Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

Are either of these the binaries newsgroup people are using to post pics of
their tanks? if not, what is it? I'm in the process of attempting to get
this group carried PROPERLY throughout the net, and need to know which
heirarchy it should belong to.

Ta,

Velvet

Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

Ok, I think I've just managed to answer BOTH my questions. A search through
google revealed the following from the last time this issue was encountered,
back in 1998!

start quoted

Most likely it should be called alt.binaries.pictures.aquaria.
not a good idea at all - when i first heard about a.b.aquaria being
proposed,
the idea was to exclude "pictures" for the simply reason that it places it
way
out of line of the pictures groups and the porn-spammers don't see it as
part
of their target list - and sofar that's worked admirably !

Unfortunately, you'll probably get objections if your group name doesn't
fit with the others in the namespace, so it is less likely to fly with just
alt.binaries.aquaria. Perhaps one reason you don't see much porn-spam here
is because very few sites carry alt.binaries.aquaria due to bad namespace.

end quoted

*sigh*

So, it doesn't fit the naming conventions, which means there's little hope
it'll ever be ISC listed. I shall return to leading a pictorially-deprived
life, unless people can see fit to upload photos to webspace and post a link
to such here as well as posting in binaries.

Velvet

Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

"Marvin Hlavac" wrote in message
able.rogers.com...

"Velvet" wrote in message
...
Ok, I think I've just managed to answer BOTH my questions. A search through
google revealed the following from the last time this issue was encountered,
back in 1998!

start quoted

Most likely it should be called alt.binaries.pictures.aquaria.
not a good idea at all - when i first heard about a.b.aquaria being
proposed,
the idea was to exclude "pictures" for the simply reason that it places it
way
out of line of the pictures groups and the porn-spammers don't see it as
part
of their target list - and sofar that's worked admirably !

Unfortunately, you'll probably get objections if your group name doesn't
fit with the others in the namespace, so it is less likely to fly with just
alt.binaries.aquaria. Perhaps one reason you don't see much porn-spam here
is because very few sites carry alt.binaries.aquaria due to bad namespace.

end quoted

*sigh*

So, it doesn't fit the naming conventions, which means there's little hope
it'll ever be ISC listed. I shall return to leading a pictorially-deprived
life, unless people can see fit to upload photos to webspace and post a link
to such here as well as posting in binaries.

Velvet




Hi Velvet,

I wonder what is involved in creating a new news group. It most likely would
not
be that difficult to create rec.aquaria.binaries or what ever the proper name
should be. What should be the proper name?

--
Marvin
hlavac (at) rogers (dot) com




Hi Velvet,

It could be worth while to start a newsgroup with a proper name for that
purpose. If your ISP doesn't want to carry alt.binaries.aquaria because it is
not named properly chances are other ISP's feel the same way. The current
alt.binaries.aquaria does not have very many visitors who actually post
something. Perhaps if more people can access it this will improve.

If you want to go through the trouble why don't you find out how to set up a new
newsgroup and most of us will be very grateful ;-)

Good luck,
--
Marvin
hlavac (at) rogers (dot) com

Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

Why not just post photos to a website. Easier for everyone.

http://www.fishlinkcentral.com/photos/index.php

Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

"Velvet" wrote in message ...
Ok, I think I've just managed to answer BOTH my questions. A search through
google revealed the following from the last time this issue was encountered,
back in 1998!

start quoted

Most likely it should be called alt.binaries.pictures.aquaria.
not a good idea at all - when i first heard about a.b.aquaria being
proposed,
the idea was to exclude "pictures" for the simply reason that it places it
way
out of line of the pictures groups and the porn-spammers don't see it as
part
of their target list - and sofar that's worked admirably !

Unfortunately, you'll probably get objections if your group name doesn't
fit with the others in the namespace, so it is less likely to fly with just
alt.binaries.aquaria. Perhaps one reason you don't see much porn-spam here
is because very few sites carry alt.binaries.aquaria due to bad namespace.

end quoted

*sigh*

So, it doesn't fit the naming conventions, which means there's little hope
it'll ever be ISC listed. I shall return to leading a pictorially-deprived
life, unless people can see fit to upload photos to webspace and post a link
to such here as well as posting in binaries.

Velvet

What is ISC? Some few years ago Google purchased Deja. Then Deja was
a true unadulterated very uncommercial search engine with internet
roots before HTML. As I understand the value Google paid for ... Deja
had "software" albiet programming that still makes it possible to
search every post of words, combinations of words and in the old days
posts to DejaNews groups showed up within minutes. The Deja database
Google bought was complete also. I miss those old posts.

In the orginal transition from Deja to Google there were hordes of
Porn Spam. Some slipped through the Deja newsgroup but not much.

I just wish Google could still search posts for info like Deja could.

Best,

Sharon

Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

ISC (internet software consortium) is the body that now maintains the list
of usenet newsgroups which conform to the standards agreed regarding naming
conventions (to make it organised and thus speed searching for a group, and
the posts within). Whilst they didn't originally lay down the guidelines,
they are the current holders of the list, and the people who add and remove
groups to it. Generally, the organisations that are involved with the
actual running of the internet will never bend the rules, unless the purpose
is to make the net more efficient, and even then, because people seem to
give up time on a volunteer basis to look after this side of the net for us,
it can be a slow process to actually discuss, evaluate, vote, and then look
at implementing, a change (which, because no one organisation actually has
'control' over what people should do online, can be a very slow and tedious
process, hence the rigorous sticking to the guidelines).

