Ok, I set up Aioe.org at least for at home.

I might get this up at work too, we'll see.

--
Tom

Tom F. wrote:
> In fact, you have some good points, however I just am not convinced
> that GG is the evil entity you make it out to be. I switch between at
> least 3 computers per day, and I only administrate one of them. GG
> lets me keep up with things where ever I am. That is a convenience.
> It's a lot better than ssh to my home box.

No, it isn't.

>> > GG serves legitimate users and serves a need -- or it wouldn't exist.
>>
>> That does not mean that it is a good idea and should be used. The same
>> can be said for Windows, for the RIAA, for patent trolls and many other
>> things.
>
> Hard to argue when you put it that way, but Google is not MS or RIAA.

There are other things in existence that are used and still a stupid
idea. Bottled still water is another one.

>> Yes, it is. It sucks big time and instead of only bothering the people
>> using it, it also bothers the rest of Usenet. For one, they make it hard
>> to understand that Usenet thread is a tree structure and not a line.
>> This influence how people react to postings.
> I'm looking at the tree structure right now. You should check GG out
> before you presume too much.

The standard is not a tree. Many people will keep using that.

>> The second thing is that it makes it diffcult for the user to quote
>> correctly and that user often does not even understand what correct
>> quoting is.
> That's a user issue. I've been quoting correctly, haven't I? GG is not
> really standing in my way.

I was hoping you would say that. The fact that Google makes it hard is a
Google issue, not a user issue.

> Yes, I would lose out. But wouldn't you also lose out if you filter
> out all that traffic. Some of it may be worthwhile, you never know.

I have been looking at Google postings long enough to know I am not
loosing out. People who have something to contribute will use the proper
tools.

> It has nothing to do with not being" willing." In fact, I love Knode
> and would like nothing better than to use it exclusively. We can't
> always get what we want.

Yes you can. I have been in situations where I was unable to use Usenet.
You know what I did? I did not went to Google or any other HTML based
thing. I waited till I was able to use the correct tool.

>> Because of you defending it, it means more people will start using it,
>> kiling Usenet slowly and turning it into webforums.
> I know what you are saying here, but we can't turn back the clock.

That is no reason to use the wrong tool.

> True Usenet used to be a very small community of cool folks. Now it's
> a much larger community of mostly cool folks, some jerks and a lot of
> spam. That is a somewhat a loss, but I don't think we can put the
> entire blame on GG.

Who is blaming GG entirely? Not me. They are just helping. Does that
make it any less bad> No. Look what they did to DejaNews.com

> At some point, the masses would have turned on to
> it and that's not all bad. AOL users were the first. Nothing to do
> with GG there.

AOL users did not destroy Usenet, nor were they even close to killing
it. Outlook Express came a lot closer.

>>
>> If you like webforums, please visit those. There are some fantastic ones
>> about openSUSE, or so I have been told.
> They are not bad, actually, but I still think it is silly to try to
> kick me out just because I am using GG. I don't think I'm polluting
> the atmosphere all that much with my posts.

I do not want to kick anybody out. I want people to use the proper
tools, even if that means waiting several hours before you can post.

houghi
--
This was written under the influence of the following:
| Artist : Art of Noise
| Song : Slip Of The Tongue
| Album : In Visible Silence

Tom F. wrote:
> Ok, I set up Aioe.org at least for at home.
>
> I might get this up at work too, we'll see.

The servers I use:
root@penne : grep ^server /etc/leafnode/config|awk '{print $NF}'
news.cnntp.org
news.motzarella.org
news.albasani.net
news.sunsite.dk
newszilla.xs4all.nl
news.xs4all.nl
news.gmane.org
fb1.euro.net
news.readfreenews.net
nntp.aioe.org
news.x-privat.org
news.news4us.nl

Some are free, others are not.

houghi
--
This was written under the influence of the following:
| Artist : Art of Noise
| Song : Peter Gunn
| Album : In Visible Silence

Tom F. wrote:

> On Apr 8, 2:25 pm, houghi wrote:
>> > You are the one having conniptions over a news reader.
>>
>> Google Groups is not a news reader.
> Haha. OK, you got me on that one.
>
>> > The details of one particular situation doesn't really matter.
>>
>> Yes, it does. Always a pity if people do not want to go into those
>> details. Sure sounds as if you agree with me and just are afraid to
>> admit it.
> In fact, you have some good points, however I just am not convinced
> that GG is the evil entity you make it out to be. I switch between at
> least 3 computers per day, and I only administrate one of them. GG
> lets me keep up with things where ever I am. That is a convenience.
> It's a lot better than ssh to my home box.
>

I don't agree with that. In fact I carry the NoMachine clients on a USB
memory stick just so I can use a real newsreader and email reader. That
way I have a copy of all my posts and can keep track of what I have already
read.

