Hello, I'm new to usenet :) I found the whole concept very cool
especially how far it goes back and then finding out it still existed, I >decided to check it out and so far its been super cool
In article <wZ8cS.162443$yWz9.158400@fx04.ams4>,
chicken <chicken@chickens.org> wrote:
Hello, I'm new to usenet :) I found the whole concept very cool
especially how far it goes back and then finding out it still existed, I
decided to check it out and so far its been super cool
Glad to hear it! It's a good concept and it worked well for a long time. These days it is somewhat eclipsed but there are plenty of helpful old people left on it. Some may even be interesting.
--scott
In article <wZ8cS.162443$yWz9.158400@fx04.ams4>,
chicken <chicken@chickens.org> wrote:
Hello, I'm new to usenet :) I found the whole concept very cool
especially how far it goes back and then finding out it still existed, I
decided to check it out and so far its been super cool
Glad to hear it! It's a good concept and it worked well for a long time. These days it is somewhat eclipsed but there are plenty of helpful old people left on it. Some may even be interesting.
--scott
In article <wZ8cS.162443$yWz9.158400@fx04.ams4>,Well, you weren't lying, I found someone interesting and its you because
chicken <chicken@chickens.org> wrote:
Hello, I'm new to usenet :) I found the whole concept very cool
especially how far it goes back and then finding out it still existed, I
decided to check it out and so far its been super cool
Glad to hear it! It's a good concept and it worked well for a long time. These days it is somewhat eclipsed but there are plenty of helpful old people left on it. Some may even be interesting.
--scott
In article <wZ8cS.162443$yWz9.158400@fx04.ams4>,
chicken <chicken@chickens.org> wrote:
Hello, I'm new to usenet :) I found the whole concept very cool
especially how far it goes back and then finding out it still existed, I
decided to check it out and so far its been super cool
Glad to hear it! It's a good concept and it worked well for a long time. These days it is somewhat eclipsed but there are plenty of helpful old people left on it. Some may even be interesting.
--scott
Well, you weren't lying, I found someone interesting and its you because
I just looked up your name and I got some old new york times article on
you that you've been using usenet since 1984, that is crazy to me and so >cool, what was it like during those times? I found it funny in the
article you said ufo people took over in 1999
Hello, I'm new to usenet :) I found the whole concept very cool
especially how far it goes back and then finding out it still existed,
I decided to check it out and so far its been super cool
Hello, I'm new to usenet :) I found the whole concept very cool
especially how far it goes back and then finding out it still existed, I decided to check it out and so far its been super cool
chicken <chicken@chickens.org> wrote:
Hello, I'm new to usenet :) I found the whole concept very cool
especially how far it goes back and then finding out it still existed, I decided to check it out and so far its been super cool
Welcome! Hopefully you're a bit younger than most of us, we need young 'blood'! :-)
FWIW (For What It's Worth), I've been on Usenet/NetNews since the
early 80s, probably 1984 or so, and am still enjoying it very much,
helping other people with computer stuff, getting tips/info and
reminiscing about past tech.
Enjoy!
Verily, in article <114sm1d.14mc.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, did this@ddress.is.invalid deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
Verily, in article <114sm1d.14mc.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, did this@ddress.is.invalid deliver unto us this message:
Minor nit: Your attribution line is a bit broken/not-useful.
Verily, in article <114stf6.118s.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, did
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
Verily, in article <114sm1d.14mc.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, did this@ddress.is.invalid deliver unto us this message:
Minor nit: Your attribution line is a bit broken/not-useful.
I'm not sure that counts as broken, but I've changed it at your request.
:-)
See for example my attribution line. IMO that shows all that's needed
and more ('email' address):
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
Usenet changes, but it never gets old.
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
Verily, in article <114stf6.118s.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, did Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> deliver unto us this message:
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
Verily, in article <114sm1d.14mc.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, did this@ddress.is.invalid deliver unto us this message:
Minor nit: Your attribution line is a bit broken/not-useful.
I'm not sure that counts as broken, but I've changed it at your request. :-)
Thanks.
As Nit is my middle name, could you move the name to (the beginning
of) the first line? (Without damaging the wit in the rest of it.)
I'm sure most people are more interested in who you are responding to
than things like message-id (which is in the 'References:' header and is hardly ever needed for human use) and 'email' address (ditto).
See for example my attribution line. IMO that shows all that's needed
and more ('email' address):
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comnospam> wrote:
Some people add the date/time - but that's hardly ever needed and can easily be looked up if needed - or/and the newsgroups which is even
more rudundant.
Feel free to share your opinion (or/and ignore me :-)).
On 4 August 2026 07:35 The True Melissa, wrote:
Usenet changes, but it never gets old.
Wonderful line!
