If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Dam a Dyeing Groups on the UseNet.
Dyeing Groups on the UseNet
For all of the old public Microsoft if you do not keep it doing UseNet like aioe will stop and delete old Groups like win 98 .gen discussion! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Dam a Dyeing Groups on the UseNet.
Makes little or no sense to some of you but not all!
Aioe will stop and delete win 98 .gen discussion if you stop using it.... did that make some sense to you! If not ask Aioe why? wrote in message ... On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 13:50:19 -0500, "Hot-Text" wrote: Dyeing Groups on the UseNet For all of the old public Microsoft if you do not keep it doing UseNet like aioe will stop and delete old Groups like win 98 .gen discussion! How come everything you post makes little or no sense? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Dam a Dyeing Groups on the UseNet.
wrote in message ... On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 13:50:19 -0500, "Hot-Text" wrote: Dyeing Groups on the UseNet For all of the old public Microsoft if you do not keep it doing UseNet like aioe will stop and delete old Groups like win 98 .gen discussion! How come everything you post makes little or no sense? Top posting corrected: Hot-Text wrote: Makes little or no sense to some of you but not all! Aioe will stop and delete win 98 .gen discussion if you stop using it.... did that make some sense to you! If not ask Aioe why? Could the possibe answer be that Windows 98 newsgroups are generally dying because of lack of use - and why use expensive storage space on their servers for that subject? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Dam a Dyeing Groups on the UseNet.
Disbelief (who is not likely to be heard from again) wrote:
How come everything you post makes little or no sense? Since you're quoting that question (but not answering it) I'll respond by saying that hot-**** is either a retarded dork or english is his third language. Could the possibe answer be that Windows 98 newsgroups are generally dying because of lack of use Is there some other way for a newsgroup to die - besides lack of use? There are many newsgroups carried by various servers that haven't had a post in them for months or even years. Maybe they're "dead", maybe they're not. It's no strain on a server to devote an empty directory to them. - and why use expensive storage space on their servers for that subject? Which means that you don't really understand that you're not really using up any storage space on a server for a group that contains no messages. And this group (win98.gen_discussion) gets more traffic then I bet half of the groups carried by this server. Also - storage space isin't expensive, and hasn't been for most of this past decade. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Dam a Dyeing Groups on the UseNet.
98 Guy wrote:
Disbelief (who is not likely to be heard from again) wrote: How come everything you post makes little or no sense? Since you're quoting that question (but not answering it) I'll respond by saying that hot-**** is either a retarded dork or english is his third language. Could the possibe answer be that Windows 98 newsgroups are generally dying because of lack of use Is there some other way for a newsgroup to die - besides lack of use? The likes of Microsoft, aioe, albasinai, news.indiviual etc dropping them off their servers because of the lack of posts maybe! There are many newsgroups carried by various servers that haven't had a post in them for months or even years. Maybe they're "dead", maybe they're not. It's no strain on a server to devote an empty directory to them. Accepted, but one day those running the servers will simply drop those groups. - and why use expensive storage space on their servers for that subject? Which means that you don't really understand that you're not really using up any storage space on a server for a group that contains no messages. And those groups are only left on those servers because someone really is too lazy to sort them out. And this group (win98.gen_discussion) gets more traffic then I bet half of the groups carried by this server. Accepted again, but that the way of things. Also - storage space isin't expensive, and hasn't been for most of this past decade. Ah, put in my place there! ROTFL But '98' and its variants really has a minority following now, and will eventually fade into memory - just as DOS, Windows 3:1 and 95 have done - simply because Microshaft has decreed that profits must come first. Never mind, life must go on and I believe that there will come a time when Usenet will simply be 'dropped' by most (if not all) ISPs. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Dam a Dyeing Groups on the UseNet.
