Re: Newsgroup back!

StarFur...@xxxxxxx wrote:
On Aug 16, 8:09 pm, Amy Guskin <aisl...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yeah, but you've been insisting all through this thread that you have
confirmations from Google that your message has been "submitted" to this
newsgroup.

Excuse me--I would be happy to post the confirmation message
again, as it makes quite clear that that is in fact where it has been
submitted according to their system, yes.

On Aug 17, 8:38 pm, Matt Ion <soundy...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
That means exactly nothing. "The system" may only refer to Google's
NNTP server. It may or may not mean that for a moderated group, it's
even gone to Google's SMTP server. It very likely DOES NOT mean that
it's been sent successfully to Jay's SMTP server.

Well, Gee--I guess it means absolutely nothing then, even
though Goole Groups is telling me that it's been sent tothe moderators
of this group for review. I wonder why it would do that --perhaps to
throw me off, eh? Yes, of course--now I get it --Google Groups has NO
IDEA where it's forwarding posted messages to despite what it's
informing the poster of.
And again, this has NOTHING to do with whether or not it's
actually been received at Jay's and/or Cheryl's end. That's another
matter entirely, but hey--by all means try to misconstrue what I've
been saying deliberately for your own nefarious purpose. It does not
however mean that I have been unclear, lacked an understanding, or
stated something that I never supposedly stated, regardless of how you
or Amy try to frame it.

I just posted a reply to this message from Google Groups... all it does
is show me a little yellow box saying "Your post was successful." That
doesn't mean anything - all it means is that the web interface has
successfully sent it to the NNTP server. Nothing else has come in to my
gmail.com inbox, no "confirmation" of any sort.

Who said anything about anything going to an Inbox? The
confirmation message appears immediately on the very next Page you end
up at after clicking Send.
And once again, the "confirmation" doesn't necessarily mean
anything other than that the post was registered with Google Groups as
having been sent along. Whether or not it actually ends up at its
intended destination is another matter entirely -- but we are talking
about a success-to-failure ratio here, meaning that the vast majority
of the messages posted end up going to their intended destination, and
that the system therefore knows where to send them.

Capisce?

Good Lord.

Sorry, but your argument holds NO water.

It holds all the water in the world. You're just trying to
make it sound as though I don't know what I'm talking about when I
sure as hell do.

Google Groups' "confirmation"
message means nothing in the context of moderated groups. It doesn't
prove that the message went anywhere except onto their NNTP server.

I can't speak to this latest incident of posted messages that
have thus far failed to show up. I can however state that Yes, over a
period of YEARS, there has indeed been that 'curious' pattern, and
someone in my place might well wonder if the posts were being
deliberately "lost" as a means of discouraging further posting by me
to this particular Group. And if there has been a pattern through the
years which at the very least suggests that as a distinct possibility
--posts that get "lost in the ether," never to turn up-- that it might
well lead someone in my place to wonder who else may have had the same
experience here over the years.

Lots of us have had posts get "lost in the ether". It's happened to me
on non-moderated groups, where it should just be posted publicly within
seconds. It's happened to me on this group, where it has to go through
a slightly longer process.

IT HAPPENS. GET OVER IT. THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY, AGENT MULDER.

Jay doesn't want to be bothered arguing with me, and frankly,
I really don't care to be bothered arguing with him either for that
matter. Aside from which, he has other more important matters to
attend to at the moment no doubt. <<
Why do you say arguing?

Because in the past that's what my collective experiences with
Jay have involved and amounted to: arguing. He sees things one way and
I see them another, and unfortunately he's in a position to censor
people --at will basically, be it right or wrong.

He sees things based on technical knowledge of how this thing works.
You see things based on some sort of perceived persecution.

My experiences, sir, are mine and not yours --therefore, don't
take it upon yourself to speak for me and what I may have experienced
in the past when you have no firsthand knowledge of it evidently.
Speak for yourself, not for me.

Jay is correct. Amy is correct. You are wrong.

My Ass --I have been quite clear in just what I've been
saying, and if either of you have either chosen to deliberately
misconstrue what I've said, or it was just an honest mistake, it
doesn't change the contents of the posts leading up to this point on
my part.

Move along.

I see you have a fixation on this thread despite it having had
absolutely nothing to do with you from the outset, therefore, why
don't you "Move along"? No one asked you to involve yourself in it in
the first place. So by all means, get lost.

*And incidentally, this is basically the message I posted last night,
but which for some reason never appeared.*

Well it appeared this time... so there goes your theory that your posts
are being singled out.

I questioned one post from last night which didn't appear --
count them: _one_, so I suggest you go back and have a look at where
this conversation actually originated if your mind needs refreshing.



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Switch Newsgroup Server
    ... I currently connect to the Earthlink newsgroup server to view MS public ... The posts that I have read are in standard font and the posts ... the articles and overview databases in each different news server. ... have a different number in the database for a different NNTP server. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6_outlookexpress)
  • Re: Searching for answers
    ... you might want to increase the retention period ... that are no longer on that NNTP server. ... Rather than visit microsoft.* newsgroups using Giganews, ... I usually do a Google Groups search to find old newsgroup posts. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
  • Re: Simple question to those who know - rest of us ??
    ... Jolly Roger wrote: ... I mean that signs of confirmation of anything are ten a penny. ... MT-Newswatcher's spam filtering. ... I made sure to train it, marking posts ...
    (comp.sys.mac.apps)
  • Re: Break debugger into worker thread?
    ... do not generally display submitted posts immediately. ... With direct access to the NNTP server, hours is pretty rare, but Google ... The thread is actually executing deeper ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)