No Longer a Flood

[elaich]

You are correct, but some ISPs/Networks only limit traffic to certain
ports.

So what's stopping ANYBODY from using PeoplePC or Netscape ISP? Certainly
not the price ($9.99 a month.)

 

[Anti_Freak_Machine]

So what's stopping ANYBODY from using PeoplePC or Netscape ISP? Certainly
not the price ($9.99 a month.)

I dunno. Ask them.

 

[Anti_Freak_Machine]

Please explain why you are restricted to port 80 and why you cannot use
news.individual.net and a newsreader like Xnews.

Ok..let's say the network you use to connect to the internet or maybe
even your ISP does not allow certain ports to be used, you would be
forced to use whatever ports they do allow. Why do they do this? Think
about it, blocking certain ports allow them to prevent possible issues
like boxes/users being turned into spam relays, P2P programs wont work,
unintentional FTP sites, spreading of viruses etc...
However, almost ISPs/networks will allow you to use port 80 (http
i.e. the web) With what you read above, keep in mind that some
ISPs/networks will actually block port 119 (newsgroups)...so you, the
end user, are forced to find a way to read newsgroups-
news.individual.net and xnews will still require you to connect via port
119...so thats why they cant be used by some people. Thats where
services like google groups come into play. You can read newsgroups
using port 80 through your web browser.
Hope this clears things up

 

[mike ring]

For me [using Xnews], adding a poster to a killfile is no more
difficult than selecting a name in the "From" list and hitting the "K"
key on my keyboard.

Easier than that - just hit K while you've got the bugger selected!

Xnews rocks

mike

 

[Mel]

Pardon the ignorance, but what does "only port 80" mean? I thought
computers have several thousand "ports." I am not being sarcastic; I
honestly do not know what this means.

http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers

 

[Andy]

Companies these days tend to start off my blocking ALL the TCP ports on
their Internet firewall. They then only open the ones they want people
to use (e.g. 80 for web). Port 119 (NNTP) is not open on our firewall
so I can't get out on it.

 

[Dewey Edwards]

Companies these days tend to start off my blocking ALL the TCP ports on
their Internet firewall. They then only open the ones they want people
to use (e.g. 80 for web). Port 119 (NNTP) is not open on our firewall
so I can't get out on it.

I see no problem with them doing that. I would see a problem if
your personal account had limitations (unless that is the tier you
chose).

 

[Andy]

Sorry, should have made myself clearer. I was on about access to ACF
while at work. The firewall there does allow connections on port 119
which is why I have to use port 80 (web access via Google Groups). I
was trying to make the point that not everyone can use a newsreader
application and kill file.

 

[dansheen]

In reality, this extreme posting by Tramp is now a Tsunami and no longer
just a Flood.
Yes, one could killfile him/her.
Better if Tramp would take the suggestions offered in other post(s) and
simply provide a daily updated link as in
Today, we'll cover the E's and F's or some such thing.
Generally, he/she is showing a total lack of respect and that is truly
unfortunate.

Just my 1.5 cents, oh, wait, the exchange rate is better these days so it's
about 1.70 cents.

rocker

The complaints about the "flood" just seem to be a different kind of
flood to me. Look at how long this thread is.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

So what's stopping ANYBODY from using PeoplePC or Netscape ISP?

Sysadmins.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

Sorry, should have made myself clearer. I was on about access to ACF
while at work.

Shouldn't one be "working" while at work ?

The firewall there does allow connections on port 119
which is why I have to use port 80 (web access via Google Groups). I
was trying to make the point that not everyone can use a newsreader
application and kill file.

I think your point would more appropriately be expressed as "People
who are freeloaders, and want to access personal newsgroups at work,
might have a number of ports blocked."

In any case such people can easily solve such a problem by connecting
to the internet at home.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

That's stupid; obviously you are experienced enough to recognize the
flooders and killfile them, so am I.

Why would I want to killfile the flooders ? They post about freeware
in a freeware newsgroup. That's why I come to this newsgroup. For
freeware.

(and what a relief, I stuck it as long as I could as I only like to
killfile malice or filth).

