In article <uh18mi$2247n$1@news1.tnib.de>,
Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Nothing ironic about it. Many of Google services are good. Their email
>>service in particular is very good at filtering spam.
>
>Their email service in particular is very good at rejecting or
>deleting legitimate mail, especially if the admins of the delivering
>systems dont jump through the burining hoops that google erects. This
>works because their email service is too darn big to just say fuck
>you.
>

https://www.nk.ca/blog/index.php?/categories/14-Google-Spam

>>Hence it's a
>>mystery to me why they don't do the same with googlegroups.
>
>It would be work to not spam Usenet via googlegroups. Newsadmins don't
>reject messages from google groups because they're too darn big to
>just say fuck you.
>
>See the parallels? Google doesn't care either way. They're too darn
>big to care.
>

Time to pull the plug on GG!

>Greetings
>Marc
>--
>-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
>Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
>Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " |
>Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Those who want mob rule are opposed to civilisation. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

In article <uh1993$225pj$1@news1.tnib.de>,
Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>Syber Shock <admin@sybershock.com> wrote:
>>On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 15:16:29 +0100
>>Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> If a GG user manages to find a technical group that hasn't been
>>> flooded with spam, then they'd wonder why an otherwise active group
>>> is completely ignoring them. I don't think whitelisting would be
>>> fair.
>>
>>Google groups users are the modern version of the September AOL users.
>
>I disagree. The September AOL users were cluless and naive, annoying
>because of their sheer numbers. The Google Groups Spammers are a
>relatively small number, a serious provider would simply have them cut
>off.
>

Small?

Have you seen comp.lang.c lately?

>It is the problem that Google doesnt cut them off.
>

And all their spammerrs!

>Greetings
>Marc
>--
>-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
>Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
>Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " |
>Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Those who want mob rule are opposed to civilisation. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

In article <1qiz2tt.skzini88hx0gN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>,
Sn!pe <snipeco.1@gmail.com> wrote:
>Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>
>> Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >Nothing ironic about it. Many of Google services are good. Their email
>> >service in particular is very good at filtering spam.
>>
>
>My guess is that Google collates mail marked as spam by their users.
>It would be simple to use those many user reports to feed their filters.
>
>>
>> Their email service in particular is very good at rejecting or
>> deleting legitimate mail, especially if the admins of the delivering
>> systems dont jump through the burining hoops that google erects. This
>> works because their email service is too darn big to just say fuck
>> you.
>>
>
>I am not aware of any of my legitimate mail in any of my several Gmail
>accounts having been lost or delayed.
>
>
>> >Hence it's a
>> >mystery to me why they don't do the same with googlegroups.
>>
>> It would be work to not spam Usenet via googlegroups. Newsadmins don't
>> reject messages from google groups because they're too darn big to
>> just say fuck you.
>>
>> See the parallels? Google doesn't care either way. They're too darn
>> big to care.
>>
>
>Quite likely so, although I think your analogy is weak.
>News users don't automatically report spam.
>
>

Do they know how?

>
>> Greetings
>> Marc
>
>
>--
>^�^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.
>
> My pet rock Gordon just said maybe.

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Those who want mob rule are opposed to civilisation. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:

[...]
> > News users don't automatically report spam.
> >
>
> Do they know how?
>

This News user doesn't know how to do that ~automatically.~

I do automatically report spam email delivered via Gmail by the simple
act of marking that bad email as spam in my email prog., so that it is
automatically moved to the Spam mailbox. Google would see that as a
matter of course. They don't get the same user feedback from a News
user.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.

My pet rock Gordon just said maybe.

snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:
>Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>> Their email service in particular is very good at rejecting or
>> deleting legitimate mail, especially if the admins of the delivering
>> systems dont jump through the burining hoops that google erects. This
>> works because their email service is too darn big to just say fuck
>> you.
>
>I am not aware of any of my legitimate mail in any of my several Gmail
>accounts having been lost or delayed.

I am.

