SPAM: That's really strange

On May 21, 10:11 am, Julien BH <[email protected]> wrote:
> I just posted to alt.auto.hyundai on google and noticed that there was
> a counter-spam on the bottom of the post. (Type what's in the image in
> the appropriate box)
> Why isn't Rec.audio.pro that way?

Ok I understand. There is the verification here too but it's only for
replies. Not for new posts.
At least google is doing something...

On May 21, 10:13 am, Julien BH <[email protected]> wrote:
> On May 21, 10:11 am, Julien BH <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I just posted to alt.auto.hyundai on google and noticed that there was
> > a counter-spam on the bottom of the post. (Type what's in the image in
> > the appropriate box)
> > Why isn't Rec.audio.pro that way?
>
> Ok I understand. There is the verification here too but it's only for
> replies. Not for new posts.
> At least google is doing something...

yeah i see the same thing, only for replies, not for new posts...

strange

Matk

Julien BH <[email protected]> wrote:
>I just posted to alt.auto.hyundai on google and noticed that there was
>a counter-spam on the bottom of the post. (Type what's in the image in
>the appropriate box)
>Why isn't Rec.audio.pro that way?

I have no idea, that's a question for the people that run Google. Of course,
they don't respond to emails or return phone calls, so you may have some
trouble getting a real explanation from them about why their Usenet service
is so incompetently run. Just stay away from Google completely.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On May 21, 10:38 am, [email protected] (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
> Julien BH <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I just posted to alt.auto.hyundai on google and noticed that there was
> >a counter-spam on the bottom of the post. (Type what's in the image in
> >the appropriate box)
> >Why isn't Rec.audio.pro that way?
>
> I have no idea, that's a question for the people that run Google. Of course,
> they don't respond to emails or return phone calls, so you may have some
> trouble getting a real explanation from them about why their Usenet service
> is so incompetently run. Just stay away from Google completely.
> --scott
> --
> "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

I like google :)
They may not be the best thing that happened to usenet, but in many
other places, they rule.
Spam control for replies is a step in the right way imho, don't blame
them.
The biggest problem is usenet's lack of spam control

Julien BH <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>I like google :)
>They may not be the best thing that happened to usenet, but in many
>other places, they rule.

They seem to set up a service, do a really good job with it for a while,
and then neglect it when the next big thing comes along, causing their
service to fall into disrepair.

>Spam control for replies is a step in the right way imho, don't blame
>them.
>The biggest problem is usenet's lack of spam control

There's great spam control here. I don't see any spam on this newsgroup
other than the occasional lone post every couple weeks.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On May 21, 3:43 pm, [email protected] (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
> Julien BH  <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> >I like google :)
> >They may not be the best thing that happened to usenet, but in many
> >other places, they rule.
>
> They seem to set up a service, do a really good job with it for a while,
> and then neglect it when the next big thing comes along, causing their
> service to fall into disrepair.
>
> >Spam control for replies is a step in the right way imho, don't blame
> >them.
> >The biggest problem is usenet's lack of spam control
>
> There's great spam control here.  I don't see any spam on this newsgroup
> other than the occasional lone post every couple weeks.
> --scott
> --
> "C'est un Nagra.  C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

looks like the bad news is the Google CAPTCHA is not working very
well..

you can type in ANYTHING into the validation box and it still posts...

hopefully they are in process of setting this up and soon it will be
working

Mark

"Julien BH" <[email protected]> wrote [from GoogleGroups]...
> (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>> Julien BH wrote:
>> >I just posted to alt.auto.hyundai on google and noticed that there was
>> >a counter-spam on the bottom of the post. (Type what's in the image in
>> >the appropriate box)
>> >Why isn't Rec.audio.pro that way?
>>
>> I have no idea, that's a question for the people that run Google. Of
>> course,
>> they don't respond to emails or return phone calls, so you may have some
>> trouble getting a real explanation from them about why their Usenet
>> service
>> is so incompetently run. Just stay away from Google completely.
>
> I like google :)
> They may not be the best thing that happened to usenet,
> but in many other places, they rule.

They get B+ for web search engine.
They get B- for their Usenet archives.
They get F- for their web-based usenet access. :-((

> Spam control for replies is a step in the right way imho,

They got it EXACTLY backwards! We don't need spam
control on *replies* we need it on the original postings!!
How could they be so clueless? Spammers NEVER come
back even to *read* anything, much less to reply to anything.
Stupidity multiplied by absurdity. It gives me an even stronger
impression that the Google Groups operation is run by people
who have never used the real Usenet, and have no practical
working knowledge of how it operates.

> don't blame them.

They are *precisely* to blame. No amount of personal
bias/preference or handwaving will relieve them of the
responsibility for the trash that clearly leads right to their
door.

> The biggest problem is usenet's lack of spam control

Since Usenet is a grass-roots, peer-to-peer service with
no central control, spam control on relies on the intelligent
operation of all the thousands of independent peer servers.
As long as their operators kicked out the spammers, the
idiots, and the sociopaths, Usenet was great.

But then big corporate entities like AOL (and now Google)
came along with ZERO understanding of how Usenet works
and is the worst thing that has EVER happened to the service.
I have only been on Usenet for something like 12-13 years,
but nothing else that has ever happened to Usenet is even close.

Then add to that the new pestilence of irresponsible smaller
operators like buzzardnews and Usenet is turning into the
decaying part of town where you don't want to go anymore.

We used to have the Usenet Death Penalty that could be
invoked against irresponsible operators like buzzardnews
(or even Google) But there are so many clueless operators
now (like Google) that the UDP is itself dead now.

It should come as no surprise that so many are finding the
signal-to-noise ratio from Google to be intolerable.

Richard Crowley wrote:

<a nice rant about corporate ignorance of usenet culture and practices>

>
> It should come as no surprise that so many are finding the
> signal-to-noise ratio from Google to be intolerable.

At least it makes writing an effective filter very easy <grin>.

I foolishly struggled with an ever expanding list of keywords, but as
soon as I said ignore anything with googlegroups.com in the header, all
threads are magically on topic!

Fran

--
E ho`okani pila kakou ma Kaleponi
http://www.kaleponi.com
http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/franguidry
http://www.youtube.com/franguidry