Where did everbody go?

One of the additional problems is that some ISPs are stopping the provision of nntp services... MINE, for example.

Their official explanation was

quote: Internet technology is constantly changing. Usenet was one of the earliest forms of user discussion on the Internet, but today has largely been replaced by blogs, instant messaging, personal web pages and other tools.

As a result, fewer and fewer people are accessing Usenet.

:unquote

I tried to reason with them, and they went on to tell me that if I really wanted USENET so badly, I could go use Google. "So there, good-bye. Our mind is made up. Thank you very much.".

Reply to
Icebound
Loading thread data ...

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:25:05 -0500, "Icebound" wrote in :

It's hard to get good usage numbers.

The way Usenet is structured, you can't count how many times a post is read.

Google is a great service. I'm so glad that they are preserving the Usenet archives. I can't stand to read or post from Google.

I purchase service from newsguy.com. Apart from a few hiccups, they've been OK.

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

I wondered how the powers-that-be were going to remove the last bastion of freedom-of-speech. Now we know.

Ed Cregger

Reply to
Ed Cregger

OH NO!

Sorry, everyone. I truly did not mean to go political. I retract that last post!!!!!

Ed Cregger

Reply to
Ed Cregger

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 14:15:30 -0500, "Ed Cregger" wrote in :

The folks who are giving up newsgroups (AOL was a biggie) are not being "forced" to do so nor (I imagine) does it have anything to do with concern about what folks are saying in newsgroups.

Usenet is just not a big deal to most of their customers. They can save a few bucks by not running a news server.

Usenet won't be destroyed by getting smaller. It's a remarkably resilient system. If you wanted to, you could set up your own news server, create your own hierarchy, and invite folks to join in.

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

Other than myself, none of the people in my group of friends (not counting newsgroupers I haven't met face-to-face) have used usenet, with the exception of my wife. She tried it for a while and then abandoned it because of the behavior of others.

I can understand why it would be a less than profitable venture to maintain newsgroup service, since the majority of subscribers have no knowledge of its existence and probably wouldn't care if they did.

My reference to the powers-that-be was simply me being facetious. I do not think that there is an organized movement attempting to eliminate newsgroups, not that I don't think that there are those that wish they would disappear from the face of the planet.

Ed Cregger

Reply to
Ed Cregger

On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:57:29 -0500, "Ed Cregger" wrote in :

I don't think I've made any converts in the 11 years I've been in this group. :o(

Right.

Heh heh. Fair enough. ;o)

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

Hi Everyone I've got an old 1.2 cu in Ohlsson and rice engine. This is the very common little engine that was a favourite for use in weed wackers mini drills mini chainsaws, mini generators and all sorts of cutesy mini gas gadgets in the 50s 60s and early seventies. Anyway, I've got one and was hoping somebody could point me to someone who makes prop drives for it. Mine needs a drive with a taper and half moon key. I can't cut that on my toy lathe! Any help is powerfully appreciated. Thanks Javier

Reply to
summarex

Indeed.

I you ask nicely many news server people will give you an NNTP feed for juts a couple of groups.

Any scrap PC running Linux and INND will act as a server. Aslong as it is on a public IP address.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

Getting back to some of the reasons. I think one of the main reason

more people go to the moderated forums is because of the restritions i the newgroups-bylaws. A classic example is no binaries and no htm allowed. This was setup years ago due to bandwith issues and peopl paying for the internet by the minute and the the amount of bandwit they used. More people today have high-speed connections today tha ever before. Now days these restrictions are no longer as big an issu as in the past.

Talk about moderators! Heaven forbid I post a binary or in HTML. always thought a little color here would bighten this up.

Heading for cover! "In coming

-- starca

----------------------------------------------------------------------- starcad's Profile:

formatting link
this thread:
formatting link

Reply to
starcad

On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 11:07:00 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote in :

I didn't know enough when the College shut down the news server to "ask nicely." I just went shopping, found newsguy & Forte Agent, and have been moderately content ever since.

Yes, I can almost understand the architecture. Friends of mine run home news servers. Not to put too fine a point on it--they're GEEKS! :o)

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 08:07:25 -0600, starcad wrote in :

No one can stop you from doing that.

There is no moderator in this group.

All there is is "moral suasion."

Some news providers might filter out binaries in non-binary groups.

I enjoy graphics-intense web pages (those helicopter diagrams recommended in another thread were GORGEOUS), but I understand and enjoy the text-only tradition of the Big-8.

YMMV.

