Given a call to Mountainview is never picked up by a human being...
<https://i.postimg.cc/d388rqkj/google02.jpg> +1 (650) 253-0000
If you care about either Usenet or the DejaNews DejaGoogle search
engine (which provides links to specific Usenet posts), then...
*Please Do This!*
<https://groups.google.com/g/google-usenet/about>
Which will look like this:
<https://i.postimg.cc/3JzWxG3f/please-do-this.jpg>
The DejaGoogle search engine is useful to everyone (not just us) because:
a. DejaGoogle doesn't require an account or paying for retention
b. DejaGoogle links work for everyone (even your 99 year old mother)
c. DejaGoogle only needs a web browser (which everyone has)
The problem with all this spam from Google servers is that even finding the >URI to an article posted _today_ is a mess of wading through that garbage.
<https://i.postimg.cc/yxpSLVrr/Google-Groups-Usenet-Portal-spam-20231206-730am.jpg>
Details follow...
That is the easiest way (I know of) to complain to Google about
their Google-Groups servers allowing Google Usenet portal spam
(which ruins their own Usenet DejaGoogle search engine output)
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android>
You're welcome to upload this screenshot showing the problem:
<https://i.postimg.cc/fyCXPjpR/Google-Groups-Usenet-Portal-spam-20231206-730am.jpg>
Together, maybe we can get Google to at least look at the problem we face.
*Please do this today:*
1. Go to <https://groups.google.com/g/google-usenet/about>
2. Click the "Gear" icon at the top right of that web page
3. Select the option to "Send feedback to Google"
Box 1: "Tell us what prompted this feedback."
Box 2: "A screenshot will help us better understand your feedback."
Optionally, you can do the deluxe version of sending feedback to Google.
A. In tab 1, go to <https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android>
B. Take a screenshot & save it to a date-related name you can easily find.
C. In tab 2, go to <https://groups.google.com/g/google-usenet/about>
D. Click the "Gear" icon at the top right of that "about" web page
E. In the first box "Tell us what prompted this feedback."
tell Google the problem in a way that Google 'may' care about.
For example, tell them something like "Your Google Groups servers
are allowing obvious off-topic rampant spamming by few individuals
<https://groups.google.com>
such that your own Google Groups Server Search Engine
<http://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android>
is now useless because a few users are abusing your Google servers."
F. In the second box upload that screenshot of the first tab.
G. Press the "Send" button on the bottom right of that second tab.
Here's what it looks like, with every step above documented below.
<https://i.postimg.cc/25gytfM9/googlebug1.jpg> <https://i.postimg.cc/sX0KBm6Z/googlebug2.jpg> <https://i.postimg.cc/mgt9kRxV/googlebug3.jpg> <https://i.postimg.cc/Mp2wMbN4/googlebug4.jpg> <https://i.postimg.cc/CLVYdsW-2/googlebug5.jpg> <https://i.postimg.cc/4ysLRySW-/googlebug6.jpg>
In summary, I tried contacting Google to find a better way, to no avail.
<https://i.postimg.cc/kgFknPX0/google01.jpg>
So this online complaint form is the only one that I know about.
<https://groups.google.com/g/google-usenet/about>
If you know of a better way to complain about this, please let us know.
--
Together we can get Google to stop spamming their own Usenet search engine.
Given a call to Mountainview is never picked up by a human being...
<https://i.postimg.cc/d388rqkj/google02.jpg> +1 (650) 253-0000
Using <news:ukqefp$sbs1$1@dont-email.me>, Alan wrote:
...just what do you think a picture of a smartphone dialing screen
proves...
What were your results when you called Google to help complain?
...other that the fact that for all your protestations, it turns out
you actually use an iPhone?
The image status bar & aspect ratio seems to not be that of an iphone.
But of an iPad.
...just what do you think a picture of a smartphone dialing screen proves...
...other that the fact that for all your protestations, it turns out you actually use an iPhone?
If you know of a better way to complain about this, please let us know.
Better yet , Depeer Google Groups!
I'm using news.individual.net and I don't see anything from Google
Groups here.
