0
0_Qed
George said:Has anybody else noticed that Google, in conjunction with their new format
and the "groups-beta.google.com", seems to be offering private "Google
Groups" which are mixed in with their coverage of Usenet... as though, to
the casual observer, there is no distinction between the two? I just found
out last night that I can no longer navigate to this newsgroup at Google
Groups by clicking through a hierarchy of comp, .sys, .ibm, .pc, .hardware,
.chips - after the 2nd level, they appear to only list their own
propietary, private groups. If there's still a way, I couldn't find it.
Have you tried the "other", civilized "GGs" ...
http://groups.google.ca/
http://groups.google.nl
http://groups.google.co.uk/
http://groups.google.it
Without an 'inclusion' of the =entire= Dictionary of Amer Slang ...
I am unabale to offer a fully descriptive comment.
My apologies.
This seems like a serious violation of the spirit of Usenet to me and while
I do value their search of the Usenet archives, it's looking like a
dangerous threat to the future of Usenet in general - a bloody takeover in
fact. Just wondered what others think of this?... and what alternatives we
have for the archives?
A fair <?>.
If IBM can screw up, so can Google Corp.
To 'err' is hu_man.
Mite be a new Marketing "type", with a shiney new MBA ... `eh?
You "thimk" ???
MC&HNY,
Ed