radioacti...@gmail.com <radioactiveseattle@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bryan profoundly irritated Adam:
>
> "...become a subscriber on a genuine News server and stop using Google Groups. Just stop using it entirely."
> -----------------------
> I hope you'll pardon my ignorance--but many of you may not, I gather--but as Google (also, I gather) now owns usenet groups these days, my understanding is it's IMPOSSIBLE to access it WITHOUT using Google Groups. And some of us
> are too dumb--never-trained, really--to simply (1) figure out what a "genuine news server" IS (or at least distinguish them from all the non-genuine ones I presume are out there), and (2) then how to set up things on our computer to
> do so. (Heck, I always thought any "server" was a large mainframe in some office somewhere around the globe.)

Well,it is an absolute core,foundational attribute of the Network News Tranfer Protocol that the network of newsgroups is not "ownable",can not have a center.
EVERYTHING is dispersed,feeds propagate from wherever they are generated to wherever they are received.
Some groups have moderators,some hierarchies have ways to restrict where they are received,Goodle plays that game at it pleases.
But no one can ever "own usenet groups" (which most strictly refers only to the Big-7-plus-humanities. that I will NEVER call the Big 8,the oddball is a permanent oddball) or the protocol as a whole.
Collaborative fora set rules that are largely followed but no one domain can ever be "headquarters".

> While many people find installing software as easy as buying a candy bar from a vending machine, I find it INCREDIBLY intimidating, and am cautioned you risk corrupting your operating system if you mess up on any of the half-dozen
> or more steps. Further, I avoid subscriptions of all sorts, for fear that you inadvertently get billed forever.
>
> [Michael in the U.K.: I use a (supposedly more-intuitive-than-PC) Apple desktop, so I'm confident that my "I am not a robot" prompt is NOT Microsoft software. As it happens, it seems to have been a temporary problem, which is how
> I was able to post that "Testing" item that caused this e-outrage.]
>
> Several times I've been accused (years ago) herein of faking my cyber incompetence; never mind that I can't IMAGINE what would be the upside of such dishonesty. Few dim-witted people recognize their cranial limitations--most of
> y'all are well acquainted with the famed Dunning-Kruger effect, I'm sure--but jeeze, I DO understand advanced algebra and even much cosmology and nuclear physics...but I find the protocols in even the most basic software to be
> cripplingly non-intuitive. (Meanwhile, the prevalent ethos among the computer engineering community seems to be that you're just dumb or not trying if you don't get it.)
>
> Yep, every darned one of you fine folks are clearly more adept--indeed, WAY more adept--at cyber technology than I am. I salute you for that. REALLY.
>
> And yes, I realize few (if any) of you value my widely-published [1971-2005], adjective-dense writing style; indeed, some are even seem ANGERED by it. But it's puzzling why you hold my untrained-in-internet situation as further
> evidence of how lame-brained you consider me. (Or worthy of banishment herefrom.)
>
> To those whose goal may be to merely make me "feel bad" about all this, good ahead and savor the pleasure--you're succeeding. And yeah, during weak moments in my own winding-down life, I've ALSO tried to make people feel bad about
> themselves after one uncalled-for misdeed or another. But every such instance was someone I KNEW; it's unfathomable to me why people desire to textually savage people they've never met or even spoken with on the phone, all the
> while typically working under pseudonyms. (Adam, Louis, Kenny and many others herein ARE happy exceptions, of course, to this sniping-from-the-shadows practice; I for one am proud that I've never even ONCE posted a single word
> anywhere on the internet without my [true] name AND [true] geographical location.)
>
> [Oh, and specifically to Louis: truly sad to learn you disdain my mini-essays; your ever-principled intellect was one I actually thought might appreciate what I modestly offer to this foru. Your annoyance notwithstanding, kindly
> rest assured I look forward to each and every posting of yours (though I don't understand them all; probably "my bad", not yours), and remain in awe of your tireless ability to marshal copious arcana.]

Not sure which expression of annoyance you refer to;
the issue here is to get everyone currently using Google as their news server/reader
to load tin or trn or slrn or knews or some other reader and point it at an open NNTP
server where they can read and post.

This is INN-dispensable.

> Still, for my own part, I nonetheless also value every one of y'all's collective contributions hereto, and even (usually) admire them, EVEN WHEN I disagree PROFOUNDLY with whatever points or ideological arguments made. When I
> first learned about newsgroups circa 1996, I was informed it was a newfangled journalistic medium. I strive to uphold that in my utterly-inconsequential way (which is why I try to always answer in my essays the five Ws and the H,
> journalistic basics that precious few Yahoo! and AOL writers practice), but wonder why so many people seem to instead regard it principally as an arena for so-called "flaming".
>
> Granted, I don't appreciate impoliteness from anyone (and do my darnedest to avoid projecting it to any of you, even WHEN it is flung my way), but I do realize this is an era where civility is in short supply. Alas.
>
> I wish you each good luck and good will as we round out 2023 and anticipate 2024.
>
> BRYAN STYBLE/Florida

-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.