A little confused by newsgroup format...

[White Swan]

Hi all!

Coming from a bulletin board experience, this place is a little
different. (So far, i love it!)

But two questions: It seems like on a long thread with many posts,
people can reply to any particular thread in a non-chronological
fashion. The end result is that new posts are scattered throughout the
thread, and it's easy to miss something new and interesting that was
added if it shows up tucked away high up on the list of posts.(Is this
making any sense?) Just wondering if there was a trick to not
overlooking all the new posts (you know, a "sort by date" function or
something...)

Secondly, I was wondering how or why some parts of some threads seem
to show up as their own independent threads. For instance, there are
two unique threads right now about "Harvey as Pope", both of which
were spin-offs from an original "Kurt Foster" thread. Can someone
explain what happened there?

Thanks! I'll get the hang of it eventually!

[Scott Dorsey]

White Swan > wrote:
>
>But two questions: It seems like on a long thread with many posts,
>people can reply to any particular thread in a non-chronological
>fashion. The end result is that new posts are scattered throughout the
>thread, and it's easy to miss something new and interesting that was
>added if it shows up tucked away high up on the list of posts.(Is this
>making any sense?) Just wondering if there was a trick to not
>overlooking all the new posts (you know, a "sort by date" function or
>something...)

Depends on what newsreader you are using. Some do organized threads using
the "followup-to" field for reference. Others don't do threading and just
sort everything as it comes in. Some will allow you to select by subject,
cancel entire subjects or posters. There are literally hundreds of different
pieces of newsreading software out there, all with different user interfaces
and different setups.

>Secondly, I was wondering how or why some parts of some threads seem
>to show up as their own independent threads. For instance, there are
>two unique threads right now about "Harvey as Pope", both of which
>were spin-offs from an original "Kurt Foster" thread. Can someone
>explain what happened there?

Someone replied and changed the subject, but left the followups-to field
the same, probably.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Steve King]

"White Swan" > wrote in message
om...
> Hi all!
>
> Coming from a bulletin board experience, this place is a little
> different. (So far, i love it!)
>
> But two questions: It seems like on a long thread with many posts,
> people can reply to any particular thread in a non-chronological
> fashion. The end result is that new posts are scattered throughout the
> thread, and it's easy to miss something new and interesting that was
> added if it shows up tucked away high up on the list of posts.(Is this
> making any sense?) Just wondering if there was a trick to not
> overlooking all the new posts (you know, a "sort by date" function or
> something...)
>
> Secondly, I was wondering how or why some parts of some threads seem
> to show up as their own independent threads. For instance, there are
> two unique threads right now about "Harvey as Pope", both of which
> were spin-offs from an original "Kurt Foster" thread. Can someone
> explain what happened there?
>
> Thanks! I'll get the hang of it eventually!

I know what you mean. For instance I am replying to your original posting
instead of Scott Dorsey's reply.

I have set up Outlook express to only show "Unread Messages". That way I
see all new additions. When posters include the most recent material they
are commenting on, it makes it pretty easy for all of us to follow.

Steve King

[Steve Scott]

says...
<snip>
> But two questions: It seems like on a long thread with many posts,
> people can reply to any particular thread in a non-chronological
> fashion. The end result is that new posts are scattered throughout the
> thread, and it's easy to miss something new and interesting that was
> added if it shows up tucked away high up on the list of posts.(Is this
> making any sense?) Just wondering if there was a trick to not
> overlooking all the new posts (you know, a "sort by date" function or
> something...)

I'm using Microplanet Gravity, an excellent reader. Original developer
is out of business but it became freeware and is maintained here:

http://lightning.prohosting.com/~tbates/gravity/start1.html

Steve

[Patric D'Eimon]

with unquestioned accuracy of thought, White Swan replied:

> Thanks Dave.
>
> You nailed me - I am using Google to access this group. I'mLike many
> Pro Tools users, I'm a Mac person, so anyone have some software they
> can recommend that will work on a Mac running OS9? What are the
> advantages of that kind of software over Google?
Both Netscape and Outlook work great as newsreaders for RAP. For me, better
than Google. Patric

[White Swan]

Thanks Dave.

You nailed me - I am using Google to access this group. I'mLike many
Pro Tools users, I'm a Mac person, so anyone have some software they
can recommend that will work on a Mac running OS9? What are the
advantages of that kind of software over Google?

