Surprised!

Carried by server nntp.aloe.org, but not Share with msnews.microsoft.com!

Share by Carried by Whos Who?


"Don Phillipson" wrote in message
...
"glee" wrote in message
...

AFAIK, MS is closing the slowest (least trafficked) groups first.

"webster72n" wrote in message
...

Does that mean they will eventually close all other NG's?

This and other Win98 NGs are carried on the server nntp.aloe.org
which will presumably continue to do so if msnews.microsoft.com
closes completely.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

Carried by server nntp.aloe.org, but not Share with msnews.microsoft.com!

Share by Carried by Whos Who?


"Don Phillipson" wrote in message
...
"glee" wrote in message
...

AFAIK, MS is closing the slowest (least trafficked) groups first.

"webster72n" wrote in message
...

Does that mean they will eventually close all other NG's?

This and other Win98 NGs are carried on the server nntp.aloe.org
which will presumably continue to do so if msnews.microsoft.com
closes completely.

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

Sunny wrote:

What part of "Microsoft is withdrawing from Usenet news groups" don't
you understand ? If you need Microsoft "discussions" in future you
will be forced to use their Web based "forums" One more time "-

Microsoft is withdrawing their NNTP server from Usenet.

Yes, just *Microsoft* is dropping their own NNTP server. Microsoft is
not Usenet. Usenet won't disappear because Microsoft decided to end
their Usenet usurping experiment back in 2006. Giganews, Albasani,
Eternal-September, Earthlink, and other NSPs have already stated that
they will continue carrying the microsoft.public.* newsgroups (i.e.,
they will ignore any rogue 'rmgroup' control message issued by a
self-appointed netcop).

The microsoft.public.* newsgroups are NOT going away from Usenet. It
is *Microsoft* that is scrambling away from Usenet. No one is getting
forced to use Microsoft's inane web-based forums to continue
participating in these newsgroups.

You can, if you feel so inclined to self-torture, use Microsoft's (well,
Microsoft didn't write it but they proffer it as their software) NNTP
Bridge to access the web-based forums (well, only some of them as not
all have been brought under the same umbrella for access control).
Rather than operate a forum-to-NNTP gateway server on their end (which
is what all the Usenet-leeching web sites do), Microsoft wants you to
run a local NNTP-to-forums proxy on your host. It has lots of problems
and deficiencies. That it is workable doesn't mean it is preferred.

If you want to continue participating in the microsoft.public.*
newsgroups then do so by using any other NNTP server. There are free
and paid NSPs you can use to access these newsgroups. You do NOT need
to use Microsoft's NNTP server. The groups are not going away because
Microsoft is.

Sunny wrote:

What part of "Microsoft is withdrawing from Usenet news groups" don't
you understand ? If you need Microsoft "discussions" in future you
will be forced to use their Web based "forums" One more time "-

Microsoft is withdrawing their NNTP server from Usenet.

Yes, just *Microsoft* is dropping their own NNTP server. Microsoft is
not Usenet. Usenet won't disappear because Microsoft decided to end
their Usenet usurping experiment back in 2006. Giganews, Albasani,
Eternal-September, Earthlink, and other NSPs have already stated that
they will continue carrying the microsoft.public.* newsgroups (i.e.,
they will ignore any rogue 'rmgroup' control message issued by a
self-appointed netcop).

The microsoft.public.* newsgroups are NOT going away from Usenet. It
is *Microsoft* that is scrambling away from Usenet. No one is getting
forced to use Microsoft's inane web-based forums to continue
participating in these newsgroups.

You can, if you feel so inclined to self-torture, use Microsoft's (well,
Microsoft didn't write it but they proffer it as their software) NNTP
Bridge to access the web-based forums (well, only some of them as not
all have been brought under the same umbrella for access control).
Rather than operate a forum-to-NNTP gateway server on their end (which
is what all the Usenet-leeching web sites do), Microsoft wants you to
run a local NNTP-to-forums proxy on your host. It has lots of problems
and deficiencies. That it is workable doesn't mean it is preferred.

If you want to continue participating in the microsoft.public.*
newsgroups then do so by using any other NNTP server. There are free
and paid NSPs you can use to access these newsgroups. You do NOT need
to use Microsoft's NNTP server. The groups are not going away because
Microsoft is.

VanguardLH wrote:

Giganews, Albasani, Eternal-September, Earthlink, and other NSPs
have already stated that they will continue carrying the
microsoft.public.* newsgroups

Where have they stated that? In what newsgroup(s) have they posted that
they will continue to carry the microsoft.public hierarchy?

(i.e., they will ignore any rogue 'rmgroup' control message issued
by a self-appointed netcop).

Many of them have been following that "self-appointed netcop" for years
(Julien Elie). Like it or not, he is the recognized authority for that
hierarchy, and he intends to administrate those groups out of existance.

The server nntp.AIOE.org recognizes the "official" list of newsgroups
generated by ISC.org, and ISC.org recognizes the authority of Julien's
PGP key and his control messages.

