On Mar 1, 8:13 pm, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > No, Archimedes?Plutonium, I don't work for Google or anything like that. Few of my own posts get indexed by Google Groups; to get indexed, a post must have "quality" replies. To make a lasting/meaninful contribution, edit Wikipedia; Google Groups is uncensored, it's too wild to index fully. Were G.G. fully indexed, people would use it to game the system, to boost the rank of certain web sites.
Thanks, I am beginning to see the picture you are trying to present on Google. But can you stop showing off with that black background.
You could have made it more clear in your presentation.
Most of us still view sci. newsgroups in Old Google, and the part that escaped me was that in New-Google-Newsgroups is this thing called **fully indexed** important.
In Old Google, **fully indexed** was irrelevant. I remember in Spring of 2012 that after I posted, I could see my post in the Google archive minutes later, or almost simultaneous to when I had sent it, much like what Drexel Math Forum has now of about a few minutes delay. So in Old Google, the archiving was natural. But with New Google, this issue of gaming the system would require a depleted archive.
So thanks for explaining why the archive of Google ran aground sometime in late May early June of 2012 when the New Google Newsgroups got started. They had to destroy or ruin the archiving in order to bring on their new system.
So that leaves me and others concerned about having something better than Google because we need a archiving and we like to have less search engine bombing.
If we look at Drexel's Math Forum, it is far better than Google New Newsgroup. It's only major problem is that it is confined to mathematics. So what we need is more Universities willing to host a science subject. We need a University to do sci.physics, another to do sci.chem, etc etc, so that every science has a University that hosts the subject. We model them after Drexel's Math Forum.
Now if we had all the sciences hosted by various Universities, Usenet would have likely been far better rather than when Google emerged with Usenet over the past 15 years. I say that because hatemongers like Uncle Al or various others would not have been so destructive since what magnified their destructive influence was the search engine bombing that they harnessed with Google. If you look at Drexel's Math Forum, the most destructive characters there were AdamK, facile Bacle the imbecile, Kevin and BroilJab. But for some reasons, they never really upset me in the Math Forum, but upsetting on Google. Perhaps it is the magnification of their abuse by search engine bombing that made Google newsgroup distasteful, and not Math Forum.
So maybe the clearcut evolution of the science newsgroups is for Google to turn it into a repulsive chat room. And for Universities across the world to individually host the various science newsgroups like Drexel's Math Forum.
The only reason I stay with Google is the ability to post out and to read on Old Newsgroups, but if those two functions were gone and only New Google Newsgroup remained then I would say goodbye to Google. Then I would spend my time with Drexel.
So I please need people to look into and seek Colleges and Universities to set up a sci.physics, sci.chem and all the other sciences hosted by Universities in the same way Drexel hosts sci.math. That I feel was the natural evolution intended for the science newsgroups. That it was unnatural for a corporate entity like Google to so to speak "own" the newsgroups and try to make money from them. Science never thrives in an environment where the owners, after all, will look for ways of making money. Science thrives in the environment of education, the thirst to know, to learn, to be curious.
So let us not delay, but rather immediately seek Colleges and Universities to set up all the science newsgroups, just like Drexel with sci.math.