All this is gleaned from searching within google for info on the ISC, so I
might have it a bit wrong. Forgive me if there are innacuracies, I'm not an
expert on this side of the internet at all :-)

Velvet

Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

In om,
(Sharon Frey) empowered us with this mighty
blow against the Patriarchy:

I just wish Google could still search posts for info like Deja could.

Google took away the ability to use the "*" wildcard within search terms.
Lousy.

Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

because not everybody HAS a website, free or pay for, and it's only easy for
those who DO have a website to post to...

even with fishlinkcentral, it's almost the same trouble, ten clicks later,
you're there....

"Mark Barnett" wrote in message
...
| Why not just post photos to a website. Easier for everyone.
|
| http://www.fishlinkcentral.com/photos/index.php

Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

My ISP only provides ISC NGs and provides alt.binaries.aquaria...
So what is wrong with yours ?

Philippe


"Velvet" wrote in message ...
| ISC (internet software consortium) is the body that now maintains the list
| of usenet newsgroups which conform to the standards agreed regarding naming
| conventions (to make it organised and thus speed searching for a group, and
| the posts within). Whilst they didn't originally lay down the guidelines,
| they are the current holders of the list, and the people who add and remove
| groups to it. Generally, the organisations that are involved with the
| actual running of the internet will never bend the rules, unless the purpose
| is to make the net more efficient, and even then, because people seem to
| give up time on a volunteer basis to look after this side of the net for us,
| it can be a slow process to actually discuss, evaluate, vote, and then look
| at implementing, a change (which, because no one organisation actually has
| 'control' over what people should do online, can be a very slow and tedious
| process, hence the rigorous sticking to the guidelines).
|
| All this is gleaned from searching within google for info on the ISC, so I
| might have it a bit wrong. Forgive me if there are innacuracies, I'm not an
| expert on this side of the internet at all :-)
|
| Velvet
|
|

Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

The problem is that alt.binaries.aquaria isn't on the ISC list.

This is the current, active, ISC list.

ftp://ftp.isc.org/usenet/CONFIG/newsgroups

As you can see, there's NO alt.binaries.aquaria group on there. I would
suggest your ISP either added this when the group WAS ISC listed (I don't
know if it ever was), or they aren't that averse to sneakily adding a
non-ISC listed group here and there.

Whichever, mine, sadly, isn't so flexible. They won't give an inch, cos
they know it'll be taken a mile.

Velvet


"Philippe Lemaire" wrote in message
...
My ISP only provides ISC NGs and provides alt.binaries.aquaria...
So what is wrong with yours ?

Philippe


"Velvet" wrote in message
...
| ISC (internet software consortium) is the body that now maintains the
list
| of usenet newsgroups which conform to the standards agreed regarding
naming
| conventions (to make it organised and thus speed searching for a group,
and
| the posts within). Whilst they didn't originally lay down the
guidelines,
| they are the current holders of the list, and the people who add and
remove
| groups to it. Generally, the organisations that are involved with the
| actual running of the internet will never bend the rules, unless the
purpose
| is to make the net more efficient, and even then, because people seem to
| give up time on a volunteer basis to look after this side of the net for
us,
| it can be a slow process to actually discuss, evaluate, vote, and then
look
| at implementing, a change (which, because no one organisation actually
has
| 'control' over what people should do online, can be a very slow and
tedious
| process, hence the rigorous sticking to the guidelines).
|
| All this is gleaned from searching within google for info on the ISC, so
I
| might have it a bit wrong. Forgive me if there are innacuracies, I'm
not an
| expert on this side of the internet at all :-)
|
| Velvet
|
|

Is it alt.binaries.aquaria or rec.aquaria.binaries
 

Surely it was !
Nice my ISP doesn't know it is NOT anymore ...

Philippe


"Velvet" wrote in message ...
| The problem is that alt.binaries.aquaria isn't on the ISC list.
|
| This is the current, active, ISC list.
|
| ftp://ftp.isc.org/usenet/CONFIG/newsgroups
|
| As you can see, there's NO alt.binaries.aquaria group on there. I would
| suggest your ISP either added this when the group WAS ISC listed (I don't
| know if it ever was), or they aren't that averse to sneakily adding a
| non-ISC listed group here and there.
|
| Whichever, mine, sadly, isn't so flexible. They won't give an inch, cos
| they know it'll be taken a mile.
|
| Velvet
|
|
| "Philippe Lemaire" wrote in message
| ...
| My ISP only provides ISC NGs and provides alt.binaries.aquaria...
| So what is wrong with yours ?
|
| Philippe
|
|
| "Velvet" wrote in message
| ...
| | ISC (internet software consortium) is the body that now maintains the
| list
| | of usenet newsgroups which conform to the standards agreed regarding
| naming
| | conventions (to make it organised and thus speed searching for a group,
| and
| | the posts within). Whilst they didn't originally lay down the
| guidelines,
| | they are the current holders of the list, and the people who add and
| remove
| | groups to it. Generally, the organisations that are involved with the
| | actual running of the internet will never bend the rules, unless the
| purpose
| | is to make the net more efficient, and even then, because people seem to
| | give up time on a volunteer basis to look after this side of the net for
| us,
| | it can be a slow process to actually discuss, evaluate, vote, and then
| look
| | at implementing, a change (which, because no one organisation actually
| has
| | 'control' over what people should do online, can be a very slow and
| tedious
| | process, hence the rigorous sticking to the guidelines).
| |
| | All this is gleaned from searching within google for info on the ISC, so
| I
| | might have it a bit wrong. Forgive me if there are innacuracies, I'm
| not an
| | expert on this side of the internet at all :-)
| |
| | Velvet
| |
| |
|
|
|