi-cores and hyperthreading
(which is virtual/pretend multicore). The former can have real benefits
for problems amenable to parallel processing the latter can sometimes
(IME often) choke on data path bandwidth - again improved in 64bit kit.

They are sort of stuck with 3-4GHz clock speeds now. The days when every
generation was 1.5x faster clock speeds are long gone. And the benefits
of multi-CPU don't scale all that well after about 4 even for algorithms
that are optimised for parallelism.

A special case are dedicated 3D graphics cards where the job of
rendering in realtime can be divided up across many cores.

Solid state disks are the latest big system improvement at least if you
have to handle large amounts of data quickly. Prices are falling too as
they become mainstream.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Nick Odell]

Thanks, Huge & Martin.
Nick

[John Rumm]

On 25/10/2012 10:59, Huge wrote:

> First implemented by Burroughs in ~1970.
>
>> and the 32-bit
>> microprocessor
>
> That's not really an innovation. We were just waiting for the engineering
> to catch up with the desire. The earliest 32 bit microprocessor that I
> can find is the AMD 32000 in 1988, but I'm certain there are earlier ones...

68020 was '84 ish, and the 68K itself even earlier, although that was
only really 32 bit on the inside,

>> and that everything we have now still stems from those.
>> Am I right? Are today's multi-core processors not just banks of 32-bit
>> technology, harnessed together?
>

> In effect, yes.

or banks of 64 bit cores with 32 bit emulation.

[Steve Firth]

Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

[snip]

> These days they are mostly 64bit native processors and the OS has just
> about caught up but not all the applications/drivers.

Only if you are talking about BillyGates ShiteWare(tm). The 64 bit OS,
drivers and applications that I use have been 64 bit native for errm years.

> 64bit isn't a massive leap forward like the step up from 16bit was. 2^32
> is already a big enough number that most consumers won't notice the difference.

Video conversion and filtering and crypto are both noticeably faster on the
same OS run as 64bit compared with 32bit.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

[Martin Brown]

On 25/10/2012 12:34, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <7pqdnYYeUv2zgRTN...@brightview.co.uk>,

> John Rumm <see.my.s...@nowhere.null> wrote:
>
>> On 25/10/2012 10:59, Huge wrote:
>
>> >> and the 32-bit microprocessor
>> >
>> > That's not really an innovation. We were just waiting for the
>> engineering
>> > to catch up with the desire. The earliest 32 bit microprocessor that I
>> > can find is the AMD 32000 in 1988, but I'm certain there are earlier
>> ones...
>>
>> 68020 was '84 ish, and the 68K itself even earlier, although that was
>> only really 32 bit on the inside,
>

> I attended a presentations (by the companies concerned) on the 68000,
> 8086, and Z8000 in 1979.

The CPU from that era I was most impressed by for realtime work were the
TI9900 and later 99000. They were astonishingly fast at context
switching since all 16 working registers including the program counter
were in ram!

This could also be a serious disadvantage if the CPU register pointer
ever found itself in ROM! There was always a dead man's handle/watchdog
timer - which became progressively more complex as the kit found ways to
die but keep on pumping the "I'm OK flag".

We didn't realise how good they were until we tried to do the same thing
on a 68k later.

I did some early work on Z8000 too including the ultimately doomed
Ollivetti M20. I regret not saving the Captain Zilog comics.

http://www.kranenborg.org/z8000/
>
> The 68000 (and I have one wired in a board about 12" to the left of my
> left hand) is a proper 32-bit processor with 32-bit address registers -
> you can do a 32-bit add in one instruction, f'rinstance. As it happens,
> only 24 of the address bits are brought out to external pins, but all 32
> bits are involved when an address calculation is done.
>
> In 1979, 2^24 of memory (i.e. 16Mbytes) was Huge - oh, sorry *huge* -
> anyway.

68k was pretty good but in some ways TI9900 was better.

Humble 8bit 6502 still wins the prize for triggering affordable mass
market consumer interest in home computing and games.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Alan Braggins]

In article <589989843372853232.101392%steve%-mallo...@news.eternal-september.org>, Steve Firth wrote:
>Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>[snip]
>
>> These days they are mostly 64bit native processors and the OS has just
>> about caught up but not all the applications/drivers.
>
>Only if you are talking about BillyGates ShiteWare(tm). The 64 bit OS,
>drivers and applications that I use have been 64 bit native for errm years.

There have been 64-bit versions of Windows for over 10 years. There might
be legacy applications and drivers that haven't caught up yet, but I'd be
surprised if there's much mainstream that hasn't in cases where it matters.

