Thread: Google to shut down RFC!

On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 08:59:03 -0700 (PDT), Chemo the Clown
<[email protected]> wrote:

>April fool!!

I wish RFC could shut down google to force some of you to use real
usenet and I'd killfile google.

Lou

In article <[email protected]>,
Lou Decruss <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 08:59:03 -0700 (PDT), Chemo the Clown
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >April fool!!
>
> I wish RFC could shut down google to force some of you to use real
> usenet and I'd killfile google.

If rfc shut down GoogleGropes, why would you need to killfile them?

Can't you just killfile the people whose posts you don't want to read?

Or, you can killfile all of GoogleGropes, and select out those that you
still want to see.

I don't know how it works for you, but I've noticed for myself in the
past, that sometimes when I see horrible posts, that only then do I look
at the source. I then tend to associate bad posts with GoogleGropes and
FoodBanter. I try not to do that anymore, and find that if I try to
look at sources once in a while, for both good and bad posts, that there
are many good Google posters and at least one good FoodBanter poster.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]

On Apr 1, 11:41*am, Lou Decruss <LouDecr...@biteme.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 08:59:03 -0700 (PDT), Chemo the Clown
>
> <bhansen1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >April fool!!
>
> I wish RFC could shut down google to force some of you to use real
> usenet and I'd killfile google.

Ooooh, Lou! You're so authentic!
>
> Lou *

--Bryan

On Apr 1, 6:41*am, Lou Decruss <LouDecr...@biteme.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 08:59:03 -0700 (PDT), Chemo the Clown
>
> <bhansen1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >April fool!!
>
> I wish RFC could shut down google to force some of you to use real
> usenet and I'd killfile google.
>
> Lou *

Posting through GG reminds me of the old days and posting on BBSes.
Remember those? That was a lot of fun but slow. :-)

On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 13:22:34 -0700 (PDT), dsi1 <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Apr 1, 6:41*am, Lou Decruss <LouDecr...@biteme.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 08:59:03 -0700 (PDT), Chemo the Clown
>>
>> <bhansen1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >April fool!!
>>
>> I wish RFC could shut down google to force some of you to use real
>> usenet and I'd killfile google.
>>
>> Lou *
>
>Posting through GG reminds me of the old days and posting on BBSes.
>Remember those? That was a lot of fun but slow. :-)

Most were 14.4, it was a treat to find one that was 19.2kb. I remember with our
300 baud modem starting to download a 1 meg. file at midnight, and it finishing
the download about 7AM, now it takes 8 seconds.

On Apr 1, 12:41*pm, Lou Decruss <LouDecr...@biteme.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 08:59:03 -0700 (PDT), Chemo the Clown

> I wish RFC could shut down google to force some of you to use real
> usenet and I'd killfile google.

Google will be around long after the demise of Usenet. Usenet is so
8088 and green screen monitors.

On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:21:09 -1000, dsi1 <[email protected]>
wrote:

>My new eternal-september Usenet server is acting flaky these days.

IF anything is flaky, it's YOU.

I use E-S for all my text groups, and it is working just fine!

On 4/1/2011 2:43 PM, HumBug! wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:21:09 -1000, dsi1<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> My new eternal-september Usenet server is acting flaky these days.
>
> IF anything is flaky, it's YOU.
>
> I use E-S for all my text groups, and it is working just fine!
>

Gee what a grouch. I'm not sure what the problem is. Most times, it
works fine. But sometimes it times-out and sometimes there's a lag when
posting. I won't be able to see a post on ES for a few hours although I
can verify the posts on other servers. At least they pass it on out to
other servers on the network - that's nice of them.

Of course, it is a free service so I can't complain but I can drop them
and look for another server. OTOH, I tired of checking out servers, one
day I'll just go over to the dark side and use Google Groups. :-)

On 4/1/2011 6:43 PM, HumBug! wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:21:09 -1000, dsi1<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> My new eternal-september Usenet server is acting flaky these days.
>
> IF anything is flaky, it's YOU.
>
> I use E-S for all my text groups, and it is working just fine!
>
>
>
>

I can receive messages via E-S pretty reliably but it won't
always let me reply. Its' being obstreperous.

