Newsgroup providers
 

In article ,
soup wrote:
On 06/11/2014 08:54, Nick Maclaren wrote:

soup wrote:
Thirty three years ago.
Not just then.

It was you that said you couldn't find archives that went back beyond 1981.

Sigh. Despite Wikipedia, Usenet did not arise like Athena, but was
based on existing mailing lists. Naturally, there would be no Usenet
archives as such before that, but there might be ones of those mailing
lists.

However, that was NOT the context of my posting that you responded to,
which was that I and others had failed to persuade the relevant
libraries and other organisations that computing documentation and
discussions were of any consequence. And THAT started in the 1970s,
with my most recent failure here about a decade ago - even now, the
criteria for archiving such material are much stricter than for some
other, similar material.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Newsgroup providers
 

On 06/11/2014 12:27, Nick Maclaren wrote:


DejaNews one now owned by Google. And, as I understand it, even
that is very patchy.

I don't know what it is like now but shortly after Google took over I
tried looking for my early posts and found next to nothing and even
before that not all my early posts (late 1994, early 1995) were still
accessible.

--
Roger Chapman

Newsgroup providers
 

On 06/11/2014 13:40, Nick Maclaren wrote:

Sigh. Despite Wikipedia, Usenet did not arise like Athena, but was
based on existing mailing lists. Naturally, there would be no Usenet
archives as such before that, but there might be ones of those mailing
lists.

Double sigh.
Who[1] would want to read the scribblings of web weenies from thirty
three years ago?
By its de-facto nature Usenet (and its predecessors) posts are not
worthy (beyond the wants of a few academics) of archiving.


[1] Apart from a few academics (who like that sort of thing).

Newsgroup providers
 

In article ,
soup wrote:

Sigh. Despite Wikipedia, Usenet did not arise like Athena, but was
based on existing mailing lists. Naturally, there would be no Usenet
archives as such before that, but there might be ones of those mailing
lists.

Double sigh.
Who[1] would want to read the scribblings of web weenies from thirty
three years ago?
By its de-facto nature Usenet (and its predecessors) posts are not
worthy (beyond the wants of a few academics) of archiving.


[1] Apart from a few academics (who like that sort of thing).

It is well-known that trolls are extremly ignorant, so I will
excuse you for not realising how much information on the history
of technology is accessible from such records.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Newsgroup providers
 

On 06/11/2014 18:32, Nick Maclaren wrote:

It is well-known that trolls are extremly ignorant, so I will
excuse you for not realising how much information on the history
of technology is accessible from such records.

Oh there is lots of information on the history available in such an
archive..

But is the average schmoo at all interested? Maybe in a few years time
there will be a(nother) TV program on how digital electronic computing
came about and how ARPANET developed into the internet and...

Just as an aside, I am not trolling (bored yes but not trolling) I
genuinely believe that while you think an extensive archive of every
Usenet (and before) post is a good thing I genuinely believe that it is
such a small market and will cost so much that no-one has calculated
that it is worth doing.

Newsgroup providers
 

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 18:32:39 +0000 (GMT),
Nick Maclaren wrote:

It is well-known that trolls are extremly ignorant, so I will
excuse you for not realising how much information on the history
of technology is accessible from such records.

Suffering from burns by technology, I am backing this statement and want
to add, that conversation-skills, too, benefit from the lecture of
historic postings. In a world where knowledge is considered balast if it
comprises more than knowing which button to push, I am often lacking the
vocabulary (German, French or English, doesn't matter) to give the right
orientation to the people who seek my advice. The “early days” have the
advantage that the basics where about all that we had to talk about. The
communication was clearer and arguments more pertinent.

Those who don't get that now, won't later.

F'up to gardening

--
Location: Lower Normandy (Orne), France
GnuPG/OpenPGP 4096R/3216CF02 2013-11-15 [expires: 2015-11-15]
sub 4096R/2751C550 2013-11-15 [expires: 2015-11-15]

Newsgroup providers
 

"Peter & Jeanne" wrote in message
...


"Peter James" wrote in message
. ..

Try the German server "Individual.new.NET" :

http://news.individual.net at

A retention period of 584 days.


Just fine - only if you do not want binary gropes (:-)

Pete (another !)

It's true that they don't provide binaries but otherwise they are perfect.
I ask myself if I'd want to go away from NIN to see binaries and the answer
is no.
Because if I have a problem with them there is a real person that replies.
Bettina or Florian usually.