I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

This newsgroup, in particular, seems to be vibrant and well
subscribed. The chess newgroups that I lurk on seem to be in the same
condition.

When I look at the Netscan statistics, I see signs that there are many
active groups.

Why this attitude by the ISP's?

I use two newsgroup providers, TeraNews being my backup, because my
ISP's provider is often out of whack. TeraNews is fine for a backup
but is often down.

However, I've had complaints from some that they don't see my posts
when they come through my ISP's provider (Voicenet, I believe) because
their system does not pick up the posts.

I've tried reading the group through Google but it seems to have a lot
of lag time between the time that posts are made and when they show up
on Google.

What is going on with this Usenet thing? Are the ISP's right in
claiming that Usenet is dying? And, given that the ISP's don't care,
what is the most reliable way to read and post on Usenet?


Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

Tom, I read it many times a day so I am a frequent user also. I have
noticed that MNAY other groups are basically dead. Maybe the victims
of too much spam, too much hate, too many ????




On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:26:57 GMT, Tom Watson
wrote:

I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

This newsgroup, in particular, seems to be vibrant and well
subscribed. The chess newgroups that I lurk on seem to be in the same
condition.

When I look at the Netscan statistics, I see signs that there are many
active groups.

Why this attitude by the ISP's?

I use two newsgroup providers, TeraNews being my backup, because my
ISP's provider is often out of whack. TeraNews is fine for a backup
but is often down.

However, I've had complaints from some that they don't see my posts
when they come through my ISP's provider (Voicenet, I believe) because
their system does not pick up the posts.

I've tried reading the group through Google but it seems to have a lot
of lag time between the time that posts are made and when they show up
on Google.

What is going on with this Usenet thing? Are the ISP's right in
claiming that Usenet is dying? And, given that the ISP's don't care,
what is the most reliable way to read and post on Usenet?


Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

Tom Watson wrote:

I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

snip

My next door neighbor works "network tech support" (internal to the
company) for Adelphia Cable. Prior to me showing him what "UseNet" was,
he didn't even know it existed. I suspect it is the same with many of the
"kids" working for various ISP's.

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
(Remove "SPAM" from email address to reply)

"Nova" wrote in message
...
snip

My next door neighbor works "network tech support" (internal to the
company) for Adelphia Cable. Prior to me showing him what "UseNet" was,
he didn't even know it existed. I suspect it is the same with many of the
"kids" working for various ISP's.


Boy, does that sound familiar. I have used 5 or 6 ISP's in as many years,
and I have frequently had to tell customer support what USENET was. The
better ISP's use more than one news feed, which helps with the missing posts
problem. I have frequently complained about Earthlink newsgroup service,
but in all fairness I have seen a dramatic improvement since they
implemented new servers and split their subscriber base into two groups,
East and West. Message retention seems to be longer, as well.

I do believe that the number of ISP subscribers which use USENET is low,
probably less than 5%, maybe even less.
--
Ken Vaughn
Visit My Workshop: http://home.earthlink.net/~kvaughn65/

The vast majority of people that I talk to have never heard of Usenet.

"Nova" wrote in message
...
Tom Watson wrote:

I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

snip

My next door neighbor works "network tech support" (internal to the
company) for Adelphia Cable. Prior to me showing him what "UseNet" was,
he didn't even know it existed. I suspect it is the same with many of the
"kids" working for various ISP's.

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA
(Remove "SPAM" from email address to reply)

"CW" wrote in message
news:xFRvb.210817$ao4.750180@attbi_s51...
The vast majority of people that I talk to have never heard of Usenet.

\
When I think of it I do not know of one other personal friend that uses
usenet. Most all have internet, they just have not discovered usenet.
Greg

In article xFRvb.210817$ao4.750180@attbi_s51,
says...
The vast majority of people that I talk to have never heard of Usenet.

I'm not surprised. About 5 years ago I helped my brother-in-law set up
his computer and hook up to a local ISP. When I asked the ISP about
newsgroups, he said that indeed he provided Usenet, but he never told any
customers about it unless they knew enough to ask him!

--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 22:29:29 GMT, Nova
wrote:
My next door neighbor works "network tech support" (internal to the
company) for Adelphia Cable. Prior to me showing him what "UseNet" was,
he didn't even know it existed. I suspect it is the same with many of the
"kids" working for various ISP's.

