Re: Usenet Brewing Groups not what they used to be <sighhhh>

Bill Velek <billvelek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
Scott Sellers wrote:

snip

I don't find spam a problem. A single key click, and
poof, it's gone. No fuss, no muss. Usenet or e-mail, it's just
not big problem.

What triggered my post was that, starting with a message on 5/21 at 8:00
p.m., there were 43 spam posts with only 6 brewing posts interspersed
among them; each one was posted under a different user name, making it
extremely impractical to filter using my 'primative' reader, and it was
made cumbersome because a few of the subject lines might possibly have
even had some usefulness for a brewer, e.g., "Smith Ultra High Pressure
Regulator Purging Nitrogen" might possibly have been posted by someone
wanting to know if it could be used to regulate CO2 for a kegging
system. That just tends to make it that much more difficult to use this
group, and is therefore an undesireable problem; if you think it is
desireable or not a problem, then that's your opinion.

I've only seen a handful spam lately, so it must be an ISP issue.
Even when there are more, I don't see dealing with it as
particularly honerous. Just hit 'd', and in less than a wink,
bye-bye spam.

So, in responding to another poster who seemed surprised that another
brewing group has apparently 'bit the dust' -- no doubt due to spam -- I
made a frustrated 'passing comment' that "Usenet Brewing Groups not what
they used to be <sighhhh>" -- notice the 'sigh'. This has generated 36
reply posts (of which only one was from me) -- many of then lengthy, and
some of them downright impolite. Now, my filter works perfect to
'plonk' people who continue to post under the same name, but it would be
ridiculous for me to set up a separate filter for each of those 43 spam
posts under different names, especially since those names will probably
not be used again. But my reader (Netscape) is limited since it does
not permit filtering based on what is included in the message 'path', in
this instance "feed-me.highwinds-media.com", but I fail to see why I
should choose to pay money or install different software to deal with
that problem when the usefulness of this group, compared to other
brewing groups, is rapidly declining. Furthermore, I happen to have
spent a lot of time with my current reader to set up folders and
sub-folders, and filters for certain purposes -- including using the
substantial search feature of Netscape -- and I have many saved posts,
and I don't feel like abandoning all of that and then need to spend time
familiarizing myself with other software. Those are legitimate reasons
for me to make the decision that I have, and I fail to see any cause for
other members to belittle me or anyone else here just because we aren't
inclined to do what THEY do. It is immature and the height of arrogance
-- and I don't mean you, Scott, when I say that. One of the fellows --
and I won't mention the name because I'm not inviting a flame war -- who
has made a litany of critical posts about this, some of which are
totalling lacking in politeness, has posted _ONE_ brewing related post
prior to this topic. At least that's all I've been able to find among
the past 2,173 posts from r.c.b. that are stored on my computer. That
says something right there. Now, I vote that we get back to discussing
brewing and forget all of this nonsense; this will therefore be my last
post in this thread.

People are free to pick and choose what they spend their time on.
You can easily spend all day fighting spam, or conflicting with
other users. Or not.

I find folks with a hair-trigger, almost hygienic response to
spam usually to have another agenda.

Well, I don't know that a passing mild and brief complaint about 43 spam
posts constitutes a 'hair trigger', if you are referring to me, and if
you are, I also don't know what 'agenda' you think I have.

You seem set on moving readers from usenet into web forums,
including several forums which you have a proprietary (if not
monetary) interest in. Fair enough, but when you also seem to be
sticking the knife into usenet...

Furthermore, I find web interfaces cluttered, tedious, slow, not
to mention the insulting advertisements. What the web calls
"added value" I call crap. Too often, more emphasis is placed on
manipulative eye-candy then on clear, simple communication. The
web is largely a producer's medium. Producers usually have an
agenda.

I honestly don't think I ever even look at the banner ads that appear in
the web 'forums' that I visit; I just read the messages in the thread,
and it's like the ads aren't even there. I'm rather surprised that
there is _any_ nuisance about them at all; I do use high-speed Internet,
so the pages load almost instantly for me, but I suppose it might be a
problem for others. But most of my stuff comes as email, and most of it
is from Yahoo, and I _never_ see any advertising at all in the posts.

The ads take up significant amounts of screen space, which in
usenet readers goes towards solid content. They make for a
clunky, crowded, busy interface, requiring much more scrolling --
I suppose mouse manufacturers like them. I find these endless
sectionings of screenspace much more distracting than spam, and
you can't make them go away.

In contrast, usenet is all about content. Stripped down,
bare, user-provided content. Usenet is a writers and a
thinkers medium. It's all about the communication. Usenet
technology is simple, it is distributed, and it's free.

I can _ASSURE_ you that there are plenty of writers and thinkers
in the forums and mail-lists I furnished, and they are all free;
r.c.b. doesn't have an exclusive on all of the experienced and
knowledgeable brewers out there.

The forums are not free if they are owned and if they are
moderated. The central comparison I was attempting to make,
again, is that the web is a producer's medium first. To the
extent that contrived, produced, owned, "value added" web forums
try to match the efficiency and no-nonsense ethos of usenet, they
come up short. You'll always be wading through nonsense to get
to the content.

That's the future.

I'll give Usenet another year ... maybe two at the most. Oh, it
might linger on for years, but it won't be what it is now or
used to be!

Good for you and other producers/controllers/owners. Good for ad
sellers, mouse manufacturers. Good for Micro$oft and good for
Google, who would suck up all the air and sell it back to you if
they could.

Bad for users.

cheers,
Scott S

--
Scott Sellers |
scottsellers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is this newsgroup monitored by Chrysler?
    ... no one who posts to these newsgroups has to ... >>Internet's forums. ... Your assertion that Usenet is a quagmire and a company shouldn't be ... was a policy ...
    (rec.autos.makers.chrysler)
  • Re: Is this newsgroup monitored by Chrysler?
    ... >responder, I ... >>>Cisco Systems also regularly responds to posts on the Cisco NSP mailing ... >>>Internet's forums. ... >Your assertion that Usenet is a quagmire and a company shouldn't be ...
    (rec.autos.makers.chrysler)
  • Re: The Accuracy of mtDNA vs. Y chromosomal DNA
    ... This is Usenet. ... fetches the missing posts. ... Thus, the "cancel post" ... I'll just hold my breath and hope that, as you observed, the spam isn't ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: pointer to replacement forum ...
    ... The spam doesn't look "too bad" to me in terms of the absolute ... number of posts (dismissing for the moment the fact that any and all ... Given the volume and preponderance of porn in the binary groups, and the increased likelihood of prosecution for kiddie porn xmission, it appears that usenet feeds have been relegated to 2nd and 3rd tier providers, on a fee basis. ... Sadly, this has affected the overall quality of usenet, even for text based, and potentially useful groups. ...
    (comp.robotics.misc)
  • Re: Other boards ....
    ... There's at least one Yahoo list that was started with similar intentions... ... from this Usenet Group. ... it would not be moderated (except for SPAM). ... Your posts are not publicly associated with an email address, ...
    (alt.vacation.las-vegas)
Loading