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

Hey Red, I have considered you a friend for a long time. We can discuss RCU in an unemotional way if you like. I suspect this may be the first time that you realized that you were not aware of my behind-the-scenes battles with Marc, Michael, and Nathan, either as a group or as individuals. I will give them some credit for that, since most of it is done with e-mail and not with posts on RCU, and by all rights, does not involve the moderators. As a result I can only discuss those communications in a very general way because of my self-imposed standards.

I think it will become apparent that some items would likely never have been allowed to be posted on RCU IMHO, whether discussed with them or not.

The EC has been told by the EVP, Doug Holland, that they (the EC) serve as the audit committee in the post Enron world. As the audit committee, it is up to the EC to look at situations like the relationship with RCU and determine if even the appearance of a conflict of interest is taking place between an AMA staffer or an EC member, and RCU or it's representatives. How do you feel about the amount that the AMA takes for the link with RCU? Some on the EC have stated they believe the AMA membership gets some benefit from the link, but, so far, no one is willing to put a value on it. Should RCU, or the EC review this relationship? How do you keep it an arms length transaction, if you are the AMA? Do you believe there is a potential conflict of interest?

Reply to
J_R

That's not ENTIRELY accurate,, just because YOU have high-speed does not mean that MOST people have it. there are areas where the ONLY option for high speed internet is satellite service, and it's not all that fast and it is VERY expensive.

as to the HYPERPUKE messages, HTML is NOT a good idea for e-mail or newsgroups it is nothing more than a fast way to bloat messages to many times their normal size without adding anything to the value of the content.

Reply to
Bob Cowell

That's my situation. Neither DSL or cable is available out here.

AMEN!

Reply to
David Hopper

If we may create a new subject - this one has kind of drifted from "Where did everybody go?".

For openers in as small a world as our hobby finds itself operating in there are many opportunities, if one has nothing better to do, to sniff after "conflicts of interest". You have people writing for hobby magazines that have other hobby relationships, You have a President and VPs of the AMA that own hobby business, you have people serving on various AMA committees that have hobby related businesses - lets face it, if you exclude all the hobby business people from a relationship with the AMA you pretty well run out of capable and dedicated people willing to work for nothing toward whatever they perceive is in the best interest of the hobby. Need I remind every one that there have been darn few that will step forward to take the responsibility of serving the AMA at the national level.

If the membership has some kind of a problem with the AMA/RCU Marketplace arrangement then they should let their District VP know about it. As for myself I have no problem with it, in fact I didn't even recall there was a relationship. I vaguely recall a relationship with RCU's competitor before they merged, but I never found it useful when you could go direct to RCU in the first place. From the AMA web page the RCU link doesn't really jump out at you. For those that have discovered the link and have things to sell or buy I can't really see where there would be a conflict of interest any more than the link on the AMA site to Red's R/C Battery Clinic or Clarance Raglands R/C Training School. As for how much the AMA takes from the link with RCU - if they get anything it is more than they get from the link to the Battery Clinic or any of the other modeling related links. I guess I would have to ask the question if I were RCU management, is the link worth that much to RCU?

One dedicated to looking for "even the appearance of a conflict of interest " should find no problem in the hobby world or elsewhere. Unless you happen to be a lawyer-politician, what benefit is it to discover such an "appearance"? Will it make the hobby better for it? To what end is being served other than bringing up another opportunity to suspect some other "appearance of a conflict of interest" on the part of the discoverer.

Red S.

Reply to
Red Scholefield

On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 08:14:40 -0600, starcad wrote in :

FWIW, here's the original charter:

=================================================================================

uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!in2.uu.net!tale From: snipped-for-privacy@uunet.uu.net (David C Lawrence) Newsgroups: rec.models.rc.air Subject: newgroup rec.models.rc.air Control: newgroup rec.models.rc.air Approved: snipped-for-privacy@uunet.uu.net Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 14:30:06 GMT Lines: 12 Xref: uunet control.newgroup:915

rec.models.rc.air is an unmoderated newsgroup which passed its vote for creation by 282:54 as reported in news.announce.newgroups on

17 Aug 1995.

For your newsgroups file: rec.models.rc.air RC controlled air models.

The charter, culled from the call for votes:

The rec.models.rc.air newsgroup will provide a place to disseminate reports, discussions, ask questions and provide information related to radio control of air based items including related items for individual sale.

=======================================================================

Having said that, a few observations:

-- Charters aren't enforceable in unmoderated groups, except by persuasion.

-- There is no way to change the text of the charter at present.

-- The health of a newsgroup depends on the good-will and wisdom of the members.

People have recommended using "For Sale," "FS," "For Auction," "FA" in the header of posts to accurately identify the content. But that's just netiquette, not law.