gloria p

Re: in5tib$jni$[email protected]

dsi1 <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 4/1/2011 2:43 PM, HumBug! wrote:
>> On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:21:09 -1000,
>> dsi1<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> My new eternal-september Usenet server is acting flaky these days.
>>
>> IF anything is flaky, it's YOU.
>>
>> I use E-S for all my text groups, and it is working just fine!
>>
>
> Gee what a grouch. I'm not sure what the problem is. Most times, it
> works fine. But sometimes it times-out and sometimes there's a lag
> when posting. I won't be able to see a post on ES for a few hours
> although I can verify the posts on other servers. At least they pass
> it on out to other servers on the network - that's nice of them.
>
> Of course, it is a free service so I can't complain but I can drop
> them and look for another server. OTOH, I tired of checking out
> servers, one day I'll just go over to the dark side and use Google
> Groups. :-)

I think it goes back to your config as discussed earlier. Unless the server
is down like it was for that six hour period a week or so back, it is very
reliable and posts always appear for me right away. Maybe you should use a
different newsreader application that will let you set the correct config
instead of the uucp thing. Surely there's something available for your
tablet pc.

On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:17:05 -0700, Dan Abel <[email protected]> wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
> Lou Decruss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 1 Apr 2011 08:59:03 -0700 (PDT), Chemo the Clown
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >April fool!!
>>
>> I wish RFC could shut down google to force some of you to use real
>> usenet and I'd killfile google.
>
>If rfc shut down GoogleGropes, why would you need to killfile them?

Um, Dan? I was just kidding.

>Can't you just killfile the people whose posts you don't want to read?

I do that but it doesn't help with drive- by nutjobs.

>Or, you can killfile all of GoogleGropes, and select out those that you
>still want to see.

As much as I like Agent it doesn't allow exceptions as far as I can
tell.

>I don't know how it works for you, but I've noticed for myself in the
>past, that sometimes when I see horrible posts, that only then do I look
>at the source. I then tend to associate bad posts with GoogleGropes and
>FoodBanter. I try not to do that anymore, and find that if I try to
>look at sources once in a while, for both good and bad posts, that there
>are many good Google posters and at least one good FoodBanter poster.

Google has some good ones and I know of the one good FB poster. I was
just being silly and I know I have no control over anything other than
my screen.

Lou

In article <[email protected]>,
Lou Decruss <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:17:05 -0700, Dan Abel <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >In article <[email protected]>,
> > Lou Decruss <[email protected]> wrote:

> >> I wish RFC could shut down google to force some of you to use real
> >> usenet and I'd killfile google.
> >
> >If rfc shut down GoogleGropes, why would you need to killfile them?
>
> Um, Dan? I was just kidding.

Sorry. That thought crossed my mind, but not until after I had posted.

> >Can't you just killfile the people whose posts you don't want to read?
>
> I do that but it doesn't help with drive- by nutjobs.
>
> >Or, you can killfile all of GoogleGropes, and select out those that you
> >still want to see.
>
> As much as I like Agent it doesn't allow exceptions as far as I can
> tell.

I thought Agent did scoring. I guess not. My client can do it, but
I've never set it up.

> >I don't know how it works for you, but I've noticed for myself in the
> >past, that sometimes when I see horrible posts, that only then do I look
> >at the source. I then tend to associate bad posts with GoogleGropes and
> >FoodBanter. I try not to do that anymore, and find that if I try to
> >look at sources once in a while, for both good and bad posts, that there
> >are many good Google posters and at least one good FoodBanter poster.
>
> Google has some good ones and I know of the one good FB poster. I was
> just being silly and I know I have no control over anything other than
> my screen.

It seems that my sense of humor was especially broken on April Fool's
Day!

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]

On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 09:10:48 -0700, Dan Abel <[email protected]> wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> Lou Decruss <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:17:05 -0700, Dan Abel <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >Or, you can killfile all of GoogleGropes, and select out those that you
> > >still want to see.
> >
> > As much as I like Agent it doesn't allow exceptions as far as I can
> > tell.

Yes, it does. You just need to know how to write the filter.
Example:
Dave and not (<[email protected]> or <[email protected]>)

>
> I thought Agent did scoring. I guess not. My client can do it, but
> I've never set it up.

No scoring in Agent. It's a usenet reader, not a game.



--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.

On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 10:04:46 -0700, sf <[email protected]> wrote:


>No scoring in Agent. It's a usenet reader, not a game.

Agent has scoring for filters, at least priority levels for them.

On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 10:24:31 -0700, HumBug! <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 10:04:46 -0700, sf <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> >No scoring in Agent. It's a usenet reader, not a game.
>
> Agent has scoring for filters, at least priority levels for them.
>
I didn't know that was the same scoring they're talking about.
Thanks.

