Why did Google change this?

[Guest lb]

I frequent these NG's a lot and still cannot figure out why they

changed how posts are listed and how active topics are dealt with. I

see on the right side is the supposed improvement listing active older

topics. I see in here, 3 topics that are spam and only have 1 author

and no replies. How are these active? I sometimes have to go back

many pages to find topics that have had several replies in the last 24

hours, but are not in the list on the right. How is this an

improvement?

 

Please go back to the way it was done and post topics in order as they

are authored or replied to. The spam will die out faster that way. I

am not sure who to complain to so maybe this will generate some

feedback.

 

Anyone with me on this?

[Guest Tim Slattery]

Re: Why did Google change this?

 

lb <ldbrw@my-dejanews.com> wrote:

>I frequent these NG's a lot and still cannot figure out why they

>changed how posts are listed and how active topics are dealt with.

>Please go back to the way it was done and post topics in order as they

>are authored or replied to. The spam will die out faster that way. I

>am not sure who to complain to so maybe this will generate some

>feedback.

 

Nobody here can control such things. Your argument is with Google.

This is a newsgroup, Google just happens to scoop it up and make it

available via its Googlegroups interface.

 

If you want things to work differently, try a different interface. You

can get a newsreader from various places. Agent

(http://www.forteinc.com/agent) and Thunderbird (http://www.mozilla.org/thunderbird)

are good, there are others too. Aim your newsreader at

msnews.microsoft.com for the microsoft.public.* groups, find out about

your ISP's Usenet server for other groups.

 

--

Tim Slattery

MS MVP(Shell/User)

Slattery_T@bls.gov

http://members.cox.net/slatteryt

[Guest letterman@invalid.com]

Re: Why did Google change this?

 

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 06:28:42 -0700 (PDT), lb <ldbrw@my-dejanews.com>

wrote:

>I frequent these NG's a lot and still cannot figure out why they

>changed how posts are listed and how active topics are dealt with. I

>see on the right side is the supposed improvement listing active older

>topics. I see in here, 3 topics that are spam and only have 1 author

>and no replies. How are these active? I sometimes have to go back

>many pages to find topics that have had several replies in the last 24

>hours, but are not in the list on the right. How is this an

>improvement?

>

>Please go back to the way it was done and post topics in order as they

>are authored or replied to. The spam will die out faster that way. I

>am not sure who to complain to so maybe this will generate some

>feedback.

>

>Anyone with me on this?

 

I dont use googlegroups to post, only rarely do I use them to read

posts. The way that thing is setup is rediculous. That 10 posts per

page is the worst. Why can they just make a list of the last 100 or

something is beyond me, and of course they dont filter any spam.

 

Complaining will unlikely do anything (if they even read it). But go

ahead and try if you wish. The google homepage should have a list of

contacts, you complain to the contact regarding googlegroups.

 

In my opinion, Google is on their way out the door. Their search

engine fills up with advertisers before they give results, they allow

all the spam on their groups, and now they got that most annoying

search suggestion popup by default, which would be fine if it was NOT

by default and needed to be turned on by the user. I always get a

laugh when people post "google is your friend". It's not my friend.

My friends dont spam me, or annoy me.

 

I've been using other search engines latel.

[Guest Dan]

Re: Why did Google change this?

 

What search engines do you prefer, letterman?

 

"letterman@invalid.com" wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 06:28:42 -0700 (PDT), lb <ldbrw@my-dejanews.com>

> wrote:

>

> >I frequent these NG's a lot and still cannot figure out why they

> >changed how posts are listed and how active topics are dealt with. I

> >see on the right side is the supposed improvement listing active older

> >topics. I see in here, 3 topics that are spam and only have 1 author

> >and no replies. How are these active? I sometimes have to go back

> >many pages to find topics that have had several replies in the last 24

> >hours, but are not in the list on the right. How is this an

> >improvement?

> >

> >Please go back to the way it was done and post topics in order as they

> >are authored or replied to. The spam will die out faster that way. I

> >am not sure who to complain to so maybe this will generate some

> >feedback.