More to the point, it's true of the vast majority of Internet users
today. So as far as the ISPs are concerned, Usenet is not something
that very many subscribers care about, and not something that's worth
putting much time or money into.

My ISP has a pretty crappy news server. Often down, slow, lots of
missing messages, minuscule retention times. There are a couple of
on-line forums where the ISP has an official or at least semi-official
presence and when users complain about the news service, their
response is that they're tryin' but realistically, there's only so
much priority that they can give to a service that's used by perhaps
5-10% of their subscribers.


-- jc
Published e-mail address is strictly for spam collection.
If e-mailing me, please use jc631 at optonline dot net

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 22:29:29 GMT, Nova
wrote:

My next door neighbor works "network tech support" (internal to the
company) for Adelphia Cable. Prior to me showing him what "UseNet" was,
he didn't even know it existed. I suspect it is the same with many of the
"kids" working for various ISP's.

I'd agree with that.

I was an admin for a large, phone company owned, ISP from 1996-2000.
Back then, I was one of the few employees that actually used Usenet.

Our official policy was that it was not an advertised or premium
service. Very little money and effort was put forth on Usenet, and
our help desk probably didn't know what it was.

Barry

To paraphrase your own recent words, what you are now getting in Internet
access from the corporate ISP model currently in vogue is more sizzle and
less steak.

It is not UseNet that is dying, it is the technical competence required to
run an ISP, with all the attendant services like nntp, that has become a
victim of the general corporate incompetence in this country.

The attitude you remark upon has become prevalent as the smaller local
ISP's, which were plentiful during the early days of the Internet, have been
replaced with these large, corporate ISP's.

Many of the current problems can be traced directly to the technical
incompetence that results from hiring inexperienced IT personnel in order to
make the bottom line more attractive. Corporate ISP's like AT&T (one of the
VERY worst as far as technical competence is concerned, IMNSHO) try make it
easy on themselves with self-serving justifications for doing away with the
services we came to expect as part of the ISP package not all that long ago.

Those services that they can't outright do away with (yet) they reluctantly
continue to provide, but at reduced levels, and with none of the required
technical expertise to do the job well.

As a partner in a small Internet company, I deal with the situation on a
daily basis, spending increasingly more time wading through self serving
corporate directives aimed at justifying technical shortcuts, and arguing,
on behalf of our clients, with increasingly incompetent technical personnel
who are barely conversant with the basic underpinnings of the Internet.

AAMOF, it is getting so bad that I sometimes fancy you may eventually see
some of the older, pre-Internet networks, like FidoNet, rear their heads
again.

On second thought, there soon may be no one left competent enough to do even
that again.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/21/03


"Tom Watson" wrote in message
I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

This newsgroup, in particular, seems to be vibrant and well
subscribed. The chess newgroups that I lurk on seem to be in the same
condition.

When I look at the Netscan statistics, I see signs that there are many
active groups.

Why this attitude by the ISP's?

I use two newsgroup providers, TeraNews being my backup, because my
ISP's provider is often out of whack. TeraNews is fine for a backup
but is often down.

However, I've had complaints from some that they don't see my posts
when they come through my ISP's provider (Voicenet, I believe) because
their system does not pick up the posts.

I've tried reading the group through Google but it seems to have a lot
of lag time between the time that posts are made and when they show up
on Google.

What is going on with this Usenet thing? Are the ISP's right in
claiming that Usenet is dying? And, given that the ISP's don't care,
what is the most reliable way to read and post on Usenet?


Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 22:49:58 GMT, "Swingman" wrote:

AAMOF, it is getting so bad that I sometimes fancy you may eventually see
some of the older, pre-Internet networks, like FidoNet, rear their heads
again.

Aye, Cry Havoc and Release the Dogs of War!

(i thought fidonet was still extant)

Shall we all become eunuchs (shame on ye tommy, 'tis Unix that spells
it) again?

(tom's ready to fire up his old 2400 baud modem and ride to bbs
battle)


Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

"Tom Watson" wrote in message
s.com...
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 22:49:58 GMT, "Swingman" wrote:

(i thought fidonet was still extant)

It was last time I looked, but you better be prepared to read/write Russian.


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/21/03

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 00:00:27 GMT, "Swingman" wrote:



It was last time I looked, but you better be prepared to read/write Russian.

nyet ****ski?

