Re: Fediverse newsgroup

On 2025-12-20, William Stickers <[email protected]> wrote:

> Peter J Ross wrote:
>> 
>> On 2024-10-11, Adam H. Kerman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> > Schlomo Goldberg <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>Adam H. Kerman <[email protected]> writes:
>> >
>> >>>Although now that I look, comp.infosystems.* is a thing, but
>> >>>alt.comp.infosystems.* is not. Proposed alt.* groups shouldn't be named
>> >>>to skip a hierarchy level.
>> >
>> >>Is such rule written somewhere?
>> >
>> > There it is, written.
>> 
>> I agree with the rule as written, which makes it unanimous among all
>> surviving alt.configgers who have any plausible claim to be taken
>> seriously. And the threshhold for being taken seriously here is loooow!
>> 
>> Any newsgroup you newgroup will be useless at best, harmful at worst.
>> Why not enjoy participating in existing newsgroups instead?
>
> Funny. 

Graveyard humour at its best, eh?

> Did you happen to notice the result of the recent  UK Usenet Committee 
> Election?

No, but I can guess that there was a shortage of both candidates and
voters.

> Or this <https://individual.net/>?

As an intermittent user of their server for twenty-five years, how could
I not have noticed? But I was shocked, because I thought that the
experience of running a news server would be useful for students even if
there were almost no users. Grappling with INN is like grappling with
Fortran: useless but instructive.

> Most sane usenetters have fucked off, leaving only a few diehard
> participants and a shit load of nutters that have no where else to go.

This is my second visit to Usenet this year, after a gap of two years.
Within two days, I'm already tiring of making fun of the nutters, so I
may be gone for good soon.

But it was bloody good fun while it lasted!


-- 
PJR :-)