Please complain to Google about their spamming of Usenet
The DejaGoogle search engine is useful to everyone (not just us) because:
a. DejaGoogle doesn't require an account or paying for retention
b. DejaGoogle links work for everyone (even your 99 year old mother)
c. DejaGoogle only needs a web browser (which everyone has)
Together, maybe we can get Google to at least look at the problem we face.
Brian Gregory <void-invalid-dead-dontuse@email.invalid> wrote
I'm using news.individual.net and I don't see anything from Google
Groups here.
Even so, you still have the problem described in the original post.
Which News server are you using?
I'm using news.individual.net and I don't see anything from Google
Groups here.
Using <news:ukqefp$sbs1$1@dont-email.me>, Alan wrote:
...just what do you think a picture of a smartphone dialing screen proves...
What were your results when you called Google to help complain?
Given a call to Mountainview is never picked up by a human being...
<https://i.postimg.cc/d388rqkj/google02.jpg> +1 (650) 253-0000
If you care about either Usenet or the DejaNews DejaGoogle search
engine (which provides links to specific Usenet posts), then...
Together, maybe we can get Google to at least look at the problem we face.
In the past, Google's response to getting many spam complaints for a group has been to block the group from being *read* on Google Groups.
This would mean we will all lose access to DejaGoogle search in this group.
A couple of examples where this has already happened:
* mozilla.support.seamonkey <https://groups.google.com/g/mozilla.support.seamonkey>
* misc.test <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.test>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ QUOTE ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Banned content warning
mozilla.support.seamonkey has been identified as containing spam,
malware, or other malicious content.
For more information about content policies on Google Groups see our
Help Center article on abuse and our Terms of Service.
[ Back to safety ] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ QUOTE ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What were your results when you called Google to help complain?
A waste of time and none of your or anybody else's business in this group.
If you know of a better way to complain about this, please let us know.
Ralph Fox <-rf-nz-@-.invalid> wrote
Together, maybe we can get Google to at least look at the problem we face. >>In the past, Google's response to getting many spam complaints for a group >> has been to block the group from being *read* on Google Groups.
This would mean we will all lose access to DejaGoogle search in this group.
Thanks for that input, because you seem to a rare respondent who understood >the problem set, as most self-centered people think it's only about them.
Just filtering out the spam only helps one person; what I'm seeking (as >always) is a general-purpose solution that improves life for everyone.
That's why I posted this thread - to find people who cared about others. >(Where it's clear that most of the respondents only care about themselves.)
If Google wipes out the dejanews/dejagoogle search engine, that's bad. >Everyone loses if the dejanews/dejagoogle searcb engine is wiped out.
There is great utility in the dejanews archives found nowhere else.
a. Dejagoogle allows easy cites to individual threads & articles
b. Dejagoogle allows anyone to see those cites (no newsreader needed)
c. Dejagoogle allows searches without news server retention, etc.
What you understood is _everyone_ is affected when dejagoogle is.
It would mean that every discussion on this group would be unsearchable.
<http://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering> <http://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.net-abuse.usenet> <http://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android>
Except by HowardKnight (or narkives) neither of which has the same utility.
<http://news.admin.peering.narkive.com> <http://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com> <http://comp.mobile.android.narkive.com>
Note: I realize people who only post for their amusement won't have a need >for a general purpose search engine that the whole world can easily use.
A couple of examples where this has already happened:
* mozilla.support.seamonkey ><https://groups.google.com/g/mozilla.support.seamonkey>
* misc.test <https://groups.google.com/g/misc.test>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ QUOTE ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> Banned content warning
mozilla.support.seamonkey has been identified as containing spam,
malware, or other malicious content.
For more information about content policies on Google Groups see our
Help Center article on abuse and our Terms of Service.
[ Back to safety ]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ QUOTE ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thanks for that example, although when Google took over DejaNews' search >engine, Google was never faithful to any product which competed with it.