--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834

Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:

> snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:
> >Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
> >> Their email service in particular is very good at rejecting or
> >> deleting legitimate mail, especially if the admins of the delivering
> >> systems dont jump through the burining hoops that google erects. This
> >> works because their email service is too darn big to just say fuck
> >> you.
> >
> >I am not aware of any of my legitimate mail in any of my several Gmail
> >accounts having been lost or delayed.
>
> I am.

YMMV! ≈:o)

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.

My pet rock Gordon just said nothing.

Thus spake snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
> Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>> snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:
>> >I am not aware of any of my legitimate mail in any of my several Gmail
>> >accounts having been lost or delayed.
>> I am.
> YMMV! ≈:o)

The receiver does not get notified, it's only the sender:

<ray.banana.rb@googlemail.com>: host
gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[2607:f8b0:4004:c17::1a] said: 550-5.7.26 This
mail has been blocked because the sender is unauthenticated. 550-5.7.26
Gmail requires all senders to authenticate with either SPF or DKIM.
550-5.7.26 550-5.7.26 Authentication results: 550-5.7.26 DKIM = did not
pass 550-5.7.26 SPF [raybanana.net] with ip:
[2a01:238:4322:f100:97c6:a04c:74ee:429e 550-5.7.26 ] = did not pass
550-5.7.26 550-5.7.26 To mitigate this issue, please visit Gmail's
authentication guide 550-5.7.26 for instructions on setting up
authentication: 550 5.7.26
https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication
g13-20020ac8580d000000b0041986eba0b0si3340575qtg.396 - gsmtp (in reply to
end of DATA command)

--
Пу́тін — хуйло́
http://www.eternal-september.org

Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net> wrote:

> Thus spake snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
>
> > Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
> >> snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:
> >> >I am not aware of any of my legitimate mail in any of my several Gmail
> >> >accounts having been lost or delayed.
> >> I am.
> > YMMV! ≈:o)
>
> The receiver does not get notified, it's only the sender:
>
> <ray.banana.rb@googlemail.com>: host
> gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[2607:f8b0:4004:c17::1a] said: 550-5.7.26 This
> mail has been blocked because the sender is unauthenticated. 550-5.7.26
> Gmail requires all senders to authenticate with either SPF or DKIM.
> 550-5.7.26 550-5.7.26 Authentication results: 550-5.7.26 DKIM = did not
> pass 550-5.7.26 SPF [raybanana.net] with ip:
> [2a01:238:4322:f100:97c6:a04c:74ee:429e 550-5.7.26 ] = did not pass
> 550-5.7.26 550-5.7.26 To mitigate this issue, please visit Gmail's
> authentication guide 550-5.7.26 for instructions on setting up
> authentication: 550 5.7.26
> https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication
> g13-20020ac8580d000000b0041986eba0b0si3340575qtg.396 - gsmtp (in reply to
> end of DATA command)

Noted, thanks, Ray.

Whatever, I'm still not aware of any ~expected~ mail having gone astray.
I use Google Mail with IMAP and Mac OS 14.0 Mail.app. FWIW I'm 2FA on
all my Gmail accounts, in case that's relevant.

I think discussion of email is probably OT here. (Subject. marked)

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.

My pet rock Gordon just is.

In article <1qizw9m.zmhpkl1w3bpjbN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>,
Sn!pe <snipeco.1@gmail.com> wrote:
>The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>[...]
>> > News users don't automatically report spam.
>> >
>>
>> Do they know how?
>>
>
>This News user doesn't know how to do that ~automatically.~
>
>I do automatically report spam email delivered via Gmail by the simple
>act of marking that bad email as spam in my email prog., so that it is
>automatically moved to the Spam mailbox. Google would see that as a
>matter of course. They don't get the same user feedback from a News
>user.
>

I found it pointless and futile as Google would not follow up.

>--
>^�^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.
>
> My pet rock Gordon just said maybe.

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Those who want mob rule are opposed to civilisation. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

Le 22/10/2023 à 13:56, snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) a écrit :

> Whatever, I'm still not aware of any ~expected~ mail having gone astray.

Ray wrote to me and I didn't get the message :)
Maybe I should change this adress although it is useful against spam.

Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:

> Le 22/10/2023 à 13:56, snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) a écrit :
>
> > Whatever, I'm still not aware of any ~expected~ mail having gone astray.
>
> Ray wrote to me and I didn't get the message :)
> Maybe I should change this adress although it is useful against spam.

I hardly ever see spam to my Usenet addresses: <snipeco.1@gmail.com>
and <snipeco.2@gmail.com>. In fact the only spam to them is what Gmail
is currently sending directly to my spam mailbox, namely Paganini's test
autoresponder stuff.

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.

My pet rock Gordon just is.

Thus spake snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
> Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Le 22/10/2023 à 13:56, snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) a écrit :
>> > Whatever, I'm still not aware of any ~expected~ mail having gone astray.
>> Ray wrote to me and I didn't get the message :)
>> Maybe I should change this adress although it is useful against spam.
> I hardly ever see spam to my Usenet addresses: <snipeco.1@gmail.com>
> and <snipeco.2@gmail.com>. In fact the only spam to them is what Gmail
> is currently sending directly to my spam mailbox, namely Paganini's test
> autoresponder stuff.

Google seems to switch their email security settings a lot recently.
At the moment, it's not testing SPF and DKIM. They're worse than Elon
Musk as far as testing in production is concerned.

--
Пу́тін — хуйло́
http://www.eternal-september.org

On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 21:27:13 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:

>
> jump through the burining hoops that google erects. This works because
> their email service is too darn big to just say fuck you.
>

It works becasue many - but not all - network admins, are gutless pricks

There are some of us out here that have the attitude "no-one is too big
to block" and proved it gmail has over the past several years been
blocked by us on a scaled basis, the last time was February this year
where they were ousted for 60 days, sure they wont care about our ~900K,
so do little, but if all or a majority of admins got off their pathetic
whiny arses and too a stand, then google will have to fix the spam issue
at gmail.

In article <8mv8ayn1fv.fsf@raybanana.net>,
Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net> wrote:
>Thus spake snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
>
>> Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Le 22/10/2023 à 13:56, snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) a écrit :
>>> > Whatever, I'm still not aware of any ~expected~ mail having gone astray.
>>> Ray wrote to me and I didn't get the message :)
>>> Maybe I should change this adress although it is useful against spam.
>> I hardly ever see spam to my Usenet addresses: <snipeco.1@gmail.com>
>> and <snipeco.2@gmail.com>. In fact the only spam to them is what Gmail
>> is currently sending directly to my spam mailbox, namely Paganini's test
>> autoresponder stuff.
>
>Google seems to switch their email security settings a lot recently.
>At the moment, it's not testing SPF and DKIM. They're worse than Elon
>Musk as far as testing in production is concerned.
>

Google is sure dropping the ball!

>--
>Пу́тін — хуйло́
>http://www.eternal-september.org

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
When pride is the most valuable thing, then the life will be misery. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

In article <6535bc4e$1@news.ausics.net>, noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> wrote:
>On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 21:27:13 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>
>
>>
>> jump through the burining hoops that google erects. This works because
>> their email service is too darn big to just say f*k you.
>>
>
>It works becasue many - but not all - network admins, are gutless pricks
>
>There are some of us out here that have the attitude "no-one is too big
>to block" and proved it gmail has over the past several years been
>blocked by us on a scaled basis, the last time was February this year
>where they were ousted for 60 days, sure they wont care about our ~900K,
>so do little, but if all or a majority of admins got off their pathetic
>whiny arses and too a stand, then google will have to fix the spam issue
>at gmail.
>

There is

https://www.nk.ca/blog/index.php?/categories/14-Google-Spam
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
When pride is the most valuable thing, then the life will be misery. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 13:18:49 +0200, Ray Banana wrote:

> Thus spake snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
>
>> Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:

