Lets create comp.microsoft.public.vc.mfc or alt.microsoft.public.vc.mfc
in [MFC]
|
Prev: Simple encryption solution
Next: MFC Dialog - Menu
From: Bert Hyman on 15 May 2010 11:25 In news:A-adnbTafdFTKnPWnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com "Peter Olcott" <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote: > A link that Hector provided indicated that the last step > will be to send a delete message to all servers such that > the actual newsgroups will be deleted unless specific action > is taken to make sure to ignore this message. Every reference I've seen was to an individual, Juli�n �lie, who's not connected to Microsoft and has chosen to issue these messages on his own. "Control articles for that hierarchy are not issued by Microsoft itself but by a Usenet active participant in order to improve the quality of the propagation of Microsoft newsgroups." http://usenet.trigofacile.com/hierarchies/index.py?see=MICROSOFT The management of at least one public server has indicated that he'll be ignoring any control messages originating from that source. -- Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert(a)iphouse.com
From: BobF on 15 May 2010 11:58 On 5/15/2010 9:22 AM, Peter Olcott wrote: > "BobF"<nothanks(a)nospam.yum> wrote in message > news:hsltda$nkt$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> On 5/14/2010 10:53 PM, Peter Olcott wrote: >>> We can create a new newsgroup to replace the ones that >>> Microsoft will be deleting. >>> >>> From what I remember creating a new newsgroup in the alt >>> hierarchy is really easy. >>> >>> It would be better in the comp hierarchy, but, this is >>> more >>> difficult and requires substantial agreement by many >>> people. >>> >>> >> >> comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.tools.mfc already exists > > Did you know that the entire microsoft.public hierarchy is > scheduled to be deleted by the end of next month? > > I heard! I'm not yet convinced that it will disappear from all of usenet. A google group admin has stated such an intention, but that's it.
From: Peter Olcott on 15 May 2010 12:05 "Bert Hyman" <bert(a)iphouse.com> wrote in message news:Xns9D7969FD0C0F9VeebleFetzer(a)207.46.248.16... > In news:A-adnbTafdFTKnPWnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com > "Peter Olcott" > <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote: > >> A link that Hector provided indicated that the last step >> will be to send a delete message to all servers such that >> the actual newsgroups will be deleted unless specific >> action >> is taken to make sure to ignore this message. > > Every reference I've seen was to an individual, Juli�n > �lie, who's not > connected to Microsoft and has chosen to issue these > messages on his > own. > > "Control articles for that hierarchy are not issued > by Microsoft > itself but by a Usenet active participant in order > to improve > the quality of the propagation of Microsoft > newsgroups." > > http://usenet.trigofacile.com/hierarchies/index.py?see=MICROSOFT > > The management of at least one public server has indicated > that he'll be > ignoring any control messages originating from that > source. > > -- > Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert(a)iphouse.com He should not have this degree of authority. It should be as difficult to delete a newsgroup as it is to create one.
From: Hector Santos on 15 May 2010 12:17 Bert Hyman wrote: > In news:A-adnbTafdFTKnPWnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com "Peter Olcott" > <NoSpam(a)OCR4Screen.com> wrote: > >> A link that Hector provided indicated that the last step >> will be to send a delete message to all servers such that >> the actual newsgroups will be deleted unless specific action >> is taken to make sure to ignore this message. > > Every reference I've seen was to an individual, Juli�n �lie, who's not > connected to Microsoft and has chosen to issue these messages on his > own. > > "Control articles for that hierarchy are not issued by Microsoft > itself but by a Usenet active participant in order to improve > the quality of the propagation of Microsoft newsgroups." > > http://usenet.trigofacile.com/hierarchies/index.py?see=MICROSOFT > > The management of at least one public server has indicated that he'll be > ignoring any control messages originating from that source. > UseNet is a basically a "LIST" file that list Once nodes that honor control commands automatically (meaning by people that don't sit at their servers deciding who to keep or not), especially the main "backbone" ones, they will slowly be OFF the network of nodes withing "USENET." Which basically means that there will less "servers" that people will find that carry them and only those smaller network links will exchange mail will have it, like that one server you mentioned. He might want to keep them around if only to keep the appearance of "richness" for his peer links, but empty groups are not rich. Again it is a LIST. Overall these smaller "network" still keeping older copies of the "LIST" peering off main chains or one or two hops off the main chains, the giganews.com and others like it, they may have the LIST but no or lesser articles will be seen. Once its off the main ones, the microsoft.* groups will be for all intent and purposes - gone. http://groups.google.com/group/news.admin.hierarchies/browse_thread/thread/67439c68236e7e35# http://groups.google.com/group/news.admin.hierarchies/browse_thread/thread/e9ec576003ce3fab# -- HLS
From: Hector Santos on 15 May 2010 12:39
BobF wrote: >> Did you know that the entire microsoft.public hierarchy is >> scheduled to be deleted by the end of next month? > > I heard! I'm not yet convinced that it will disappear from all of > usenet. A google group admin has stated such an intention, but that's it. BobF, You do realize that this is a "Network" of computers and that there is really a "backbone" concept and that really a "LIST" that you are managing? All these public systems directly or indirectly are off the "backbone", there is really a "star" topology the deeper you go, if only, for PROFIT reasons. Its not free and attempting to carry the entire usenet backbone is expensive. You need high bandwidth. Sure, there will be pockets of computers that want to keep a new LIST containing, microsoft.*, or maybe a separate list, like we once had when I was pulling usenet selected newsgroups off my T1 MCI/UUNET (now Verizon) but I had a separate list for msnews.microsoft.com because I wanted to be closer to the source here. In short, the more automated you are off your uplink, the more likely that you follow the "LIST" that is carried - automatically. So imagine if I used only usenet and indeed it was removed, then I would be SAFE because I maintained a separate list. Now the the server will be gone, I have to restart the usenet feed. But the activity will be a lot less now because of similar setups. Overall, when its not honored or not, then you begin to get separate listing for different mesh of links and now you have to literally create a new HOST entry on your software in other to delegate the directed paths that 2nd list follows. I guess my point is that it is fallacy or illusion that these UseNet is a Glorious pipe of mail air broadcasted for anyone to get from any point without any lost of dissipation. If you want to get a stronger whiff, you need to get closer to the source. That source is going to be lost soon. -- HLS |