Best regards
I've always seen it as a citation for the quotation. You're right that
it's already in the headers. I do know a number of modern Usenet users
who seem to have no idea what the headers are, FWIW.
When I see or post an attribution along the lines of "Bob Smith wrote,"
it's usually something I wrote myself -- I'm combining several replies
or bringing an outside source into a discussion. That's not a firm rule,
of course.
I do agree that the humor of my attribution template has gone stale. My signature could also use a refresher. When I'm coming up with something
new, I'll bear your points in mind and try to keep it snappy and human- readable.
On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 17:00:06 -0400, The True Melissa wrote:
I've always seen it as a citation for the quotation. You're right that it's already in the headers. I do know a number of modern Usenet users
who seem to have no idea what the headers are, FWIW.
Mind you, they probably don't know what to do with that message-id in
your introduction line either. (-;
s|b wrote in article <ndhavbF2chhU2@mid.individual.net>:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 17:00:06 -0400, The True Melissa wrote:
I've always seen it as a citation for the quotation. You're right that it's already in the headers. I do know a number of modern Usenet users who seem to have no idea what the headers are, FWIW.
Mind you, they probably don't know what to do with that message-id in
your introduction line either. (-;
I figure they can click on it. They're unlikely to be using trn :-)
I'm using tin, kind of a trn for amateurs, and I keep clicking these
<...> thingies, but nothing happens! [1]
s|b wrote in article <ndhavbF2chhU2@mid.individual.net>:
Mind you, they probably don't know what to do with that message-id in
your introduction line either. (-;
I figure they can click on it. They're unlikely to be using trn :-)
Clicking will work for me in Forto Agent, but Thunderbird seems to be
popular atm. Will it work in TB? (I assume it works with MicroPlanet-Gravity?)
s|b wrote in article <ndj0o5Fab94U1@mid.individual.net>:
Clicking will work for me in Fort|- Agent, but Thunderbird seems to be popular atm. Will it work in TB? (I assume it works with MicroPlanet-Gravity?)
I believe so, but a Thunderbird user can tell us for sure.
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
I'm using tin, kind of a trn for amateurs, and I keep clicking these
<...> thingies, but nothing happens! [1]
"I just click on the clicker and all I get are error messages. The Unix I
am using is America On-Line."
-- the first post I ever saw from AOL, posted eight times to
comp.unix-wizards
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 17:28:48 -0400 (EDT),
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
I'm using tin, kind of a trn for amateurs, and I keep clicking these
<...> thingies, but nothing happens! [1]
"I just click on the clicker and all I get are error messages. The Unix I >> am using is America On-Line."
-- the first post I ever saw from AOL, posted eight times to
comp.unix-wizards
Okay, that made me laugh!
In article <slrn117cjbd.iti.theise@panix2.panix.com>,
Ted Heise <theise@panix.com> wrote:
On Wed, 5 Aug 2026 17:28:48 -0400 (EDT),
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
"I just click on the clicker and all I get are error messages. The Unix I
am using is America On-Line."
-- the first post I ever saw from AOL, posted eight times to
comp.unix-wizards
Okay, that made me laugh!
It does now but it did not the first time I saw it.
s|b wrote in article <ndhavbF2chhU2@mid.individual.net>:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 17:00:06 -0400, The True Melissa wrote:
I've always seen it as a citation for the quotation. You're right that
it's already in the headers. I do know a number of modern Usenet users
who seem to have no idea what the headers are, FWIW.
Mind you, they probably don't know what to do with that message-id in
your introduction line either. (-;
I figure they can click on it. They're unlikely to be using trn :-)
In article <MPG.44dd494369dcd5d098a287@news.eternal-september.org>,
The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.comNOSPAM> wrote:
s|b wrote in article <ndhavbF2chhU2@mid.individual.net>:
On Tue, 4 Aug 2026 17:00:06 -0400, The True Melissa wrote:
I've always seen it as a citation for the quotation. You're right that >> > it's already in the headers. I do know a number of modern Usenet users >> > who seem to have no idea what the headers are, FWIW.
Mind you, they probably don't know what to do with that message-id in
your introduction line either. (-;
I figure they can click on it. They're unlikely to be using trn :-)
As another pair of data points - I've been using Usenet since probably 1985, at Uni in an engineering program.
And I'm reading and posting this using trn ;-)
On a related note, I was explaining this past week to the young'uns that the >way e-commerce used to work was that someone posted a list of stuff
they wanted to sell to the appropriate newsgroup. You replied by email
with what you wanted. They told you the price and postage. You mailed
a physical check for that amount, and they mailed you the goods.
Often those crossed in the mail ...
On a related note, I was explaining this past week to the young'uns that the way e-commerce used to work was that someone posted a list of stuff
they wanted to sell to the appropriate newsgroup. You replied by email
with what you wanted. They told you the price and postage. You mailed
a physical check for that amount, and they mailed you the goods.