An example is that the Windows XP newsgroup was already archived
<http://groups.google.com/g/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general>
But, Google refused to add the newer windows versions after that
<http://alt.comp.os.windows-8.narkive.com> <http://alt.windows7.general.narkive.com> <http://alt.comp.os.windows-10.narkive.com> <http://alt.comp.os.windows-11.narkive.com>
Although, to Google's credit, there is one overarching Windows archive
<http://groups.google.com/g/alt.comp.microsoft.windows>
But, it's full of Google spam too (plus nobody usually posts to it).
I'm still shocked that Google Groups' Usenet portal allows all this obvious >spam, but if they're going to wipe out the dejanews/dejagoogle search
engine, even the self-centered people who will never understand this
problem set (which is 9,999 out of 1,000) will be adversely affected.
--
On Usenet we can discuss problems with people who have more information.
That's why I posted this thread - to find people who cared about others. >(Where it's clear that most of the respondents only care about themselves.)
If Google wipes out the dejanews/dejagoogle search engine, that's bad. >Everyone loses if the dejanews/dejagoogle searcb engine is wiped out.
There is great utility in the dejanews archives found nowhere else.
a. Dejagoogle allows easy cites to individual threads & articles
b. Dejagoogle allows anyone to see those cites (no newsreader needed)
c. Dejagoogle allows searches without news server retention, etc.
Google Groups has now made the Dejanews Archive worth less than 1 cent US.
If Google wipes out the dejanews/dejagoogle search engine, that's bad. >>Everyone loses if the dejanews/dejagoogle searcb engine is wiped out.
They broke the indices years ago and old posts can no longer be found. They are in there, but you can't get to them except by message-id.
Google Groups has now made the Dejanews Archive worth less
than 1 cent US.
Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
That's why I posted this thread - to find people who cared about others. >>(Where it's clear that most of the respondents only care about themselves.) >>
If Google wipes out the dejanews/dejagoogle search engine, that's bad. >>Everyone loses if the dejanews/dejagoogle searcb engine is wiped out.
They broke the indices years ago and old posts can no longer be found. They are in there, but you can't get to them except by message-id.
On Google Groups, there's a "public-ntp-discuss" group.
I would like to locate any message by message-id, no matter in
which group it was posted. Is that a dream?
I would like to locate any
message by message-id, no matter in which group it was posted. Is that
a dream?
Julieta Shem <jshem@yaxenu.org> wrote
I would like to locate any message by message-id, no matter in
which group it was posted. Is that a dream?
You didn't mention whether or not you already know the message id.
If you already know it, what's wrong with the Howard Knight site?
<http://al.howardknight.net/>
If you don't already know the message id, I'm not sure of any lookup that will give it to you - as I don't use the narkives & I think dejagoogle stopped archiving the headers a few years ago (as I recall).
<https://news.admin.net-abuse.usenet.narkive.com>
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>
How are you going to find the message id if you don't already have the article's headers in your possession (e.g., from your news server)?
I'm using news.individual.net and I don't see anything from Google
Groups here.
Probably you mean NNTP.
Then there's the "you gave X number of articles to the free global
Usenet out of the Y total articles therein" where X is significantly >>smaller than Y and as such you get an infinitesimally small part back,
if that.
Yes, precisely.
BTW, on the Android newsgroup some of us are discussing WHY they're doing
all this spam, where not every newsgroup is being spammed, it seems.
I haven't looked extensively but they don't seem to be spamming groups
(such as the Windows 10 and 11 newsgroups most people post to) which aren't auto-archived - but that could also be because the Google-to-Usenet portal might not work for groups that aren't part of the DejaNews archives.
Dunno what they're doing for real, but it's only some newsgroups.
Not all.
BTW, on the Android newsgroup some of us are discussing WHY they're doing
all this spam, where not every newsgroup is being spammed, it seems.
I'm of the opinion that it's a bunch of different spam campaigns, likely
by almost as many spammers.
I haven't looked extensively but they don't seem to be spamming groups
(such as the Windows 10 and 11 newsgroups most people post to) which aren't >> auto-archived - but that could also be because the Google-to-Usenet portal >> might not work for groups that aren't part of the DejaNews archives.
^DejaNews^Usenet
I know that the newsgroups for Thunderbird / Firefox support and some of
the newer versions of Windows don't have Usenet newsgroups inside of
Google Groups.