(well, that's damned disappointing)




Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

Tom Watson writes:
nyet ****ski?
Privyet!

ne-poonimiu po russki. A Bac?
--
paka!
flip
Verso l'esterno! Verso l'esterno! Deamons di ignoranza.
Remove origin of the word spam from address to reply (leave "+")

In article .com,
"Swingman" wrote:

It is not UseNet that is dying, it is the technical competence required to
run an ISP, with all the attendant services like nntp, that has become a
victim of the general corporate incompetence in this country.

If you're looking for an ISP run by people who know what they're doing
and enjoy working with sophisticated customers, try Panix.

Swingman wrote:

AAMOF, it is getting so bad that I sometimes fancy you may eventually see
some of the older, pre-Internet networks, like FidoNet, rear their heads
again.

AFAIK, FidoNet never died. Don't quote me on that, but I think it's still
around after some fashion.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

"Tom Watson" wrote in message
s.com...

What is going on with this Usenet thing? Are the ISP's right in
claiming that Usenet is dying? And, given that the ISP's don't care,
what is the most reliable way to read and post on Usenet?


Try this site:
http://news.individual.net/

It's a usenet server based in Germany that is very reliable, fast, and free.
You can still keep your current access via your ISP and use this as a
back-up, or, do as I do and use it all the time, since it is much more
reliable than most ISP access is.

Lee K wrote:

Try this site:
http://news.individual.net/

It's a usenet server based in Germany that is very reliable, fast,
and free. You can still keep your current access via your ISP and use
this as a back-up, or, do as I do and use it all the time, since it
is much more reliable than most ISP access is.

One bummer:

http://news.individual.net/faq.html#5.3

5.3 May I mangle my "From:" header address so that I do not get SPAM?

No. We recommend to get an account with a free e-mail provider (such as
GMX, Yahoo, Hotmail, Bigfoot...) and to not read mails that go to that
address at all, only sporadically or in combination with suitable filter
mechanisms.
This has the same effect, but does not violate the netiquette, our policy or
other guidelines.
Another way is the usage of ". The owner of privacy.net has
given his permission to use that address for SPAM protection purposes.

-- Mark

Mark Jerde wrote:

One bummer:

http://news.individual.net/faq.html#5.3

5.3 May I mangle my "From:" header address so that I do not get SPAM?

Same deal with the University of Berlin server I was talking about a bit
ago. That sounds like maybe the same thing by a different name. (Maybe
they've changed the name.)

That one in particular is what I had in mind when I said "very reasonable
rules."

I've been on usenet for 10 years now, and I have never used a fake address.
Right choice for me, and no, I'm not preaching, but abiding by that rule
has never bothered me.

They *will* dump you if they catch you breaking that rule. I think they'll
warn you first.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

In article ,
says...
Same deal with the University of Berlin server I was talking about a bit
ago. That sounds like maybe the same thing by a different name. (Maybe
they've changed the name.)

Correct. It is the same server. Great free newsfeed of non-binary
groups.

--
Where ARE those Iraqi WMDs?

Larry Blanchard wrote:

Same deal with the University of Berlin server I was talking about a bit

Correct. It is the same server. Great free newsfeed of non-binary
groups.

Makes me feel a little guilty every time I hear how broke Germany is though.
Why are the German taxpayers paying for me to have a free news server? I
don't get it.

It's not like they don't know who and where I am though.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

There were approximately 11 MILLION messages posted in the last 30 days.
How does that square with your ISP's comments? IT DOESN'T!! Perhaps
they are shirking their duties as "providers" with less than stellar
support of the NG's.

dave

Tom Watson wrote:

I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

This newsgroup, in particular, seems to be vibrant and well
subscribed. The chess newgroups that I lurk on seem to be in the same
condition.

When I look at the Netscan statistics, I see signs that there are many
active groups.

Why this attitude by the ISP's?

I use two newsgroup providers, TeraNews being my backup, because my
ISP's provider is often out of whack. TeraNews is fine for a backup
but is often down.

However, I've had complaints from some that they don't see my posts
when they come through my ISP's provider (Voicenet, I believe) because
their system does not pick up the posts.

I've tried reading the group through Google but it seems to have a lot
of lag time between the time that posts are made and when they show up
on Google.

What is going on with this Usenet thing? Are the ISP's right in
claiming that Usenet is dying? And, given that the ISP's don't care,
what is the most reliable way to read and post on Usenet?


Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

How much of that was porn?


