On May 17, 1:33 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote: > On May 14, 2:51 pm, Archimedes Plutonium > > > > > > > > > > <plutonium.archime...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On May 14, 8:14 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 13, 10:48 pm, Archimedes Plutonium > > (snipped) > > > > Nice enough topic, and you are right about the kinds of index methods > > > of censorship that takes place, and otherwise notice how few if any > > > K-12s are anywhere to be seen within these public Usenet/newsgroups. > > > The fact that few if any High Schoolers post should be a alarm bell > > for those who look after Usenet. When Usenet started, everyone was > > shouting a banner of "freedom of speech", but there is little fairness > > of speech in Usenet so long as anyone can hide behind fake names and > > post almost unlimited volume. When you have fake names-- BroilJAB, > > HVAC, Kevin, Bacle and more than 5 posts per 24 hours by such dolts, > > then the Usenet science newsgroups are tarnished so much that a High > > School youngster would not feel comfortable in posting. > > > So that if those two rules were installed-- no fake names, only 5 > > posts per day we would see a science forum. > > > > They'll also connect your words together so as to making them a whole > > > lot less searchable, and they've done the same thing with external > > > links by connecting the prior word to that link and thereby making it > > > unfunctional. So, there are ways of messing up your topics and > > > Worse yet is this Docendi.org or Niuz.biz that collects my posts and > > then when a bystander opens up that post in Niuz, Niuz attaches > > malware to the bystanders computer, at least that is what the Google > > warnings say about Niuz. I still want a lawyer to sue Niuz > > for wrecking computers, or the threat of wrecking computers. > > > > replies in ways that computer forensics can't link to the insider > > > perpetrators that intend to make their own stuff stick and your stuff > > > either fail or eventually vanish. > > > > However, I do believe we're seeing more than 400 million ly distance > > > by way of extremely long time exposures and lots of computer PhotoShop- > > > like methods applied. > > > I am still looking to see if 400 million light years is the upper > > limit. It appears so, since that Ring in the 3rd layer of Jarrett's > > galaxy mapping is 400 m l y distance. It is not final, but a good > > rough guess. > > > AP > > If the current generations of K-12s were even half as smart as our era > of 5th graders, there wouldn't be a problem with Usenet/newsgroups as > having been run into the nearest toilet by ZNR oligarchs and redneck > mafia types, that are mostly public funded and the rest faith-based > funded as to keeping as many K-12s from showing up or staying for > long.
I see it more as a general laziness and apathy of subscribers with the idea, the muddled idea of freedom of speech with no rules attached.
So the two rules that I deem necessary for a Science Forum-- no fake names and 5 posts limit per 24 hours are necessary rules to even have a science forum.
If we analogize to a grocery store where you buy food and you pay by leaving a true name so the bill is sent and you pay at the end of the month. So in comes shopping BroilJAB and buys every day a huge cart of groceries but never pays for anything because he never leaves a true name of accountability. And in comes Sam Wormley who clears out the entire aisle of food every day, sometimes twice a day so that others cannot buy any food of that aisle in that day.
Google wanted to improve the newsgroups, but went about it all contorted. They have hired unpaid moderators in sci.math. Those poor moderators who have to give so much of their time, when all Google had to do was impose the two rules-- no fake names and no more than 5 posts/24 hours. BroilJAB would never post his crap with his real name and if he did, we would quickly learn of his employer or where he works and the complaints would drive him away. And Sam Wormley would be restricted to 5 posts a day not able to hog the front pages of sci.physics.
So Google missed the boat with its New Newsgroups. It is easy for them to engineer those two rules and besides, having posters with true real names only is of benefit to Internet companies because commerce does not make money from people masquerading behind fake names. Do you think Amazon or Ebay are happy to see someone with a fake name?
So think of the High Schooler who opens up sci.physics today and sees a swarm of political manure by BroilJAB and not physics and then another swarm of one liner airhead parroting of physics topics by Sam Wormley. Not much benefit of science physics when you have tons of fake name posters, none of which can be relied on for any information.
If you want to do serious science, you have to have a real name to take responsibility of your posting interaction.