Guest guest Posted June 6, 2002 Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 I prefer to get email messages. I don't have much problems with the volume because I can easily skip those I am not interested in. And I like to have local archives. Roman Berg wrote: > This mailing list averaged over 37 e-mails per day last month, and that was > a bit of a lull--in the three months prior to that it averaged about 60 per > day. I don't know about the rest of you, but that's too much e-mail for me. > How many of you would be interested in a Usenet newsgroup? Here's what I've > been able to come up with in terms of arguments for and against: > > Advantages: > -No e-mail! > -The ability to group messages by thread and maintain the thread hierarchy, > thus allowing you to ignore threads or parts of threads in which you have no > interest. > -Archiving at Google, which is much better than 's archives, and > without the annoying ads. > > Disadvantages: > -It may take a while to get everybody's ISP to carry it, but in the worst > case, anyone should be able to read it at Google, which, again, is a much > more pleasurable experience than reading the archives at . > -Typically Usenet newsgroups are unmoderated, which means that anyone can > post anything. This does occasionally result in spammers and morons coming > out of the woodwork. It's also possible to create a moderated newsgroup, but > that would require someone to do the moderating. I believe that a moderated > newsgroup can be run in a semi-moderated fashion, where all posts are > automatically accepted except those from specific individuals who have been > blacklisted or put on probation, which can be reviewed or thrown out as > appropriate. Moderation is fairly rare; my provider lists about 100 > moderated newsgroups out of tens of thousands, and most of them are for > groups likely to draw excessive controversy, trolling, and mockery. > > I'll do all the research and work to petition for its creation, unless > anyone with prior experience would like to volunteer. I'm currently thinking > of the following names: > > alt.support.diet.price > alt.support.diet.nourishing-traditions > alt.support.diet.traditional > rec.food.traditional > > Let me know if you're interested and whether you can think of any other > issues or have any better ideas for names. Note that newsgroups not in the > alt.* hierarchy tend to take longer to get approved, but often propagate > faster once they do. > > Berg > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2002 Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 > >Disadvantages: 1) spam Spam and SPAM, you will be kept up to date on all the latest porn sites and " send money " offerings 2) Total lack of control of participants Changing from email list to newsgroup has ruined two groups I have been on in the past because people with marginal interest/knowledge can become very disruptive and there is no way to ban trouble makers. If you don't like the way your email client handles the mail, change email programs . I use Agent, by Forte that lists email by subject, same as a news group, but then so did Outlook Express from microsoft, but Agent has none of the holes to allow virus attacks that LookOut has mike Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2002 Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 Sounds good to me. Astrid ----- Original Message ----- From: Roman <r_rom@...> < > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 7:40 AM Subject: Re: Too much mail! > > Berg wrote: > > > This mailing list averaged over 37 e-mails per day last month, and that was > > a bit of a lull--in the three months prior to that it averaged about 60 per > > day. I don't know about the rest of you, but that's too much e-mail for me. > > How many of you would be interested in a Usenet newsgroup? Here's what I've > > been able to come up with in terms of arguments for and against: > > > > Advantages: > > -No e-mail! > > -The ability to group messages by thread and maintain the thread hierarchy, > > thus allowing you to ignore threads or parts of threads in which you have no > > interest. > > -Archiving at Google, which is much better than 's archives, and > > without the annoying ads. > > > > Disadvantages: > > -It may take a while to get everybody's ISP to carry it, but in the worst > > case, anyone should be able to read it at Google, which, again, is a much > > more pleasurable experience than reading the archives at . > > -Typically Usenet newsgroups are unmoderated, which means that anyone can > > post anything. This does occasionally result in spammers and morons coming > > out of the woodwork. It's also possible to create a moderated newsgroup, but > > that would require someone to do the moderating. I believe that a moderated > > newsgroup can be run in a semi-moderated fashion, where all posts are > > automatically accepted except those from specific individuals who have been > > blacklisted or put on probation, which can be reviewed or thrown out as > > appropriate. Moderation is fairly rare; my provider lists about 100 > > moderated newsgroups out of tens of thousands, and most of them are for > > groups likely to draw excessive controversy, trolling, and mockery. > > > > I'll do all the research and work to petition for its creation, unless > > anyone with prior experience would like to volunteer. I'm currently thinking > > of the following names: > > > > alt.support.diet.price > > alt.support.diet.nourishing-traditions > > alt.support.diet.traditional > > rec.food.traditional > > > > Let me know if you're interested and whether you can think of any other > > issues or have any better ideas for names. Note that newsgroups not in the > > alt.