In traditional news parlance, Google doesn't carry said newsgroups /
they aren't in Google's active newsgroups file. As such there is
nothing inside of Google Groups that the spammers can post to using the Google Groups Usenet gateway.
Dunno what they're doing for real, but it's only some newsgroups.
Not all.
I don't think I've ever seen a single spam campaign hit all of the
newsgroups that I subscribe to, much less all of the thousands in my
server's active file. All of them are one or few groups and there is no
rime or reason that I'm aware of in their selection of groups.
BTW, regarding the message from Individual.net, I was heartened they care. >> Anybody have any new datapoints from Giganews & Highwinds admins yet?
IMHO Individual.net is run by an individual, much like most of the text
only Usenet servers. Both GigaNews and HighWinds are commercial
entities and likely don't care unless one of their paying users complains.
I wish we had a name for it but it's like when we talk about unwanted spam. No matter what name we use, everyone knows what we're talking about.
Yup. I tried valiantly, as did you, I believe, to get Google to add them to the auto-archives so that others can run searches to find answers before
they post a question. I failed.
NOTE: Interesting I got two different errors for those two URIs just now.
Yeah. That must be why the Gspammers aren't spamming these Windows ngs.
I've noticed a lot of the spam is in funky characters, which I find odd,
but many also have URLs so they could be phishing attacks for all I know.
The M0VIE spam is particularly repetitive - I suspect they want to get into search engine results - but I don't know that for a fact. I'm just guessing as a lot of my tutorials posted to Usenet end up in the first page of hits from a "normal" www.google.com search - so Usenet _does_ show up there too.
BTW, regarding the message from Individual.net, I was heartened they care. Anybody have any new datapoints from Giganews & Highwinds admins yet?
IMHO Individual.net is run by an individual, much like most of the
text only Usenet servers.
The 'paying customers' of GigaNews & HighWinds seem to be all spammers. ;->
There are (at least) three distinct things in the discussion:
1) The copy of Usenet articles that Deja News had which Google acquired.
2) Usenet as it exists today as a set of newsgroups.
3) The groups in the Google Groups system
#1 is a static and has not changed since acquisition.
#2 is what the people outside of Google use.
#3 is what the people inside of Google use.
#2 and #3 are close and related but are not the same thing.
On 12/12/23 19:38, Wally J wrote:
BTW, on the Android newsgroup some of us are discussing WHY they're doing
all this spam, where not every newsgroup is being spammed, it seems.
I'm of the opinion that it's a bunch of different spam campaigns, likely
by almost as many spammers.
On 12/13/23 15:57, Scott Dorsey wrote:
This is not true. It has degraded since acquisition which is where the
resentment of older Usenet users comes from.
I maintain that the corpus of articles that Google acquired from Deja
News has not changed since the acquisition.
Yes, the interface thereto has gotten worse and yes more has been added
to the newsgroups.
But the articles as they existed in late 2000 still exist and have not >changed.
I'll say it this way: An unfiltered news feed outside of Google will
show very similar things as a news feed inside of Google.
If this is the case, and it's possible, first thing is that they are using the same script to do it.
And secondly, they all are dumping stuff with the intention of being disruptive rather than the intention of gimmicking search engines.
I suspect initially they were trying to get search engine results up,
but at this point they are just intending to be destructive.
This is why I suspect it's more likely to be one spammer, but I am not positive.
This is not true. It has degraded since acquisition which is where the resentment of older Usenet users comes from.
They are quite remarkably different, especially in that #3 is far more full of spam than #2.
On 12/13/23 15:54, Scott Dorsey wrote:
This is why I suspect it's more likely to be one spammer, but I am not
positive.
Let's agree to disagree. :-D
I suspect initially they were trying to get search engine results up,
but at this point they are just intending to be destructive.
I don't think that it ever did much for a /web/ search engine. Maybe it
did something for a /Usenet/ search engine. But I'm defaulting to /web/
as that's what 90% of people will think of when you ask them what a
search engine searches. ;-)
This is possible, but we can't really know with the indices having been broken so badly. There are messages that I know were in the database
in 2000 which I have copies of, but which I cannot find on google with any search. They might be there but I have to assume they aren't.