"Bay Area Dave" wrote in message
om...
There were approximately 11 MILLION messages posted in the last 30 days.
How does that square with your ISP's comments? IT DOESN'T!! Perhaps
they are shirking their duties as "providers" with less than stellar
support of the NG's.

dave

Tom Watson wrote:

I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

This newsgroup, in particular, seems to be vibrant and well
subscribed. The chess newgroups that I lurk on seem to be in the same
condition.

When I look at the Netscan statistics, I see signs that there are many
active groups.

Why this attitude by the ISP's?

I use two newsgroup providers, TeraNews being my backup, because my
ISP's provider is often out of whack. TeraNews is fine for a backup
but is often down.

However, I've had complaints from some that they don't see my posts
when they come through my ISP's provider (Voicenet, I believe) because
their system does not pick up the posts.

I've tried reading the group through Google but it seems to have a lot
of lag time between the time that posts are made and when they show up
on Google.

What is going on with this Usenet thing? Are the ISP's right in
claiming that Usenet is dying? And, given that the ISP's don't care,
what is the most reliable way to read and post on Usenet?


Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

In article ,
Bay Area Dave wrote:
There were approximately 11 MILLION messages posted in the last 30 days.
How does that square with your ISP's comments? IT DOESN'T!! Perhaps
they are shirking their duties as "providers" with less than stellar
support of the NG's.

dave

*snork* 11 million messages in 30 days is a drop in the bucket. A *full*
newsfeed these days (circa 45,000 newsgroups) requires most of the bandwidth
of a dedicated T-3 circuit, 24 hrs/day. That is 45 mbit/sec, or 9 Mbyte/sec.
The full feed is probably only about 600 *GIGABYTES* of traffic _per_day_.

Well over 90% of that traffic is in the 'alt.binaries.*' hierarchy -- the
vast majority of which is "dirty pictures", stolen computer software, etc.
5-10 _million_ MESSAGES PER DAY, *just* in 'alt.binaries.*' hierarchy, is
probably realistic, And _at_least_as_many_more_ for the rest of USENET.



Those who do 'know about' USENET tend to use it fairly heavily. Those who
"don't know" about it, _don't_use_it_ (oddly enough!

Those who "don't know" outnumber those who "do know", by a ratio that is
probably 'in the _thousands_' to one, if not higher.

Statistic: My provider has around a million customers. at _peak_times_
there are a couple of _hundred_ connections active to the news server.
in the middle of the night, that number is around a -dozen-.





Tom Watson wrote:

I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

This newsgroup, in particular, seems to be vibrant and well
subscribed. The chess newgroups that I lurk on seem to be in the same
condition.

When I look at the Netscan statistics, I see signs that there are many
active groups.

Why this attitude by the ISP's?

I use two newsgroup providers, TeraNews being my backup, because my
ISP's provider is often out of whack. TeraNews is fine for a backup
but is often down.

However, I've had complaints from some that they don't see my posts
when they come through my ISP's provider (Voicenet, I believe) because
their system does not pick up the posts.

I've tried reading the group through Google but it seems to have a lot
of lag time between the time that posts are made and when they show up
on Google.

What is going on with this Usenet thing? Are the ISP's right in
claiming that Usenet is dying? And, given that the ISP's don't care,
what is the most reliable way to read and post on Usenet?


Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

On 25-Nov-2003, (Robert Bonomi) wrote:

The full feed is probably only about 600 *GIGABYTES* of traffic _per_day_.

I distinctly remember when a local sysop was complaining that if Usenet
continued to grow, he'd have to upgrade to a 20MB drive to contain it.
That was an $800 upgrade for a clone!

Mike

In article e.rogers.com,
Michael Daly wrote:
On 25-Nov-2003, (Robert Bonomi) wrote:

The full feed is probably only about 600 *GIGABYTES* of traffic _per_day_.

I distinctly remember when a local sysop was complaining that if Usenet
continued to grow, he'd have to upgrade to a 20MB drive to contain it.
That was an $800 upgrade for a clone!

I go back to the days when you could get a 'full feed' over a 19.2kbit/sec
dial-up modem -- in about 3 hrs. When it was possible to 'eyeball' _every_
article. And there were people who _did_ exactly that.

I don't see Usenet dying at all. It is an expense to maintain Usenet
servers, so to cut costs some ISPs don't offer them or only offer a
small subset. I use AT&T because they carry a full set of newsgroups
and have been very reliable.