[Ty Ford]

In Article >,
(White Swan) wrote:
>Hi all!
>
>Coming from a bulletin board experience, this place is a little
>different. (So far, i love it!)
>
>But two questions: It seems like on a long thread with many posts,
>people can reply to any particular thread in a non-chronological
>fashion. The end result is that new posts are scattered throughout the
>thread, and it's easy to miss something new and interesting that was
>added if it shows up tucked away high up on the list of posts.(Is this
>making any sense?) Just wondering if there was a trick to not
>overlooking all the new posts (you know, a "sort by date" function or
>something...)
>
>Secondly, I was wondering how or why some parts of some threads seem
>to show up as their own independent threads. For instance, there are
>two unique threads right now about "Harvey as Pope", both of which
>were spin-offs from an original "Kurt Foster" thread. Can someone
>explain what happened there?
>
>Thanks! I'll get the hang of it eventually!


!. Welcome to the anarchy..er democracy.
2. Check your browser for preferences that might align the messages.

Regards,

Ty Ford

**Until the worm goes away, I have put "not" in front of my email address.
Please remove it if you want to email me directly.
For Ty Ford V/O demos, audio services and equipment reviews,
click on http://www.jagunet.com/~tford

[Robert Blank]

a great newsgroup reader is MacSoup. It is excellent in showing threads
- the top of your screen looks like a 'family tree' diagram. It also
organizes your posts...

White Swan > wrote:

> Hi all!
>
> Coming from a bulletin board experience, this place is a little
> different. (So far, i love it!)
>
> But two questions: It seems like on a long thread with many posts,
> people can reply to any particular thread in a non-chronological
> fashion. The end result is that new posts are scattered throughout the
> thread, and it's easy to miss something new and interesting that was
> added if it shows up tucked away high up on the list of posts.(Is this
> making any sense?) Just wondering if there was a trick to not
> overlooking all the new posts (you know, a "sort by date" function or
> something...)
>
> Secondly, I was wondering how or why some parts of some threads seem
> to show up as their own independent threads. For instance, there are
> two unique threads right now about "Harvey as Pope", both of which
> were spin-offs from an original "Kurt Foster" thread. Can someone
> explain what happened there?
>
> Thanks! I'll get the hang of it eventually!

[Scott Dorsey]

White Swan > wrote:
>
>You nailed me - I am using Google to access this group. I'mLike many
>Pro Tools users, I'm a Mac person, so anyone have some software they
>can recommend that will work on a Mac running OS9? What are the
>advantages of that kind of software over Google?

The most popular Mac newsreaders are derivatives of Newswatcher...
YA-Newswatcher and MT-Newswatcher are the ones that most people here
seem to like. They are free. In a pinch, most Web browsers also have
news clients built in, but most of them are fairly crude. Even so, they
are a big step up from trying to read through Google.

The difference between a real newsreader connected to your ISP's NNTP
server and using google is like night and day. Google is sheer torture,
it has no easy ways to select and kill threads and individual posters,
and it is normally a day or so behind the backbone sites in getting updated.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Dave Johnson]

White Swan wrote:

> Hi all!
>
> Coming from a bulletin board experience, this place is a little
> different. (So far, i love it!)
>
> But two questions: It seems like on a long thread with many posts,
> people can reply to any particular thread in a non-chronological
> fashion. The end result is that new posts are scattered throughout the
> thread, and it's easy to miss something new and interesting that was
> added if it shows up tucked away high up on the list of posts.(Is this
> making any sense?) Just wondering if there was a trick to not
> overlooking all the new posts (you know, a "sort by date" function or
> something...)

Looks to me like you are posting via Google Groups. I'm not sure how
Google sorts things, but you'll probably find it worthwhile to use a
standalone newsreader--Google is great for searching, but I haven't
seen any web-based access nearly as good as a mediocre stanalone
newsreader. I can recommend Forte Agent if you are using Windows and
are willing to pay $30 if you like it--It's free for the first 30 days.
Other free possibilities are the newsreader part of Mozilla browser,
the standalone spin-off Thunderbird (much of the same code as Mozilla,
but with the browser removed) Xnews or Turnpike. Google search should
lead you to free downloads of all of these. You've probably got
Outlook Express--If you use it for mail, you may as well use it for
news, but I wouldn't recommend it for either.