Unfortunately true, which is why everyone uses some degree of filtering.
Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:
On 12/13/23 15:54, Scott Dorsey wrote:
This is why I suspect it's more likely to be one spammer, but I am not
positive.
Let's agree to disagree. :-D
Let's send a legal disclosure request to Google for user information.
Let's send a legal disclosure request to Google for user information.
We know the difference between what http://groups.google.com/g/<nameofng> searches versus what http://google.com searches where the groups.google.com search is _only_ inside that singular newsgroup...
I'll just make a point that when I search on the normal google.com search engine, I sometimes find my own tutorials showing up, especially when the topic is esoteric...
Which means...
Usenet results can spill into the regular google.com search engine output;
but (to my knowledge), web sites outside of Usenet/GoogleGroups do NOT
spill into the DejaGoogle search engine results.
If the spam wasn't there, DejaGoogle is rather useful for two purposes:
a. Looking things up BEFORE you post to a newsgroup, and,
b. Referencing an article by URI instead of by Message-ID
The beauty is that no newsreader is needed - and no account is needed.
And article retention is, for our purposes, forever (so to speak).
We know the difference between what http://groups.google.com/g/<nameofng>
searches versus what http://google.com searches where the groups.google.com >> search is _only_ inside that singular newsgroup...
We do. But does the average user using (unqualified) Google searching
for movies going to find web sites or news articles?
What if they use a different (unqualified) search engine?
My point being that even searching for the exact phrase in one of the
spam is going to be fairly unlikely to pop up on the first page of (unqualified) Google search results. And it's even less likely to pop
up on the first page of some other search engine.
I'll just make a point that when I search on the normal google.com search
engine, I sometimes find my own tutorials showing up, especially when the
topic is esoteric...
Yes, it is possible.
I suspect that the plethora of much things for streaming movies will
drown out such a Google Groups post so far past the first page that it's
not even funny.
Which means...
Usenet results can spill into the regular google.com search engine output;
Yes, it is possible. I just think that it will be extremely unlikely
given the context that the spam I've seen is advertising.
but (to my knowledge), web sites outside of Usenet/GoogleGroups do NOT
spill into the DejaGoogle search engine results.
Agreed.
But how many people will search inside of Google Groups Usenet gateway
search for movies to download? The people that will actually do so will probably use a different search which is associated with their
commercial Usenet provider.
Sure, there will be a few people that try it and run into problems. But
the people actually using Usenet to transfer binary content almost
certainly aren't in the same group.
If the spam wasn't there, DejaGoogle is rather useful for two purposes:
a. Looking things up BEFORE you post to a newsgroup, and,
b. Referencing an article by URI instead of by Message-ID
I absolutely agree.
The beauty is that no newsreader is needed - and no account is needed.
I'd like to think that some other news provider also provides a web interface.
Though I don't know about the account part.
And article retention is, for our purposes, forever (so to speak).
True enough.
This is possible, but we can't really know with the indices having been
broken so badly. There are messages that I know were in the database
in 2000 which I have copies of, but which I cannot find on google with any >> search. They might be there but I have to assume they aren't.
I wonder if it would be possible, all be it extremely annoying ~> infuriating, to go backwards message by message from current to find the message that you're looking for.
Unfortunately true, which is why everyone uses some degree of filtering.
I believe there are still people who aren't filtering in any way.
Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:
On 12/13/23 15:57, Scott Dorsey wrote:
This is not true. It has degraded since acquisition which is where the
resentment of older Usenet users comes from.
I maintain that the corpus of articles that Google acquired from Deja
News has not changed since the acquisition.
Yes, the interface thereto has gotten worse and yes more has been added
to the newsgroups.
But the articles as they existed in late 2000 still exist and have not >changed.
This is possible, but we can't really know with the indices having been broken so badly. There are messages that I know were in the database
in 2000 which I have copies of, but which I cannot find on google with any search. They might be there but I have to assume they aren't.