But how is a newcomer (perhaps if you didn't use that pompous patronising
word "newbie"

I used the word "newbie" because I was referring to the previous
poster's comments. Which included that word. I see nothing wrong with
that word. As you say, we are/were all "newbies" ourselves at one time
or another.

you'd be more tolerant, most of us, if not you, are new to
something somewhere), to distinguish between a flooder and the helpful,
knowledgeable people who don't post as much, and so are not perceived by a
new subscriber, who would then be justified in looking elsewhere for info?

Why bother ? A flooder makes posts about freeware. A non flooder makes
posts about freeware. There isn't any need to differentiate.

< snip >

Regards, John.

 

[Mike Dee]

Shouldn't one be "working" while at work ?

If port 119 is allowed from the OP's work, then he/she would have no
trouble using Xnews and <http://news.individual.net/> There is no
excuse [other than they *should* probably be working, unless on a lunch
break etc.] for not being able to use a killfile when needed.

I think your point would more appropriately be expressed as "People
who are freeloaders, and want to access personal newsgroups at work,
might have a number of ports blocked."

Draconian but true.

In any case such people can easily solve such a problem by connecting
to the internet at home.

I agree.

 

[jo]

Why would I want to killfile the flooders ? They post about freeware
in a freeware newsgroup. That's why I come to this newsgroup. For
freeware.

I could put one post here pointing people to SoS's site.
Or I could put individual posts here linking to every app on his site.
You see no distinction here?
The only distinction I see is that at least a SoS flood will have been
reviewed - validated - in some way.
Tramp or PT could be posting Babyaware for all they know. Or care.
And flooders create 'noise'. Disproportionate noise. When they do it in
binary groups they can be wholly destructive, ruining them for ordinary
punters by slashing retention times.
Here I download bodies for all posts below a certain size. On dial up. I
have certain expectations. Flooders trash those expectations. Tramp has
always done this stuff, for his own reasons. PT has seen a bandwagon to
jump on because he loves the attention.
I was going to put a post in earlier, because I found a lovely freeware
app on my puter that gives you a countdown in days/seconds/whatever to a
certain time - tells you how long you have been alive for etc. So I went
to the site of the app - looked about a bit - saw a disk contents type
app (of the sort you were asking for recently) and downloaded it and
looked at it carefully and decided that it was not really very good -
though very pretty - checked the site more, found that my app was now
buyw*re and that the free stuff was, er, not necessarily free.
So I didn't bother to post. Tramp or PT don't bother to put that work
in.
I could probably put 200 T Lobsang Rampa posts a day into a group where
they would be on topic. That would be a laugh for the poster. Not
necessarily for the group.

 

[Mel]

flood to me. Look at how long this thread is.

Let's not forget this whole subject was started by one of the
flooders attempting to justify his actions. I for one wouldn't
have posted on the subject otherwise (I already had the
flooders killed).
Although why it couldn't have all been contained in a single thread
is quite beyond me.

 

[Andy]

I was just trying to make the point that this statement made by someone
earlier in the thread (specifically point 2) ... "Nobody has to use
Google Groups to read Usenet unless either 1) they want to, or 2) they
are just plain clueless." ... was wrong. You shouldn't make a sarcastic
response like that unless you know your facts. This showed that the
person making it was suffering from point 2 themselves!

As to accessing newsgroups at work, why shouldn't I? I actually use the
computer / programming ones quite a bit. The idea of asking a question
if you're having problems or helping out someone who is encountering
the same problem you did and solved is what newsgroups are about. I've
always managed this through Google Groups so never needed to enquire as
to whether our I.T. infrastructure could be extended to open port 119
on our company firewall.

As for checking ACF at work, again, why not? Alot of the software I
find there I can use at work too (as long as it is free for commercial
use too before anyone moans). Programmers Text Editors, PDF creators
etc etc etc. I prefer to use the same software at work as I do at home
if I can help. Saves learning two things.

At the end of the day, the point I am making is that not everyone can
use a KillFile and not everyone can access newsgroup with a news
client. Dont keep saying "all you have to do is use a killfile".

 

[Vic Dura]

Shouldn't one be "working" while at work ?

No, not if he is "working" for a government agency in the U.S.

 

[Mike Dee]

I was just trying to make the point that this statement made by
someone earlier in the thread (specifically point 2) ... "Nobody
has to use Google Groups to read Usenet unless either 1) they want
to, or 2) they are just plain clueless." ... was wrong. You
shouldn't make a sarcastic response like that unless you know your
facts. This showed that the person making it was suffering from
point 2 themselves!

