"dsi1" > wrote in message
news
> jmcquown wrote:
>
>> doesn't. I know your daughter works (or worked) for Google, but they
>> (the collective they) couldn't give a crap about Usenet. Why they even
>> have it as an option is beyond me.
>
> This is an odd thing to say considering that they are the archivers of
> Usenet. To quote Google:
>
Actually, they were not the first to archive Usenet (although they might
claim to be, much as Al Gore claimed to invent the Internet). Dejanews
archived Usenet before Google ever even thought about it.

In fact, our posts are scattered all over creation. And that wasn't my
point Doesn't really have a thing to do with age demographics.

Jill

"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 10:00:55 -0400, George > wrote:
>>
>> >Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> >> But in the olden days, nearly every ISP (and certainly the big ones)
>> >> had
>> >> their own newservers. First AOL dropped theirs, and then many of the
>> >> others. I don't know which major ISPs still have them. Mine, which
>> >> is
>> >> not a major ISP, still has their own. I believe that all major
>> >> universities used to have their own newservers. I don't know if they
>> >> still do.
>> >>
>> >
>> >University of Pittsburgh still has one (Since I'm the one who maintains
>> >it) as do, CMU, PSU, Ga Tech, Standford and OSU, to name a few.
>> >
>> >Not a lot of people use ours anymore. It's mostly the Netasaurs who
>> >harken back to the old days, before the WWW.
>>
>> Is this server open to everyone or do you need to be enrolled?
>
> Back in the bad old days, access to newservers was very tightly
> controlled. People were always asking, and the answer was always the
> same, you have to pay. That was at least one reason that people paid
> for ISPs instead of free access. I believe that GoogleGroups was the
> first free newsgroup access.
>
> --
> Dan Abel
> Petaluma, California USA
>



Nope, Prodigy allowed ng access and AOL, too, starting back in the 1980's.
GoogleGroups is relatively new in the grand scheme of things.

Jill

On Mon, 16 Mar 2009 16:17:32 -0500, Becca wrote:

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> bulka wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Checked the survey results. One other person admitted to being bored
>>> and argumentative. Are you the same one with a gender identification
>>> problem?
>>>
>>> Just askin'.
>>>
>>
>> Heh. I guess there must be a couple of hermaphrodites who read r.f.c out
>> there...
>
> You promised never to mention that. =-O
>
> Becca

i suppose the proper response to that would be 'go **** yourself.'

your pal,
blake

l, not -l wrote:

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> bulka wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Checked the survey results. One other person admitted to being
>>> bored
>>> and argumentative. Are you the same one with a gender
>>> identification problem?
>>>
>>> Just askin'.
>>>
>>
>> Heh. I guess there must be a couple of hermaphrodites who read r.f.c
>> out there...
>
> I have read that between 1 and 5 percent of the population is
> transgender; given the total number of respondents to the RFC survey,
> it seems reasonable that there might be 2 or more transgender
> participants.
>

AFAIAA, until as such time as the necessary surgery has been done and
completed successfully, people are either biologically (and legally)
male or female. However, as there are (allegedly) thousands of
participants (a.k.a lurkers) in this newsgroup, I suppose it's not
unreasonable to assume that we might have 2 (or more) transgender
participants.
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

In article >,
"jmcquown" > wrote:

> "Dan Abel" > wrote in message
> ...

> > Back in the bad old days, access to newservers was very tightly
> > controlled. People were always asking, and the answer was always the
> > same, you have to pay. That was at least one reason that people paid
> > for ISPs instead of free access. I believe that GoogleGroups was the
> > first free newsgroup access.

> Nope, Prodigy allowed ng access and AOL, too, starting back in the 1980's.
> GoogleGroups is relatively new in the grand scheme of things.

