Phil Carmody wrote:
And usenet would be left without inane googlegroups posters. It
sounds only positive currently.

In the days of DejaNews, the archive was OK and I don't remember
reading DejaNews spam, though maybe there was some; I don't know.

I'm not sure if there would be a legal challenge that would be based in
some law/laws; but Google has money to burn, so that seems
pretty useless.

The spammers are misbehaving, according to Usenet rules. I see
a double standard at Google with newsgroups/GoogleGroups:
Google Groups about Google Maps, Gmail, Google Earth
or AdWords is probably better checked (at least I did see that
about one popular G Group : Maps, Earth, ...).

I was thinking that with lots of stats in hand, some person
maybe not as expert as David Ritz, but still quite expert
could follow the steps Ritz did and eventually call for
a UDP. The UDP threat against @Home was
mentioned in CNet at least. Maybe a call for UDP
with stats in hand, after faxing Google about the problem
or using another means would be a good move if
the geek-crowd knew it and was upset. There could be
better moves.

Anyway, I now block all cookies.

In the days of DejaNews, the archive was OK and I don't remember
reading DejaNews spam, though maybe there was some; I don't know.

There was no posting via dejanews. It acted just as an archive.
And a very usable one at that. Then it went all web 1.0 (beta)
renamed itself, and made its search interface pants. (However,
the CGI backend was the same, so people like Jeromy Nixon put
up alternative front ends which were vastly better than Deja's.)
And of course, only google could make the interface worse than
Deja.com's. And amazingly, they managed to subsequently make it
even worse with their 'beta' (pronounced /shit/) version.

I had no web access until August of 1996, so maybe dejanews started

quite well, charging people from $10 - $40 a month for Usenet access -

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, WindsorFox<SS> wrote:
William Elliot wrote:
On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Gary L. Burnore wrote:

Perhaps there is a market for a USENET providor that blocks spam, and
the simplist way is to block posts with a googlegroups message ID.
We're about to roll out a server that does exactly that to see what
happens. We'll let our users choose which to connect to.

When will that be happeing?
What news server will it be?
I think the world blinks everytime I sit up and say this. There are
already lots of servers that block goosle spam.
http://www.glorb.com/usenet.php is one of them.

What's the cost?

----

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 01:12:27 -0700, William Elliot
marsh@hevanet.remove.com> wrote:

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, WindsorFox<SS> wrote:

Dave Balderstone wrote:
In article <fub3ms$2od$1@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>, Gary L.
Burnore <gburnore@databasix.com> wrote:

At $62 a year, why would I consider your service over individual.net at
less than 25% of that, and my own client-side filtering?
Because we're DataBasix. Why else?
That answers that. Cheers.
Not sure where you got that price from either, I'm seeing $51 a
year. Hell why pay a German college, Aioe is free.

How good of a news server is it?

Probably fine, but there's no way that a free usenet server could
handle the full volume of Google Groups users, if they were all to
switch over.

Not to mention the learning curve of installing and configuring and
using a newsreader.

quasi

quasi <quasi@null.set> wrote:
[...]

Not to mention the learning curve of installing and configuring and
using a newsreader.

For the *majority* of users - including you - there *is* no such
thing! [1]

Just plug this in their/your *webbrowser*, i.e. Internet Explorer, and
away they/you go:

Marc Bissonnette a écrit :
quite well, charging people from $10 - $40 a month for Usenet access
-

For Usenet access, or for accessing pirated binaries and porn ?

Come on, guys, one more time, all these "unlimited usenet access for
$XX/month" are *not* targetting text groups. The purpose is to access
alt.binaries, and their unlimited sources of movies/music/warez.

The big issus here is that we consider all news servers as having the
same goals:

- text usenet archives (we do not care about usenet groups but we
index them and make some money with advertising)
- binary-centric servers (we do not care *at all* about text groups
and they are only provided not to admit that we only focus on
pirac^Wbinaries) - text-only servers, which consist of only very small
sites, with near-to-zero influence

Now you are suggesting that the three categories could work together ?
What a louzy joke, if you excuse my french.

Suggestion - now it's newgrouped, XP all rants to alt.google-sucks

All that being said, I'm sure you are quite correct in that the majority of
people paying for unlimited usenet access probably are using it for
binaries.

marsh@hevanet.remove.com> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, WindsorFox<SS> wrote:
Dave Balderstone wrote:
Burnore <gburnore@databasix.com> wrote:

At $62 a year, why would I consider your service over individual.net at
less than 25% of that, and my own client-side filtering?
Because we're DataBasix. Why else?

That answers that. Cheers.

Not sure where you got that price from either, I'm seeing $51 a
year. Hell why pay a German college, Aioe is free.

Web address?

Why did you not try google?

Because I use Yahoo.

Hint: The search terms

aioe usenet

should suffice.

Phil Carmody wrote:
Suggestion - now it's newgrouped, XP all rants to alt.google-sucks

It's not very well propagated at 34.7% and it seems to be missing on
some popular servers:
http://groupsearch.aacity.net/cgi-bin/prop.pl?action=search&group=alt.google-sucks&sorting=group

What I'd suggest doing is put a .sig line as an "ad" when you're
posting on topic in a group. Something like "alt.google-sucks has now
been newgrouped. If your news server isn't carrying it, ask your
system administrator to add it to the the active file."

I think Adam can phrase it better, though.

Frank Slootweg wrote:
quasi <quasi@null.set> wrote:
[...]

Not to mention the learning curve of installing and configuring and
using a newsreader.

For the *majority* of users - including you - there *is* no such
thing! [1]

Just plug this in their/your *webbrowser*, i.e. Internet Explorer, and
away they/you go:


Holy crap that was different. Put that in FF and TB opens and adds
the server. I didn't know it would do that.

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008, quasi wrote:
marsh@hevanet.remove.com> wrote:
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, WindsorFox<SS> wrote:
Dave Balderstone wrote:
Burnore <gburnore@databasix.com> wrote:

At $62 a year, why would I consider your service over individual.net at
less than 25% of that, and my own client-side filtering?
Because we're DataBasix. Why else?
That answers that. Cheers.
Not sure where you got that price from either, I'm seeing $51 a
year. Hell why pay a German college, Aioe is free.

Web address?
Why did you not try google?

Because I use Yahoo.

"WindsorFox<SS>" <darkshado666@gmail.com> wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
quasi <quasi@null.set> wrote:
[...]

Not to mention the learning curve of installing and configuring and
using a newsreader.
For the *majority* of users - including you - there *is* no such
thing! [1]

Just plug this in their/your *webbrowser*, i.e. Internet Explorer, and
away they/you go:

Holy crap that was different. Put that in FF and TB opens and adds
the server. I didn't know it would do that.

Thanks for the feedback. Does it (TB) also do all the other things I
mentioned? (I.e. "the News Account is configured, the latest articles
from the group are downloaded, and the subject lines etc. are presented
to the user.")

This is why no one takes Databasix seriously.