I didn't even look at the M0VIE spam to see if there's a hidden
payload.
For example, there's a homeowner DIY site somewhere that mirrors alt.home.repair such that our Usenet posts to a.h.r "could" be
found in a normal search engine result but linked to _that_ web
site specifically.
In summary, I suspect these M0VIE spammers are smarter than I can
account for, but I too have no idea what their ultimate goal appears
to be.
Hell, for all I know they could be sending tin-foil-hat messages
back and forth between Russian:Hungarian:Belarussian TLA operatives
embedding their informative payload in the otherwise seemingly
gibberitic M0VIE spam scrambled eggs.
Absolutely I agree. Hence, there's likely more to it, using Occam's
Razor. However, I'm not privy to the secret decoder ring that explains
their MO.
They _could_ be out trying to destroy the GoogleGroupsUsenet portal;
but why would they want to do that? As always, the motive eludes me.
Thanks for understanding as I participate daily on the child-like Apple newsgroups and on the adult OS newsgroups also, where I have to explain
the simplest of things to them - which - luckily - isn't the case here.
In summary, I openly and humbly declare that I have no clue what
the M0VIE spam purpose is, but it's destroying the utility of the
dejagoogle engine.
Rest assured, I have done that about twenty times on twenty different
VPNs (and on quite a number of different web browsers to foil fingerprinting).
This old form of URL apparently still works for some (only old?)
articles.
But it does not work for new articles. For example it does not work
(gives "You are not a member of any groups yet") for your article (the
one I am responding to), while that article *is* in Google Groups (I
just checked).
On 12/14/23 09:11, Frank Slootweg wrote:
This old form of URL apparently still works for some (only old?) articles.
But it does not work for new articles. For example it does not work (gives "You are not a member of any groups yet") for your article (the
one I am responding to), while that article *is* in Google Groups (I
just checked).
I wonder if the indexing for that was performed by DeJa and Google
simply brought it forward but didn't continue creating said index.
The different behavior for articles posted at different times tends to support Google being very inconsistent in what they do.
Absolutely I agree. Hence, there's likely more to it, using Occam's
Razor. However, I'm not privy to the secret decoder ring that explains
their MO.
My understanding of Occam's Razor + parsimony is that the simplest explanation is the most likely explanation and we don't really need any
other explanation. To whit, I maintain that the simplest and thus most likely explanation is that multiple actors are simply letting their spam publishing software go Brrrrr and we're suffering because of their actions.
Rest assured, I have done that about twenty times on twenty different
VPNs (and on quite a number of different web browsers to foil
fingerprinting).
Sadly, I think the multiple reports could be misconstrued and end up
being a dis-service.
I strongly suspect that Google would give much more credence to fewer
(longer lived and more active) accounts sending multiple reports (which
pass the sanity check) than reports from more (shorter lived and less
active) accounts.
After all, what's to differentiate burner accounts posting spam vs other burner accounts complaining about spam from a burner account turf war?
Indeed. For example this still finds (multiple occurences of) your
article (assuming logged into a Google account)
I wonder if the indexing for that was performed by DeJa and Google
simply brought it forward but didn't continue creating said index.
The different behavior for articles posted at different times tends to support Google being very inconsistent in what they do.
This banner is now appearing on Google GRoups
The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote
This banner is now appearing on Google GRoups
Yeah. I noticed it too and posted this thread about it.
*Effective February 15, 2024, Google Groups will no longer support new
Usenet content*
<https://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering/c/_w1mbwzgzs0>
What that means is:
a. The ability to search before asking, will be greatly diminished.
b. The ability to reference a URI to a thread or post will disappear.
c. The ability for non-Usenet folks to "read" Usenet will go away too
Sigh.
Maybe we asked for too much from Google?
--
The whole point of Usenet is to reach out to others to help them, and to >learn from them and then to add to the group's tribal knowledge for others.
c. The ability for non-Usenet folks to "read" Usenet will go away too
Bogus on c.
The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote
c. The ability for non-Usenet folks to "read" Usenet will go away too
Bogus on c.
Hmmmmm. Pray tell please... how?
