Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
2003: 36,400
2004: 25,200
2005: 23,400
2006: 21,400
2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
John Navas wrote:
> Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
> 2003: 36,400
> 2004: 25,200
> 2005: 23,400
> 2006: 21,400
> 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
Post some more "Wireless (Internet) Wiki (FAQ)" and the numbers will get
better.
> Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
> 2003: 36,400
> 2004: 25,200
> 2005: 23,400
> 2006: 21,400
> 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
>
> John Navas wrote:
>
>> Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
>> 2003: 36,400
>> 2004: 25,200
>> 2005: 23,400
>> 2006: 21,400
>> 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
>
>
>
> Post some more "Wireless (Internet) Wiki (FAQ)" and the numbers will get
> better.
John Navas wrote:
> Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
> 2003: 36,400
> 2004: 25,200
> 2005: 23,400
> 2006: 21,400
> 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
>
1.I was going to sat that people are becoming more knowledgeable about
the eqpt that they are using, but I still get asked basic questions.
2.There are a lot of web based forums, people seem to prefer these(my
family do).e.g:- http://bbs.adslguide.org.uk/ http://www.dslreports.com/forums/all
3.In the UK the Help information on ISP websites has improved, but still
has a long way to go.
4.While not causing a decline of Usenet there are a lot of
eqpt,ISP,etc...specific newsgroups that people are now using.e.g.:-
comp.sys.hp.hardware
comp.sys.laptops
uk.comp.home-networking
bt.broadband.support
5.While a lot of people I know have heard of and used "Google Groups"
very few of them have a News Server, and if there ISP didn't provide one
they wouldn't pay for one.
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 13:31:13 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote
in <a42dnVvPZJUOI3PYnZ2dnUVZ8vydnZ2d@bt.com>:
>John Navas wrote:
>> Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
>> 2003: 36,400
>> 2004: 25,200
>> 2005: 23,400
>> 2006: 21,400
>> 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
I should have noted that there are similar declines in other unrelated
newsgroups.
>1.I was going to sat that people are becoming more knowledgeable about
>the eqpt that they are using, but I still get asked basic questions.
Yep -- I think there are actually far more wireless newbies now than in
the past.
Yep -- I think that's a significant factor, in part because it's often a
more complete experience (FAQs, file download areas), and in part
because there is so much less noise and discourtesy than there is here.
Back in the beginning Usenet had a high signal to noise ratio, but
that's come down year by year, which has driven away all too many
valuable participants.
>3.In the UK the Help information on ISP websites has improved, but still
>has a long way to go.
I don't think that's a significant factor.
>4.While not causing a decline of Usenet there are a lot of
>eqpt,ISP,etc...specific newsgroups that people are now using.e.g.:-
>comp.sys.hp.hardware
>comp.sys.laptops
>uk.comp.home-networking
>bt.broadband.support
I've done some checking on that with Google, and I don't think it's a
significant factor, in part because those newsgroups are declining as
well.
>5.While a lot of people I know have heard of and used "Google Groups"
>very few of them have a News Server, and if there ISP didn't provide one
>they wouldn't pay for one.
Yep -- many ISPs no longer promote the use of Usenet. I'd hazard a
guess that less than 5% of ISP customers even know that Usenet exists.
>I could probably go on but...
Another factor that I think belongs on the list is the increased
availability of (paid) support services by retailers (e.g., Geek Squad,
although in my experience they all too often do a poor job).
We're also now seeing the rise of non-Usenet groups (Yahoo, Google)
where standards of conduct can be enforced, but they are closed systems,
and it's not clear to me that they will really take off. Blogs and
social networking sites (MySpace) appear to be the next big things in
interactive communications.
Overall, I think this is essentially a case of self-destruction, much
like the decline and fall of CB radio, a kind of tragedy of the commons.
It greatly saddens me because Usenet has so many advantages over these
other alternatives. If only we could find a way to get rid of all the
crap that's killing Usenet (the childish post to this thread by CJ being
a case in point).
Measured by volume of traffic, Usenet now exists primarily as a
mechanism for distributing illicit materials (binaries).
