it depends upon how it was created and propagated
by various peers. if it was created on a fairly remote
and untrusted peer then many others would not have
picked it up for further propagation.
i'm trying to dig into it, but google groups
via my connection is horrendous. so far i have
not seen any vote for it's creation... *sigh*
if you have the patience for it look at
google groups archives and search news.groups
for the conversation around rec.gardens.edible
then look into how usenet works, find the
place where control messages get sent and search
that group to see if it was or not. if there
is no archived control message for the creation
of the group then it would explain why it isn't
propagated and also why it doesn't get much
the wiki might have better and faster info than
trying to dig stuff out of news.groups via google
for extra bonus points go back and read through
the great renaming debate and see what happened
and then figure out when AOL went online and the
effect on usenet and why so much went downhill after
that and ... it was quite interesting to be there
and now too. especially when you can see the effect
of livejournal, facebook, etc on social usenet groups.
pretty much killed soc.singles/soc.singles.moderated
songbird (scratching very anciently used brain-cells
because i used to regularly read news.groups
and could tell you exactly where to look for
the archived control messages, etc.
(back in the day... i could skim the
entire usenet news feed and still get my
work, homework done and still read other
yes, there are very few news servers which
honor rmgroup control messages these days.
the spam wars really took a lot of the fun
out of both usenet and e-mail for being
useful mediums of communication.
however, if you think about it in the
biological sense, it probably mirrors the
development of the immune system.
Have to confess that it was me that replied but I did have to subscribe
first. Fortunately my ISP has a feed, with no binaries, from giganews and
giganews seems to carry many, many newsgroups with little action on them.
That might be because you persist in using that broke-ass OE ;-)
Yep; lets'em advertise that they carry every newsgroup that ever
was, regardless of whether it still _is_. Giganews, including binaries,
is part of my ISP deal, too. I stick with it because it has been very
reliable and I'd still pay the same flat rate, regardless. My
newsreading client (a very old "Agent') lists over 111,000 newsgroups
and I have it set to filter out "All extinct groups"; ri-i-i-i-ght....
Retention is pretty good; a full header retrieval -- excluding twits,
googlegroupies, and most spam -- for r.g.e sucked down 43,776 dating
from June, '03.
Well, it must be extinct, although, it's possible that traffic fell
to the point that the free servers dropped it. My test post over there
drew one followup. It came from Oz and the most recent post cited is
from Sept, 2010, so.... It also is possible that the commercial
newsreading service that I use is hanging on to it to help impress the
rubes with the bodacious number of NGs it hosts.
Is no matter: We have (more than) enough religious warfare here to
suit me, LOL!
I don't think it was ever propery proposed for discussion and
There was a lot of squabbling going on around the time that
rec.gardens.edible was proposed/discussed/voted on.
There was a competing proposal for rec.gardens.organic that
evolved into a proposal for rec.gardens.ecosystems (which was
created but I have no idea if it is active).
(Confession: I was in regular correspondence and colaborated
with the fellow who did formal proposal for r.g.e and I was not
part of the r.g.o-eventually-ecosystems group.)
It's on the Giganews server but no traffic since June, '09. I was
just curious about r.g.o; it's among a host of inactive groups,
including the news heirarchy, that show up on my newsreading service. I
used to keep up with .news, .groups, and .announce; all just pointless,
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.