On 2003/11/22 4:26 PM, "Tom Watson" wrote:

I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

I think that you have to look at it from the business perspective of the
ISPs. What they are seeing is that fewer and fewer of their new customers
are using Usenet, or even know of it. Hence the ISPs get relatively few
requests for Usenet news group access. When Comcast took over the @Home
market here, they did not seem to have any plans to support Usenet until
there was a significant outcry from existing customers.

For people who have come to the use of computers in the last five years, the
Internet is the same as the Web. They have no idea of how many other
services can ride over the basic bit transport of the Internet. And as more
services, such as email, are web-ified, we lose some of the distinctive
nature of services such as email, list servers and Usenet news groups.

The other factor which may be causing ISPs to consider dropping Usenet
service is the danger of legal action for intellectual property violations.
Let's be honest here. Many of the binary newsgroups are rampant with pirated
software, music, video and images. Every time some idiot posts a copyrighted
work without permission, every carrier and server that transports that post
faces some risk of legal action. The ISPs may not be held liable, but even
the threat of having to mount a legal defense in court is daunting to risk
adverse corporations.

If you are worried about the health of Usenet, do two things - let you ISP
know how important it is to you and introduce some other people to the
wonders on news group resources.

Unfortunately the first response is pretty valid. Having been in the IT
field for over 25 years and having worked for a few ISP's, I can say most
ISP's don't want to expend the capital to support a small client base. The
younger people, and a lot of uniformed people use chat rooms for similar
information sharing (among other uses) Guess we're just dinosaurs........and
I remember dialing into a BBS (bulletin board service) ........so there
won't be any guessing what BBS means!

Dave

"Tom Watson" wrote in message
s.com...
I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

This newsgroup, in particular, seems to be vibrant and well
subscribed. The chess newgroups that I lurk on seem to be in the same
condition.

When I look at the Netscan statistics, I see signs that there are many
active groups.

Why this attitude by the ISP's?

I use two newsgroup providers, TeraNews being my backup, because my
ISP's provider is often out of whack. TeraNews is fine for a backup
but is often down.

However, I've had complaints from some that they don't see my posts
when they come through my ISP's provider (Voicenet, I believe) because
their system does not pick up the posts.

I've tried reading the group through Google but it seems to have a lot
of lag time between the time that posts are made and when they show up
on Google.

What is going on with this Usenet thing? Are the ISP's right in
claiming that Usenet is dying? And, given that the ISP's don't care,
what is the most reliable way to read and post on Usenet?


Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

David Babcock wrote:
Unfortunately the first response is pretty valid. Having been in the IT
field for over 25 years and having worked for a few ISP's, I can say most
ISP's don't want to expend the capital to support a small client base. The
younger people, and a lot of uniformed people use chat rooms for similar
information sharing (among other uses) Guess we're just dinosaurs........and
I remember dialing into a BBS (bulletin board service) ........so there
won't be any guessing what BBS means!

My first computer/modem was a Monroe 220 with a 110 coupler doing a
timeshare with Great Lakes Naval. Or an old Morrow if you want to talk
PCs that were store bought not homebrew. As for BBSs I ran RBBS and
Wildcat, the others were too clunky to be fun. And now my wife
complains when her T-1 is slow. How times change.

Dave in Fairfax
--
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net

It depends on the ISP's implementation of the usenet/newsgroup
protocols. If the ISP is trying to run news servers the update and
transmission can be a major problem, Some of the Midsized and smaller
ISP's use a passthru service. Supernews is both a usenet repository,and
a ISP passthru provider. I believe Google also provides the service but
is not as fast on posts. It takes less technical knowledge to provide
passthru service, Just a couple of entries in the DNS. To figure out if
your ISP is providing passthru or local news service do a "Ping" on the
newsserver name. It will show if the server is inhouse or a passthru.
in Tom's case it seems they are trying to run it in house.

Tom

Tom Watson wrote:
I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

This newsgroup, in particular, seems to be vibrant and well
subscribed. The chess newgroups that I lurk on seem to be in the same
condition.

When I look at the Netscan statistics, I see signs that there are many
active groups.

Why this attitude by the ISP's?

I use two newsgroup providers, TeraNews being my backup, because my
ISP's provider is often out of whack. TeraNews is fine for a backup
but is often down.

However, I've had complaints from some that they don't see my posts
when they come through my ISP's provider (Voicenet, I believe) because
their system does not pick up the posts.

