Poldie wrote:
James Farrar wrote:
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 11:03:42 +0100, Paul G
wrote:

In message , James
Farrar writes
At the point I answered, no replies was visible (using Google
Groups).

Well, then, use a real news server and newsreader.

No.

Well, then, expose yourself to ridicule.

Someone (in this came, James) appears to have forgotten that
regardless
of the method used to view usenet articles, due to their usenet's
of propagation, there is no guarantee that one usenet provider
will be quicker to receive articles than another provider. [1]

Actually, I did not forget this; I applied the maxim in footnote 1.

Articles propagation is not necessary linear. Genuine question:
Why exclude people using a different method of reading usenet
articles from yourself?

Frankly, Google Groups may be the worst thing to happen to Usenet
since 1993. If people who use GG to read and post to Usenet are not
aware that that is, in fact, what they are doing, they are quite
likely to say or do silly things.

The technical barrier to Usenet entry is lower with GG; but that in
itself requires GG users to be more technically savvy.

You're the one making basic mistakes regarding Usenet! I'm a
programmer who can't be bothered to install a newsgroup reader on
every machine I connect to the 'net with.

Fair enough. Actually, Google must have been particularly slow that
evening; it's included your last post in less than 10 minutes. Your
"sin" in using GG might have been overlooked if you hadn't made a "basic
mistake" in your answer!

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)