Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting 
Author Message
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting

Message posted...


Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:26:11 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting

Quote:

>Message posted...

Hey Marcos,

I looked at Google newsgroups today and was disappointed....because a
single posting with the title xbase++ (memory may be wrong here)
brought a link to another 143 old messages with the same title going
back to 1997. Surely it would make more sense to disconnect such
obviously wrong threads via a date limit of say 1 month.... anyone
agree?

Regards,

Ross McKenzie
ValuSoft
Melbourne Australia



Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:32:49 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting
Asking a NG VOyager to "Don't Read..." is like asking men in the street to
turn around and look away whilst a young, nubile female strips {*filter*} in the
middle of the road.


Quote:
> Message posted...



Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:50:26 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting

Quote:
> I looked at Google newsgroups today and was disappointed....because a
> single posting with the title xbase++ (memory may be wrong here) brought a
> link to another 143 old messages with the same title going back to 1997.
> Surely it would make more sense to disconnect such obviously wrong threads
> via a date limit of say 1 month.... anyone agree?

Are you saying that in "reading mode", Google groups threads on the subject
and the subject alone? Ugh!

--
Dave Pearson                        |  OSLib - Timeslice release functions.
http://www.davep.org/               |     eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
http://www.davep.org/clipper/       |    weg - Norton Guide reader for Windows.
http://www.davep.org/norton-guides/ | dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.



Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:45:26 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting
On Thu, 31 May 2001 13:32:49 GMT, Ross McKenzie sez:

Quote:
>I looked at Google newsgroups today and was disappointed....because a
>single posting with the title xbase++ (memory may be wrong here)
>brought a link to another 143 old messages with the same title going
>back to 1997. Surely it would make more sense to disconnect such
>obviously wrong threads via a date limit of say 1 month.... anyone
>agree?

That isn't necessary.  Each message on Usenet receives a unique
identifier, and "well-behaved" newsreaders will retain the original
message's ID in the headers.  For example, Marcos' original message
had this in the headers:

Your reply had these headers:


Newsreaders which group messages by thread make use of that feature,
and it would make sense for Google's search to do the same when you
ask to view the thread related to a particular message.

That connectivity breaks down with ill-behaved newsreaders or people
who write a new message to reply rather than hit the "Reply" button,
but I'd rather deal with the user error than wade through ten billion
messages titled "Re: Cars in Detroit" trying to figure out which ones
are about the auto industry and which ones are about the music.

Peter B. Steiger
Cheyenne, WY
----
If you reply by email, send it to pbs at com dot
canada (or vice-versa).  All adverti{*filter*}ts will be
returned to your postmaster, eh!



Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:27:40 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting
Ross,
Quote:
> ...
> I looked at Google newsgroups today and was disappointed....because a
> single posting with the title xbase++ (memory may be wrong here)
> brought a link to another 143 old messages with the same title going
> back to 1997. Surely it would make more sense to disconnect such
> obviously wrong threads via a date limit of say 1 month.... anyone
> agree?
> ...

Don't know... Even fast, "Google Groups" has a really awkward interface.

Best regards,

Marcos Nogueira
S. Paulo - Brazil



Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:52:20 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting
On Thu, 31 May 2001 13:50:26 GMT, "Geoff Schaller"

Quote:

>Asking a NG VOyager to "Don't Read..." is like asking men in the street to
>turn around and look away whilst a young, nubile female strips {*filter*} in the
>middle of the road.

...which road?

<g>



Tue, 18 Nov 2003 06:08:27 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting


Quote:

>> I looked at Google newsgroups today and was disappointed....because a
>> single posting with the title xbase++ (memory may be wrong here) brought a
>> link to another 143 old messages with the same title going back to 1997.
>> Surely it would make more sense to disconnect such obviously wrong threads
>> via a date limit of say 1 month.... anyone agree?

>Are you saying that in "reading mode", Google groups threads on the subject
>and the subject alone? Ugh!

Yes.

Ross

Quote:
>--
>Dave Pearson                        |  OSLib - Timeslice release functions.
>http://www.davep.org/               |     eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
>http://www.davep.org/clipper/       |    weg - Norton Guide reader for Windows.
>http://www.davep.org/norton-guides/ | dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.



Tue, 18 Nov 2003 06:16:41 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting

Quote:

>On Thu, 31 May 2001 13:32:49 GMT, Ross McKenzie sez:
>>I looked at Google newsgroups today and was disappointed....because a
>>single posting with the title xbase++ (memory may be wrong here)
>>brought a link to another 143 old messages with the same title going
>>back to 1997. Surely it would make more sense to disconnect such
>>obviously wrong threads via a date limit of say 1 month.... anyone
>>agree?

>That isn't necessary.  Each message on Usenet receives a unique
>identifier, and "well-behaved" newsreaders will retain the original
>message's ID in the headers.  For example, Marcos' original message
>had this in the headers:

>Your reply had these headers:


>Newsreaders which group messages by thread make use of that feature,
>and it would make sense for Google's search to do the same when you
>ask to view the thread related to a particular message.

Did I say something about searching? I meant, ... when Google
presented its list of the latest available postings yesterday, a
single one entitled xbase++ was listed as being the latest of 144. To
view it you would need to walk past 144/maybe 10 (14 pages of ancient
postings) to get to this one.

In a similar way, if you create a new thread with a common title eg
Printing problem", it will suddenly be the latest in a long list of
previous ones with the same title. Try it.