--

Today's mighty oak is just yesterday's nut that held its ground.

On 4/2/2011 3:26 AM, Nunya Bidnits wrote:
> Re: in5tib$jni$[email protected]
>
> dsi1<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 4/1/2011 2:43 PM, HumBug! wrote:
>>> On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:21:09 -1000,
>>> dsi1<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My new eternal-september Usenet server is acting flaky these days.
>>>
>>> IF anything is flaky, it's YOU.
>>>
>>> I use E-S for all my text groups, and it is working just fine!
>>>
>>
>> Gee what a grouch. I'm not sure what the problem is. Most times, it
>> works fine. But sometimes it times-out and sometimes there's a lag
>> when posting. I won't be able to see a post on ES for a few hours
>> although I can verify the posts on other servers. At least they pass
>> it on out to other servers on the network - that's nice of them.
>>
>> Of course, it is a free service so I can't complain but I can drop
>> them and look for another server. OTOH, I tired of checking out
>> servers, one day I'll just go over to the dark side and use Google
>> Groups. :-)
>
> I think it goes back to your config as discussed earlier. Unless the server
> is down like it was for that six hour period a week or so back, it is very
> reliable and posts always appear for me right away. Maybe you should use a
> different newsreader application that will let you set the correct config
> instead of the uucp thing. Surely there's something available for your
> tablet pc.
>
>

I'm using T-bird on a laptop running Win7. The server I'm using is
"news.us.Usenet-News.net" on port 443. Any info on this? It's the
nuttiest thing - my post gets relayed to the other servers including
Google Groups but not on eternal-september.

The only way I can post to Usenet on my iPad is through Google Groups. I
suppose there's some kind of way to access newgroups on an iPad but
that's the easiest way.

On 4/2/2011 10:30 AM, dsi1 wrote:
> On 4/2/2011 3:26 AM, Nunya Bidnits wrote:
>> Re: in5tib$jni$[email protected]
>>
>> dsi1<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/1/2011 2:43 PM, HumBug! wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 11:21:09 -1000,
>>>> dsi1<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My new eternal-september Usenet server is acting flaky these days.
>>>>
>>>> IF anything is flaky, it's YOU.
>>>>
>>>> I use E-S for all my text groups, and it is working just fine!
>>>>
>>>
>>> Gee what a grouch. I'm not sure what the problem is. Most times, it
>>> works fine. But sometimes it times-out and sometimes there's a lag
>>> when posting. I won't be able to see a post on ES for a few hours
>>> although I can verify the posts on other servers. At least they pass
>>> it on out to other servers on the network - that's nice of them.
>>>
>>> Of course, it is a free service so I can't complain but I can drop
>>> them and look for another server. OTOH, I tired of checking out
>>> servers, one day I'll just go over to the dark side and use Google
>>> Groups. :-)
>>
>> I think it goes back to your config as discussed earlier. Unless the
>> server
>> is down like it was for that six hour period a week or so back, it is
>> very
>> reliable and posts always appear for me right away. Maybe you should
>> use a
>> different newsreader application that will let you set the correct config
>> instead of the uucp thing. Surely there's something available for your
>> tablet pc.
>>
>>
>
> I'm using T-bird on a laptop running Win7. The server I'm using is
> "news.us.Usenet-News.net" on port 443. Any info on this? It's the
> nuttiest thing - my post gets relayed to the other servers including
> Google Groups but not on eternal-september.
>
> The only way I can post to Usenet on my iPad is through Google Groups. I
> suppose there's some kind of way to access newgroups on an iPad but
> that's the easiest way.

Ha ha - big oops. For the eternal-september account I'm using the
default server "news.eternal-september.org" on port 119. My assumption
is that most everybody uses this. Sorry about that.

On 4/2/2011 4:30 PM, dsi1 wrote:
> I'm using T-bird on a laptop running Win7. The server I'm using is
> "news.us.Usenet-News.net" on port 443.

Try using the default port 119.

On 4/2/2011 4:38 PM, dsi1 wrote:

> Ha ha - big oops. For the eternal-september account I'm using the
> default server "news.eternal-september.org" on port 119. My assumption
> is that most everybody uses this. Sorry about that.

Ah, ignore my reply then, unless you aren't using 119 for
news.us.usenet-news.net which is what you said in the post I replied to.