Re: Apple II Google Group

[et472@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black)]

"Chris Alaimo" (cpalaimo@gmail.com) writes:

> I am not saying that it is.  I am just saying that it would be nice to
> be able to use the Google Group as an 'advanced interface', acting as
> sort of a web portal for the usenet group.  I am not suggesting moving
> anything anywhere.  I am trying to figure out a means of doing so right
> now.
> 
But this newsgroup is "mirrored" at google, since google archives
newsgroups.

If the only purpose of this new "group" is to mirror this, then
there is no purpose for it.

This is another case of someone creating a new space because they
can, rather than because there is an existing need.  

Some people don't like the newsgroups, that are communal and 
cooperative, and want to go to branded spaces on the web where 
some commercial entity is defining the experience.  Any rules 
to Usenet derive from the experience, and on the whole it is 
all pretty much common sense.  

I find it amusing that some lament that it's "so hard" to
create a new Usenet newsgroup, when in reality the process
of creating a newsgroup is not about keeping them from being
created, but about ensuring there is an actual need for
a new newsgroup.  Commercial places like yahoo and google
make it really easy to create newsgroups, but then you get
all these empty spaces because they are ego driven or created
without any really thought to the need, and then the item
that's really needed, content, is not there.

Note you came here and posted about it, yet most of the people here
have no problem with here.  You expect us to flock to your space,
when if you really need people to make this new space viable (and
you don't have a viable space unless there are posters), you need
to find the people who aren't already here.

As for the filespace, in the old days everything was really open.
Then the commercialization of the internet came along, and instead
of communal and cooperative spaces, we get branded spaces where you
have to register to get access.  That may not mean anything to
recent immigrants to the internet, but it is a radical change
for people who've been around even a decade.  So those files
are not accessible to the world at large, only members of your
little group.  And that's the notion of the commercial space,
not because you've decided the files should be accessible only
by "members".

You've followed the traditional route for this sort of group.
Make an announcement in an existing newsgroup, and basically
say the purpose is because you don't like newsgroups.  Dismiss
the existing discussion, yet too often the new "group" has
virtually none.  And any files collected are not open to
the world.

This happened last year with a radio related group last
year.  Discussion is a trickle, and basically it's lost
to a wider audience, and the "group" loses the context of
a wider number of participants.  The "useful files" are
not so useful if you have to register to a commercial entity
in order to see them.

  Michael