Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)

On 26 Feb 2008 06:40:40 +0200, Phil Carmody
<thefatphil_demunged@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

quasi <quasi@xxxxxxxx> writes:

On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:36:21 -0800, Michael Press <rubrum@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

Google groups is a bad usenet denizen.

I don't disagree with that.

So why aren't you encouraging people not to use it?

Because it won't work.

For one thing, new Google Groups users will just keep on arriving, It
would be a full time job trying to redirect them.

And what would I redirect them to? None of the free alternatives that
I'm aware of are sufficiently low tech for the typical newbie.

quasi
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
    ... quasi wrote: ... Telling Google Groups users to use a different newsreader is missing a ... That is your opinion. ... You wrote "punishing these new users for using Google Groups." ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
    ... quasi writes: ... Telling Google Groups users to use a different newsreader is missing a ... both unfair and pointless (not to mention repetitive, ... You wrote "punishing these new users for using Google Groups." ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
    ... quasi wrote: ... that telling people to not use google groups is not ... burdening my conscience, to blackguard google groups ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
    ... quasi wrote: ... Telling Google Groups users to use a different newsreader is missing a ... both unfair and pointless (not to mention repetitive, ... You wrote "punishing these new users for using Google Groups." ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: -- a cure for spam (fwd)
    ... quasi wrote: ... Telling Google Groups users to use a different newsreader is missing a ... both unfair and pointless (not to mention repetitive, ... You wrote "punishing these new users for using Google Groups." ...
    (sci.math)