Disbelief wrote:
Is there some other way for a newsgroup to die - besides lack of use? The likes of Microsoft, aioe, albasinai, news.indiviual etc dropping them off their servers because of the lack of posts maybe! Maybe not! The not-so-short explanation is as follows: Once upon a time, microsoft peered it's usenet server with the world-wide usenet. But microsoft never made an "official" list of microsoft.public newsgroups. It fell to an outside individual (Julien Ellie - who's name I am no doubt mis-spelling) to be ordained the official maintainer of the list of microsoft newsgroups. Over the years, as microsoft added new groups, Julian added those groups to the "official" list. One place that list manifests itself is at ISC.ORG. Some usenet server operators use that list, some don't. Over time, it was generally the case that microsoft groups were *added*, and very few were deleted or removed. Again, note that just because microsoft removes any particular newsgroup or group of groups from it's server, it does not mean that those groups must be removed from the "world-wide" usenet. Microsoft has no control over what newsgroups are carried by the outside world. Now as I said, it was generally believed that Microsoft would carry usenet forever, and that they would generally add groups over time, and Julian's efforts would insure that any new group created by Microsoft would be propagated into the world-wide usenet - or at least be noted in lists like that maintained by ISC.ORG. It was never determined by anyone how the world-wide usenet should proceed if microsoft ever decided to turn off it's server in terms of what should happen to the microsoft.public newsgroup hierarchy. But a few months ago, microsoft announced it would do just that - it would shut down it's usenet server and basically only host web-based forums for discussion and support (more for support I would imagine). ============== It's widely acknowledged by most people that Microsoft was being disengenuous when it said that usenet usage (or at least the usage of the microsoft.public groups) was dropping and that it didn't make sense to keep operating a usenet server. Microsoft has ulterior motives to stop operating their usenet server, among them is the fact that it can't control what gets posted to those groups from servers outside of it's own, and it can't or doesn't want to devote resources to monitor and/or censor the posts that appear on it's own servers. Microsoft seemed largely inept at controlling the use of it's own servers to post spam to the microsoft.public hierarchy. ============= So as Microsoft performed a controlled mass-removal of groups from it's server, Julian dutifully sent out control messages that, if followed by other servers, would also remove those same groups from those other servers. The usenet list maintained by ISC.ORG was also altered based on Julien's control messages, and anyone who has their server configured to automatically follow the ISC.ORG list would also see that their server was removing the microsoft.public groups in-step with Microsoft. Now the alert reader will note that this group (m.p.win98.gen_discussion) was removed from Microsoft's server at the end of June, yet it is still being carried by most other servers including aioe.org. I believe the reason for this is that Julien has not yet performed a mass group-removal broadcast to mirror the large group-removal that microsoft performed in early July. I'm not sure if there are any official discussions (RFD's) happening anywhere on usenet pertaining to this topic of how to handle microsoft's absence from usenet, and if indeed anything should be done other than to simply let these groups exist. So the bottom line is that the future carriage of these various microsoft.public newsgroups on any particular server will not depend on their current or recent usage, traffic or perceived relevance. There are many newsgroups carried by various servers that haven't had a post in them for months or even years. Maybe they're "dead", maybe they're not. It's no strain on a server to devote an empty directory to them. Accepted, but one day those running the servers will simply drop those groups. Server operators generally don't spend a lot of time looking at the thousands of usenet groups and deciding which of them they want to carry or not based on usage. The commercial operators want to advertize to customers that they carry a lot of groups - so again there's no rush to remove seldom-used groups. And those groups are only left on those servers because someone really is too lazy to sort them out. To a server operator, there's no benefit to your base of users when you remove seldom-used groups, and it's almost a garantee that a week after you remove a group, one of your users will ask where it went and will want it back. So although you might have some idea of what a "clean" server looks like from a group-carriage point of view, the benefits or efficiency of that "neat and tidy" organization exists only in your mind. But '98' and its variants really has a minority following now, That doesn't matter. There is no criteria to say that in order to start or keep a usenet newsgroup, that it must have X people reading it or Y people posting to it. simply because Microshaft has decreed that profits must come first. Again, Microsoft can do what it wants with it's own usenet server - including removing groups and even turning it off. It's up to the world-wide usenet community to decide what it's vision is of the microsoft.public hierarchy given that microsoft (the corporation) is no longer participating in them. One vision is that nothing changes - that these groups simply continue to exist. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Dam a Dyeing Groups on the UseNet.
"Disbelief" wrote in message ... 98 Guy wrote: Disbelief (who is not likely to be heard from again) wrote: How come everything you post makes little or no sense? Since you're quoting that question (but not answering it) I'll respond by saying that hot-**** is either a retarded dork or english is his third language. Could the possibe answer be that Windows 98 newsgroups are generally dying because of lack of use Is there some other way for a newsgroup to die - besides lack of use? The likes of Microsoft, aioe, albasinai, news.indiviual etc dropping them off their servers because of the lack of posts maybe! There are many newsgroups carried by various servers that haven't had a post in them for months or even years. Maybe they're "dead", maybe they're not. It's no strain on a server to devote an empty directory to them. Accepted, but one day those running the servers will simply drop those groups. My ISP "Bigpond" has just added 7 news groups of the "microsoft.public" hierarchy to make a total of 400+ (Including Win95) :-) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Dam a Dyeing Groups on the UseNet.