I usually read c.l.c with Free Agent and delete unwanted postings.
Every now and again, this snags a new one on a past one also. But I
can handle that. Yesterday I tried using IE5 and went to "visit" the
google version of Deja (is that an adequate description of the
situation?) anyway the rest is now my experience as reported...

Have a good one,

Ross

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

>That connectivity breaks down with ill-behaved newsreaders or people
>who write a new message to reply rather than hit the "Reply" button,
>but I'd rather deal with the user error than wade through ten billion
>messages titled "Re: Cars in Detroit" trying to figure out which ones
>are about the auto industry and which ones are about the music.

>Peter B. Steiger
>Cheyenne, WY
>----
>If you reply by email, send it to pbs at com dot
>canada (or vice-versa).  All adverti{*filter*}ts will be
>returned to your postmaster, eh!



Tue, 18 Nov 2003 06:25:09 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting
Hi Ross,

Quote:

> ... Surely it would make more sense to disconnect such
> obviously wrong threads via a date limit of say 1 month.... anyone
> agree?

Yes.  Like this reply to you, to test Google Groups Posting. <g,d,&r>

Regards,
Bob

--
Robert Haley
eMail: r_haley (at) zdnetmail (dot) com



Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:12:40 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting
On Thu, 31 May 2001 22:25:09 GMT, Ross McKenzie sez:

Quote:
>Did I say something about searching? I meant, ... when Google
>presented its list of the latest available postings yesterday, a
>single one entitled xbase++ was listed as being the latest of 144. To
>view it you would need to walk past 144/maybe 10 (14 pages of ancient
>postings) to get to this one.

My bad, I did kind of stray from the original topic into a general
"why can't Google work better" gripe.  But I think the underlying
problem is the same.  Whether you're going in through their
day-to-day newsreader view or their reconstituted deja news
search, they still group threads together by message title rather
than message ID, "assuming" that all messages in c.l.c with
the title xbase++ are related to the same thread.

pbs, far better at pointing out flaws than suggesting improvements

Peter B. Steiger
Cheyenne, WY
----
If you reply by email, send it to pbs at com dot
canada (or vice-versa).  All adverti{*filter*}ts will be
returned to your postmaster, eh!



Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:29:08 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting


Quote:


>>Message posted...

>Hey Marcos,

>I looked at Google newsgroups today and was disappointed....because a
>single posting with the title xbase++ (memory may be wrong here)
>brought a link to another 143 old messages with the same title going
>back to 1997. Surely it would make more sense to disconnect such
>obviously wrong threads via a date limit of say 1 month.... anyone
>agree?

Use this page...

http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search

--

        Oasis WWW  http://www.the-oasis.net
         FTP Site  ftp://ftp.the-oasis.net
      Clipper FAQ  http://www.the-oasis.net/clipper.html
  Harbour Project  http://www.Harbour-Project.org

           Be as you would seem to be.



Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:45:05 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting

Quote:

>On Thu, 31 May 2001 22:25:09 GMT, Ross McKenzie sez:
>>Did I say something about searching? I meant, ... when Google
>>presented its list of the latest available postings yesterday, a
>>single one entitled xbase++ was listed as being the latest of 144. To
>>view it you would need to walk past 144/maybe 10 (14 pages of ancient
>>postings) to get to this one.

>My bad, I did kind of stray from the original topic into a general
>"why can't Google work better" gripe.  But I think the underlying
>problem is the same.  Whether you're going in through their
>day-to-day newsreader view or their reconstituted deja news
>search, they still group threads together by message title rather
>than message ID, "assuming" that all messages in c.l.c with
>the title xbase++ are related to the same thread.

Hurray!!! Thank you Peter. At last someone who appears to understand
my observation, or gripe as you have described it. If anyone cares to
look at

http://www.*-*-*.com/

and then examine the thread on the opening page entitled "Printing
Problems" you will see that the first posting is dated July 2000.
Nothing to do with searching for particular titles. I guess my point
is simply that it is highly improbable that today's posting with the
same title relates directly to the original one....

...never mind, I will stick with Free Agent (love it!)

Have a good weekend,

Ross

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

>Peter B. Steiger
>Cheyenne, WY
>----
>If you reply by email, send it to pbs at com dot
>canada (or vice-versa).  All adverti{*filter*}ts will be
>returned to your postmaster, eh!



Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:18:46 GMT  
 Don't read - just testing Google Groups posting

Quote:
> Hurray!!! Thank you Peter. At last someone who appears to understand
> my observation, or gripe as you have described it. [SNIP]

I think you'll find that pretty much everyone who commented actually
understood your observation. Google seems to thread on subject instead of on
references.

--
Dave Pearson                        |  OSLib - Timeslice release functions.
http://www.davep.org/               |     eg - Norton Guide reader for Linux.
http://www.davep.org/clipper/       |    weg - Norton Guide reader for Windows.
http://www.davep.org/norton-guides/ | dgscan - DGROUP scanner for Clipper.



Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:38:09 GMT  
 
 [ 14 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Test Posting (don't read)

2. test posting. don't read/reply

3. Test Post- Don't read

4. test post (don't read)

5. Test Post Only - don't read

6. click the link for the best google group http://groups-beta.google.com/group/boysworld

7. don't make smalltalk discussion group into consultant hunter's group

8. Don't read - testing

9. test, don't read

10. Test - don't read

11. this is test, DON'T READ

12. test, don't read

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software