Re: Another bug in Google Groups
- From: "Edward Green" <spamspamspam3@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 10 Feb 2007 15:28:38 -0800
On Feb 7, 10:17 am, "Sue..." <suzysewns...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 4, 8:53 pm, "Edward Green" <spamspamsp...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In case anybody is interested...
I think if you hit "reply", and then take too long pondering over your
reply, Google times you out, doesn't post your message, but doesn't
give you any warning or error message either, consigning your post to
the void without mention.
It's just interesting how a modern, hip, savvy, hot, young -- and
probably antiwar, politically correct, green, diverse... oh, and very
well capitalized... company can "improve" a service they offer, adding
more bells and whistles than a Class A4 4-6-2 Pacific steam
locomotive, and somehow completely ignore basic functionality, just
like a bad, old, image-driven, top-heavy, sluggish, Dilbertized, un-
nimble, this _is_ your father's Oldsmobile, Chrysler bailout, Big
Who says sociology isn't a science? The systems follow laws damn well
as ineluctable as the evolution of thermodynamic systems.
Posted (without thinking too long) via Google...
Yes... I experienced the same thing pondering too long
over my ramblings. I received the yellow confirmation notice
but the message has been lost over 24 hours.
I thought I had received the confirmation too -- although Eric Gisse
claims he has received a yellow warning at least once.
It is worth noting that the engine accepted a message
from another poster while I was writing. Serial number ?
I've concluded that it just an undocumented feature that
gives priority to the most worthy poster. I know my
therapist is going to beat me up for thinking that way
but I probably deserve that too. ;-)
It's an undocumented feature, alright.
I was going to start another OT thread, but what's the point? It was
to be something like "Google really _did_ kill Usenet".
Yeah, yeah, yeah... another paranoid sour grapes rant: but let's
consider the working hypothesis. Years ago, regulars griped that the
quality of the net went down when AOL ramped up. The reason? AOL
made the venerable net look like just another, ahem, spew-hole for its
inmates. And now Google, which is trying to be all things to all
people, continues the tradition, making Usenet just about seemlessly
transparently just another extension of Google Groups.
Now, anyone always could and did find their way onto Usenet...
unmoderated Usenet... but as long as the thing was at least a _little_
obscure; required you to make the decision to go out an acquire a
newsreader and learn how to use it, or (better), a dial up account,
for which the old net was optimized, there was _some_ barrier to
entry. You had to have your somewhat serious kook, like Archimedes
Plutonium, who was a kind of known character, and not that hard to
But now every fool who knows how to open a web browser -- and by now
every fool does -- can post their deathless spoo _directly_ to the net
with no more effort or prior investment than it would take to IM their
friends. The shear volume of spuff (new words invite their own
coinage in the richness of the spuzum), though technically it could
still be filtered, discouraged all but the most determined Serious
Persons, and left the field in possession of the spuzzle-fuzers,
strutting about and farting into the air in horrible simulacrum of
conversation like Boschian boffle-gorzers (the ones parading around
with the trumpets in their arse).
The only question is, was this a _deliberate_ kill off, like the
spread of small-pox infected blankets among the Indians, or and
accidental act of mindless vandalism -- oops! _sorry_ about your
tapestries! We just brought in the moths to filter the candle light.
Better send this rant now, before it's too late...
- Re: Another bug in Google Groups
- From: Ben Newsam
- Re: Another bug in Google Groups