[sigh]
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
John Navas wrote:
ant factor.
>
>> 4.While not causing a decline of Usenet there are a lot of
>> eqpt,ISP,etc...specific newsgroups that people are now using.e.g.:-
>> comp.sys.hp.hardware
>> comp.sys.laptops
>> uk.comp.home-networking
>> bt.broadband.support
>
> I've done some checking on that with Google, and I don't think it's a
> significant factor, in part because those newsgroups are declining as
> well.
>
One of the problems here is that if you take the bt newsgroups, of which
there are 13 listed, none are available via Google Groups and I wonder
how widespread this occurrence is.
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 18:39:01 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote
in <Vd2dnSw778sqm3LYnZ2dnUVZ8qWhnZ2d@bt.com>:
>John Navas wrote:
>ant factor.
>>
>>> 4.While not causing a decline of Usenet there are a lot of
>>> eqpt,ISP,etc...specific newsgroups that people are now using.e.g.:-
>>> comp.sys.hp.hardware
>>> comp.sys.laptops
>>> uk.comp.home-networking
>>> bt.broadband.support
>>
>> I've done some checking on that with Google, and I don't think it's a
>> significant factor, in part because those newsgroups are declining as
>> well.
>>
>One of the problems here is that if you take the bt newsgroups, of which
>there are 13 listed, none are available via Google Groups and I wonder
>how widespread this occurrence is.
Google is good at carrying general newsgroups. What it can miss are
newsgroups not intended for general distribution; e.g., internal ISP
newsgroups.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 04:14:20 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
> 2003: 36,400
> 2004: 25,200
> 2005: 23,400
> 2006: 21,400
> 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
Usenet is older than the web and a lot of people who browse the web
don't even know about it. It has a relatively boring interface.
This isn't an issue for a text newsgroup but if you download stuff
like pirated MP3's the Usenet MIME/yenc/UUENCODE interface which turns
binaries into lines of texst almost doubles the size of the file.
However, you'd think that posts about this topic are going up.
Unless maybe this n.g. was of more interests to the pioneers and now
that the topic has become more mainstream the newsgroup is of less
importance/use.
Also, raw numbers may not be a good comparison when you consider the
ammount of spam, especially in alt newsgroups
(which afe both relatively unsuprevised and fall near the beginning of
the alphanumeric sort)
John Navas wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 18:39:01 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote
> in <Vd2dnSw778sqm3LYnZ2dnUVZ8qWhnZ2d@bt.com>:
>
>> John Navas wrote:
>> ant factor.
>>>> 4.While not causing a decline of Usenet there are a lot of
>>>> eqpt,ISP,etc...specific newsgroups that people are now using.e.g.:-
>>>> comp.sys.hp.hardware
>>>> comp.sys.laptops
>>>> uk.comp.home-networking
>>>> bt.broadband.support
>>> I've done some checking on that with Google, and I don't think it's a
>>> significant factor, in part because those newsgroups are declining as
>>> well.
>>>
>> One of the problems here is that if you take the bt newsgroups, of which
>> there are 13 listed, none are available via Google Groups and I wonder
>> how widespread this occurrence is.
>
> Google is good at carrying general newsgroups. What it can miss are
> newsgroups not intended for general distribution; e.g., internal ISP
> newsgroups.
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/askbruc...whatis_1.shtml
"The simplest and easiest way to see them is on the web at sites like
Google Groups or Foorum.
Looking at newsgroups on websites like these mean you don't have to
bother setting up your software which is good as it can be quite tricky."
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:33:46 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote
in <a8GdnWzpPt8WjnLYnZ2dnUVZ8tvinZ2d@bt.com>:
>John Navas wrote:
>> Google is good at carrying general newsgroups. What it can miss are
>> newsgroups not intended for general distribution; e.g., internal ISP
>> newsgroups.
>>
>http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/askbruc...whatis_1.shtml
>
>"The simplest and easiest way to see them is on the web at sites like
>Google Groups or Foorum.
>
>Looking at newsgroups on websites like these mean you don't have to
>bother setting up your software which is good as it can be quite tricky."