As to accessing newsgroups at work, why shouldn't I? I actually
use the computer / programming ones quite a bit. The idea of
asking a question if you're having problems or helping out someone
who is encountering the same problem you did and solved is what
newsgroups are about. I've always managed this through Google
Groups so never needed to enquire as to whether our I.T.
infrastructure could be extended to open port 119 on our company
firewall.

I agree with you here. If your need to find programs/info which can be
used at/by your work requires that you research newsgroups, then you
should be at liberty to do this during work hours.

On the other hand. Because you can access newsgroups more easily [as in
selectively filter/killfile] using dedicated news clients via NNTP,
your work place should make port 119 available to you. It is to their
benefit to do so, as it would cut down on the time you would need to be
on-line needlessly sifting through flooding, SPAM and Junk posts.

It sounds to me that you actually *need* to have port 119 opened to you
at work. That is, if they understand the reason behind requiring this.

As for checking ACF at work, again, why not? Alot of the software
I find there I can use at work too (as long as it is free for
commercial use too before anyone moans). Programmers Text Editors,
PDF creators etc etc etc. I prefer to use the same software at
work as I do at home if I can help. Saves learning two things.

At the end of the day, the point I am making is that not everyone
can use a KillFile and not everyone can access newsgroup with a
news client. Dont keep saying "all you have to do is use a
killfile".

But everyone with their *own* web account CAN access newsgroups with a
news client. So therefore "all you have to do is use a killfile". But
if for reasons such as, port restrictions imposed by a workplace, then
those people should probably access newsgroups unrestricted from home.
Unless their workplace requests that they visit newsgroups during work
hours for those reasons that you pointed out - and in which case, port
119 should be made avaiable to them.

 

[Mike Dee]

No, not if he is "working" for a government agency in the U.S.

In which case, port 119 should be made available to that individual.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

John Fitzsimons wrote:

I could put one post here pointing people to SoS's site.

You wouldn't be the first here to do that.

Or I could put individual posts here linking to every app on his site.
You see no distinction here?

If you want to do that then that is fine by me. I can easily killfile
you if your posts bothered me. A two second exercise. Hardly worth
my getting bothered by it.

The only distinction I see is that at least a SoS flood will have been
reviewed - validated - in some way.

Many "recommendations" here turn out to be crippleware, demo,
shareware, liteware etc. Or otherwise simply not doing what the
original poster required. I don't see Tramp or PT's posts as being any
worse in that regard.

Tramp or PT could be posting Babyaware for all they know.

We already get plenty of Babyaware posts. Without Tramp or PT. If
anything the latter reduce the amount of Babyaware "noise".

Or care.
And flooders create 'noise'. Disproportionate noise.

I disagree. I regularly find worthwhile downloads from both posters.

When they do it in
binary groups they can be wholly destructive, ruining them for ordinary
punters by slashing retention times.

No idea what they do in binary groups. I am only interested in what
they do here. Which is fine by me.

Here I download bodies for all posts below a certain size. On dial up. I
have certain expectations. Flooders trash those expectations. Tramp has
always done this stuff, for his own reasons. PT has seen a bandwagon to
jump on because he loves the attention.

Whatever the motivation I am helped by both of them.

I was going to put a post in earlier, because I found a lovely freeware
app on my puter that gives you a countdown in days/seconds/whatever to a
certain time - tells you how long you have been alive for etc. So I went
to the site of the app - looked about a bit - saw a disk contents type
app (of the sort you were asking for recently) and downloaded it and
looked at it carefully and decided that it was not really very good -
though very pretty - checked the site more, found that my app was now
buyw*re and that the free stuff was, er, not necessarily free.
So I didn't bother to post. Tramp or PT don't bother to put that work
in.

There are many other "one post" posters here who do exactly the same
thing.

I could probably put 200 T Lobsang Rampa posts a day into a group where
they would be on topic. That would be a laugh for the poster. Not
necessarily for the group.

Don't know why posting "on topic" posts would be funny. Be sure to let
me know when you post those Rampa posts though. So I don't miss out on
downloading them.

Regards, John.