Blogs replacing Usenet problem?

You know how the economic crisis hit you, because the few who
spoke out about its coming were drowned out by the herd ?
Blogs are a crappy substitute for newsgroups:
= for a hi-volume forum the inability to thread is disasterous,
= it's absurd to dedicate a whole full-feature browser to the task,
= under linux: opera is difficult to read,
= lynx fetches me other contributer's [supposed to be confidential]
email-addresses,
= links doesn't wait for the cookie-prompts'
= if ya'll are managing OK, it's because you are herd-followers,
with never an original though, so just by luck the
used-by-95%-of-the-population-sytem works OK for you.
There's a difference between 'works according to the officially
agreed specification', and 'works by current consensus/popularity'

What can we do about this problem?

== TIA.

(E-Mail Removed) writes:

> You know how the economic crisis hit you, because the few who
> spoke out about its coming were drowned out by the herd ?
> Blogs are a crappy substitute for newsgroups:
> = for a hi-volume forum the inability to thread is disasterous,
> = it's absurd to dedicate a whole full-feature browser to the task,
> = under linux: opera is difficult to read,
> = lynx fetches me other contributer's [supposed to be confidential]
> email-addresses,
> = links doesn't wait for the cookie-prompts'
> = if ya'll are managing OK, it's because you are herd-followers,
> with never an original though, so just by luck the
> used-by-95%-of-the-population-sytem works OK for you.
> There's a difference between 'works according to the officially
> agreed specification', and 'works by current consensus/popularity'
>
> What can we do about this problem?

Simple enough, if you like Usenet, use it.

But whatever you do, don't post to Usenet from Google Groups.

(E-Mail Removed) wrote in
news:hco34m$j71$(E-Mail Removed):

> You know how the economic crisis hit you, because the few who
> spoke out about its coming were drowned out by the herd ?
> Blogs are a crappy substitute for newsgroups:
> = for a hi-volume forum the inability to thread is disasterous,
> = it's absurd to dedicate a whole full-feature browser to the task,
> = under linux: opera is difficult to read,

with infintely variable resolutions and scrolling multiple sized desktops.
How?

> = lynx fetches me other contributer's [supposed to be confidential]
> email-addresses,
> = links doesn't wait for the cookie-prompts'
> = if ya'll are managing OK, it's because you are herd-followers,
> with never an original though, so just by luck the
> used-by-95%-of-the-population-sytem works OK for you.
> There's a difference between 'works according to the officially
> agreed specification', and 'works by current consensus/popularity'
>
> What can we do about this problem?
>
Wait until the shiny new smell wears off. It's a fad. My big peeve is the
fact that there is now no central place to look for unsupported
information anymore in a lot of cases. Too many newsgroups have died off.

--
(setq (chuck nil) car(chuck) )

On 2009-11-03, (E-Mail Removed) <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> You know how the economic crisis hit you, because the few who
> spoke out about its coming were drowned out by the herd ?
> Blogs are a crappy substitute for newsgroups:
> [...]
> What can we do about this problem?
>
>

Who is this "we" of whom you speak?
And what are you smoking?

--
indi

I thought blogs are getting replaced by twitter.



--

+0==)]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>

<MBB>-

Indi <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 2009-11-03, (E-Mail Removed) <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > You know how the economic crisis hit you, because the few who
> > spoke out about its coming were drowned out by the herd ?
> > Blogs are a crappy substitute for newsgroups:
> > [...]
> > What can we do about this problem?
> >
> >
>
> Who is this "we" of whom you speak?

"We" is obviously our dear friend Chris "write-only" Glur from South
Africa, using one of his endless number of nyms! You *really* should pay
more attention, Indi! :-)

> And what are you smoking?

*Anything*, as long as it's bandwidth friendly.

MBB <A@b_nd.com> wrote:
> I thought blogs are getting replaced by twitter.

s/replaced/used/
s/ter/s/

In article <hco34m$j71$(E-Mail Removed)>,
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>You know how the economic crisis hit you, because the few who
>spoke out about its coming were drowned out by the herd ?
>Blogs are a crappy substitute for newsgroups:
>= for a hi-volume forum the inability to thread is disasterous,
>= it's absurd to dedicate a whole full-feature browser to the task,
>= under linux: opera is difficult to read,
>= lynx fetches me other contributer's [supposed to be confidential]
> email-addresses,
>= links doesn't wait for the cookie-prompts'
>= if ya'll are managing OK, it's because you are herd-followers,
> with never an original though, so just by luck the
> used-by-95%-of-the-population-sytem works OK for you.
>There's a difference between 'works according to the officially
>agreed specification', and 'works by current consensus/popularity'
>
>What can we do about this problem?
>
>== TIA.
>

IT will never happen.
--
Member - Liberal International This is (E-Mail Removed) Ici (E-Mail Removed)
God, Queen and country! Never Satan President Republic! Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://twitter.com/rootnl2k http://www.myspace.com/502748630
For the latest World News go to http://www.cuttingedge.org/ - Lest we forget 2009 .

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>(E-Mail Removed) writes:
>
>> You know how the economic crisis hit you, because the few who
>> spoke out about its coming were drowned out by the herd ?
>> Blogs are a crappy substitute for newsgroups:
>> = for a hi-volume forum the inability to thread is disasterous,
>> = it's absurd to dedicate a whole full-feature browser to the task,
>> = under linux: opera is difficult to read,
>> = lynx fetches me other contributer's [supposed to be confidential]
>> email-addresses,
>> = links doesn't wait for the cookie-prompts'
>> = if ya'll are managing OK, it's because you are herd-followers,
>> with never an original though, so just by luck the
>> used-by-95%-of-the-population-sytem works OK for you.
>> There's a difference between 'works according to the officially
>> agreed specification', and 'works by current consensus/popularity'
>>
>> What can we do about this problem?
>
>Simple enough, if you like Usenet, use it.
>
>But whatever you do, don't post to Usenet from Google Groups.

There are other alternatives to Google Groups. Look at top1000.com IIRC.

I am listed there.
--
Member - Liberal International This is (E-Mail Removed) Ici (E-Mail Removed)
God, Queen and country! Never Satan President Republic! Beware AntiChrist rising!
http://twitter.com/rootnl2k http://www.myspace.com/502748630
For the latest World News go to http://www.cuttingedge.org/ - Lest we forget 2009 .

On 2009-11-03, Frank Slootweg <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Indi <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>> Who is this "we" of whom you speak?
>
> "We" is obviously our dear friend Chris "write-only" Glur from South
> Africa, using one of his endless number of nyms! You *really* should pay
> more attention, Indi! :-)
>

Yes, perhaps I should.

>> And what are you smoking?
>
> *Anything*, as long as it's bandwidth friendly.

That's the spirit.

--
indi