A major disappointment

I'm just developing an interest in amateur astronomy and thought this
would be a good group to lurk, but 98% is spam.

Are things always this bad here, or is what I'm seeing an abberation?
I'm seriously disappointed.

Cheers,
Delaware Dave

The Universe isn't about us.
~ Carl Sagan

No, it's your fault.

Delaware Dave wrote:
I'm just developing an interest in amateur astronomy and thought this
would be a good group to lurk, but 98% is spam.

Are things always this bad here, or is what I'm seeing an abberation?
I'm seriously disappointed.

I'd say that things have been steadily getting worse, but this is a
pretty severe aberration. Spam filters help, but some persistence will
always be needed.

But there will also always be worthwhile postings, too.

--
Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

(Delaware Dave) wrote in
:

I'm seriously disappointed.

Stop using googlegroups.

Sign up with a decent commercial news provider (or find a decent free
one) and use a real news reader client.

Your news provider will likely filter out almost all of the junk and
you can either filter the remainder yourself or ignore it.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN |

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:48:47 -0800 (PST), Delaware Dave
wrote:

I'm just developing an interest in amateur astronomy and thought this
would be a good group to lurk, but 98% is spam.

Are things always this bad here, or is what I'm seeing an abberation?
I'm seriously disappointed.

Cheers,
Delaware Dave

The Universe isn't about us.
~ Carl Sagan

Carl Sagan didn't say that!

Hi Dave,

I seen this group on and off for many years from its early usenet
days, through deja news and now google groups.
Its always had something worthwhile with friendly and knowledgeable
people to encourage beginners and inspire those more advanced.

I'm afraid the signal-to-noise ratio has fallen dramatically in recent
years, however.

Clear Skies!
Craig

You have to learn to use "averted satisfaction" to exist here.
But this trains you to use "averted vision" at the faux telescope.
Then you can get a grant from NASA!
Then you can run for Governor and be brilliant and tax
everyone.


Delaware Dave wrote:

I'm just developing an interest in amateur astronomy and thought this
would be a good group to lurk, but 98% is spam.

Are things always this bad here, or is what I'm seeing an abberation?
I'm seriously disappointed.

Cheers,
Delaware Dave

The Universe isn't about us.
~ Carl Sagan

Bert Hyman wrote:

(Delaware Dave) wrote in
:

I'm seriously disappointed.

Stop using googlegroups.

Sign up with a decent commercial news provider (or find a decent free
one) and use a real news reader client.

Your news provider will likely filter out almost all of the junk

Nope. None I know do. Where did you get this misinformation and why are you
passing it along?
Are you the spammer?





and
you can either filter the remainder yourself or ignore it.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN |

Delaware Dave wrote:

I'm just developing an interest in amateur astronomy and thought this
would be a good group to lurk, but 98% is spam.

That's because you aren't actually seeing the newsgroup, just the
Inferior Google Groups website derived from it. Go to supernews.com
and get a 30-day free trial account and then go to newsreaders.com
and get a good newreader, and you will miss most of the spam.

--
Guy Macon
http://www.guymacon.com/

Honor wrote:

Bert Hyman wrote:

Your news provider will likely filter out almost all of the junk

Nope. None I know do. Where did you get this misinformation and
why are you passing it along?

It is you who are wrong. Supernews does indeed filter out
most of the junk. In fact, I got a Giganews account just
so I could see the spam in a newsgroup I moderate.

Are you the spammer?

*plonk*


Definitions:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Plonk

[Usenet: possibly influenced by British slang `plonk' for cheap booze,
or `plonker' for someone behaving stupidly (latter is lit. equivalent
to Yiddish `schmuck')] The sound a newbie makes as he falls to the
bottom of a kill file. While it originated in the newsgroup talk.bizarre,
this term (usually written "*plonk*") is now (1994) widespread on Usenet.

See also kill file.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Killfile

[Usenet; very common] (alt. `KILL file') Per-user file(s) used by some
Usenet reading programs (originally Larry Wall's rn(1)) to discard
summarily (without presenting for reading) articles matching some
particularly uninteresting (or unwanted) patterns of subject, author,
or other header lines. Thus to add a person (or subject) to one's kill
file is to arrange for that person to be ignored by one's newsreader in
future. By extension, it may be used for a decision to ignore the
person or subject in other media.

See also plonk.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Troll

1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting
on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the
post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in
turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one
trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite.
The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and
flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do,
while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in
fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be
in on it. See also YHBT.

2. n. An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts
specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup,
discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone
or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they
have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply
want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after,
they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are
recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him,
he's just a troll."

Some people claim that the troll (sense 1) is properly a narrower
category than flame bait, that a troll is categorized by containing
some assertion that is wrong but not overtly controversial.

The use of `troll' in either sense is a live metaphor that readily
produces elaborations and combining forms. For example, one not
infrequently sees the warning "Do not feed the troll" as part of
a followup to troll postings.

See also Kook.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------