> >

> >Anyone with me on this?

>

> I dont use googlegroups to post, only rarely do I use them to read

> posts. The way that thing is setup is rediculous. That 10 posts per

> page is the worst. Why can they just make a list of the last 100 or

> something is beyond me, and of course they dont filter any spam.

>

> Complaining will unlikely do anything (if they even read it). But go

> ahead and try if you wish. The google homepage should have a list of

> contacts, you complain to the contact regarding googlegroups.

>

> In my opinion, Google is on their way out the door. Their search

> engine fills up with advertisers before they give results, they allow

> all the spam on their groups, and now they got that most annoying

> search suggestion popup by default, which would be fine if it was NOT

> by default and needed to be turned on by the user. I always get a

> laugh when people post "google is your friend". It's not my friend.

> My friends dont spam me, or annoy me.

>

> I've been using other search engines latel.

>

[Guest letterman@invalid.com]

Re: Why did Google change this?

 

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 12:50:02 -0700, Dan

<Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>What search engines do you prefer, letterman?

>

>"letterman@invalid.com" wrote:

 

I just started looking for alternatives to google, so I'm still

looking. So far I use altavista the most. It's an oldie and was

always pretty good. Just more advertising these days. I also use

metacrawler and lycos and on occasion yahoo. I'm still looking for

others that I like.

[Guest MEB]

Re: Why did Google change this?

 

 

<letterman@invalid.com> wrote in message

news:812sd45ofntjd6askp196p3pm48tchob74@4ax.com...

| On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 12:50:02 -0700, Dan

| <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

|

| >What search engines do you prefer, letterman?

| >

| >"letterman@invalid.com" wrote:

|

| I just started looking for alternatives to google, so I'm still

| looking. So far I use altavista the most. It's an oldie and was

| always pretty good. Just more advertising these days. I also use

| metacrawler and lycos and on occasion yahoo. I'm still looking for

| others that I like.

|

 

Hmm, then it may be worthwhile to address that may of those actually get

their information [all, most, or part of] from Google. So though you aren't

directly using Google, you are usually using its data. If fact, several

advised of that for awhile on the services.

If you are a webmaster or service provider you can check your logs to see

what crawlers and services are actually doing their own *research*.

 

--

MEB

http://peoplescounsel.org

a Peoples' counsel

_ _

~~

[Guest J]

Re: Why did Google change this?

 

letterman@invalid.com wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 12:50:02 -0700, Dan

> <Dan@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>

> >What search engines do you prefer, letterman?

> >

> >"letterman@invalid.com" wrote:

>

> I just started looking for alternatives to google, so I'm still

> looking. So far I use altavista the most. It's an oldie and was

> always pretty good. Just more advertising these days. I also use

> metacrawler and lycos and on occasion yahoo. I'm still looking for

> others that I like.

 

http://www.mamma.com/ ?

[Guest J]

Re: Why did Google change this?

 

letterman@invalid.com wrote:

> On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 06:28:42 -0700 (PDT), lb <ldbrw@my-dejanews.com>

> wrote:

>

> >I frequent these NG's a lot and still cannot figure out why they

> >changed how posts are listed and how active topics are dealt with. I

> >see on the right side is the supposed improvement listing active older

> >topics. I see in here, 3 topics that are spam and only have 1 author

> >and no replies. How are these active? I sometimes have to go back

> >many pages to find topics that have had several replies in the last 24

> >hours, but are not in the list on the right. How is this an

> >improvement?

> >

>

> I dont use googlegroups to post, only rarely do I use them to read

> posts. The way that thing is setup is rediculous. That 10 posts per

> page is the worst. Why can they just make a list of the last 100 or

> something is beyond me, and of course they dont filter any spam.

>

> Complaining will unlikely do anything (if they even read it). But go

> ahead and try if you wish. The google homepage should have a list of

> contacts, you complain to the contact regarding googlegroups.

 

https://www.google.com/adsense/support/bin/request.py