Maybe you know something I don't know about providing your mom, or your >non-technical neighbor, or your non-Usenetted coworker a read-only link to >almost any Usenet thread or article w/o using dejagoogle (and without >subjecting them to a HowardKnight search when nobody has the Message ID)?
--
And no, we won't give them the MessageID as they're not going to deal with
it (and nobody would have that Message-ID anyway, in a normal situation).
Wally J wrote:
What that means is:
a. The ability to search before asking, will be greatly diminished.
b. The ability to reference a URI to a thread or post will disappear.
c. The ability for non-Usenet folks to "read" Usenet will go away too
Bogus on c.
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote
Indeed. For example this still finds (multiple occurences of) your article (assuming logged into a Google account)
I was going to mention that some of those MID URIs require being logged
into a Google Account, which Frank knows but maybe others might not.
So he's right when he says "(assuming logged into a Google account):".
Since I'm almost never logged into any Google account when I use Google services, I immediately noticed these URIs Frank initially supplied failed.
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=MID&dmode=source>
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=MID>
They asked me to log into my Google Account (which I almost never do).
These, of course work without needing to be logged into a Google Account.
<http://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
<http://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>
<http://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android>
which is, after all, the beauty of the dejagoogle beast.
The Doctor wrote:
Wally J wrote:
What that means is:
a. The ability to search before asking, will be greatly diminished.
b. The ability to reference a URI to a thread or post will disappear.
c. The ability for non-Usenet folks to "read" Usenet will go away too
Bogus on c.
There'll be nothing *TO* read
"new content from Usenet peers will not appear"
In article <ulg2q6$3o7in$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
Sigh.
Maybe we asked for too much from Google?
Nope! Google Groups like Google Mail is anti-spam incompetent.
On 12/14/23 19:30, The Doctor wrote:
In article <ulg2q6$3o7in$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
Sigh.
Maybe we asked for too much from Google?
Nope! Google Groups like Google Mail is anti-spam incompetent.
To be fair, at least Google Mail tried.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
In article <ulhshm$1uv5a$1@dont-email.me>,
candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
On 12/14/23 19:30, The Doctor wrote:
In article <ulg2q6$3o7in$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
Sigh.
Maybe we asked for too much from Google?
Nope! Google Groups like Google Mail is anti-spam incompetent.
To be fair, at least Google Mail tried.
https://www.nk.ca/blog/index.php?/categories/14-Google-Spam
On 12/15/23 10:10, The Doctor wrote:
In article <ulhshm$1uv5a$1@dont-email.me>,
candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
On 12/14/23 19:30, The Doctor wrote:
In article <ulg2q6$3o7in$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
Sigh.
Maybe we asked for too much from Google?
Nope! Google Groups like Google Mail is anti-spam incompetent.
To be fair, at least Google Mail tried.
https://www.nk.ca/blog/index.php?/categories/14-Google-Spam
I said **tried**, not succeeded. My spam inbox has some suspicious stuff
that it caught.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
c. The ability for non-Usenet folks to "read" Usenet will go away too
Bogus on c.
Hmmmmm. Pray tell please... how?
Maybe you know something I don't know about providing your mom, or your >>non-technical neighbor, or your non-Usenetted coworker a read-only link to >>almost any Usenet thread or article w/o using dejagoogle (and without >>subjecting them to a HowardKnight search when nobody has the Message ID)?
Or a revival of interest!
Bogus on c.
There'll be nothing *TO* read
"new content from Usenet peers will not appear"
Bogus on c.
There'll be nothing *TO* read
"new content from Usenet peers will not appear"
Try a REAL newsserver.
Given that Google Groups is going to be shut down for new Usenet
content, this issue is somewhat moot, but ...
As I wrote, the 'selm=MID&dmode=source' and 'selm=MID' form URLs work
for some (very?) *old* articles and do *not* work for new(er)/current articles, so it's no wonder that you got an error.
However for the (very?) old articles for which the URLs work, you do
*not* have to logged into a Google Account.
These, of course work without needing to be logged into a Google Account.
