 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Engineering - Lighting Forum » Fading Usenet Newsgroups - the next step... |
|
Page 1 of 5 Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Thomas Paterson... |
 Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:28 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear All,
These groups have been great over the past ten or twelve years for me
- I've stayed in touch with friends, learned a huge amount from you
all and, I hope, contributed what little I can. Thank you to all.
I am finding it increasingly difficult to find time for the groups
when most of the times I look, there is nothing. I fear that we are
witnessing the death-rattle of the terminally... well, I don't think
they have a great deal of life left. My suggestion is to switch both
rec.arts.theatre.stagecraft and sci.engr.lighting over onto
linkedin.com. I'm finding its groups to be vibrant and growing, and
largely spam free (we'll see how long that lasts!). I also like that
it gives you access to people's broader professional backgrounds, so
it helps you find specific people as well as a forum. Maybe some
anonymity is lost, but not a huge amount in reality as you don't have
to give anyone access to your information.
Is there anyone who would like to comment on this idea? Come on out
of the woodwork, lurkers!
Thomas Paterson - RATS SEL junkie. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Christopher Jahn... |
| Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 3:43 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Thomas Paterson <t_p_paterson at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote in
news:cf705737-4d54-4f67-83d6-f0e5413d4e25 at (no spam) z4g2000prh.googlegroups
..com:
[quote:e8c27b6bb3]Dear All,
These groups have been great over the past ten or twelve years
for me - I've stayed in touch with friends, learned a huge
amount from you all and, I hope, contributed what little I
can. Thank you to all.
I am finding it increasingly difficult to find time for the
groups when most of the times I look, there is nothing. I
fear that we are witnessing the death-rattle of the
terminally... well, I don't think they have a great deal of
life left. My suggestion is to switch both
rec.arts.theatre.stagecraft and sci.engr.lighting over onto
linkedin.com. I'm finding its groups to be vibrant and
growing, and largely spam free (we'll see how long that
lasts!). I also like that it gives you access to people's
broader professional backgrounds, so it helps you find
specific people as well as a forum. Maybe some anonymity is
lost, but not a huge amount in reality as you don't have to
give anyone access to your information.
Is there anyone who would like to comment on this idea? Come
on out of the woodwork, lurkers!
Thomas Paterson - RATS SEL junkie.
[/quote:e8c27b6bb3]
I find all the web-based forums to be too primitive; not the
content, but the actual interface. I belong to several, but I
find them harder to use than this tired ol' usenet forum.
--
} Christopher Jahn
{ http://soflatheatre.blogspot.com/
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Richard Crowley... |
| Posted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 9:02 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Thomas Paterson wrote:
[quote:05f06c8b41]These groups have been great over the past ten or twelve years for me
- I've stayed in touch with friends, learned a huge amount from you
all and, I hope, contributed what little I can. Thank you to all.
I am finding it increasingly difficult to find time for the groups
when most of the times I look, there is nothing. I fear that we are
witnessing the death-rattle of the terminally... well, I don't think
they have a great deal of life left.
[/quote:05f06c8b41]
Predictably, you are reading this newsgroup on Google Groups.
Please remember that "Google Groups" IS NOT USENET.
The problem is not Usenet newsgroups. Thousands of them are
thriving quite nicely today just as they have for decades.
Please DO NOT judge what Usenet looks like from your POV
through the dirty little "Google Groups" keyhole. You are seeing
not only a kludge user interface, but Google Groups itself is now
the number one source of spam on Usenet.
[quote:05f06c8b41]My suggestion is to switch both
rec.arts.theatre.stagecraft and sci.engr.lighting over onto
linkedin.com.
[/quote:05f06c8b41]
No web-based forum holds a candle to real Usenet. If you only
know Usenet through a web-based interface like Google Groups,
then you don't really know Usenet. All web-based forums are
dramatically inferior to Usenet, and Google Groups is far and
away Worst of Breed.
