Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #1050

Re: non-comp tech articles (was fertility ...)

Show all headers | View raw

On 2014-02-27, wjwlsn <ibillwilson@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just did a little searching around and found
> misc.news.internet.discuss, which actually seems to have some fairly
> regular traffic that is similar to this. It's worth a look. (In fact,
> if we ever did decide that we absolutely had to move elsewhere in
> Usenet, it would be my new recommendation. Many of our discussions
> would fit right in.)
>
> If you do decide to start posting stuff there, I recommend posting an
> announcement here on comp.misc and letting tdk know (it could be a
> good newsgroup to add to s'qute).
>
> Regards, Bill
>

I had a look at m.n.i.d. (too bad the acronym doesn't work out to
m.i.n.d.! - oh well).  It's not bad.  Two comments:

1. The stuff posted there is often more whimsical often has no tech
angle at all (Japanese tourists arrested because they didn't understand
traffic signals etc.) whereas I'm finding and hoping to share articles
that are technical in nature but not necessarily related to computers or
computing.  I'd like to look around a bit longer.

2. There's already a bit of a community there, though a thin one.  In
light of Michael Black's concerns - which I think are legitimate - I
posted a note there saying they might see some names and faces.  It's
one thing to start using comp.misc which had nothing but robo-spam and
another to drop in on a community already sort of doing its own thing.
(I also invited them to come join us here).

In sum, let's look around a bit longer.  There's still alt.geek and
alt.nerd.obsessive.  alt.hackers.discuss seems available but it's not
quite right.  There's also alt.misc and misc.misc, both of which seem to
receive regular robo-spam posts of total garbage and neither of which
seems like a great fit.

I was going to say, perhaps it's time to propose to the Big-8 Board an
alt.something but what would it be and how would it differ from this?
Then we're back to posting the Your Rights Online type stuff in
alt.privacy and the hacker stuff in alt.2600 and we're spread out again.

In the short term while we get organized, I'll post the technical- but
not-comp stuff on m.n.i.d and I guess we'll see how it goes.

Back to comp.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Fertility procedure risks "designer babies" RS Wood  <rswood@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-25 20:30 +0000
  Re: Fertility procedure risks "designer babies" Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-02-25 23:19 +0200
    Re: Fertility procedure risks "designer babies" Rob <monst.oorzudo@ntlworld.com> - 2014-02-26 09:36 +0000
    Re: Fertility procedure risks "designer babies" SlimmPickens <lachlanmoss@gmail.com> - 2014-02-26 02:50 -0800
      Re: Fertility procedure risks "designer babies" Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-02-26 15:03 +0200
        Re: Fertility procedure risks "designer babies" "Andy K." <andy.k466@gmail.com> - 2014-03-02 23:42 +0100
    Re: Fertility procedure risks "designer babies" Shadow <Sh@dow.br> - 2014-02-26 11:24 -0300
  Re: Fertility procedure risks "designer babies" Peter Percival <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2014-02-26 12:51 +0000
    Re: Fertility procedure risks  designer babies "wjwlsn" <ibillwilson@gmail.com> - 2014-02-26 11:06 -0600
    Re: Fertility procedure risks "designer babies" RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-26 17:13 +0000
      Re: Fertility procedure risks "designer babies" Peter Percival <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2014-02-27 12:18 +0000
        non-comp tech articles (was fertility ...) RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-27 15:44 +0000
          Re: non-comp tech articles (was fertility ...) Peter Percival <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2014-02-27 16:58 +0000
          Re: Fertility procedure risks  designer babies "wjwlsn" <ibillwilson@gmail.com> - 2014-02-27 11:05 -0600
            Re: Fertility procedure risks  designer babies "tdk" <forum.tdk@squte.com> - 2014-02-27 12:22 -0600
            Re: non-comp tech articles (was fertility ...) RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-27 20:09 +0000
              Re: Fertility procedure risks  designer babies "wjwlsn" <ibillwilson@gmail.com> - 2014-02-27 14:39 -0600
                Re: Fertility procedure risks  designer babies RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-02-27 20:50 +0000
              Re: non-comp tech articles (was fertility ...) Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2014-03-01 04:59 -0400
                Re: non-comp tech articles (was fertility ...) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-02 23:48 -0500
              Re: non-comp tech articles (was fertility ...) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-03-02 23:43 -0500

csiph-web