Often those crossed in the mail ...
On Wed, 12 Aug 2026 04:21:16 -0400 (EDT), Jeff Berry wrote:
On a related note, I was explaining this past week to the young'uns that the >> way e-commerce used to work was that someone posted a list of stuff
they wanted to sell to the appropriate newsgroup. You replied by email
with what you wanted. They told you the price and postage. You mailed
a physical check for that amount, and they mailed you the goods.
Often those crossed in the mail ...
How is that related?
s|b
Related to what? To usenet? That was where people posted their sales
or auctions. This was pre-web, so usenet was the easiest way to reach
a wide audience. There were groups specfically for sales - eg rec.games.frp.marketplace -
but often folx would just put there stuff up in the general group. Lots of game
sales in rec.games.board, IIRC.
Commercial use of the net is prohibited.
Q
In article <ne3e4oFsqsrU1@mid.individual.net>,
s|b <sb.nospam@belgacom.net> wrote:
How is that related?
Related to what? To usenet? That was where people posted their sales
or auctions. This was pre-web, so usenet was the easiest way to reach
a wide audience. There were groups specfically for sales - eg rec.games.frp.marketplace -
but often folx would just put there stuff up in the general group. Lots of game
sales in rec.games.board, IIRC.
In article <115kgee$2ka$1@panix2.panix.com>,
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Commercial use of the net is prohibited.
Q
Prohibited by whom, exactly?
Also, I'm not sure that someone doing the usenet equivalent
of a swap meet or boot sale is commercial in the sense of
that prohibition.
And in any case, it happened. People would be moving and want
to get rid of their excess games, or would really be hoping
that someone had a copy of Dragon Magazine #8 that they'd
be willing to sell or trade.
Yes, and your chance of getting scammed was pretty low because
even if you didn't know the guy you were trading with, your site
admin knew his site admin. Not that I didn't get burned a couple
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Yes, and your chance of getting scammed was pretty low because
even if you didn't know the guy you were trading with, your site
admin knew his site admin. Not that I didn't get burned a couple
So very this ;-) I mean, if someone tried to shaft you with
an ncar.edu address, you could probably find somone to complain
to ...
On a related note, I was explaining this past week to the young'uns that the way e-commerce used to work was that someone posted a list of stuff
they wanted to sell to the appropriate newsgroup. You replied by email
with what you wanted. They told you the price and postage. You mailed
a physical check for that amount, and they mailed you the goods.
Often those crossed in the mail ...
Jeff Berry <nexus@panix.com> wrote:
On a related note, I was explaining this past week to the young'uns that the >> way e-commerce used to work was that someone posted a list of stuff
they wanted to sell to the appropriate newsgroup. You replied by email
with what you wanted. They told you the price and postage. You mailed
a physical check for that amount, and they mailed you the goods.
Often those crossed in the mail ...
Yeah, itrCOs nice to have a country with 90% homogeneous White population and >high-trust society. Too bad US is already browner than Uruguay. I wonder >whorCOs to blame for that.
On Sun, 16 Aug 2026 09:01:28 -0400 (EDT),
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
D. Ray <d@ray> wrote:
Jeff Berry <nexus@panix.com> wrote:
On a related note, I was explaining this past week to the
young'uns that the way e-commerce used to work was that
someone posted a list of stuff they wanted to sell to the
appropriate newsgroup. You replied by email with what you
wanted. They told you the price and postage. You mailed a
physical check for that amount, and they mailed you the
goods. Often those crossed in the mail ...
Yeah, itrCOs nice to have a country with 90% homogeneous White >population and high-trust society. Too bad US is already
browner than Uruguay. I wonder whorCOs to blame for that.
I'll pass on the bigotry, thanks. Especially since one of the
guys I did a bit of trading on Usenet with back in the early
nineties was in Venezuela where he didn't have much access to
new test equipment or any easier ways to buy used test
equipment. The internet has been a force for globalization
before it even was the internet.
+1 (and then some)
Back in the late 1990s/early 2000s I was trying my hand at
cycle racing and frequented rec.bicyles.racing. Somehow I
connected with a fellow in Europe who desperately wanted a UCLA
jersey and was offering to trade a jersey of ones choice for it.
Apparently the UCLA jersey wasn't available for purchase where he
was (Germany, I think).
I picked out a nice Rabobank jersey (at the time I was an Erik
Dekker fan) and promptly bought and shipped the UCLA jersey. Soon
I had the Rabobank jersey, which I still wear. The transaction
was based on trust, and it worked quite well.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 50:12:38 |
| Calls: | 1,100 |
| Files: | 1,339 |
| Messages: | 275,859 |