Re: Google Group scistatmath

MY SUBJECTIVE impressions:

There are at least 3 different ways to get news/discussion groups.
1) usenet groups such as this one. Usenet was added to the net when unix became popular. My impression is that it outlived predecessors ARPANET and DECNET, and its IBM contemporary BITNET.
These use NNTP the old protocol and do not have fonts, font size, bolding, etc. At least in Netscape filters can be applied only to SENDER and SUBJECT. not to other fields such as the body.

2) Discussion lists. *-l. These are based on listserv, listproc, and major domo. These use SMTP or POP just like any other e-mail. The are usually hosted by universities, professional organizations, etc. as public services. These include formatting capabilities and usually an option to be able to use HTML. At least in Netscape many of the SMTP fields can be used to filter messages.

3) Google. Google also uses regular mail, SMTP or POP. It is free, except that it has ads.

My personal preference is for the mail based approaches.

To me the filtering is crucial. I have participated much less in the sci.stat.* newsgroups because of the hostility, bitterness, name calling, and motivated misunderstanding in the past year or so.

I have joined the scistatmath Google group primarily because it was started to provided a more collegial and professional forum.

The mail based approaches also allow formatting of messages which for me, makes it easier to emphasize, etc.

Art Kendall
Social Research Consultants.






Richard Ulrich wrote:
On 4 Nov 2006 21:23:58 -0800, "Reef Fish"
<large_nassua_grouper@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[snip]

When I did a search of the STATISTICS about the two groups at
present, I found that there are not 18 subcribers to scistatmath,
while there are 1926 subscribers to sci.stat.math.


Where do you find those?

I learned a couple of days ago that Google-groups makes
available the number of its subscribers, so I did some browsing.

I saw 1292 for sci.stat.math and 13 for scistatmath. Today, I see 1296 for sci.stat.math and 15 for scistatmath. Typos, or
some other source?

That 1292 suggests that there *are* still 100 lurkers who never post, for every poster in a month, since it reflects only the minority who read through Google-groups.

Here is a question for anyone -- Is "scistatmath" from Google
going to be a Google-only group? My Usenet provider lists over 100,000 groups, including a variety of mis-spellings, but it did not include scistatmath when I last checked.

[snip]

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Google Group scistatmath
    ... They would not be in the Google counts. ... necessarily even be countable by the newservers. ... it did not include scistatmath when I last checked. ... scistatmath will never be on USENET. ...
    (sci.stat.math)
  • Re: RAID 1
    ... >> repeated context that also clutters the archives, ... I suppose I should have given up on usenet ... he didn't have google to help sift through the cruft and probably ... It shows parts of your 100 most recent posts with links to the full text ...
    (comp.os.linux.networking)
  • Re: Pleas for help from clueless students?
    ... Some people seem to have real problems finding anything on google for ... However a lot of questions patently are homework. ... might never have heard of usenet can now offer their opinions and ... I haven't got as far as using outlook for news yet. ...
    (comp.arch.embedded)
  • Re: Troll Activity Going Through The Roof!!! Amazing!!!
    ... Google has permitted large numbers of individuals to access usenet who ... this thread is a person who, if you run a search on all his posts in this ... posting volume through the eyes of the Google interface, ...
    (alt.sports.football.pro.ne-patriots)
  • Re: Report this spam to: groups-abuse@google.com
    ... The usenet is still routinely spammed. ... since GOOGLE IS NOT USENET. ... L3-Com/Microdyne as an engineering tech in RF, Digital, Embedded ... to Ft. Greely Alaska to work at the base's Radio and TV station. ...
    (sci.electronics.misc)
Loading