It's actually pretty easy to setup a good newsreader, and good
newsreader software is much more capable and easy to use than a web
interface. I use and recommend Forte Agent.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 14:02:33 -0500, Tester <teest@test.org> wrote in
<kh2uu2l8nl44ur0k5c1le6d2sc8gekbnie@entropy.org> :
>On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 04:14:20 GMT, John Navas
><spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
>> 2003: 36,400
>> 2004: 25,200
>> 2005: 23,400
>> 2006: 21,400
>> 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
>
>Usenet is older than the web and a lot of people who browse the web
>don't even know about it. It has a relatively boring interface.
Not necessarily -- the interface is a function of newsreaders, which
vary considerably. I much prefer the interface of Forte Agent to a
browser interface.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
John Navas wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 19:33:46 +0000, Kev <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote
> in <a8GdnWzpPt8WjnLYnZ2dnUVZ8tvinZ2d@bt.com>:
>
>> John Navas wrote:
>
>>> Google is good at carrying general newsgroups. What it can miss are
>>> newsgroups not intended for general distribution; e.g., internal ISP
>>> newsgroups.
>>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/askbruc...whatis_1.shtml
>>
>> "The simplest and easiest way to see them is on the web at sites like
>> Google Groups or Foorum.
>>
>> Looking at newsgroups on websites like these mean you don't have to
>> bother setting up your software which is good as it can be quite tricky."
>
> It's actually pretty easy to setup a good newsreader, and good
> newsreader software is much more capable and easy to use than a web
> interface. I use and recommend Forte Agent.
>
I agree that that it is easy to set up a newsreader but I found it odd
that that a question to the BBC Site would provide an answer that could
put people off from trying one.
"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:fuesu2p5r5tqfbutcjttnc0dknj95r7irg@4ax.com...
> Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
> 2003: 36,400
> 2004: 25,200
> 2005: 23,400
> 2006: 21,400
> 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
a bit worrying that you assume that a computer counted the messages and so
it must be correct :)
and surely the load depends on users - so is likely to vary thru the year.
all the other Internet load indices vary across a year.
So if you can get Google to tell you how many messages it counted up to the
same time last year, and graph the numbers so we can see no suspicous gaps -
then maybe it is time to worry.
surely individual groups traffic changed based on how useful they are to
people who manage to find them - there are examples of effectively "dead"
groups all over the hierarchy.
comp.dcom.net-analysis for example just carries the odd spam.....
>
> --
> Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
> John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
> Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
> Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
--
Regards
Tester <teest@test.org> writes:
(snip)
> Also, raw numbers may not be a good comparison when you consider the
> amount of spam, especially in alt newsgroups
(snip)
Mmmm, it's probably not helping this group that some news servers have
dropped alt.* altogether.
> So if you can get Google to tell you how many messages it counted up to the
> same time last year, and graph the numbers so we can see no suspicous gaps -
> then maybe it is time to worry.
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:35:05 -0500, mark@ixod.org (Mark T.B. Carroll)
wrote in <871wk03fg6.fsf@ixod.org>:
>Tester <teest@test.org> writes:
>(snip)
>> Also, raw numbers may not be a good comparison when you consider the
>> amount of spam, especially in alt newsgroups
>(snip)
>
>Mmmm, it's probably not helping this group that some news servers have
>dropped alt.* altogether.
Really? Which ones? All the majors and ISPs I know of carry alt
newsgroups.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:35:05 -0500, mark@ixod.org (Mark T.B. Carroll)
> wrote in <871wk03fg6.fsf@ixod.org>:
(snip)
>>Mmmm, it's probably not helping this group that some news servers have
>>dropped alt.* altogether.
>
> Really? Which ones? All the majors and ISPs I know of carry alt
> newsgroups.
I tend to rely more on university news servers, friends' computers, etc.
- my current ISP at home and work AFAIK don't actually offer a news
server. For instance, with a bit of poking around tonight, I see much
more of other Usenet than I do alt.* on correo.antakira.com and
odysseus.frankfurt.de.velia.net (which don't carry this group but do
carry the non-alt.* groups I tried). I used to get this group from
news.cse.ohio-state.edu before it dropped alt.*.
