G+ sci.space.history just flat-lined on me

The topic index page(s) of sci.space.history are not displayed, so there must be another G+ glitch that's going to need some rework in order to get back our public access to reading this Usenet/newsgroup.

Actually, G+ excluding all of sci.space.history would be no great loss.

On Sunday, June 30, 2013 3:36:50 PM UTC-7, Brad Guth wrote:
The topic index page(s) of sci.space.history are not displayed, so there must be another G+ glitch that's going to need some rework in order to get back our public access to reading this Usenet/newsgroup.



Actually, G+ excluding all of sci.space.history would be no great loss.

And now it's back up as per usual. Go figure, it was probably something I did which killed it. Sorry about that.

On Sunday, June 30, 2013 3:39:04 PM UTC-7, Brad Guth wrote:
On Sunday, June 30, 2013 3:36:50 PM UTC-7, Brad Guth wrote:

The topic index page(s) of sci.space.history are not displayed, so there must be another G+ glitch that's going to need some rework in order to get back our public access to reading this Usenet/newsgroup.







Actually, G+ excluding all of sci.space.history would be no great loss.



And now it's back up as per usual. Go figure, it was probably something I did which killed it. Sorry about that.

Ever so gradually, G+ is getting better. It's page format is still somewhat less than ideal (too much header space taken up), and a lot of CPU and memory resources are required, not to mention the need of a fast DSL or better channel for getting into G+ to begin with.

On Sunday, June 30, 2013 6:36:50 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:
The topic index page(s) of sci.space.history are not displayed, so there must be another G+ glitch that's going to need some rework in order to get back our public access to reading this Usenet/newsgroup.



Actually, G+ excluding all of sci.space.history would be no great loss.

I HATE GOOGLE GROUPS! I liked the old format that doesnt appear to be available any more

On Saturday, July 6, 2013 5:12:02 AM UTC-7, bob haller wrote:
On Sunday, June 30, 2013 6:36:50 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:

The topic index page(s) of sci.space.history are not displayed, so there must be another G+ glitch that's going to need some rework in order to get back our public access to reading this Usenet/newsgroup.







Actually, G+ excluding all of sci.space.history would be no great loss.



I HATE GOOGLE GROUPS! I liked the old format that doesnt appear to be available any more

Yes indeed, they need to get their G+ version more similar to the original faster and better format. However, some of the G+ features can be useful, but only if you care to utilize them. G+ does allow for some policing of those attempting to FUD.

If you have enough computer to allow several newsgroups in multiple tabs or additional windows, makes it almost as good as before.

On Saturday, July 6, 2013 5:12:02 AM UTC-7, bob haller wrote:
On Sunday, June 30, 2013 6:36:50 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:

The topic index page(s) of sci.space.history are not displayed, so there must be another G+ glitch that's going to need some rework in order to get back our public access to reading this Usenet/newsgroup.







Actually, G+ excluding all of sci.space.history would be no great loss.



I HATE GOOGLE GROUPS! I liked the old format that doesnt appear to be available any more


Yes indeed, they'll need to get their G+ version more similar to the original faster and better format. However, some of the G+ features can be useful, but only if you care to utilize them. G+ does allow for some policing of those attempting to FUD.

If you have enough computer to allow several newsgroups in multiple tabs or open additional windows without running out of memory, makes it almost as good as before.

It's gradually getting better, with somewhat less wasted screen/page space and as always offering a good search performance. Unfortunately, K-12s are still not going to be smart enough to figure this out, and otherwise they can be easily distracted or intimidated as well as mainstream snookered and dumbfounded by those having intent upon topic/author stalking and bashing without any hit or fear of policing by those capable of giving us sufficient options that could make their skulduggery and X-rated context a lot tougher to pull off and get away with.

In article ,
says...

bob haller wrote:


I HATE GOOGLE GROUPS!


So use something else. Most of us are, I think.


I liked the old format that doesnt appear to be available any more


Get a real Usenet feed and a real Newsreader, Bobbert.

I use MicroPlanet Gravity on Windows through Eternal September. They're
both free, and they both work just fine. I think it took all of 10 to
20 minutes to install the software and create a free account.

I could never stand using a Web interface to a Usenet Newsgroup.

Jeff
--
"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would
magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper
than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in
and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

On Monday, July 8, 2013 5:23:54 AM UTC-7, Jeff Findley wrote:
In article ,

says...



bob haller wrote:





I HATE GOOGLE GROUPS!





So use something else. Most of us are, I think.





I liked the old format that doesnt appear to be available any more





Get a real Usenet feed and a real Newsreader, Bobbert.



I use MicroPlanet Gravity on Windows through Eternal September. They're

both free, and they both work just fine. I think it took all of 10 to

20 minutes to install the software and create a free account.



I could never stand using a Web interface to a Usenet Newsgroup.



Jeff

--

"the perennial claim that hypersonic airbreathing propulsion would

magically make space launch cheaper is nonsense -- LOX is much cheaper

than advanced airbreathing engines, and so are the tanks to put it in

and the extra thrust to carry it." - Henry Spencer

The drawbacks to G+ are gradually fading away, although their hogging of bandwidth and consuming computer resources is still an issue, not to mention G+ not having the efficient TREE View option in order to quickly see who's replying to other parts of the same topic.

With G+ you need to have multiple tabs and/or extra windows going, and enough computer memory to deal with it. Older computers and slow DSLs are just out of luck, not to mention limited intranet capacity issues. No doubt whatsoever, PRISM and Five Eyes likes what G+ is doing.

On Sunday, June 30, 2013 3:36:50 PM UTC-7, Brad Guth wrote:
The topic index page(s) of sci.space.history are not displayed, so there must be another G+ glitch that's going to need some rework in order to get back our public access to reading this Usenet/newsgroup.



Actually, G+ excluding all of sci.space.history would be no great loss.

Now G+ just flat-lined alt.astronomy, but sci.history is still running as it should.

On Thursday, July 11, 2013 9:51:23 AM UTC-7, Brad Guth wrote:
On Sunday, June 30, 2013 3:36:50 PM UTC-7, Brad Guth wrote:

The topic index page(s) of sci.space.history are not displayed, so there must be another G+ glitch that's going to need some rework in order to get back our public access to reading this Usenet/newsgroup.







Actually, G+ excluding all of sci.space.history would be no great loss.



Now G+ just flat-lined alt.astronomy, but sci.history is still running as it should.

Whenever I "mark all as read" is when G+ seems to flat-line. Not sure if it affects others or just my account.