>
> Tom

--
Later,
Darrell Stec darstec@neo.rr.com

Webpage Sorcery
http://webpagesorcery.com
We Put the Magic in Your Webpages

houghi wrote:
>
> The servers I use:
> root@penne : grep ^server /etc/leafnode/config|awk '{print $NF}'
That's a good list Houghi, thanks.

It's working well at home, but I still can't get a newsreader running from
behind my firewall at work, even with port 80 to Aioe! Can't figure it
out.
--
Tom

Tom F. wrote:
> On Apr 8, 12:58 pm, houghi wrote:
>
>> > However, now you are going overboard.
>>
>> Overboard? I am downtoning it.
>
> You are kidding, right? You are the one having conniptions over a news
> reader.
>
> The details of one particular situation doesn't really matter. GG
> serves legitimate users and serves a need -- or it wouldn't exist.
>
> In any case, I find it serves me well, so I use it and I like it. Is
> that so bad?

He's not the only one who has abandoned hope for GG. I don't know anyone
personally (except over a network) that hasn't simply plonked everything
from GG. Life is too short to wade through crap. I see responses, so
I'm slightly less militant than many, but I don't see initial posts from
GG. Lately it's been interesting that over half the spam in usenet is
comming from GG and has picked up quite a bit lately. Killing GG
immediately improves spam and reduces the noise level considerably. From
an informal survey of computer users at the local university a GG post
is seen by something less than half of usenet. I'm talking computer
types here, I can't find a business type that has ever heard of usenet.

In Tom F:

[Snip...]

> behind my firewall at work, even with port 80 to Aioe

Probably nothing to do with port 80; that's HTTP (not NNTP) by default. It
seems more to me like allowing NNTP on your company's proxy servers. Since
it works at home, it should work by default at work (unless it needs proxy
or firewall tweaking at work).

Corporates are sometimes reluctant to provide NNTP on their intranets. But
in reality, promiscuous browsing and email are IMO generally a MUCH larger
security risk than Usenet. Most clued IT staff understand this.

FWIW: I worked at a large US DOD firm and never had any problems on Usenet
at work; it was allowed on proxy servers from gitgo (with email, etc.).

Justification was business: computer/software newsgroups in particular.

(I'd check your IT staff and see if they have even heard of Usenet/NNTP)

--
Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
Kids jumping ship? Looking to hire an old-school type? Email me.

On Apr 9, 10:01 pm, stan wrote:
> He's not the only one who has abandoned hope for GG. I don't know anyone
> personally (except over a network) that hasn't simply plonked everything
> from GG.

I understand what all you guys are saying. I do have sympathy for the
argument. But on the other hand, Web portals don't kill Usenet, people
kill Usenet.

I'm in a situation where it is very convenient for me to use GG. It is
silly for me to jump through hoops just to be with the in crowd,
though I did try. If I could come up with a better solution, I would,
but I'm currently out of realistic options.


Life is too short to wade through crap. I see responses, so
> I'm slightly less militant than many, but I don't see initial posts from
> GG. Lately it's been interesting that over half the spam in usenet is
> comming from GG and has picked up quite a bit lately. Killing GG
> immediately improves spam and reduces the noise level considerably.

I have no doubt you are right about that, and hopefully the situation
will improve in the future. This has been a trend for a long time.
When did the September that never ends start? 1993?

From
> an informal survey of computer users at the local university a GG post
> is seen by something less than half of usenet. I'm talking computer
> types here,

Well, it's too bad less than half of Usenet will see this post.

> I can't find a business type that has ever heard of usenet.

LOL, yup.

The bottom line is, I'm still the same guy making the same posts,
whether I use NNTP or the HTTP. So in my very small way, I'm improving
the signal to noise ratio (I hope). Certainly, I have no evil
intentions, yet I've been told I should wait several hours before I
post so I may do it properly. That's just not realistic. See a post,
respond to a post. That's how the normal mind works. I have to hold my
response in my mind for hours because I'm not at my home computer?
Seems a little silly to me.

So, I'll post with the "proper" tool when I can, and GG when I must.
It's a pity some of you will never see those posts, but so be it.

Tom

Harold Stevens wrote:
> Corporates are sometimes reluctant to provide NNTP on their intranets. But
> in reality, promiscuous browsing and email are IMO generally a MUCH larger
> security risk than Usenet. Most clued IT staff understand this.

I have seen the most idiotic 'security' in different companies. The real
secure ones were never the most strict ones. I have seen people blocking
hotmail. Yahoo the next day. Google mauil the next ...

> (I'd check your IT staff and see if they have even heard of Usenet/NNTP)

Either they will think you are an idiot, because you disturb them with
such an obvious question or they think you are more knowledgeble then
they are and thus a security risk.
Both will result in no access.

houghi
--
This was written under the influence of the following:
| Artist : Jeff Wayne
| Song : Dark Autumn Dub
| Album : War Of The Worlds

On Apr 10, 3:54 am, houghi wrote:
> So because of YOUR convinience many others need to suffer and endure the
> GG postings.

