From: MB@nospam.net   
      
   On 03/01/2019 10:40, Graeme Wall wrote:   
   > On 03/01/2019 10:05, Athel Cornish-Bowden wrote:   
   >> On 2019-01-03 01:28:36 +0000, Steve Hayes said:   
   >>   
   >>> On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 10:08:30 +0000, nemo@erewhon.invalid (John Hill)   
   >>> wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> [ … ]   
   >>   
   >>>>   
   >>> I doubt that there can be a "Group Owner" sinbce no one "owns" usenet   
   >>> newsgroups. Google decided, on their own initiativew to gate usenet   
   >>> groups to their GoogleGroups system.   
   >>>   
   >>>> Mind you, Google Groups is not Usenet, much as it would like people to   
   >>>> think it is, and  it seem to me that soc.genealogy.britain is working   
   >>>> very nicely for people who have proper usenet readers.   
   >>>   
   >>> Indeed.   
   >>>   
   >>> The advantage of having newsgroups gated there is that they can be   
   >>> discovered by people who are interested in genealogy. The   
   >>> disadvantage, of course, is that they can also be discovered by   
   >>> spammers.   
   >>   
   >> You don't need Google Groups for that. Anyone who knows about Usenet   
   >> can find this group by searching through the complete list of groups.   
   >> That's how I found it.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >   
   > A lot of people don't realise that.   
   >   
      
      
   It is rather like the "old days" when USENET was dominated by academic   
   users who always seemed to resent anyone else using it even though they   
   were getting access free at their work when others were probably paying   
   in some way.  It was full of petty arguments about things like top and   
   bottom posting.   
      
   Shouldn't we be trying to attract new users to ensure its survival, so   
   everything does not disappear onto Farcebook?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)