Most of the time it actually makes more sense to read things in threaded
view, rather than cronological. It also helps when people respond like
I'm doing here, with my comments interwoven with your old ones for
context.

>
> Secondly, I was wondering how or why some parts of some threads seem
> to show up as their own independent threads. For instance, there are
> two unique threads right now about "Harvey as Pope", both of which
> were spin-offs from an original "Kurt Foster" thread. Can someone
> explain what happened there?

Hidden in the headers of the article is a references section that most
newsreaders use to sort and arrange the view. This tells the software
which article is associated with which. Different software handles
this differently--For instance, Agent can be set to start a new thread
when the subject changes, or to leave it attached to the original
thread.

[Dan]

Hi,

I use Google exclusively, and have no troubles at all...in the left
hand window, where the thred is shown, you can view by thread tree or
click "Sort by Date" to see what has shown up most recently. i usually
click Sort by Date to see the latest, and I if I need to see how the
message fits into the thread (what "branch" on the "tree") I click
back to the thread view.

d

(White Swan) wrote in message >...
> Thanks Dave.
>
> You nailed me - I am using Google to access this group. I'mLike many
> Pro Tools users, I'm a Mac person, so anyone have some software they
> can recommend that will work on a Mac running OS9? What are the
> advantages of that kind of software over Google?

[Chakaal The Indifferent]

In article >,
White Swan > wrote:
>Thanks Dave.
>
>You nailed me - I am using Google to access this group. I'mLike many
>Pro Tools users, I'm a Mac person, so anyone have some software they
>can recommend that will work on a Mac running OS9? What are the
>advantages of that kind of software over Google?

I use "Shell Account from Panix" to read my news on a mac for several
reasons:

1) Panix seems to have a much better news feed than google, in that articles
show up on panix much more quickly than on google. Google is often hours
behind, which is too long for me to want to deal with.

2) I don't wind up with piles of newsgroup articles saved on my hard drive.
And if I miss one I should have read, there are ways to get back to it,
although I admit that can be a bit of a pain.

3) I dont' have to be at my computer to check newsgroups. I can simply
telnet/ssh to panix, check my news and go. From the library, from a friends
house, from the Press Room at AES...

It's $10/month if you pay annually, and well worth it to me.

--chak

[Marc Wielage]

On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:24:50 -0800, White Swan wrote
(in message >):

> Like many
> Pro Tools users, I'm a Mac person, so anyone have some software they
> can recommend that will work on a Mac running OS9?
>--------------------------------snip----------------------------------<

The best thing out there for Mac Usenet newsreaders is Hogwasher (lousy name,
great program). It trounces any of the "Newswatcher"-type programs I've ever
seen or used. It's also under $50, which is cheap in my book.

You can get more info here:

http://www.hogwasher.com/

--MFW

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Robert Blank > wrote:

> a great newsgroup reader is MacSoup. It is excellent in showing threads
> - the top of your screen looks like a 'family tree' diagram. It also
> organizes your posts...

What he said; wonderful thing for Macsters.

--
ha

[LeBaron & Alrich]

White Swan wrote:

> Thanks Dave.

> You nailed me - I am using Google to access this group. I'mLike many
> Pro Tools users, I'm a Mac person, so anyone have some software they
> can recommend that will work on a Mac running OS9? What are the
> advantages of that kind of software over Google?

MacSOUP. Download it and try it; it's about thirty bucks to register.
But you can try it first, and I think one shot with it will show you
what's so cool.

--
ha

[White Swan]

Thanks to everyone, and especially Dan for pointing out that "sort by
date" function, which is hardly hidden, but somehow I overlooked it.
That solves my main problem and makes everything much more manageable.

However, I will definitely try some of your other suggestions, since I
am intrigued by the fact that many of these alternatives update the
board with far less lag time than google. i hadn't realized that was
the case. And for a new addict like me, speed in getting a fix is
paramount!

By the way, when I post, I always get a message that says the post
will not show up on the board until 3 to 9 hours from the time of
posting. Is that because I am using Google, or does everyone get that
message?

Thanks again everyone.