<http://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.peering>
<http://groups.google.com/g/news.admin.net-abuse.usenet>
<http://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android>
which is, after all, the beauty of the dejagoogle beast.
The point of the URL forms I gave (including the form for new articles (which needs to be logged into a Google account)) is to display an
*article*, given *only* the message-id.
The URLs you give, point to a
*newsgroup*, not to an article-by-message-id.
In article <ulhu93$1uv5b$11@dont-email.me>,
candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
On 12/15/23 10:10, The Doctor wrote:
In article <ulhshm$1uv5a$1@dont-email.me>,
candycanearter07 <no@thanks.net> wrote:
On 12/14/23 19:30, The Doctor wrote:
In article <ulg2q6$3o7in$1@paganini.bofh.team>,
Wally J <walterjones@invalid.nospam> wrote:
Sigh.
Maybe we asked for too much from Google?
Nope! Google Groups like Google Mail is anti-spam incompetent.
To be fair, at least Google Mail tried.
https://www.nk.ca/blog/index.php?/categories/14-Google-Spam
I said **tried**, not succeeded. My spam inbox has some suspicious stuff
that it caught.
WEll I just use blackholes.
Wally J wrote:because:
Given a call to Mountainview is never picked up by a human being...
https://i.postimg.cc/d388rqkj/google02.jpg +1 (650) 253-0000
If you care about either Usenet or the DejaNews DejaGoogle search
engine (which provides links to specific Usenet posts), then...
*Please Do This!*
https://groups.google.com/g/google-usenet/about
Which will look like this:
https://i.postimg.cc/3JzWxG3f/please-do-this.jpg
The DejaGoogle search engine is useful to everyone (not just us)
a. DejaGoogle doesn't require an account or paying for retentionmother)
b. DejaGoogle links work for everyone (even your 99 year old
c. DejaGoogle only needs a web browser (which everyone has)finding the
The problem with all this spam from Google servers is that even
URI to an article posted _today_ is a mess of wading through thatgarbage.
Details follow...
That is the easiest way (I know of) to complain to Google about
their Google-Groups servers allowing Google Usenet portal spam
(which ruins their own Usenet DejaGoogle search engine output)
https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android
You're welcome to upload this screenshot showing the problem:
Together, maybe we can get Google to at least look at the problemwe face.
*Please do this today:*page
1. Go to https://groups.google.com/g/google-usenet/about
2. Click the "Gear" icon at the top right of that web
3. Select the option to "Send feedback to Google"feedback."
Box 1: "Tell us what prompted this feedback."
Box 2: "A screenshot will help us better understand your
Optionally, you can do the deluxe version of sending feedback toGoogle.
A. In tab 1, go tohttps://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android
B. Take a screenshot & save it to a date-related name you caneasily find.
C. In tab 2, go tohttps://groups.google.com/g/google-usenet/about
D. Click the "Gear" icon at the top right of that"about" web page
E. In the first box "Tell us what prompted thisfeedback."
tell Google the problem in a way that Google 'may' care about.servers
For example, tell them something like "Your Google Groups
are allowing obvious off-topic rampant spamming by fewindividuals
https://groups.google.comservers."
such that your own Google Groups Server Search Engine
http://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android
is now useless because a few users are abusing your Google
F. In the second box upload that screenshot of the first tab.second tab.
G. Press the "Send" button on the bottom right of that
Here's what it looks like, with every step above documented below.avail.
https://i.postimg.cc/25gytfM9/googlebug1.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/sX0KBm6Z/googlebug2.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/mgt9kRxV/googlebug3.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/Mp2wMbN4/googlebug4.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/CLVYdsW-2/googlebug5.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/4ysLRySW-/googlebug6.jpg
In summary, I tried contacting Google to find a better way, to no
https://i.postimg.cc/kgFknPX0/google01.jpgknow.
So this online complaint form is the only one that I know about.
https://groups.google.com/g/google-usenet/about
If you know of a better way to complain about this, please let us
--engine.
Together we can get Google to stop spamming their own Usenet search
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 05:12:11 |
| Calls: | 6,666 |
| Files: | 12,213 |
| Messages: | 5,335,948 |