Likely many of us also use web-based forums for certain
specialty topics, particularly forums that are chartered for the
discussion of certain hardware and or software, etc. But the
Usenet newsgroups continue to be orders of magnitude faster
and more efficient than any web-based forum I have seen in
20 years. Yes, including LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo
Groups, and most certainly Google Groups.
[quote:05f06c8b41]Is there anyone who would like to comment on this idea?
[/quote:05f06c8b41]
Web-based forums are HORRID. I avoid them unless absolutely
necessary. If you have never used a real Usenet newsreader client
and a proper Usenet NNTP server, then you are in no position to
judge what is happening to this or any other Usenet newsgroup.
I was just checking two Yahoo Groups I read regularly. It took
me TWICE as long just to review the action on those TWO groups
than it did for me to review the TEN usenet newsgrops (including
this one) that I read regularly.
Everyone who comes here complaining about newsgroups is
practically guaranteed to be using the horrible Google Groups
user interface. Please try the REAL Usenet before complaining
about Usenet. You are not necessarily seeing what is really
happening on Usenet if you have only the POV from Google.
Note also that because of Google's horrible reputation of being
the source of most spam today, many real Usenet users filter
out everything from Google Groups (and some even filter out
everyone who is using a gmail address). |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Andrew Gabriel... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 1:37 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In article <cf705737-4d54-4f67-83d6-f0e5413d4e25 at (no spam) z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
Thomas Paterson <t_p_paterson at (no spam) hotmail.com> writes:
[quote:86456b983e]Dear All,
These groups have been great over the past ten or twelve years for me
- I've stayed in touch with friends, learned a huge amount from you
all and, I hope, contributed what little I can. Thank you to all.
I am finding it increasingly difficult to find time for the groups
when most of the times I look, there is nothing. I fear that we are
witnessing the death-rattle of the terminally... well, I don't think
they have a great deal of life left. My suggestion is to switch both
rec.arts.theatre.stagecraft and sci.engr.lighting over onto
linkedin.com. I'm finding its groups to be vibrant and growing, and
[/quote:86456b983e]
Sorry, but I won't be switching to a web-based forum.
Wastes too much of my time.
Perhaps you need a better newsreader?
Mine only draws my attention to this group when there's
new material in it.
--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Duncan Wood... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 2:10 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 04:02:49 +0100, Richard Crowley <rcrowley at (no spam) xp7rt.net>
wrote:
[quote:e9523cb604]Thomas Paterson wrote:
These groups have been great over the past ten or twelve years for me
- I've stayed in touch with friends, learned a huge amount from you
all and, I hope, contributed what little I can. Thank you to all.
I am finding it increasingly difficult to find time for the groups
when most of the times I look, there is nothing. I fear that we are
witnessing the death-rattle of the terminally... well, I don't think
they have a great deal of life left.
Predictably, you are reading this newsgroup on Google Groups.
Please remember that "Google Groups" IS NOT USENET.
The problem is not Usenet newsgroups. Thousands of them are
thriving quite nicely today just as they have for decades.
Please DO NOT judge what Usenet looks like from your POV
through the dirty little "Google Groups" keyhole. You are seeing
not only a kludge user interface, but Google Groups itself is now
the number one source of spam on Usenet.
My suggestion is to switch both
rec.arts.theatre.stagecraft and sci.engr.lighting over onto
linkedin.com.
No web-based forum holds a candle to real Usenet. If you only
know Usenet through a web-based interface like Google Groups,
then you don't really know Usenet. All web-based forums are
dramatically inferior to Usenet, and Google Groups is far and
away Worst of Breed.
Likely many of us also use web-based forums for certain
specialty topics, particularly forums that are chartered for the
discussion of certain hardware and or software, etc. But the
Usenet newsgroups continue to be orders of magnitude faster
and more efficient than any web-based forum I have seen in
20 years. Yes, including LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo
Groups, and most certainly Google Groups.
Is there anyone who would like to comment on this idea?