Marty

Reply to
Martin X. Moleski, SJ

A list of instructors available to those wanting an instructor has been authorized by an EC motion several years ago. Instructors are also covered under the AMA liability insurance and are something of a special case. As you point out, many other links are provided, at least as far as I know, free of charge, to those being linked to. In the case of RCU... first it is on the main page of the AMA site. Secondly, it is a link that is being paid for. A link that no competitive bidding has taken place for. That is what makes it unique, in my view. Is the Battery Clinic in some way benefiting financially from the link provided by the AMA? Are you selling batteries or chargers, perhaps some other goods? Are you selling advertising? Or are you providing information for the benefit of modelers?

It is interesting to note that Marc, IMO, started the AMA forum on RCU to gripe about the relationship between RCO and the AMA, done without bidding. Now, Michael, who was the principle at RCO, is his partner and the link has become one to RCU rather than RCO. How much would E-bay pay for such a link, if anything? How much would RC Groups pay for such a link, if anything? Anyone else out there that you can think of with for-profit enterprise that might want to bid? The AMA front page must be viewed as an asset. If you are going to sell some of that asset, it only makes sense to sell it for as much as possible, doesn't it?

It is interesting that you raise the issue about others that may or may not have apparent conflicts of interest. The gap between what is and appearances seems to be closing. The liability policy the AMA supplies to it's member does not cover commercial ventures, with the exception of instruction. As I understand, the AMA has asked for a definition of "commercial". The use of autonomous vehicles for commercial purposes is prohibited. Now the question may become those who receive compensation for efforts. Will receiving a sponsorship that involves getting a radio be deemed commercial? Will those that fly demonstrations of a product they produce be deemed commercial? Will those that receive any type of compensation be allowed to fly from a chartered club field?

As it stands, there are specific rules within the AMA to control conflicts of interest of those who have modeling related businesses. The AMA is a 501 ( c ) 3 non-profit and it's conflicts of interest situations are controlled by the IRS as well. It is violations of those rules that must be of concern to the EC.

The point of raising the issue is simple. Is the AMA maximizing it's potential income?

Reply to
J_R

JR,

You are obviously in tight with the AMA EC, have you ever brought this up to them? As an RCG regular have you addressed the issue there, have they made any effort to submit a proposal to the AMA? Or have you suckered us into another thread where you can expound on how badly RCU is treating the modeling community?

Red S.

From: "J_R" Subject: Re: AMA - RCU relationship Date: Saturday, March 18, 2006 12:02 PM

A list of instructors available to those wanting an instructor has been authorized by an EC motion several years ago. Instructors are also covered under the AMA liability insurance and are something of a special case. As you point out, many other links are provided, at least as far as I know, free of charge, to those being linked to. In the case of RCU... first it is on the main page of the AMA site. Secondly, it is a link that is being paid for. A link that no competitive bidding has taken place for. That is what makes it unique, in my view. Is the Battery Clinic in some way benefiting financially from the link provided by the AMA? Are you selling batteries or chargers, perhaps some other goods? Are you selling advertising? Or are you providing information for the benefit of modelers?

It is interesting to note that Marc, IMO, started the AMA forum on RCU to gripe about the relationship between RCO and the AMA, done without bidding. Now, Michael, who was the principle at RCO, is his partner and the link has become one to RCU rather than RCO. How much would E-bay pay for such a link, if anything? How much would RC Groups pay for such a link, if anything? Anyone else out there that you can think of with for-profit enterprise that might want to bid? The AMA front page must be viewed as an asset. If you are going to sell some of that asset, it only makes sense to sell it for as much as possible, doesn't it?

It is interesting that you raise the issue about others that may or may not have apparent conflicts of interest. The gap between what is and appearances seems to be closing. The liability policy the AMA supplies to it's member does not cover commercial ventures, with the exception of instruction. As I understand, the AMA has asked for a definition of "commercial". The use of autonomous vehicles for commercial purposes is prohibited. Now the question may become those who receive compensation for efforts. Will receiving a sponsorship that involves getting a radio be deemed commercial? Will those that fly demonstrations of a product they produce be deemed commercial? Will those that receive any type of compensation be allowed to fly from a chartered club field?

As it stands, there are specific rules within the AMA to control conflicts of interest of those who have modeling related businesses. The AMA is a 501 ( c ) 3 non-profit and it's conflicts of interest situations are controlled by the IRS as well. It is violations of those rules that must be of concern to the EC.

The point of raising the issue is simple. Is the AMA maximizing it's potential income?

Reply to
Red Scholefield

So are people who fly toy planes.

Reply to
The Natural Philosopher

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.