You know, I was just jumping around, bored really and came across this
interesting thread. You guys really know your stuff and I say this
because I keep up with cars, the gas prices and all that stuff every
day and still learned something here.

mike
ocengas.com

wrote in message
...
You know, I was just jumping around, bored really and came across this
interesting thread. You guys really know your stuff and I say this
because I keep up with cars, the gas prices and all that stuff every
day and still learned something here.

mike
ocengas.com

You'll be even more impressed when you learn to access Usenet directly
instead of via Google Groups.
--
Graham.

%Profound_observation%

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Graham. wrote:

wrote in message
...
You know, I was just jumping around, bored really and came across
this interesting thread. You guys really know your stuff and I say
this because I keep up with cars, the gas prices and all that stuff
every day and still learned something here.

mike
ocengas.com

You'll be even more impressed when you learn to access Usenet directly
instead of via Google Groups.

.. . . and learn to quote the message you're replying to, so we know what
you're talking about!
--
Cheers,
Roger
______
Email address maintained for newsgroup use only, and not regularly
monitored.. Messages sent to it may not be read for several weeks.
PLEASE REPLY TO NEWSGROUP!

On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 14:46:09 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

In an earlier contribution to this discussion, Graham.
wrote:

wrote in message
news:6151b714-
...
You know, I was just jumping around, bored really and came across this
interesting thread. You guys really know your stuff and I say this
because I keep up with cars, the gas prices and all that stuff every
day and still learned something here.

mike
ocengas.com

You'll be even more impressed when you learn to access Usenet directly
instead of via Google Groups.

. . . and learn to quote the message you're replying to, so we know what
you're talking about!


Maybe I'm just cynical thanks to many years on t'Web, but it looked more
like blogspam to me anyway...

In article ,
PCPaul wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 14:46:09 +0100, Roger Mills wrote:

In an earlier contribution to this discussion, Graham.
wrote:

wrote in message
news:6151b714-
...
You know, I was just jumping around, bored really and came across
this interesting thread. You guys really know your stuff and I say
this because I keep up with cars, the gas prices and all that stuff
every day and still learned something here.

mike ocengas.com

You'll be even more impressed when you learn to access Usenet
directly instead of via Google Groups.

. . . and learn to quote the message you're replying to, so we know
what you're talking about!


Maybe I'm just cynical thanks to many years on t'Web, but it looked more
like blogspam to me anyway...

Indeed - exactly the same message was sent to more than one group. And
it's gmail.

--
*Time is the best teacher; unfortunately it kills all its students.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 20 Jul, 17:52, "Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:
You'll be even more impressed when you learn to access Usenet
directly instead of via Google Groups.

. . . and learn to quote the message you're replying to, so we know
what you're talking about!
Maybe I'm just cynical thanks to many years on t'Web, but it looked more
like blogspam to me anyway...

Indeed - exactly the same message was sent to more than one group. And
it's gmail.

Its sad that genuine gmail / google groups posters like myself get
tarred with a dullards brush.

I've used usenet since 1993 through a variety of tools, but now as my
internet access is spread across various PCs (some of which I own,
some I don't) I find google groups access to usenet for posting
purposes a really functional way to keep abreast of posts. I try to
follow appropriate netiquette in terms of not top posting, snipping
irrelevant details etc (though I'm sure I could do better).

But I post knowing that some people automatically discard postings
from google groups, and that most people sneer at us.

Please treat us all on our merits - we're not all idiots that think
that uk.d-i-y is a forum.......

Matt

wrote:


Please treat us all on our merits - we're not all idiots that think
that uk.d-i-y is a forum.......


Welcome to the board. :-)

Totally agree - there are plenty of reasons to use Google Groups. To be
honest, I would rather like my newsreader to have a GG feature so that I
can easily get archive posts without popping over to a browser. (Hmmm -
maybe that is a feature I haven't noticed?)

--
Rod

Hypothyroidism is a seriously debilitating condition with an insidious
onset.
Although common it frequently goes undiagnosed.
www.thyromind.info www.thyroiduk.org www.altsupportthyroid.org

In article
,
wrote:
Indeed - exactly the same message was sent to more than one group. And
it's gmail.

Its sad that genuine gmail / google groups posters like myself get
tarred with a dullards brush.

Possibly - but gmail are a pain for allowing so much spam and doing
nothing about it. Other ISPs do care more.
I blocked gmail for a while and the spam level dropped considerably -
both email and news.