Web-based forums are HORRID. I avoid them unless absolutely
necessary. If you have never used a real Usenet newsreader client
and a proper Usenet NNTP server, then you are in no position to
judge what is happening to this or any other Usenet newsgroup.
I was just checking two Yahoo Groups I read regularly. It took
me TWICE as long just to review the action on those TWO groups
than it did for me to review the TEN usenet newsgrops (including
this one) that I read regularly.
Everyone who comes here complaining about newsgroups is
practically guaranteed to be using the horrible Google Groups
user interface. Please try the REAL Usenet before complaining
about Usenet. You are not necessarily seeing what is really
happening on Usenet if you have only the POV from Google.
Note also that because of Google's horrible reputation of being
the source of most spam today, many real Usenet users filter
out everything from Google Groups (and some even filter out
everyone who is using a gmail address).
[/quote:e9523cb604]
None of which alters the fact that this newsgroup whether accessed from
googlr groups or by nntp has almost no traffic compared with any of the
web forums. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Atlantic Illumination Entertainment Lighting... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 2:42 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Christopher Jahn wrote:
[quote:2e7bc28f2b]Thomas Paterson <t_p_paterson at (no spam) hotmail.com> wrote:
I am finding it increasingly difficult to find time for the
groups when most of the times I look, there is nothing. I
fear that we are witnessing the death-rattle of the
terminally... well, I don't think they have a great deal of
life left. My suggestion is to switch over to
linkedin.com.
(Snip)
Thomas Paterson
I find all the web-based forums to be too primitive;
not the content, but the actual interface.
[/quote:2e7bc28f2b]
*** I'll say.
[quote:2e7bc28f2b]I belong to several, but I find them harder to use than this tired ol'
usenet forum.
--
Christopher Jahn
[/quote:2e7bc28f2b]
*** I agree. I hate dealing with on-line forms and the layout of forum
threading. A browser is not a newsreader.
Richard Bonner
http://AIEL.chebucto.biz |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Atlantic Illumination Entertainment Lighting... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 2:47 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Richard Crowley wrote:
[quote:6af40a862a]Thomas Paterson wrote:
I am finding it increasingly difficult to find time for the groups
when most of the times I look, there is nothing. I fear that we are
witnessing the death-rattle of the terminally... well, I don't think
they have a great deal of life left.
Predictably, you are reading this newsgroup on Google Groups.
Please remember that "Google Groups" IS NOT USENET.
[/quote:6af40a862a]
*** Yup.
[quote:6af40a862a]The problem is not Usenet newsgroups. Thousands of them are
thriving quite nicely today just as they have for decades.
[/quote:6af40a862a]
*** I belong to several dozen and many of them are indeed thriving.
[quote:6af40a862a]No web-based forum holds a candle to real Usenet. If you only
know Usenet through a web-based interface like Google Groups,
then you don't really know Usenet. All web-based forums are
dramatically inferior to Usenet, and Google Groups is far and
away Worst of Breed.
[/quote:6af40a862a]
*** If only one could use a newsreader to access those forums,
with *all* the features intact, that would go a long way to
improving the Internet forum interface.
[quote:6af40a862a]Web-based forums are HORRID. I avoid them unless absolutely
necessary. If you have never used a real Usenet newsreader client
and a proper Usenet NNTP server, then you are in no position to
judge what is happening to this or any other Usenet newsgroup.
[/quote:6af40a862a]
*** I agree.
[quote:6af40a862a]I was just checking two Yahoo Groups I read regularly. It took
me TWICE as long just to review the action on those TWO groups
than it did for me to review the TEN usenet newsgrops (including
this one) that I read regularly.
(Snip)[/quote:6af40a862a]
*** Yup.
Richard Bonner
http://AIEL.chebucto.biz |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Atlantic Illumination Entertainment Lighting... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 2:52 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Duncan Wood wrote:
[quote:ac9cf0a3a5]None of which alters the fact that this newsgroup whether accessed from
googlr groups or by nntp has almost no traffic compared with any of the
web forums.
