On 7/30/2014 11:46 AM, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2014 23:34:38 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> "dsi1" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 7/29/2014 2:34 PM, jmcquown wrote:
>>>> On 7/29/2014 4:53 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>>>> What problem are you having with Google Groups? Freaking hating a
>>>>> program seems to be an
>>>>> overreaction.
>>>>
>>>> Google Groups is atrocious. It appears to have been created as an
>>>> afterthought. There is no method for blocking spam (the majority of
>>>> which seems to come from people with gmail accounts). Sure, you can
>>>> report them; fat lot of good it will do. The [lack of] formatting
>>>> sucks; the line spacing if you post a reply to someone who uses GG is
>>>> annoying as hell. How's that for starters?
>>>>
>>>> Jill
>>>
>>> Spam has been a part of the Usenet long before GG. Google ain't to blame.
>>> You can make complaints to the poster's HTTP server or Google Groups but
>>> why would you want to spend your time in such a way? The formatting
>>> problem is annoying but the sheer entertainment value of folks blowing
>>> their tops over this small thing makes it all worthwhile. (-:
>>
>> Yes but if you can filter it, you don't see it.
>
> Unfiltered spam is one of the many reasons why I hate Google's usenet
> groups. If they can filter spam from their email, they should be able
> to filter it from usenet too - but they don't.
>

Usenet gives them no financial incentive to do so, since it isn't
owned by anyone. With no responsible party, there's no interest in
doing anything to change the Usenet experience. And *that*, boys and
girls, is the real reason most ISPs dumped Usenet support. Unlike the
WWW, Usenet makes no money for anyone. Better to push people onto the
Web, where they can pay for their experiences via advertising and data
scraping.