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!

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

"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) :-)

"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

"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

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