[/quote:ac9cf0a3a5]
*** Then we should advertise it more. My experience is that fewer
persons today even know what Usenet is. )-:
To that end, I shall put links to both groups on to our "Backstage
Pass" section along with a suggestion to use a newsreader for best access.
http://AIEL.chebucto.biz/BackStag.html
Richard Bonner
http://AIEL.chebucto.biz |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Atlantic Illumination Entertainment Lighting... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 2:55 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Andrew Gabriel wrote:
[quote:57811fd13c] Thomas Paterson <t_p_paterson at (no spam) hotmail.com> writes:
My suggestion is to switch both rec.arts.theatre.stagecraft and
sci.engr.lighting over to linkedin.com.
Sorry, but I won't be switching to a web-based forum.
Wastes too much of my time.
[/quote:57811fd13c]
*** Does it ever!
Also for myself, the frustration of using a browser to read "news"
turns to anger. Being angry all the time when posting does not make for
good posts, nor does it make for good health.
[quote:57811fd13c]Perhaps you need a better newsreader?
Mine only draws my attention to this group when there's
new material in it.
--
Andrew Gabriel
[/quote:57811fd13c]
*** As there is for this discussion. )-:
Richard Bonner
http://AIEL.chebucto.biz |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Thomas Paterson... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 3:38 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Sep 20, 10:02 pm, "Richard Crowley" <rcrow... at (no spam) xp7rt.net> wrote:
[quote:3c44f293f4]Thomas Paterson wrote:
Predictably, you are reading this newsgroup on Google Groups.
Please remember that "Google Groups" IS NOT USENET.
The problem is not Usenet newsgroups. Thousands of them are
thriving quite nicely today just as they have for decades.
Please DO NOT judge what Usenet looks like from your POV
through the dirty little "Google Groups" keyhole. You are seeing
not only a kludge user interface, but Google Groups itself is now
the number one source of spam on Usenet.
[/quote:3c44f293f4]
When you've finished patronizing me, perhaps we can have a real
discussion?
I've been using Usenet for over twelve years, I've posted actively to
this group for most of that time. Yes, right now I'm using Google
Groups - why? Well, I'm based in Mexico where ISPs don't provide nntp
servers as part of their service, and from where much NNTP traffic is
blocked when using 3rd party services. (Yes, Mexico is a source of
spam, but I am not).
Were you reading RATS when we were doing 150 posts a day, only 50 of
which were by FW and all of the rest made interesting points?
My point had little to do with Usenet in general, in fact, I can't
speak for anything broader than these two newsgroups and dipping into
other groups when contextual. My point is basically that these
specific, once-vibrant groups aren't, and I proposed a solution to
putting them somewhere where a huge number of lighting professionals
are now represented (about 25% of IALD are active through LinkedIn,
for example). So you don't like web interfaces - fine - valid point.
Now, let's talk about how we revive the RATS and SEL communities, or
where the appropriate place to read is.
Thanks to Richard B for a productive solution - I'll check it out, it
could well be an appropriate move for RATS. I wonder about SEL though
- that needs a less showbiz forum, perhaps.
Thomas Paterson
http://www.luxpopuli.com |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Boxman... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:42 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Strictly speaking from the standpoint of SEL, I would agree that it
has dropped off significantly over time and traffic is now nearly non
existent. It has been very useful to me in the past, but not so much
anymore. I don't know of any other usenet forums that cover this
topic either so it would be nice to see something started somewhere
else.
Linkedin would be fine with me. The only problem I see with linkedin
is that the amount of groups on a particular topic seems to propogate
quickly and create a lot of noise. For example if you are interested
in solid state lighting, I think there are at least 13 or 14 groups by
my last count that address exactly that topic and there is a lot of
overlap without any value add from having that many groups. Not sure
how it would impact a group geared towards the engineering aspect of
lighting, hopefully that would remain somewhat unique and draw the
right kind of traffic. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Dominic Hargreaves... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 10:50 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
In rec.arts.theatre.stagecraft Richard Crowley <rcrowley at (no spam) xp7rt.net> wrote:
[quote:0527d200a2]I was just checking two Yahoo Groups I read regularly. It took
me TWICE as long just to review the action on those TWO groups
than it did for me to review the TEN usenet newsgrops (including
this one) that I read regularly.
