Re: You Can Use the Internet the Old-School Unixy Way With Shell Accounts

On 2025-04-12, Borax Man <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2025-04-12, Ethan Carter <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Borax Man <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>>> ["Followup-To:" header set to alt.culture.usenet.]
>>> On 2025-03-22, yeti <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> [email protected] (Paul W. Schleck) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "One reason to sign up for a shell account is that shell providers
>>>>> often have friendly user communities.
>>>>
>>>> (*) Most neighbours I have in pubnixens are just silent, but the few
>>>> that are not are worth staying.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I signed up to one or two, and that was my experience.  The *idea* was
>>> cool, but no one was really there.  The fundamental problem, I think, is
>>> its not a real community.  Its people who want to use a particular
>>> technology, but don't share any other interest.  It's like starting a
>>> group for people who like to meet in community centres.  Once you're
>>> there, then what?  You've already achieved your goal?  The Gemini
>>> community had the same problem.  They just liked the idea of using
>>> Gemini.  That doesn't make what you have to say more interesting.
>>>
>>> It was basically, at least to me, people who liked to use a particular
>>> means to an ends, but actually had no ends.  I do understand that the
>>> communication format does matter (part of the appeal of Usenet to me),
>>> but you need more than a shared desire to use the same format.  At least
>>> on Usenet, you can find others with similar interests.
>>
>> This makes perfect sense and matches my experience as well.  That's why
>> I think that smaller communities should also peer USENET groups---the
>> ones that the smaller community cares about.  (It would be useful
>> already even if the peering is read-only.)  Let's say you have a small
>> NNTP community with a few of your friends.  You set up an NNTP server
>> for your local private groups---secrets you guys share.  Now you have a
>> small world (your community) and a big world (the USENET).  If your
>> small NNTP server also lets all of you watch the USENET, that makes your
>> small community more interesting because now you check the USENET from
>> it: so you don't miss any articles that eventually come in your small
>> community.  You know what I mean?
>>
>> Because one of the problems of small communities is precisely
>> that---nothing happens there.  So importing a tiny piece of the big
>> community would help to keep the small one engaging.
>>
>> Even though I use the super Gnus NNTP client, I don't know how to post
>> the same article to groups on different servers---that would be useful
>> to share the same post on the big community and also give a chance to my
>> small community to discuss it too (separately).
>>
>> Also, when I see an interesting article on the USENET, sometimes I would
>> reply to follow it up on my small community, for an internal discussion.
>> It's not easy to do that with my super NNTP client.  I must copy the
>> article, compose a new one on the small community, paste it and still
>> add my comment... It's not convenient.
>>
>> I think the USENET is a great source of things to discuss, but I don't
>> always want to discuss it on the USENET itself.
>>
>
> This makes sense to me.  Have your own private group, sure, but link it
> with the wider world.  Essentially, a Usenet subset which is of interest
> to that group, plus additional groups which are local only.
>
> I've discussed such ideas with a friend, who used Usenet a bit, but was
> more interested in technology which took you "off grid".  I first
> thought of BBS's with a private 'net like fsxNet or fidoNet, but NNTP
> seemed to fit the bill much better.  I still marvel at how people seem
> to overlook existing solutions.
>
> Is super Gnus an EMACS client?  Thats the only Gnus that I know of.
>
>> [* snip *]

You can access DOVE and FIDO net over news://cvs.synchro.net 
or snews://cvs.synchro.net, you can create an account over 
cvs.synchro.net.