--
*If we weren't meant to eat animals, why are they made of meat?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 22 Jul, 08:51, wrote:

But I post knowing that some people automatically discard postings
from google groups, and that most people sneer at us.

Who does that?

And do you care? 8-)


I use Google Groups during the day, a real NNTP client at home.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article
,
wrote:
Indeed - exactly the same message was sent to more than one group. And
it's gmail.

Its sad that genuine gmail / google groups posters like myself get
tarred with a dullards brush.

Possibly - but gmail are a pain for allowing so much spam and doing
nothing about it. Other ISPs do care more.


While your comments may be valid as regards gmail offering
opportunities to spam newsgroups, I think it is worth pointing out
that gmail's control of spam to email inboxes is second to none.

I use gmail for my private email, and find that its handling of spam
is outstandingly good. In the last year, out of tens of thousands of
emails delivered to my inbox, I have had only four messages that I
could describe as spam. A few genuine messages a week get delivered
to my spam folder, but these are easy to spot because there is so
little "real" spam.

I have also used Hotmail and Yahoo! Mail, and while they have both
improved considerably over the years, they are still way behind gmail.

So as an "ISP", I rate Google Mail (gmail) very highly indeed.

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article
,
wrote:
Indeed - exactly the same message was sent to more than one group. And
it's gmail.

Its sad that genuine gmail / google groups posters like myself get
tarred with a dullards brush.

Possibly - but gmail are a pain for allowing so much spam and doing
nothing about it. Other ISPs do care more.
I blocked gmail for a while and the spam level dropped considerably -
both email and news.

I still do - is it better now ?

--
geoff

On Jul 22, 11:22*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
Possibly - but gmail are a pain for allowing so much spam and doing
nothing about it. Other ISPs do care more.
*I blocked gmail for a while and the spam level dropped considerably -
both email and news.

On Jul 22, 11:22*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

Possibly - but gmail are a pain for allowing so much spam and doing
nothing about it. Other ISPs do care more.
*I blocked gmail for a while and the spam level dropped considerably -
both email and news.

Can you whitelist usernames with 'ukdiy' in with your newsreader?

Might be a way to differentiate genuine gmail postings from the spam
ones.

cheers,
Pete.

Bruce wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article
,
wrote:
Indeed - exactly the same message was sent to more than one group. And
it's gmail.

Its sad that genuine gmail / google groups posters like myself get
tarred with a dullards brush.
Possibly - but gmail are a pain for allowing so much spam and doing
nothing about it. Other ISPs do care more.


While your comments may be valid as regards gmail offering
opportunities to spam newsgroups, I think it is worth pointing out
that gmail's control of spam to email inboxes is second to none.

I use gmail for my private email, and find that its handling of spam
is outstandingly good. In the last year, out of tens of thousands of
emails delivered to my inbox, I have had only four messages that I
could describe as spam. A few genuine messages a week get delivered
to my spam folder, but these are easy to spot because there is so
little "real" spam.

I have also used Hotmail and Yahoo! Mail, and while they have both
improved considerably over the years, they are still way behind gmail.

So as an "ISP", I rate Google Mail (gmail) very highly indeed.


While I have no figures as to how good Google' filters are - and I
suspect they're pretty good, as they have so much data to work from -
the fact that you don't see much spam means their filter isn't throwing
up many "false negatives" - messages not tagged as spam when they are.

It says nothing about how many "false positives" - messages marked, and
silently destroyed, when they aren't spam.

I get about 200 spams a day. About 3/4 of them get filtered
automatically; I'd say 95% of the rest are also spam - but I like to check.

Andy

Andy Champ wrote:

Bruce wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote:

In article
,
wrote:
Indeed - exactly the same message was sent to more than one group. And
it's gmail.

Its sad that genuine gmail / google groups posters like myself get
tarred with a dullards brush.
Possibly - but gmail are a pain for allowing so much spam and doing
nothing about it. Other ISPs do care more.


While your comments may be valid as regards gmail offering
opportunities to spam newsgroups, I think it is worth pointing out
that gmail's control of spam to email inboxes is second to none.

I use gmail for my private email, and find that its handling of spam
is outstandingly good. In the last year, out of tens of thousands of
emails delivered to my inbox, I have had only four messages that I
could describe as spam. A few genuine messages a week get delivered
to my spam folder, but these are easy to spot because there is so
little "real" spam.