I've tried reading the group through Google but it seems to have a lot
of lag time between the time that posts are made and when they show up
on Google.

What is going on with this Usenet thing? Are the ISP's right in
claiming that Usenet is dying? And, given that the ISP's don't care,
what is the most reliable way to read and post on Usenet?


Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

Tom Watson wrote:

Why this attitude by the ISP's?

Usnet mostly appeals to us old guys who were on the net back before the web
came into being. I'd wager that the vast majority of ISPs are run by
people who got into the computer scene late in the game, after the AOL
revolution. These are people who are helpless if they can't point and
click their way around a problem.

My own is no exception either. They really don't have a clue, and I'd wager
they probably don't understand half of the things I use my connection to
do. I'm totally beyond the realm of their tech support drones anyway
because I run a Linux box. Boy, you should hear them babble pathetic
excuses to me when I say the L word.

However, I've had complaints from some that they don't see my posts
when they come through my ISP's provider (Voicenet, I believe) because
their system does not pick up the posts.

I get your posts. My primary server is at the University of Berlin. They
give free accounts to anyone who's willing to abide by their very
reasonable rules. It's the best free news server I've found, but even
using that one and two others, I still frequently miss original posts.

what is the most reliable way to read and post on Usenet?

Not fool-proof, but the best way I've found is to have multiple upstream
servers. I'm not sure how you might go about doing that without running
your own news spool, but you can run your own spool even on Windows.
Something called Hamster I think. I know little about it, other than it's
"the closest thing to Leafnode Windows has."

I have a crontab run fetchnews every 15 minutes, if I'm online. It pulls
articles from my three upstream sources, then stores them on my hard drive.
I connect to my own server and get the articles instantly. Posts go out
every 15 minutes. I can also run fetchnews manually if I have some
immediate need, such as sending out the last round of posts before going to
bed, or starting the fetch as soon as I get home from work. It's a good
way to go for a modem user too, since I don't have to wait for the
individual articles to download. Once I'm reading, I'm reading; any
waiting is up front.

The only down side of doing it this way is if you read a lot of groups.
Fetchnews doesn't let you at any of the new stuff until the whole run is
done, and if you subscribe to a couple dozen groups, it takes a good bit of
time to finish (by modem anyway.) I tend to only read one or two at a
time, so this is no problem. I can always connect to the upstream servers
directly if I have some need to read a group to which I don't normally
subscribe. KNode makes that easy.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 22:04:11 -0500, Silvan wrote:


Not fool-proof, but the best way I've found is to have multiple upstream
servers. I'm not sure how you might go about doing that without running
your own news spool, but you can run your own spool even on Windows.
Something called Hamster I think. I know little about it, other than it's
"the closest thing to Leafnode Windows has."

If your into a slight bit of hacking, google up "dnntpd".

-Doug

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:26:57 GMT, Tom Watson
brought forth from the murky depths:

I read someone's comment the other day about how their ISP claimed
that "no one uses newsgroups anymore."

That's absolutely false. Hell, you _alone_ have responded to
at least 50 trolls on this group this month. Your 1/2 dozen
troll-responding buddies did the same. glare


My own ISP has made the same comment to me when I've called to
complain about inadequate Newsgroup service. They seem to feel that
their customer base uses Usenet in only a marginal fashion. They act
as though they couldn't be bothered.

I think it's a burden to handle all the traffic so they
say it's dying and just don't service it like they should.
Switch ISPs, then stick with a good one.


--------------------------------------
PESSIMIST: An optimist with experience
--------------------------------------------
www.diversify.com - Web Database Development

Larry Jaques wrote:

Switch ISPs, then stick with a good one.

I'll agree to that last point in particular. I've seen'em come, and I've
seen'em go. Dad changes ISPs more often than I change shoes, always trying
to find the best deal. I've had the same ISP for 10 years.

One reason I haven't taken the plunge into cable is because I'd not only be
paying way more than seems reasonable, but I'd also be trading my dead
reliable local provider for a big name conglomerate that isn't even sure if
it will ever emerge from bankruptcy.

Hell, I do banking the same way. My bank doesn't do ATMs or debit cards or
any of that other fancy ****, but I've been dealing with the same bank for
15 years. Just about every other bank in town has been bought by some
national conglomerate in that time.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

You got lucky with the bank. I've been with one for 23 years. They've
changed names 4 times.