"Disbelief" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 13:50:19 -0500, "Hot-Text" wrote: Dyeing Groups on the UseNet For all of the old public Microsoft if you do not keep it doing UseNet like aioe will stop and delete old Groups like win 98 .gen discussion! How come everything you post makes little or no sense? Top posting corrected: Hot-Text wrote: Makes little or no sense to some of you but not all! Aioe will stop and delete win 98 .gen discussion if you stop using it.... did that make some sense to you! If not ask Aioe why? Could the possibe answer be that Windows 98 newsgroups are generally dying because of lack of use - and why use expensive storage space on their servers for that subject? Windows 98 newsgroups will dye because it's not on the LIST for XOVER from Microsoft.... old list was 1768 groups New list on 9-25-2010 is 257 groups And Windows 98 is not on the New List microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion is not a correct name for UseNet Sarver's A Server can not put ( _ ) in a groups name. So you have to keep this group running by the use of it only! And the LIST for XOVER works the same @ Organization Server Name Adobe adobeforums.com Autodesk discussion.autodesk.com Bananasplit anon services news.bananasplit.info Borland newsgroups.borland.com Corel cnews.corel.com dBASE news.dbase.com DynDNS news.dyndns.org Franconews news.franconews.org Gibson Research news.grc.com Gmane news.gmane.org Hamster local server news.uni-x.net IBM Software news.software.ibm.com Macromedia forums.macromedia.com Microsoft news.mozilla.org NetObjects news.netobjects.com Netscape secnews.netscape.com NetWin news.netwinsite.com Novell support-forums.novell.com Opera Browser news.opera.com Perl nntp.perl.org PHP news.php.net Redhat news.redhat.com SpamCop news.spamcop.net Superbase news.superbase.com Sybase forums.sybase.com Tin newsreader news.tin.org VMware news.vmware.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Dam a Dyeing Groups on the UseNet.
"Hot-Text" wrote in message ... Windows 98 newsgroups will dye because it's not on the LIST for XOVER from Microsoft.... old list was 1768 groups New list on 9-25-2010 is 257 groups And Windows 98 is not on the New List microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion is not a correct name for UseNet Sarver's A Server can not put ( _ ) in a groups name. Bull****, explain how my ISP carries these groups then : (just to name some at a quick glance) alt.alumni.Brooklyn_Tech alt.bbc.the_net alt.bbc.the_net.jules alt.bbc.the_net.jules.conceited alt.bbc.the_net.jules.conceited.little alt.bbc.the_net.jules.conceited.little.tart So you have to keep this group running by the use of it only! And the LIST for XOVER works the same @ Organization Server Name Adobe adobeforums.com Autodesk discussion.autodesk.com Bananasplit anon services news.bananasplit.info Borland newsgroups.borland.com Corel cnews.corel.com dBASE news.dbase.com DynDNS news.dyndns.org Franconews news.franconews.org Gibson Research news.grc.com Gmane news.gmane.org Hamster local server news.uni-x.net IBM Software news.software.ibm.com Macromedia forums.macromedia.com Microsoft news.mozilla.org NetObjects news.netobjects.com Netscape secnews.netscape.com NetWin news.netwinsite.com Novell support-forums.novell.com Opera Browser news.opera.com Perl nntp.perl.org PHP news.php.net Redhat news.redhat.com SpamCop news.spamcop.net Superbase news.superbase.com Sybase forums.sybase.com Tin newsreader news.tin.org VMware news.vmware.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Dam a Dyeing Groups on the UseNet.
Microsoft News Sarver Software is how!
Not Linux or FreeBSD News Sarver Software microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion is not a correct name for UseNet Sarver's A Server can not put ( _ ) in a groups name. Bull****, explain how my ISP carries these groups then : (just to name some at a quick glance) alt.alumni.Brooklyn_Tech alt.bbc.the_net alt.bbc.the_net.jules alt.bbc.the_net.jules.conceited alt.bbc.the_net.jules.conceited.little alt.bbc.the_net.jules.conceited.little.tart |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Microsoft has removed 500+ groups, including 21 Windows-98 groups | 98 Guy | General | 165 | December 28th 09 05:21 AM |
Since this forum is now completely Usenet - What Usenet is | MEB[_18_] | General | 13 | October 1st 09 08:15 AM |
Since this forum is now completely Usenet - What Usenet is | MEB[_18_] | General | 0 | September 28th 09 10:33 PM |
Curt Christianson on XP Groups? | Angel | General | 14 | July 27th 09 05:50 PM |
Win XP Groups | PCR | General | 5 | February 4th 07 03:52 PM |