Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | cykros <cykros@devio.us> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.misc |
| Subject | Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... |
| Date | 2014-02-11 23:45 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <ldeu65$ntu$2@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <ld8hti$5mc$1@dont-email.me> <ldd1es$6tj$1@dont-email.me> <6qckf99bsi9854b3jntlbi7tgatk4peed1@4ax.com> |
On 02/11/2014 09:34 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote: > On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:27:25 +0000 (UTC), John Brownalt > <deconfliction@filteredperception.org> wrote: > >> On 2014-02-09, wjwlsn <ibillwilson@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Is this the "right" newsgroup to "take over"? >>> >>> So what about something like alt.nerd.obsessive? >>> >>> Any thoughts? >> >> Here is my candidate list- (though I agree that since these are >> more or less all ghost towns, sitting here on comp.misc for a >> couple weeks until someone like, complains or something, seems fine) >> >> alt.cyberspace.rebels >> alt.fan.usenet >> misc.headlines >> misc.news.internet.discuss > > > The alt.* newsgroups aren't really a good options. Most free > news-servers exclude the entire alt.* hierarchy, and some of the > commercial servers do as well. And I don't want to push people towards > google groups (argh, what it does with line lengths!). > > The misc.* would work, but - damn it! - slashdot is (mostly) tech > geeks and hanging out in the comp.* hierarchy seems more appropriate. > Most of the discussion will likely be appropriate anyway and - to be > honest - I don't think anyone much cares if it is not anymore. > While I'll stand in favor of not using the alt.* hierarchy for stated reasons, I will point out that news.eternal-september.org is free and caches a good chunk of the alt.* world. Just in case it's something folks in here happen to decide they'd like.
Back to comp.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Before we get totally entrenched here... wjwlsn <ibillwilson@gmail.com> - 2014-02-09 13:37 +0000
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... Lance Orner <lance@orner.invalid.net> - 2014-02-09 18:54 +0000
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-09 19:54 +0000
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... TrueSatan <true_satan@fastmail.co.uk> - 2014-02-09 20:19 +0000
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... cykros <cykros@devio.us> - 2014-02-11 23:41 -0500
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-12 10:44 +0000
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> - 2014-02-10 09:51 -0500
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... "Elizabeth T. Knuth" <eknuth@csbsju.edu> - 2014-02-11 01:09 -0600
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... John Brownalt <deconfliction@filteredperception.org> - 2014-02-11 11:27 +0000
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> - 2014-02-11 09:34 -0500
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... deepmagicbeginshere@gmail.com - 2014-02-11 06:49 -0800
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-11 16:51 +0000
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... wjwlsn <ibillwilson@gmail.com> - 2014-02-11 09:04 -0800
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-02-12 13:22 -0800
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... cykros <cykros@devio.us> - 2014-02-11 23:45 -0500
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-02-26 00:01 -0500
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... sagebump <outersend@gmail.com> - 2014-03-03 09:33 -0800
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... "tdk" <forum.tdk@squte.com> - 2014-03-03 12:05 -0600
Re: Before we get totally entrenched here... RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-03 19:49 +0000
csiph-web