Boycott Google groups! Use this to read usenet..

I was thinking about a similar post as well.

Feature-for-feature: No.

I AdBlocked the stupid background image immediately. The format of the entry page after that is OK--if that's what you like. The times stated as GMT {plus/minus} drives me batty. Web links aren't clickable there--cut & paste only.

Kinda stupid that the opening page uses a monospaced font and the *message* pages AREN'T. Whitespace in HTML pages gets collapsed and isn't recoverable.

Google's ability to show monospaced pages is absolutely necessary to read ASCII prints; nobody else offers this.

That sucks. I searched Google's Usenet archive and noticed that InterBulletin also adds a 1-line footer ad; Google scores again.

Hmmm. Earlier today, went there and pulled up a Posting page but I didn't actually attempt to post. I *was* mildly impressed; now--not so much.

Not a glowing recomendation so far.

...until somebody posts a schematic. . . These guys (Poland) have a fair archive for *reading*:

Web links are clickable; Usenet Message IDs AREN'T (another thing Google gets right). No ability to post from there. There is no indication of threading. . . Next to Google, THESE folks have the best Web interface I've found:

No clickable links of any type--in fact, long links get mangled, so cut & paste is a chore. They also add a 1-line footer ad to posts made from there.

Aga>[...]for *reading*

Here is another Web-based site for reading the group. It allows posting--but adds a 3-LINE FOOTER AD to posts. They update in bursts, so latency for reading can be 2 hours. I can't say what posting latency is like--but I wouldn't hold my breath.

The page design has one really stupid premise: On my Gecko browser, the leftmost 35% of the screen is essentially blank space. After applying NukeAnything (or Platypus), it's much better.

On the main page, posts are arranged by posting time so there are multiple instances of the same thread (like interbulletin.com--which I don't like).

Long Subject lines are truncated. Subject lines with non-7-bit characters look like crap (mostly spam anyway). ...and they delete topics marked as OT

--but *keep* REAL spam (Morons) ...or maybe they just don't properly index a lot of posts (see "timestamps", below).

On pages for reading posts, the threading is nicely indicated

--but timestamps are a mish-mash. Web links are clickable; Usenet Message IDs AREN'T.

While they make an effort to retain spacing, it's a proportional font

--so unless you reconfigure your browser, ASCII prints will be junk.

...and, of course, I forgot the link:

Why not just get a real newsreader, like Pan or Agent? There is more to the Internet than the Web.

::JeffM wrote: ::http://www.talkaboutelectr>Why not just get a real newsreader, like Pan or Agent?

Jim Thompson has a list of at least 65 people who for one reason or another are limited to Port 80 access. The most common reasons are:

I might smirk and ask... If port 119 is blocked by IT, are you not goofing off on company time by reading news ?:-)

Larkin and Fields and I report to no other...

...Jim Thompson

Absolutely, an appropriate amount of "goofing off" being necessary to overall productivity and mental health. Some folks take smoke breaks, some wander over to the coffee mess, some take a gander at usenet, some do other things (darts, anyone?).

Where I work as a consultant, they do not have usenet access, or at least they have ignored my requests to set it up. So I need a web-based method to at least read posts, which are often related to the work I am doing there. I can wait until I get home to post replies, but it's helpful to be able to read some of the posts there.

My email to InterBulletin bounced, and I never was able to post. And it seems they have even longer latency than the one suggested:

Thanks!

Paul