My posts and myself are not causing anyone to suffer, I hope. I'm not
causing anyone to endure anything -- except my prose. My posts would,
except for the header, be identical, regardless of how I posted them.

> You are spreading the idea that using Google is a good idea

Come on, Houghi, I'm not "promoting" anything. I am using (and not
misusing) a tool. That's it man. I never particularly intended to
defend GG, I was just defending myself as I felt under attack.

> and although
> you yourself might be dfoing things in a good way, you also attract
> others to use it and they will do it in a bad way.

Thanks for saying I'm doing things in a good way. I'm happy to get at
least that from you.

> What is this "must" you talk about? Is somebody holding a gun to your
> head? Is it an urge you can not stop? What is it that you "must" post
> something?

Now who's trifling with semantics? OK, when I feel like posting, I
will. I don't really think this is particularly antisocial behavior.

> > When did the September that never ends start? 1993?
>
> It has ended. See the article on Wikipedia (too lazy to look it up
> myself)

Don't know what you are talking about here. That's not my
understanding of the concept and the Wikipedia article doesn't seem to
support your view, unless I'm missing something.

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

Tom

houghi wrote:
> Tom F. wrote:


>> The bottom line is, I'm still the same guy making the same posts,
>> whether I use NNTP or the HTTP.

I guess the point is my time is too valuable to wade through the crap
looking for a nugget. The fact that a few might post something valuable
just isn't enough to make it a good choice to allow exposure.

FWIW, there are/were some over in sci.electromagnetics (I think)
considering a boycott of Google. As a result they started posting online
alternatives for both searching and posting mail/news. I don't honestly
remember any of the alternatives and I certainly can't endorse any since
I've never used them, but apparently the number of alternatives is
greater than 0. Again this is just FYI, you seem content with your
solution and as noted I'm not militant on the subject and I'm very
comfortable with my solution also.

Oh and for the record, I'm pretty sure that if everyone who ever even
lurked at sci.electromagnetics stopped using google entirely that
abslutely nobody would notice. I'm not in favor of any futile boycott. I
don't really care what others think of me, but for some reason I feel
the need to distance myself from some of the usenuts.

>> So in my very small way, I'm improving
>> the signal to noise ratio (I hope).

The phrase spitting in the ocean comes to mind.

>> Certainly, I have no evil
>> intentions, yet I've been told I should wait several hours before I
>> post so I may do it properly. That's just not realistic. See a post,
>> respond to a post. That's how the normal mind works. I have to hold my
>> response in my mind for hours because I'm not at my home computer?
>> Seems a little silly to me.
>
> You are spreading the idea that using Google is a good idea and although
> you yourself might be dfoing things in a good way, you also attract
> others to use it and they will do it in a bad way.

I'm not sure I'd go that far. Tom, have you maybe sent Google a
complaint about the quantity and persistance of SPAM originating from
Google? My thinking is that maybe comming from someone with a Google
account you might get visibility. They appear to send most complaints to
/dev/nul. If you explained that as a regular user who plays nice and
could potentially reflect well on Google's service you are being lumped
in with those who are putting Google in a bad light. I've never had an
account at Google but I've forwared spam to them with no response. I've
never known anyone with an account to send them a complaint.
>
>> So, I'll post with the "proper" tool when I can, and GG when I must.
>> It's a pity some of you will never see those posts, but so be it.
>
> What is this "must" you talk about? Is somebody holding a gun to your
> head? Is it an urge you can not stop? What is it that you "must" post
> something?

Sounds like there must be a tag line in there somewhere

On Apr 16, 1:07 am, stan wrote:
> I guess the point is my time is too valuable to wade through the crap
> looking for a nugget. The fact that a few might post something valuable
> just isn't enough to make it a good choice to allow exposure.

I do understand this point.

> The phrase spitting in the ocean comes to mind.
Go ahead, burst my bubble.

> I'm not sure I'd go that far. Tom, have you maybe sent Google a
> complaint about the quantity and persistance of SPAM originating from
> Google?

Yes, in fact. I report spam on an almost daily basis with the tools
provided. I don't think they respond, however they do track such
reports and take action as far as possible.

From a recent official Goole blog:
Q: Can a user expect to receive feedback for a spam report?
A: This is a common request, and we know that our users might like
verification of the reported URLs or simple confirmation that the spam
report had been taken care of. Given the choice how to spend our time,
we have decided to invest our efforts into taking action on spam
reports and improving our algorithms to be more robust. But we are
open to consider how to scale communication with our users going
forward.

Anyway, thanks for the well reasoned response Stan. I think we are in
agreement.
Tom