I have also used Hotmail and Yahoo! Mail, and while they have both
improved considerably over the years, they are still way behind gmail.

So as an "ISP", I rate Google Mail (gmail) very highly indeed.


While I have no figures as to how good Google' filters are - and I
suspect they're pretty good, as they have so much data to work from -
the fact that you don't see much spam means their filter isn't throwing
up many "false negatives" - messages not tagged as spam when they are.

It says nothing about how many "false positives" - messages marked, and
silently destroyed, when they aren't spam.

I get about 200 spams a day. About 3/4 of them get filtered
automatically; I'd say 95% of the rest are also spam - but I like to check.


I doubt that there are many "false positives", if any.

I took up Google's invitation to try gmail (beta) in 2005. A large
proportion of my incoming emails need my response, but I have never
once had anyone contact me and ask me why I have not replied. With
Hotmail, it used to happen several times a week.

On 19 Jul, 00:43, "Graham." wrote:

You'll be even more impressed when you learn to access Usenet directly
instead of via Google Groups.

I used to use various newsreaders from 1993 (Pine is the first one I
remember), but I've used Google Groups for years now (since it was
Dejanews). Clearly I'm odd, but I prefer it. In particular I find I
can answer most of my uk.d-i-y questions by searching the archive
without having to bother you all, and on those occasions when I do
need to post it seems to make sense to do so through the same
interface.

Martin Pentreath wrote:

On 19 Jul, 00:43, "Graham." wrote:

You'll be even more impressed when you learn to access Usenet directly
instead of via Google Groups.

I used to use various newsreaders from 1993 (Pine is the first one I
remember), but I've used Google Groups for years now (since it was
Dejanews). Clearly I'm odd, but I prefer it. In particular I find I
can answer most of my uk.d-i-y questions by searching the archive
without having to bother you all, and on those occasions when I do
need to post it seems to make sense to do so through the same
interface.


It's just another opportunity for snobbery on the part of people who
are insecure and feel a need to denigrate others.

I am not interested in any of that. I concentrate on what people are
saying, and I don't judge people by the route their message took to
arrive on my screen. I have learnt a lot from other people on this
newsgroup; whether they use a newsreader or post via Google Groups
makes not the slightest difference.

Personally, I use Agent newsreader, but when I'm away from home I
access newsgroups via Google. Either way, I'm the same person, but my
ideas are apparently of less value if sent via Google Groups!

That cannot be true, they are pretty worthless regardless of which
route they took. ;-)

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:45:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:

Andy Champ wrote:


It says nothing about how many "false positives" - messages marked, and
silently destroyed, when they aren't spam.

I get about 200 spams a day. About 3/4 of them get filtered
automatically; I'd say 95% of the rest are also spam - but I like to
check.


I doubt that there are many "false positives", if any.


Gmail keeps all it's 'identified spam' for 30 days anyway, so I skim it
every couple of weeks. I think in two years I've found three posts that
were false positives, and all did look a bit 'spammy'.

PCPaul wrote:

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:45:00 +0100, Bruce wrote:

Andy Champ wrote:


It says nothing about how many "false positives" - messages marked, and
silently destroyed, when they aren't spam.

I get about 200 spams a day. About 3/4 of them get filtered
automatically; I'd say 95% of the rest are also spam - but I like to
check.


I doubt that there are many "false positives", if any.


Gmail keeps all it's 'identified spam' for 30 days anyway, so I skim it
every couple of weeks. I think in two years I've found three posts that
were false positives, and all did look a bit 'spammy'.


Thanks Paul. I had very low expectations of gmail, having been a very
satisfied user of Hotmail since its introduction in 1996, before it
was taken over by Microsoft.

It is far, far better than Hotmail. Presumably Google learned from
Hotmail's mistakes, but it is a very user-friendly service and one
that appears to work extremely well.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Bruce saying
something like:


Thanks Paul. I had very low expectations of gmail, having been a very
satisfied user of Hotmail since its introduction in 1996, before it
was taken over by Microsoft.

It is far, far better than Hotmail. Presumably Google learned from
Hotmail's mistakes, but it is a very user-friendly service and one
that appears to work extremely well.

It really is excellent. I recently used gmail as a spam filter hop to
clean up the feed to an old established hotel email address which
couldn't be changed as it was too well known to customers.
--
Dave
GS850x2 XS650 SE6a

"It's a moron working with power tools.
How much more suspenseful can you get?"
- House