The key word is "free". I believe my statement was wrong, but since
both Prodigy and AOL charged for access, they weren't the first free
access to ng. To be clear, Prodigy and AOL didn't charge their own
customers extra for ng access, but they didn't allow non-customers any
access to ng. This is how my current ISP works. As long as I log in
through my ISP, I can get right to ng. If I log in some other way, I am
prompted for my account and password to get into their newserver.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

ChattyCathy wrote:
>
> l, not -l wrote:
>
> > ChattyCathy wrote:
> >> bulka wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Checked the survey results. One other person admitted to being
> >>> bored
> >>> and argumentative. Are you the same one with a gender
> >>> identification problem?
> >>>
> >>> Just askin'.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Heh. I guess there must be a couple of hermaphrodites who read r.f.c
> >> out there...
> >
> > I have read that between 1 and 5 percent of the population is
> > transgender; given the total number of respondents to the RFC survey,
> > it seems reasonable that there might be 2 or more transgender
> > participants.
> >
>
> AFAIAA, until as such time as the necessary surgery has been done and
> completed successfully, people are either biologically (and legally)
> male or female. However, as there are (allegedly) thousands of
> participants (a.k.a lurkers) in this newsgroup, I suppose it's not
> unreasonable to assume that we might have 2 (or more) transgender
> participants.
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy


Or people such as me, who prefer to be sarcastic :P

On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:46:19 -0400, "jmcquown" >
wrote:

>Nope, Prodigy allowed ng access and AOL, too, starting back in the 1980's.
>GoogleGroups is relatively new in the grand scheme of things.

They weren't certainly were not free - they charged by the hour. I
remember a huge (in the hundreds bill) one month when I was on Prodigy
(which made me look around and find Pipeline) - AOHell didn't unleash
their hoards to the world until the internet was well developed. They
had, and still have, private groups for their members.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

Arri London wrote:

>
>
> Or people such as me, who prefer to be sarcastic :P

<laugh>

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

ChattyCathy wrote:
>
> Arri London wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Or people such as me, who prefer to be sarcastic :P
>
> <laugh>
>
> --
> Cheers
> Chatty Cathy

Perhaps I should promise never to do it again...but then I so hate
breaking promises

sf wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:46:19 -0400, "jmcquown" >
> wrote:
>
>> Nope, Prodigy allowed ng access and AOL, too, starting back in the 1980's.
>> GoogleGroups is relatively new in the grand scheme of things.
>
> They weren't certainly were not free - they charged by the hour. I
> remember a huge (in the hundreds bill) one month when I was on Prodigy
> (which made me look around and find Pipeline) - AOHell didn't unleash
> their hoards to the world until the internet was well developed. They
> had, and still have, private groups for their members.
>
>

aol had Usenet as far back as 1995 when I started with them.

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south-Texas

On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 19:54:21 -0500, Janet Wilder
> wrote:

>sf wrote:
>> On Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:46:19 -0400, "jmcquown" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Nope, Prodigy allowed ng access and AOL, too, starting back in the 1980's.
>>> GoogleGroups is relatively new in the grand scheme of things.
>>
>> They weren't certainly were not free - they charged by the hour. I
>> remember a huge (in the hundreds bill) one month when I was on Prodigy
>> (which made me look around and find Pipeline) - AOHell didn't unleash
>> their hoards to the world until the internet was well developed. They
>> had, and still have, private groups for their members.
>>
>>
>
>aol had Usenet as far back as 1995 when I started with them.

Honestly, I don't know when they finally hit the internet. All I know
is it was years after I had *real* internet access. I'm not such an
oldie that I ever participated in them, but bulletin boards were still
*very* popular when I signed up for my first ISP.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

sf wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2009 19:54:21 -0500, Janet Wilder
> > wrote:

>> aol had Usenet as far back as 1995 when I started with them.
>
> Honestly, I don't know when they finally hit the internet. All I know
> is it was years after I had *real* internet access. I'm not such an
> oldie that I ever participated in them, but bulletin boards were still
> *very* popular when I signed up for my first ISP.
>
>

Bulletin Boards were popular. AAMOF, I was trained by AOL to co-host a
monthly RV chat. They paid me in minutes which was a big help in the
days of paying by the minute for Internet connections. Those minutes
stayed in my account for years after I switched to a monthly plan.

--
Janet Wilder
Way-the-heck-south-Texas