[Rob Adelman]

White Swan wrote:

> By the way, when I post, I always get a message that says the post
> will not show up on the board until 3 to 9 hours from the time of
> posting. Is that because I am using Google, or does everyone get that
> message?

No message for me. I am using Netscape and a news server in Berlin. It
posts to the news group right as I hit enter. I can then click get
messages and there it is with the others, all in a split second. Not
always a good thing though. Like when I realize I splled somin wrong. Or
when I realize I just put my foot in my mouth. Tooo late..

[Chakaal The Indifferent]

In article >,
White Swan > wrote:
*munch*
>
>By the way, when I post, I always get a message that says the post
>will not show up on the board until 3 to 9 hours from the time of
>posting. Is that because I am using Google, or does everyone get that
>message?
>
>Thanks again everyone.

It is a google thing. This "board" is actually a UseNet news group, it
isn't really a 'board' the way a web site based forum is a board. Usenet
involves taking "newsfeeds", usually from multiple sources, and sending out
posts. It's distributed - articles arrive at different servers at different
times depending on their propogation over various feeds.

Most companies who are serious about UseNet take in multiple, redundant
feeds to get articles in as quickly as possible. They may also provide
feeds to other customers while sending their customers' posts out into the
mix as well.

I'm not clear on the architecture of the Google retrofit UseNet - however
some things come to mind:

1) UseNet admins have to set parameters that allow them to manage the
balance of content and storage time with their available resources. That
means that a server will keep an article available for a certain number of
days, in the case of certain binary groups, maybe less than one.

Unlike most News providers, Google keeps *everything* it gets. Somehow.
You can cruise the google archives back for years and years and see stuff
you regret posting when you were an Internet Newbie back before there was a
WWW. This has got to add processing and storage overhead that other news
providers don't have.

2) Google may well have a larger number of users than most feeds - since
huge numbers of people are using client based news readers, and ISPs don't
exactly light up their news services in blinking neon, Google is often the
easiest way to get to UseNet. The sheer number of people using it may slow
things down significantly.

I like Google a lot, for those times I need to find something older than
dirt. The web interface, though, is too cumbersome for me to deal with
after using "trn" on Unix shell accounts for years. My fiance thinks I'm a
wuss for bothering with a threaded reader, but other people's eyes bug out
when they see a few key strokes and no mousing necessary to scan 500
articles for ones I'm interested in...

The amount of" delay" for any one user will depend on what server he or she
is using, and local network conditions. I don't have any numbers for you,
but if you have to wait hours to see your own post, that's pretty bad, to
my mind. The panix news server seems to support high volume, and it shows me
my posts just as soon as I hit "s" for "send" and pop back into read mode.

If your ISP has a news service (do a search on their web page) you might try
it out and see how it compares side by side with Google.

--Chak

[Dave Johnson]

White Swan wrote:

> Thanks Dave.
>
> You nailed me - I am using Google to access this group. I'mLike many
> Pro Tools users, I'm a Mac person, so anyone have some software they
> can recommend that will work on a Mac running OS9? What are the
> advantages of that kind of software over Google?

Can't help you on specific Mac software. Google is great for what it
does. However, a good newsreader on a 25mhz 486 and a 14.4K modem was
faster and more responsive than any web-based discussion on a modern
computer and broadband. You can set filters to highlight subjects or
people you want to see, or to ignore stuff you don't want to see--In
some groups there are enough idiots that being able to automatically
ignore them makes a big difference. More options for how to sort the
group. The newsreader can keep track of which groups you want to look
at, and which messages you've already read. If your news server is
good, articles get updated within a few minutes of posting, where
Google can take hours.

[Scott Dorsey]

White Swan > wrote:
>By the way, when I post, I always get a message that says the post
>will not show up on the board until 3 to 9 hours from the time of
>posting. Is that because I am using Google, or does everyone get that
>message?

It is because you are using google.

The thing is, though, that Usenet runs on over 70,000 servers worldwide,
and it can sometimes take a day or so for a posting to propagate everywhere
on the net. (This is pretty good... it used to take a week back in the
days when everyone was using uucp over dialup lines and messages mostly
got transferred only at night when the rates were low).
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[White Swan]

.....(9 hours later)....

Cool! That's great info, Chak. I thought EVERYBODY had to wait 9 hours
to see their posts! I'm definitely going to try another reader.