* hierarchy tend to take longer to get approved, but often propagate > > faster once they do. > > > > Berg > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2002 Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 - >How many of you would be interested in a Usenet newsgroup? Here's what I've >been able to come up with in terms of arguments for and against: I'd only even consider a moderated newsgroup to help cut the spam, but spammers are extremely clever, and as well as getting by filters much too easily to post spam, do much more trolling for email addresses on Usenet. The only way it would really work would be for every post to require approval, and who can do that? I also don't mind the volume on this list, though I do hate the archives. Eudora spits all Native Nutrition messages into a separate folder and I can read through dozens of messages pretty quickly, skimming the ones of marginal interest. Only the longer ones with links I follow up take much time. I do wish there were proper thread management -- something only available on Compuserve and Usenet -- but the drawbacks of Usenet are too great, IMO. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2002 Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 ----- Original Message ----- From: " Idol " <Idol@...> < > Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2002 8:41 AM Subject: Re: Too much mail! > - > > >How many of you would be interested in a Usenet newsgroup? Here's what I've > >been able to come up with in terms of arguments for and against: > > I'd only even consider a moderated newsgroup to help cut the spam, but > spammers are extremely clever, and as well as getting by filters much too > easily to post spam, do much more trolling for email addresses on > Usenet. The only way it would really work would be for every post to > require approval, and who can do that? The part about trolling for addresses is something worth taking into consideration (though I post to other newsgroups enough that it wouldn't really make a difference to me), but is spam posted to newsgroups really that much of a problem? In most of the newsgroups I read, spam accounts for fewer than 10% of the threads (which is a much smaller proportion of the total messages), and those are usually easily identified by the subject line. There are a few which consist of > 50% spam, but these are mostly groups which have been more or less abandoned, so that even infrequent spam outnumbers legitimate messages. > I also don't mind the volume on this list, though I do hate the > archives. Eudora spits all Native Nutrition messages into a separate > folder and I can read through dozens of messages pretty quickly, skimming > the ones of marginal interest. I do the same with Outlook, but Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2002 Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 - >but is spam posted to newsgroups really >that much of a problem? In most of the newsgroups I read, spam accounts for >fewer than 10% of the threads Well, considering that we get maybe one spam a week here, if that, yes. 10% would be far more than we have now. We'd also get a lot more trolls bugging us about advocating saturated fat and whatnot. >I do the same with Outlook, but Your message got cut off. Anyway, other than the thread view -- a huge, HUGE benefit we're missing out on -- I don't see much difference between skipping messages in a dedicated email client folder and skipping messages on Usenet. Absent other factors, the thread view would make it easy, but the addition of spam and troll messages would probably make it harder and more time-consuming on Usenet. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2002 Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 Personally, I hate change. :-) Belinda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2002 Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 I have also thought about dropping this list, but before I go to 's suggestion maybe we could stop using this list as a chat room. There are too many unnecessary replies, stuff like * THANKS FOR THE INFO* On Monday I have 125 messages, most are asking common sense questions. I have gotten allot of good info here and I would miss that, but I can not handle the message load. ine in WA -----Original Message----- From: Berg [mailto:brberg@...] