Post by George Dance Post by Meat Plow Post by Peter J Ross Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet Post by George Dance Post by Cujo DeSockpuppet Post by George Dance
PJ's had that explained to him before. Google truncates Message
ID's, for the same reason that it truncates e-mail addy's.
You can still get them off Google, Dunce.
Why would anyone want to, Cuckoo? As I just explained, the Web has
things called 'hypertext links' one can use instead.
Which don't always work.
One day, Dunce may learn the difference between NNTP (which is what you
and I do) and HTTP
That'll be real handy if the Web turns out to be a fad that's gone in a
week, won't it?
LOL! So one day soon the demarcation between HTTP and NNTP will vanish
One day you'll be able to read and post to Usenet using HTML, and
"NNTP" will no longer be of any use. One day in March, 1995, to be
Well, it isn't any secret that Usenet is in decline, as this
interesting post discusses:
Newsgroups: alt.battlestar-galactica, news.groups,
rec.arts.comics.dc.universe, rec.arts.sf.tv, rec.arts.tv
From: "KalElFan" <***@yanospamhoo.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2010 13:28:16 -0500
Local: Tues, Dec 28 2010 1:28 pm
Subject: META+ The Root Cause of Usenet's Decline
So there I was thinking about what to title this thread and where to
post it, eh? Later in the thread I'll post the draft title I had
the one I've settled on: "META+ The Root Cause of Usenet's Decline".
For now I'll just offer up my #1 answer du jour:
"The vast, vast majority of discussion board participants
will not be interested in a pitch that says "here's a bucket
and a strainer, now filter the cesspool yourself."
It's often called "signal to noise" but that doesn't really properly
convey the "worst of the worst" Usenet content that can scroll
across a user's screen. Well run servers may have automatic
filters for binaries and spam, but some of what gets through
can still be vile stuff that would quite arguably be actionable
or illegal, or violate hate speech laws in Canada and other
jurisdictions for example. The average person just doesn't
want to get near it.
There are other problems too, but those are either moot
points or symptoms, more than they are the root causes.
For example "very few know about Usenet, especially not in
recent years" is a fair statement. But promoting something
with a cesspool barrier and then a big signal to noise problem
is largely a waste of time. Relatively few who tried it would
So why have some of us been here for fifteen or more years?
Basically because we've become immune to the stench. We
ignore it or filter it, or if it annoys us enough we flame it but
mainly it becomes an ugly piece of the furniture.
Because we can get over the cesspool barrier, we get to the
several benefits or selling points that Usenet otherwise would
have for many people out there. The better posters can be
quite knowledgeable. There's a good core base of longtimers
who haven't all died off yet. I think it has the web forums beat
in terms of their clunky interfaces, vs. a good nntp newsreader.
Windows Live Mail, easily accesible and free for download last
I looked, works fine for the average user. There are all kinds of
groups on every topic you can think of that can be searched on
a newsgroup list.
Another big benefit is the existing Usenet infrastructure and
the "passive conduit" that it represents. It allows the main
or underlying foundation to be unmoderated. That's the
traditional version of Usenet that many of its existing users
value, and new users would like the ability to "turn off the
moderator" whenever they'd like too! So that can be a big
selling point as well, because too much moderation on the
web boards and in some groups can be a problem.
That underlying foundation is a great platform to build an
optional filtering system on, one that inherently encourages
self-moderation because the worst of the worst posters or
posts will know they won't get by those optional filters.
Those posters or posts will tend to go to the unmoderated
version directly, saving any moderation work at all. The
moderated process can also provide a hi-mod and lo-mod
version, and other tools so users who choose moderation
can tailor it to their preferences.
So the root cause can be addressed, but it would require a
Plan and lots of volunteers to assist with developing and
implementing it. Group by group, it would require not just
one but a team of moderators. Pick a topic though, any tv
show for example with a reasonable online base, and you
could probably find literally dozens and probably 100+
volunteer moderators of that topic across the web on the
various boards. It's fragmented, but it illustrates the large
potential pool if Usenet can be restored as "The" place for
worldwide discussion of a topic.
Even the Cylons had a Plan, right? And they didn't need
volunteers they just made them. :-) Usenet, it needs a
Plan and it needs lots of different volunteers to carry it
out. It needs a bunch of Ones (admins), Twos (techies)
Threes (programmers), Fours (moderators), Fives (PR folk),
a Six [this space reserved for Tricia Helfer :-)] a really
massive number of Sevens (nameless, faceless cyber-
entities called Users), and an Eight [this space reserved
for Grace Park :-)].
WILL DOCKERY & FRIENDS - Little Homeless Clown - A movie by