Re: FAQ Posting problem

VK said the following on 4/29/2006 9:13 AM:
> Dr John Stockton wrote:
>> Better to post it to a standards-respecting system. One cannot rely on
>> such as Google to receive and post an article unmodified, even if they
>> do so at present. Also, it's getting tempting to kill-rule anything
>> posted /via/ Google.
>
> That would be a highly unwise decision because say comp.lang.javascript
> currently has 3460 active Gougle Groups subscribers, so this way you
> would cut off approx. 30% of the monthly newsgroup traffic; and the
> next year (if nothing awful happens with Google and the trend speed
> remains the same) it will be 70%-90%. A bit of too high price to pay to
> not see VK anymore IMHO :-)

3460 in c.l.j or in all Usenet Groups?

But, I tend to agree with John, the people who post/answer from Google
Groups tend to follow the "I am using Google, so I don't know what the
F@#$K you are talking about, it shows what I am replying to up above,
why should I quote it?" mentality.

And, to date, I have not seen anyone that answers from Google Groups
that the answers they give tend to be ones you would want to keep track
of or read/follow the advice. Witness: electrician. (I will refrain from
using you in that example).

> <http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.scripting.jscript/about>
> and btw:
> <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/about>
>
>
>> I'd suggest asking the UK Committee, who are well-known to be standards-
>> respecting and collectively technically adept, what server they suggest.
>> It can do no harm.
>
> Write right to the Queen! :-)

Amen! JRS does tend to think that anything UK is golden and anything
non-UK is junk.

> I guess one is still missing the root of the problem: and it is the
> same as a software locked after the trial period expired.

Your analogies, however wrong, amuse me at times. The problems are not
the same.

> Is it a problem? Yep. How to solve it? Pay damn money for a full version.
> If one is not willing to pay, uninstall it and forget it, or... you know
> what people do sometimes ;-)
>
> <http://www.teranews.com/>
> one time setup fee of $3.95
>
> <http://www.giganews.com/>
> $7.99/mo

And if neither of those support automated posting then it wouldn't do a
lot of good. But that still isn't the problem.

> No one is willing to pay? One needs to ask then in
> <google.public.support.general> if making a program using Google Groups
> access is not a reverse engineering or an interface stealing. I thought
> I saw some mention of it, but I was wrong - so an additional official
> clarification is needed.
>
> P.S. Usenet by its nature is a spammers' dream. Just post *one* ads in
> each group and it will be automatically replicated across all connected
> servers. So Usenet in its old implementation can be considered as a
> network of computers permanently infected by ILoveYou-like virus. Sorry
> for a rude analogy, but it shows why account-less posting in Usenet is
> blocked everywhere.

And it is also why you see a trend towards (and not away from) address
munging in Usenet postings.

> P.P.S. But it doesn't eliminate the possibility to find some caring
> soul in some organisation to get an account on their news server. I
> don't have any.

I have one and am willing to share it if it would work with what Jim has
now. But, it requires authentication and that is the problem Jim has now
is that his software won't do the authentication part.

-- 
Randy
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq & newsgroup weekly
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/