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 8:53 PM Subject: Too much mail! This mailing list averaged over 37 e-mails per day last month, and that was a bit of a lull--in the three months prior to that it averaged about 60 per day. I don't know about the rest of you, but that's too much e-mail for me. How many of you would be interested in a Usenet newsgroup? Here's what I've been able to come up with in terms of arguments for and against: Advantages: -No e-mail! -The ability to group messages by thread and maintain the thread hierarchy, thus allowing you to ignore threads or parts of threads in which you have no interest. -Archiving at Google, which is much better than 's archives, and without the annoying ads. Disadvantages: -It may take a while to get everybody's ISP to carry it, but in the worst case, anyone should be able to read it at Google, which, again, is a much more pleasurable experience than reading the archives at . -Typically Usenet newsgroups are unmoderated, which means that anyone can post anything. This does occasionally result in spammers and morons coming out of the woodwork. It's also possible to create a moderated newsgroup, but that would require someone to do the moderating. I believe that a moderated newsgroup can be run in a semi-moderated fashion, where all posts are automatically accepted except those from specific individuals who have been blacklisted or put on probation, which can be reviewed or thrown out as appropriate. Moderation is fairly rare; my provider lists about 100 moderated newsgroups out of tens of thousands, and most of them are for groups likely to draw excessive controversy, trolling, and mockery. I'll do all the research and work to petition for its creation, unless anyone with prior experience would like to volunteer. I'm currently thinking of the following names: alt.support.diet.price alt.support.diet.nourishing-traditions alt.support.diet.traditional rec.food.traditional Let me know if you're interested and whether you can think of any other issues or have any better ideas for names. Note that newsgroups not in the alt.* hierarchy tend to take longer to get approved, but often propagate faster once they do. Berg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2002 Report Share Posted June 6, 2002 I have created a specific email account for this and two other Groups. Never had a spam message. I stay out of usenet groups becuase I can't read 250 messages a day, more than half of them from trouble makers. Just try a week on alt.support.diet.low-carb and see for yourself. > This mailing list averaged over 37 e-mails per day last month, and that was > a bit of a lull--in the three months prior to that it averaged about 60 per > day. I don't know about the rest of you, but that's too much e-mail for me. > How many of you would be interested in a Usenet newsgroup? Here's what I've > been able to come up with in terms of arguments for and against: > > Advantages: > -No e-mail! > -The ability to group messages by thread and maintain the thread hierarchy, > thus allowing you to ignore threads or parts of threads in which you have no > interest. > -Archiving at Google, which is much better than 's archives, and > without the annoying ads. > > Disadvantages: > -It may take a while to get everybody's ISP to carry it, but in the worst > case, anyone should be able to read it at Google, which, again, is a much > more pleasurable experience than reading the archives at . > -Typically Usenet newsgroups are unmoderated, which means that anyone can > post anything. This does occasionally result in spammers and morons coming > out of the woodwork. It's also possible to create a moderated newsgroup, but > that would require someone to do the moderating. I believe that a moderated > newsgroup can be run in a semi-moderated fashion, where all posts are > automatically accepted except those from specific individuals who have been > blacklisted or put on probation, which can be reviewed or thrown out as > appropriate. Moderation is fairly rare; my provider lists about 100 > moderated newsgroups out of tens of thousands, and most of them are for > groups likely to draw excessive controversy, trolling, and mockery. > > I'll do all the research and work to petition for its creation, unless > anyone with prior experience would like to volunteer. I'm currently thinking > of the following names: > > alt.support.diet.price > alt.support.diet.nourishing-traditions > alt.support.diet.traditional > rec.food.traditional > > Let me know if you're interested and whether you can think of any other > issues or have any better ideas for names. Note that newsgroups not in the > alt.* hierarchy tend to take longer to get approved, but often propagate > faster once they do. > > Berg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 8, 2002 Report Share Posted June 8, 2002 Berg wrote: > This mailing list averaged over 37 e-mails per day last month, and that was > a bit of a lull--in the three months prior to that it averaged about 60 per > day. I don't know about the rest of you, but that's too much e-mail for me. > How many of you would be interested in a Usenet newsgroup? Here's what I've > been able to come up with in terms of arguments for and against: I'm afraid I'd never look at it under those circumstances. I prefer email for the same reasons as Roman mentioned. Peace, Kris , gardening in northwest Ohio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.