But otherwise I agree that Microsoft turning off it's usenet server
would not or should not automatically mean that the microsoft.public
groups will disappear from usenet.

Many people believe (incorrectly) that Microsoft's servers play some
important, critical technical role in the existance and message
transport of these groups, and the shut-down of their server will
automatically mean the loss of these groups to the rest of usenet.

Other people believe (incorrectly) that even if Microsoft's servers do
not play a critical or necessary technical role for the operation of
these groups, that Microsoft nonetheless can *force* the world-wide
usenet to discontinue their use because the groups are Microsoft's legal
property.

VanguardLH wrote:

Giganews, Albasani, Eternal-September, Earthlink, and other NSPs
have already stated that they will continue carrying the
microsoft.public.* newsgroups

Where have they stated that? In what newsgroup(s) have they posted that
they will continue to carry the microsoft.public hierarchy?

(i.e., they will ignore any rogue 'rmgroup' control message issued
by a self-appointed netcop).

Many of them have been following that "self-appointed netcop" for years
(Julien Elie). Like it or not, he is the recognized authority for that
hierarchy, and he intends to administrate those groups out of existance.

The server nntp.AIOE.org recognizes the "official" list of newsgroups
generated by ISC.org, and ISC.org recognizes the authority of Julien's
PGP key and his control messages.

But otherwise I agree that Microsoft turning off it's usenet server
would not or should not automatically mean that the microsoft.public
groups will disappear from usenet.

Many people believe (incorrectly) that Microsoft's servers play some
important, critical technical role in the existance and message
transport of these groups, and the shut-down of their server will
automatically mean the loss of these groups to the rest of usenet.

Other people believe (incorrectly) that even if Microsoft's servers do
not play a critical or necessary technical role for the operation of
these groups, that Microsoft nonetheless can *force* the world-wide
usenet to discontinue their use because the groups are Microsoft's legal
property.

You are a hooplehead at it's best

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

"98 Guy" wrote in message ...
VanguardLH wrote:

Giganews, Albasani, Eternal-September, Earthlink, and other NSPs
have already stated that they will continue carrying the

You are a hooplehead at it's best

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.
http://www.microsoft.com/protect

"98 Guy" wrote in message ...
VanguardLH wrote:

Giganews, Albasani, Eternal-September, Earthlink, and other NSPs
have already stated that they will continue carrying the

Top-Poaster Peter Foldes wrote:

You are a hooplehead at it's best

And you are a hit-and-run top-poaster.

I will summarize my last post (which you did not quote), and you will
most likely not respond to the points I'm making, or state exactly how
any of my statements are incorrect:

------------

- In what newsgroup(s) have they (various NNTP operators) posted that
they will continue to carry the microsoft.public hierarchy?

- Many of them (nntp operators) have been following that "self-appointed
netcop" for years (Julien Elie). Like it or not, he is the recognized
authority for that hierarchy, and he intends to administrate those
groups out of existance.

- AIOE follows the ISC.org list of newsgroups, and ISC.org accepts
Julien's control messages. AIOE has already removed some microsoft
newsgroups, and by all indications will remove all of them, as per
Julien's actions.

- Otherwise, Microsoft turning off it's usenet server would not or
should not automatically mean that the microsoft.public groups will
disappear from usenet.

- Many people believe (incorrectly) that Microsoft's servers play some
important, critical technical role in the existance and message
transport of these groups, and the shut-down of their server will
automatically mean the loss of these groups to the rest of usenet.

- Other people believe (incorrectly) that even if Microsoft's servers do
not play a critical or necessary technical role for the operation of
these groups, that Microsoft nonetheless can *force* the world-wide
usenet to discontinue their use because the groups are Microsoft's legal
property.

Top-Poaster Peter Foldes wrote:

You are a hooplehead at it's best

And you are a hit-and-run top-poaster.

I will summarize my last post (which you did not quote), and you will
most likely not respond to the points I'm making, or state exactly how
any of my statements are incorrect:

------------

- In what newsgroup(s) have they (various NNTP operators) posted that
they will continue to carry the microsoft.public hierarchy?

- Many of them (nntp operators) have been following that "self-appointed
netcop" for years (Julien Elie). Like it or not, he is the recognized
authority for that hierarchy, and he intends to administrate those
groups out of existance.

- AIOE follows the ISC.org list of newsgroups, and ISC.org accepts
Julien's control messages. AIOE has already removed some microsoft
newsgroups, and by all indications will remove all of them, as per
Julien's actions.

- Otherwise, Microsoft turning off it's usenet server would not or
should not automatically mean that the microsoft.public groups will
disappear from usenet.

- Many people believe (incorrectly) that Microsoft's servers play some
important, critical technical role in the existance and message
transport of these groups, and the shut-down of their server will
automatically mean the loss of these groups to the rest of usenet.

- Other people believe (incorrectly) that even if Microsoft's servers do
not play a critical or necessary technical role for the operation of
these groups, that Microsoft nonetheless can *force* the world-wide
usenet to discontinue their use because the groups are Microsoft's legal
property.