itsjoannotjoann wrote:
> Dan Abel wrote:
> > Time for the next step in your education, Joan. You figured out
> that
> > this isn't WebTV. Great. The next step is to figure out that this
> > isn't part of Google Groups either. And it's not AOL either.
> >
> > All of those three are just ways to access these groups. And most
> of us
> > don't use any of those three methods to access newsgroups. I have a
>
> > dedicated program on my Mac for nothing but accessing newsgroups.
> >
> > --
> > Dan Abel
> >
> > Petaluma, California, USA
>
> As has been posted here on numerous occasions, some ISP's do deliver
> these groups to some of us as part of Google. You probably like your
> dedicated program on your MAC and I have no complaints with my ISP
> delivering these groups to me through Google. I can set it up to
> deliver only the groups I am interested in and no searching. I can
> access either the newest or the oldest message, search through
> messages
> that are several years old, search for a specific message, etc. As
> long as we're able to read the postings, why does it matter how they
> are accessed?
If i understand the original poster, accessing and responding to news
group posts through google lacks context, people respond with out quotes
from the post they are responding to, which can make it difficult. to
understand the context of or reason for the reply.
I personally find google unwieldy to read and post from, good for
finding that lost post and a great archive but i don't see why people
would use it for groups unless they had to. Even as a way to reduce
spam it seems extreme, in that there are easier ways.
---
JL