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 21:07:29 GMT, "stephen" <stephen_hope@xyzworld.com>
wrote in <lQFHh.46748$Fm2.29421@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net>:
>"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:fuesu2p5r5tqfbutcjttnc0dknj95r7irg@4ax.com.. .
>> Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
>> 2003: 36,400
>> 2004: 25,200
>> 2005: 23,400
>> 2006: 21,400
>> 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
>
>a bit worrying that you assume that a computer counted the messages and so
>it must be correct :)
A bit worrying that you assume the computer is wrong without supporting
evidence.
>and surely the load depends on users - so is likely to vary thru the year.
No reason to think that.
>all the other Internet load indices vary across a year.
They are actually fairly steady.
>So if you can get Google to tell you how many messages it counted up to the
>same time last year, and graph the numbers so we can see no suspicous gaps -
>then maybe it is time to worry.
Easy to do. Be my guest.
>surely individual groups traffic changed based on how useful they are to
>people who manage to find them - there are examples of effectively "dead"
>groups all over the hierarchy.
This newsgroup is dead?
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
> Another factor that I think belongs on the list is the increased
> availability of (paid) support services by retailers (e.g., Geek Squad,
> although in my experience they all too often do a poor job).
>
> We're also now seeing the rise of non-Usenet groups (Yahoo, Google)
> where standards of conduct can be enforced, but they are closed systems,
> and it's not clear to me that they will really take off. Blogs and
> social networking sites (MySpace) appear to be the next big things in
> interactive communications.
>
> Overall, I think this is essentially a case of self-destruction, much
> like the decline and fall of CB radio, a kind of tragedy of the commons.
Google with your own name (or Jeff Liebermann) and see what you get.
Wi-fi is a hot subject at the moment and you will find that many
web-based "forums" actually "suck" usenet postings - whole threads -
from news groups like alt.usenet.wireless and present them to visitors
as postings to their own forums. Along with ads.
Without Usenet, these "forums" wouldn't exist.
> It greatly saddens me because Usenet has so many advantages over these
> other alternatives.
<snip: more JN sobbing>
> Measured by volume of traffic, Usenet now exists primarily as a
> mechanism for distributing illicit materials (binaries).
And binaries take up a lot more space than ascii - so what?
> Google with your own name (or Jeff Liebermann) and see what you get.
> Wi-fi is a hot subject at the moment and you will find that many
> web-based "forums" actually "suck" usenet postings - whole threads -
> from news groups like alt.usenet.wireless and present them to visitors
> as postings to their own forums. Along with ads.
>
> Without Usenet, these "forums" wouldn't exist.
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 21:07:29 GMT, "stephen"
<stephen_hope@xyzworld.com> wrote:
>"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:fuesu2p5r5tqfbutcjttnc0dknj95r7irg@4ax.com.. .
>> Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
>> 2003: 36,400
>> 2004: 25,200
>> 2005: 23,400
>> 2006: 21,400
>> 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
>
>a bit worrying that you assume that a computer counted the messages and so
>it must be correct :)
See:
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.internet.wireless/about?hl=en>
for some statistics. Note that Google lists it as "medium" traffic.
For just me:
<http://groups.google.com/groups/profile?enc_user=tWGMphwAAAAGTj9X4k0U7wKkGyU8QhaBh axMG2M1PWkMtCZAt5tdxQ&group=alt.internet.wireless& hl=en>
>and surely the load depends on users - so is likely to vary thru the year.
Most users are not loaded.
>all the other Internet load indices vary across a year.
I'll make a graph if you want using Google's statistics.
>So if you can get Google to tell you how many messages it counted up to the
>same time last year, and graph the numbers so we can see no suspicous gaps -
>then maybe it is time to worry.
See above URL's. I'll make a graph as I have a bit of time while I
clone some drives.
>surely individual groups traffic changed based on how useful they are to
>people who manage to find them - there are examples of effectively "dead"
>groups all over the hierarchy.
>comp.dcom.net-analysis for example just carries the odd spam.....
