h a l f b a k e r yOn the one hand, true. On the other hand, bollocks.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Instead of having pre-set groups for newsgroup postings, if you wish to news news posts, you input a set of keywords and your computer get's back 'groups' which are set up as posts ranked "relevan" to your query. You create a few of these and you get the equivalent of dynamic newsgroups.
Newsgroup article pool
http://www.jps.net/antons/instead.txt
A discussion of at least two alternatives to usenet that suggest ideas similar to this. [clynne, Jun 12 2000, last modified Oct 04 2004]
Google Groups
http://groups.google.com/
Search facility for USENET. [egnor, Jun 12 2000, last modified Oct 04 2004]
Unison
www.panic.com/unison
Best. Newsreader. Ever. [Linuxthess, Oct 04 2004]
Newzbin
http://www.halfbake...dea/www.newzbin.com
NZB's. 'nuff said. [Linuxthess, Oct 04 2004]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
I've been thinking about this sort of thing a lot, having grappled with several newsreaders and found none of them entirely satisfactory. The big problem, as I see it, as that you'd require some kind of back-end process to trawl and organise all the newsposts, taking into account things like multiple newsservers, spam posts and flames. |
|
| |
An idea I have for my ultimate newsreader involves having a list of conversations and mapping them in some way to bring those that you've read or responded to 'closer'. |
|
| |
Lots of people (myself included) go through a phase of wanting this (see also: clynne's link). They almost always decide it's a bad idea eventually. |
|
| |
Newsgroups aren't just content categorization; they define communities. People post to a particular newsgroup, not necessarily because their content is topical, but because they're part of that newsgroup community. They know, roughly, the set of people who will read and/or reply to their post. |
|
| |
Otherwise, you might as well just post a Web page somewhere and let the search engines pick it up. People do that, too, of course, but it's not a newsgroup; there's no conversation, there's no community. |
|
| |
In any case, if you want to search USENET, there are facilities available for the purpose (see my link). |
|
| |