[/quote:0527d200a2]
Point of order: Yahoo Groups are available as mailing lists, which
armed with a suitable mail filtering setup are as close to newsgroups
as makes no difference :)
(Hi, btw. Very occasional dabbler in theatre teah lurking here for a
while).
Dominic.
--
Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/
PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Richard Crowley... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 11:53 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Thomas Paterson" wrote ...
[quote:959d7f3bd8]Were you reading RATS when we were doing 150 posts a day, only
50 of which were by FW and all of the rest made interesting points?
[/quote:959d7f3bd8]
No, I wasn't. But I *currently* read several Usenet newsgroups
with that kind of traffic. I follow about 10 other groups besides
this one. That would be impractical with any web-based discussion
mechanism.
[quote:959d7f3bd8]My point had little to do with Usenet in general, in fact, I can't speak
for anything broader than these two newsgroups and dipping into
other groups when contextual. My point is basically that these
specific, once-vibrant groups aren't, and I proposed a solution to
putting them somewhere where a huge number of lighting professionals
are now represented (about 25% of IALD are active through LinkedIn,
for example). So you don't like web interfaces - fine - valid point.
Now, let's talk about how we revive the RATS and SEL communities, or
where the appropriate place to read is.
[/quote:959d7f3bd8]
That is completely a function of word of mouth in the r.a.t.s community.
There are currently other newsgroups that have quite vibrant traffic
on Usenet averaging likely > 100 messages per day.
But you may be right that there is a whole new generation of internet
users who don't know Usenet, or know it only as "Google Groups".
If all they know is "Google Groups" then it is no wonder that things
like LinkedIn, et.al. appear more attractive.
OTOH, I have been signed up with LinkedIn for over a year and
didn't even know that they had anything like discussion fora........
I just spent ~5 minutes looking around the main page and if they
DO have anything like discussion groups, they are pretty well
disguised. I didn't find any. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Stuart Wheaton... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:24 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Christopher Jahn wrote:
[quote:9028704a73]"Richard Crowley" <rcrowley at (no spam) xp7rt.net> wrote in
news:xZqdnS5NN5WJcyvXnZ2dnUVZ_u2dnZ2d at (no spam) posted.pcez:
I am finding it increasingly difficult to find time for the
groups when most of the times I look, there is nothing. I
fear that we are witnessing the death-rattle of the
terminally... well, I don't think they have a great deal of
life left.
Predictably, you are reading this newsgroup on Google Groups.
Please remember that "Google Groups" IS NOT USENET.
The fact that traffic on this group is in fact WAY DOWN has
nothing to do with Thomas' accessing it via Google Groups. The
fact is that the group has slowed down.
But when I've had questions, people still pop up to answer them.
[/quote:9028704a73]
Recently a few major portals cut Usenet entirely because of a few .bin
groups...
Sadly, or fortunately, FW has gone over to the stagecraft mailing list
and done his level best to destroy that...
I still read here, but weeks go by with little to talk about.
Stuart RATS since 1996 |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Richard Crowley... |
| Posted: Mon Sep 21, 2009 6:50 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Dominic Hargreaves"wrote...
[quote:bd4489be29]Richard Crowley wrote:
I was just checking two Yahoo Groups I read regularly. It took
me TWICE as long just to review the action on those TWO groups
than it did for me to review the TEN usenet newsgrops (including
this one) that I read regularly.
Point of order: Yahoo Groups are available as mailing lists,
[/quote:bd4489be29]
Yeech. Email lists are even worse than web-based forums. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Dec 05, 2009 10:32 pm
|
|