There needs to be a place for spam to collect. Actually, spam varies
with Usenet News provider. My PBI/SBC/at&t account is fairly clean.
Same with Supernews. However, my Newsguy account seems to show an
ever increasing spam leak since their major upgrade over the New
Years.
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 02:44:09 GMT, Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>>and surely the load depends on users - so is likely to vary thru the year.
>
>Most users are not loaded.
>
>>all the other Internet load indices vary across a year.
>
>I'll make a graph if you want using Google's statistics.
Done. See:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/usenet/>
Excel spreadsheet and JPG of graph for data in:
<http://groups.google.com/group/alt.internet.wireless/about?hl=en>
There's definately a decline, but that would be normal as the
technology matures and the available information on the web and under
usenet improves.
Perhaps writing the FAQ has decreased the number of questions?
Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> writes:
(snip)
> Done. See:
> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/usenet/>
> Excel spreadsheet and JPG of graph for data in:
> <http://groups.google.com/group/alt.internet.wireless/about?hl=en>
Oh, that's interesting, thanks for taking the effort.
(snip)
> Perhaps writing the FAQ has decreased the number of questions?
That certainly makes sense.
This group is far from dead. Frankly, I'm surprised it's not a comp.*
group, even - the interest warrants it.
I don't know about Usenet's long-term future, but I have no nearer-term
worries about it.
On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 03:27:05 GMT, Jeff Liebermann
<jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote in
<hsk1v2p6otgcufvg14jham2ni5m125spfj@4ax.com>:
>On Fri, 09 Mar 2007 02:44:09 GMT, Jeff Liebermann
><jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>>I'll make a graph if you want using Google's statistics.
>
>Done. See:
><http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/usenet/>
>Excel spreadsheet and JPG of graph for data in:
><http://groups.google.com/group/alt.internet.wireless/about?hl=en>
>
>There's definately a decline, but that would be normal as the
>technology matures and the available information on the web and under
>usenet improves.
I disagree -- I think the increase in less sophisticated users far
outweighs those factors.
>Perhaps writing the FAQ has decreased the number of questions?
I'd like to think that, but I doubt it. ;)
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 04:14:20 GMT, John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com>
wrote:
: Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
: 2003: 36,400
: 2004: 25,200
: 2005: 23,400
: 2006: 21,400
: 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
IMO, the signal-to-noise ratio of a newsgroup is more significant than the
number of articles posted.
On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:26:39 -0400, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote in
<ide9v2hur4pgvoeagm6i3t191m7vh123qd@4ax.com>:
>On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 04:14:20 GMT, John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com>
>wrote:
>: Posts to this newsgroup as archived and counted by Google Groups:
>: 2003: 36,400
>: 2004: 25,200
>: 2005: 23,400
>: 2006: 21,400
>: 2007: 8,725 (projected, based on year to date)
>
>IMO, the signal-to-noise ratio of a newsgroup is more significant than the
>number of articles posted.
Any data on that? ;)
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
John Navas wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:26:39 -0400, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote in
> <ide9v2hur4pgvoeagm6i3t191m7vh123qd@4ax.com>:
>> IMO, the signal-to-noise ratio of a newsgroup is more significant than the
>> number of articles posted.
>
> Any data on that? ;)
Sort by sender and follow the threads, then see how much bickering goes on
compared to useful information.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 14:06:30 GMT, DTC <no_spam@move_along_folks.foob>
wrote in <G7dJh.126555$_73.56850@newsread2.news.pas.earthli nk.net>:
>John Navas wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:26:39 -0400, Robert Coe <bob@1776.COM> wrote in
>> <ide9v2hur4pgvoeagm6i3t191m7vh123qd@4ax.com>:
>>> IMO, the signal-to-noise ratio of a newsgroup is more significant than the
>>> number of articles posted.
>> Any data on that? ;)
>Sort by sender and follow the threads, then see how much bickering goes on
>compared to useful information.
That's subjective, of course. I personally don't think there's been
much change in S:N over the past few years.
--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>
Decline and fall of usenet? 
Linear Mode