"Silvan" wrote in message
...
Larry Jaques wrote:

Switch ISPs, then stick with a good one.

I'll agree to that last point in particular. I've seen'em come, and I've
seen'em go. Dad changes ISPs more often than I change shoes, always
trying
to find the best deal. I've had the same ISP for 10 years.

One reason I haven't taken the plunge into cable is because I'd not only
be
paying way more than seems reasonable, but I'd also be trading my dead
reliable local provider for a big name conglomerate that isn't even sure
if
it will ever emerge from bankruptcy.

Hell, I do banking the same way. My bank doesn't do ATMs or debit cards
or
any of that other fancy ****, but I've been dealing with the same bank for
15 years. Just about every other bank in town has been bought by some
national conglomerate in that time.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

CW wrote:

You got lucky with the bank. I've been with one for 23 years. They've
changed names 4 times.

I guess they're not big enough to be attractive to any of the mega corps.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

Spoken like an urban type. For some, there is a single choice. Or pay
distance charges.

The answer, as I see it, is the demographic with the money to spend, and the
place where you can put advertising are the winners, a bunch of old BBS and
FidoFolks are soon to be losers. The trend favors the Napster-type format
or the forums like Woodcentral, where the ads flow freely.

You think any of the kids understand the Windows modem icon? I remember my
300 had the top molded to mate comfortably with a standard desk set, as
pictured. None of the kids I asked had any idea that telephones used to
connect in line with modems, or that there were handset types with receiver
cups. Probably antiques for sale on e-bay.

Come to think of it, I think I may still have that UDS 300 downstairs....

"Silvan" wrote in message
...
Larry Jaques wrote:

Switch ISPs, then stick with a good one.

I'll agree to that last point in particular. I've seen'em come, and I've
seen'em go. Dad changes ISPs more often than I change shoes, always
trying
to find the best deal. I've had the same ISP for 10 years.

One reason I haven't taken the plunge into cable is because I'd not only
be
paying way more than seems reasonable, but I'd also be trading my dead
reliable local provider for a big name conglomerate that isn't even sure
if
it will ever emerge from bankruptcy.

There goes that old "perspective" again. There was something very satisfying
in one of the old text based Adventure games, where the graphics were in
_your_ mind and imagination, instead of the incessant on-screen flash, whiz,
bang, of the ADD generation(s).

Of course, a prerequisite to enjoyment was a mind richly prepared by reading
and education, a commodity currently in short supply.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/21/03


"George" wrote in message

The answer, as I see it, is the demographic with the money to spend, and
the
place where you can put advertising are the winners, a bunch of old BBS
and
FidoFolks are soon to be losers. The trend favors the Napster-type format
or the forums like Woodcentral, where the ads flow freely.

You think any of the kids understand the Windows modem icon? I remember
my
300 had the top molded to mate comfortably with a standard desk set, as
pictured. None of the kids I asked had any idea that telephones used to
connect in line with modems, or that there were handset types with
receiver
cups. Probably antiques for sale on e-bay.

Come to think of it, I think I may still have that UDS 300 downstairs....

George wrote:

Spoken like an urban type. For some, there is a single choice. Or pay
distance charges.

An urban type... That's sort of funny.

I guess comparatively speaking, maybe, but I wouldn't characterize this as
an urban area.

I think the main factor here is that we got into technology early.
Supposedly the Blacksburg Electronic Village project was the very first one
to open the doors of the internet to the general public. After a couple
years of state-sponsored $6 internet, they talked a pair of companies into
starting ISPs, and kicked all the non-university types off the BEV.

We had ISPs back in 1993, and I don't think very many places did back then.
Definitely not many (or not any) places as rural in nature as this one.
(I'm still with the same ISP I signed up with after getting kicked off the
BEV, incidentally. My first provider was Radford University, then the BEV,
and then these guys for the past 10 or so years.)

You think any of the kids understand the Windows modem icon? I remember
my 300 had the top molded to mate comfortably with a standard desk set, as

Sounds like you'd lump me in with the "kids." So yes, I do. We had one of
those things when I was a wee lad, but I never used it for much. When I
got into BBSing in about middle school, it was via a PC with an internal
1200 baud modem. Dad used the 300 baud acoustic coupler deal for work,
from a Heathkit dumb terminal.

He might still have it. Should I try to sell it on eBay?

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/