[Jeremy Nicoll - news posts]

Huge <Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:

>On 2012-10-24, Jeremy Nicoll - news posts

<jn.nntp....@wingsandbeaks.org.uk> wrote:
>> bert <hugh@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:
>>
>>>Quiz question - Name one original idea ever introduced by MickeSoft.
>>
>> How about in Windows, the Registry?
>>
>> How about the SQL-like interface to WMI?
>

>SQL wasn't MS's idea and WMI sounds like an extension to SNMP to me.

I wasn't suggesting that SQL was an MS idea. SNMP I know little about but
had thought that it was a network thing.

If I use a WMI query to extract info about, say, threads & processes running
on my own computer it's hard to see how that could be related to anything
networky. I do see that there's a network capability if I want to ask the
same question about activity on other machines.

[Jules Richardson]

On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 09:59:14 +0000, Huge wrote:
>> and the 32-bit
>> microprocessor
>
> That's not really an innovation. We were just waiting for the
> engineering to catch up with the desire. The earliest 32 bit
> microprocessor that I can find is the AMD 32000 in 1988, but I'm certain
> there are earlier ones...

I'm not familiar with the AMD part... but there was the Natsemi 32016 (or
16032, depending on which you want to call it) circa 1979, which - like
the m68k - was 32 bit internals with a 16 bit external data bus. The
32032 was all 32 bit, but IIRC that didn't arrive until circa 1984.

cheers

Jules

[bert]

In message <aesgri...@mid.individual.net>, Huge
<Hu...@nowhere.much.invalid> writes

>On 2012-10-25, Nick Odell <gurzhfvp...@ntlworld.com.invalid> wrote:

>First implemented by Burroughs in ~1970.
>

>> and the 32-bit
>> microprocessor
>
>That's not really an innovation. We were just waiting for the engineering
>to catch up with the desire. The earliest 32 bit microprocessor that I
>can find is the AMD 32000 in 1988, but I'm certain there are earlier ones...
>

>> and that everything we have now still stems from those.
>> Am I right? Are today's multi-core processors not just banks of 32-bit
>> technology, harnessed together?
>

>In effect, yes.
>
I don't think Mickiesoft have ever claimed to be a hardware development
company.
The shortage of suggestions reaffirms my original point.
The only thing I can think of myself was the introduction of the
directory structure into MS-Dos when they copied CP/M
--
hugh

[bert]

In message <HLWdnbSpHsvyGxXN...@brightview.co.uk>, John
Rumm <see.my.s...@nowhere.null> writes

>On 24/10/2012 23:20, polygonum wrote:
>> On 24/10/2012 23:11, John Rumm wrote:
>>> On 24/10/2012 21:52, bert wrote:
>>>> In message <50870e22$0$1138$5b6a...@news.zen.co.uk>, alan
>>>> <ju...@admac.myzen.co.uk> writes
>>>>> On 23/10/2012 05:17, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately, for many people the Web /is/ the Internet. That thick
>>>>>> twat Gove, our so-called Education Secretary, made this mistake last
>>>>>> week when he said Tim Berners-Lee was the inventor of the Internet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Everyone else knows that it was Bill Gates.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Quiz question - Name one original idea ever introduced by MickeSoft.
>>>
>>> Clippit the paper clip?
>>>
>>>
>> I suppose the challenge didn't say it had to be a good idea.
>
>That would make it very much harder! (most of their big products they
>bought from someone else initially)
>
>

Bought/bullied into selling/plagiarised are words which spring to mind.
--
hugh

[John Rumm]

On 25/10/2012 12:34, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <7pqdnYYeUv2zgRTN...@brightview.co.uk>,
> John Rumm <see.my.s...@nowhere.null> wrote:
>

>> On 25/10/2012 10:59, Huge wrote:
>
>> >> and the 32-bit microprocessor
>> >
>> > That's not really an innovation. We were just waiting for the
>> engineering
>> > to catch up with the desire. The earliest 32 bit microprocessor that I
>> > can find is the AMD 32000 in 1988, but I'm certain there are earlier
>> ones...
>>
>> 68020 was '84 ish, and the 68K itself even earlier, although that was
>> only really 32 bit on the inside,
>

> I attended a presentations (by the companies concerned) on the 68000,
> 8086, and Z8000 in 1979.
>

> The 68000 (and I have one wired in a board about 12" to the left of my
> left hand) is a proper 32-bit processor with 32-bit address registers -
> you can do a 32-bit add in one instruction, f'rinstance. As it happens,
> only 24 of the address bits are brought out to external pins, but all 32
> bits are involved when an address calculation is done.

I was just guarding about pedants - tis what I meant by 32 bit on the
inside...

(which you could even apply to the 68008 is you want)

[John Rumm]

Never tried any of the TI chips TBH. But 68K is lovely and orthogonal
after x86 ;-)

> Humble 8bit 6502 still wins the prize for triggering affordable mass
> market consumer interest in home computing and games.

Yup... the peripherals for anything wider was going to be too expensive
for low end kit at that stage.