Re: Why the complaints about Google Usenet ? [telecom]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

hancock4@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
A number of Usenet posters have made very nasty complaints about
Google Groups, a service where many people, including me, post to
Usenet. I don't understand why. Could someone explain it?

One says Google uses "non standard" displays and adds extraneous
characters. I haven't seen any such thing, nor has anyone reproduced
what they saw.

Another says Google allows abuse. I'm not sure what that means.
Google does limit posts per person, so you can't go out and flood the
Internet.

Let's be honest: when it comes to Usenet posting, some people get
extremely emotional about it, as if any deviation from some supposed
'standard' (which may not even exist) will End Life As We Know It.
This could be a technical standard, definition of newsgroup scope
(always contentious), or what constitutes a fact vs. opinion.

Consequently, I take such complaints with a grain of salt. However,
the number of complainers seem to be growing.


Also, there's been talk about loss of Usenet access by some ISPs.
Pulling such acess seems very odd to me since many people still use
Usenet. I wonder if there's confusion because certain risque groups
are being pulled, but only those groups.


Any comments appreciated. [public replies, please]

NNTP server access is a lot more convenient. Using your own news server
program, for instance, you pull from an nntp server at an interval.
That's more private -- obscurity -- and you have a database of articles.
It's easier to navigate, and potential for more flexible search. And
there's no question about interface changes, or annoying, distracting
advertisements on the page.

I'm not sure it costs ISPs too much either. As for storage, they can
easily adjust down retention.

At the very least, USENET is a nice ISP extra that should be good for
their business. And in terms of connecting people with other people,
free speech, and so on, it's just the American thing to do -- even if
they want to charge a nominal extra fee to do it, but of course, any
additional cost could be easily folded into the regular account charge.

One contention was association with pornography. I find this dubious,
but I'll leave that, at that.

Bryan



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (MingW32) - GPGrelay v0.94

iD8DBQFIcucr8CguVNZ0FHARAljiAJ4ldJ0vLs9yw+60iQWBpLr4L54mbgCeNuft
Sg5TW3HOCtFgnB8u+8XZkbA=
=O10z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



The address for email submissions has changed: if you submit posts via email, send them to
telecomdigestmoderator atsign telecom-digest.org.
If you submit posts via a newsreader or Google groups, you don't need to change anything.

.