Teapot group...
 

I've just started a teapots group for teapot makers and collectors...
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/Teapots

1/27/05


> I've just started a teapots group for teapot makers and collectors...
> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/Teapots
>

George,

Put it on UseNet so everyone can play.

Michael
The teapot maker and collector

Michael Plant wrote:
>
> 1/27/05
>
>
> > I've just started a teapots group for teapot makers and collectors...
> > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/Teapots
> >
>
> George,
> Put it on UseNet so everyone can play.
>

That's easier said than done, Michael. If he does it in alt, which
is fairly simple, it will be very poorly propagated. If he wants to
do it in rec, he will have to go through the "new newsgroup" RFD
and voting procedure, which takes a long time and a fair bit of
effort. The Google group is a fairly attractive alternative, and
I believe anybody can in fact play if they just sign up on Google.


Randy

getting stuff on usenet is a nightmare. which is both good and bad.


"Michael Plant" > wrote in message
...
> 1/27/05
>
>
> > I've just started a teapots group for teapot makers and collectors...
> > http://groups-beta.google.com/group/Teapots
> >
>
> George,
>
> Put it on UseNet so everyone can play.
>
> Michael
> The teapot maker and collector
>

1/27/05


> Michael Plant wrote:
>>
>> 1/27/05
>>
>>
>>> I've just started a teapots group for teapot makers and collectors...
>>> http://groups-beta.google.com/group/Teapots
>>>
>>
>> George,
>> Put it on UseNet so everyone can play.
>>
>
> That's easier said than done, Michael. If he does it in alt, which
> is fairly simple, it will be very poorly propagated. If he wants to
> do it in rec, he will have to go through the "new newsgroup" RFD
> and voting procedure, which takes a long time and a fair bit of
> effort. The Google group is a fairly attractive alternative, and
> I believe anybody can in fact play if they just sign up on Google.
>
>
> Randy

Randy,

I thought setting up a new newsgroup was a simple thing. What do I know.
Thanks for the information. While we're on it, I'm confused by Google Groups
as opposed to the Listserves now run by Yahoo, etc. I belong to several
MailLists (Listserves, or whatever you call them). Some are run from
universities around the world, some are Yahoo, others are professional and
private, like the old bulletin boards, I guess. How are Google Groups
different from Yahoo groups (eg, TeaMail)?

Also, I guess I just like the democracy implicit on usenet, although some of
the newsgroups I participated in in the past are spammed to death. Also, I'm
sorry to see big operations like Google and Yahoo taking over these groups.
Slowly everything opens to commercial venture and advertising. In all this,
I agree with Jim.

I'm happily drinking Meng Hai Mini Beeng Cha Pu'erh from Silk Road Teas.

Michael

Michael

Michael

Falky /27/05


> getting stuff on usenet is a nightmare. which is both good and bad.


Yeah, so Randy said. Nothing's simple, is it?

Michael

Falky /27/05


> getting stuff on usenet is a nightmare. which is both good and bad.


Yeah, so Randy said. Nothing's simple, is it?

Michael

"Michael Plant" > wrote:

> I thought setting up a new newsgroup was a simple thing. What do I know.
> Thanks for the information. While we're on it, I'm confused by Google Groups
> as opposed to the Listserves now run by Yahoo, etc. I belong to several
> MailLists (Listserves, or whatever you call them). Some are run from
> universities around the world, some are Yahoo, others are professional and
> private, like the old bulletin boards, I guess. How are Google Groups
> different from Yahoo groups (eg, TeaMail)?

I have less than 100% confidence here, but I believe that the Google Group that
was set up for teapots is a "bulletin board" type just like Usenet. It sounds
like you were on a Yahoo mailing list, which is of course a different type.
Yahoo also has bulletin board types of groups.

> Also, I guess I just like the democracy implicit on usenet, although some of
> the newsgroups I participated in in the past are spammed to death. Also, I'm
> sorry to see big operations like Google and Yahoo taking over these groups.
> Slowly everything opens to commercial venture and advertising. In all this,
> I agree with Jim.

Well, yes I do agree here. I was involved in Usenet in the very early days -
way back in 1989! Having it very open and public is a great asset. But,
as you point out, some groups then just sink to the "lowest common
denominator".


--
Randy
(if replying by e-mail, remove SPAMFREE and DeLeTe from my address)
Current book recommendation: BLUE LIKE JAZZ