Yes, and they probably have the NNTP ports blocked on their local network so you couldn't use a NG client anyway.
As far as I'm concerned Google is great and probably the best thing to happen in terms keeping usenet alive.
Well, I wouldn't classify it as 'great' but it is satisfactory for my purposes and I have been using it many years. There are some anal retentive usenet folks who kill file all GG posts but I ignore people with bad attitudes anyway. I overcome the spam problem by opening a free hotmail account, set that account to dump all mail into a spam folder and delete it once a week, then use that hotmail account to open a google account. That way I never see the spam and Microsoft has to deal with it.
Red
Hmm, maybe I misunderstood something: I meant spam coming into this newsgroup.
Twayne
Well I agree with with you and I think a lot of others do too. This particular group is lenient and really not too loud to complain about any method as long as it's reasonable and makes a readable response.
If I'm the first responder to a post, I'll usually bottom post from habit; that's what most groups require. Well, or inline and snipped. If I'm not the first, I'll generally follow whatever the person before me has done. It makes a lot more sense than messing up the flow of the responses, especially considering it's going to be stored in several places like Google for many years. Google is great for researching but not so great to use as a newsreader.
I don't even mind when people don't snip irrelevant data to their response, but I DO mind when the responders can't be bothered to put a blank like before and after their responses, especially with inline responses. It makes it pretty hard to see where the response is, if you can see it at all, and I'll often pass on those kinds of posts. But otherwise, IMO, I just figure "When in Rome ... ".
HTH,
Twayne`
Yeah, the problem with gui's like Google is the users often don't know how to make a Reply or a New Post; they seem to just guess. They use New for a Reply, losing any connection to the thread, or they might even reply to the wrong threads sometimes. But if they get along OK with them, there's no harm in using them, that's for sure. Personally I'd much rather use the text only, direct presentation of a newsreader, any newsreader. It's just easier and clearer how to use it.
HTH,
Twayne`
On 9/10/2009 4:57 PM Jason Carlton spake thus:
From what you said it seems as if you're not aware that you have to use a valid email address to post to Usenet (like this newsgroup). You don't. News clients don't validate email addresses like mail clients do.
That's my strategy for avoiding spam: I get *zero* spam, since my address is totally bogus. Plus it can be fun making up phony names.
There's actually no good reason to use a valid email address here, if you think about it: almost all replies to posts here will be made to the newsgroup and not to a poster's email address. (Of course, if you want to initiate email contact with someone here, you can always do that.)
Consider doing that. Then you don't have to change *anything* in order to read and post here.
If you have Outlook or Outlook Express, you have a newsreader. OE comes with the Windows distribution - as a matter of fact, OE cannot be removed! It can, if one tries hard enough, be disabled, but OE is part of Internet Explorer which, in turn, is part of the operating system (not really a stand-alone program).
Therefore, if you're using IE to access Google Groups, Outlook Express is lurking about somewhere.
For years I used Forte Agent, but then they dropped access to NGs unless one paid a (small) fee.
I did for a while, but my NG usage is so very small and limited that I find it easier just to use Google Groups rather than to sign up for what you call a "real newsreader".
So, this is a serious question: Why do you say that use of Google is "frowned on" by many?
TIA
Hypatia
For years I used Forte Agent, but then they dropped access to NGs unless one paid a (small) fee.
I did for a while, but my NG usage is so very small and limited that I find it easier just to use Google Groups rather than to sign up for what you call a "real newsreader".
So, this is a serious question: Why do you say that use of Google is "frowned on" by many?
TIA
Hypatia
Chuckle. That is maybe because you are AT WORK, and they expect you to be doing company business instead of hanging out on Usenet? :^/
-- aem sends...
To carry on: Because of the spam emanating from GG, many users discard anything that comes from that source.
In addition, GG is sometimes very slow at propagating messages. Plus the interface is clunky and difficult to navigate.
I pay about $10/year for my newsgroups, but I don't get any binaries. For 10 bucks a year it's well worth not having to deal with a web based news reader/server.
And if anyone noticed I'm using Gmail (google mail) I have it set up as a pop server so I don't use the clunky web based email there either. I'm curious if they let you set up usenet that way also?
I never had a problem with others using it, just not me. Trying not to sound snobby, I do admit it makes the user look like a rookie since real usenet with a real newsreader is 100 times better, easier, and faster.
Well if it was any good you would use it at home also. Using it as a last resort doesn't make it good.
Yes true. I know of one group that averages about 1000 posts a day.
Once again, using GG as a last resort doesn't make it any good.
Yes me too. I don't care to see the stupid little smiley faces bouncing all around the damn place. Actually I'm set to only show me plain text in groups and email so you can send all the HTML you want but I'll never see it. Why would someone send me email with there newborn baby as wallpaper? I don't care if it's family, I send them a fake bounced email reply (a great feature of "mailwasher"). One friend who likes to send me some pretty funny stuff will send me an email telling me to accept the HTML mail that is coming soon.
You don't need to pay for non-binary newsgroups. I would think most folks would opt for one less billing.
Thats silly. There are a ton of real newsreaders around, many of them free. Windows comes with a free newsreader, which can instantly be replaced free with Thunderbird, an even better newsreader.
Also silly. There a a number of free newsgroup providers if all you want is non-binaries.(see my tag) Several other cheap providers if you want binaries.
What's wrong with Google Groups?
Much easier to list whats right with it. It's main use is their archives for old messages, and OK if you are at work and not permitted to use newsgroups, you generally can get access via Google. Thats all I can think of...
Yes. All are appropriate at different times. You should be smart enough to figure out when to do what.
Much more difficult it seems is what to quote. You should delete everything except what is essential to your reply. There is seldom a reason to quote an entire message, usually just a few sentences, as I just did here. If you edit/delete correctly it is usually really clear whether you should top post, bottom post or interweave your reply, and everyone reading your reply will easily and effortlessly see to what you are replying.
Bottom posting is preferred, "top posting" is also referred to as "Jeopardy! posting" since the answer comes before the question.
Laziness is usually why people don't trim the quote in a response.
HomeOwnersHub website 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.