>> YMMV! ≈:o)
>
> The receiver does not get notified, it's only the sender:
>
> <ray.banana.rb@googlemail.com>: host
> gmail-smtp-in.l.google.com[2607:f8b0:4004:c17::1a] said: 550-5.7.26
> This mail has been blocked because the sender is unauthenticated.
> 550-5.7.26 Gmail requires all senders to authenticate with either
> SPF or DKIM. 550-5.7.26 550-5.7.26 Authentication results:
> 550-5.7.26 DKIM = did not pass 550-5.7.26 SPF [raybanana.net] with
> ip: [2a01:238:4322:f100:97c6:a04c:74ee:429e 550-5.7.26 ] = did not
> pass 550-5.7.26 550-5.7.26 To mitigate this issue, please visit
> Gmail's authentication guide 550-5.7.26 for instructions on setting
> up authentication: 550 5.7.26
> https://support.google.com/mail/answer/81126#authentication
> g13-20020ac8580d000000b0041986eba0b0si3340575qtg.396 - gsmtp (in
> reply to end of DATA command)

~$ host -t txt raybanana.net
raybanana.net has no TXT record

why don't you is the bigger question.

On Sunday, 22 October 2023 09:24 +0100, Sn!pe wrote:

> The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:

> [...]

>>> News users don't automatically report spam.

>> Do they know how?

> This News user doesn't know how to do that ~automatically.~

> I do automatically report spam email delivered via Gmail by the
> simple act of marking that bad email as spam in my email prog., so
> that it is automatically moved to the Spam mailbox. Google would
> see that as a matter of course. They don't get the same user
> feedback from a News user.

Unfortunately, likely the most effective way for users to report
Google Groups spam is limited to those with Google Groups account, via
the lame Google Groups interface. While one my view the archive,
without logging into https://groups.google.com/, no one who is not
logged in may use Google's substantially b0ken reporting system.

At the top-right of the displayed article one wishes to report, there
is a vertical ellipsis. Here, the option to "Report message as
abuse," is provided. Tick the "abuse" option you wish to report:
Spam; Hateful or violent content. For example, Anti-Semitic content,
racist content, or material that could result in a violent physical
act; Personal or private information. For example, a credit card
number, a personal identification number, or an unlisted home address.
Note that email addresses and full names are not considered private
information; Promotion of regulated goods and services; Other. An
article may be reported more than once, under different categories.

Please note, reporting in this more than slightly retarded method may
be the only way that Google's algorithm is likely to take notice.

Do note, nowhere does Google provide their definition for what they
call spam.

We now return you to your continued largely meaningless whining.

--
David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
Be kind to animals; kiss a shark.

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 00:23:16 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) wrote:
>In article <6535bc4e$1@news.ausics.net>, noel <deletethis@invalid.lan> wrote:
>>On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 21:27:13 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>>> jump through the burining hoops that google erects. This works because
>>> their email service is too darn big to just say f*k you.
>>
>>It works becasue many - but not all - network admins, are gutless pricks
>>
>>There are some of us out here that have the attitude "no-one is too big
>>to block" and proved it gmail has over the past several years been
>>blocked by us on a scaled basis, the last time was February this year
>>where they were ousted for 60 days, sure they wont care about our ~900K,
>>so do little, but if all or a majority of admins got off their pathetic
>>whiny arses and too a stand, then google will have to fix the spam issue
>>at gmail.
>
>There is
>https://www.nk.ca/blog/index.php?/categories/14-Google-Spam

(using Tor Browser 13.0 to open this link)
https://www.nk.ca/blog/index.php?/categories/14-Google-Spam
>...dollars into fixed suspension...to offer you 20% of the total...
>...the world today is full...drug addict...to set up my future...
>...require from you is...payment on this transaction...keep silent...
>...
>...payment of...your information is...like to have some business...
[end spam snippets]

sounds like lines from old gangster movies . . . the black hand

Le 23/10/2023 à 03:31, David Ritz a écrit :

> Unfortunately, likely the most effective way for users to report
> Google Groups spam is limited to those with Google Groups account, via
> the lame Google Groups interface. While one my view the archive,
> without logging into https://groups.google.com/, no one who is not
> logged in may use Google's substantially b0ken reporting system.

Even with a Google account, I can tell you it almost never works, so as
useless as the rest.

Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net> wrote:
>Thus spake snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
>
>> Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>> snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:
>>> >I am not aware of any of my legitimate mail in any of my several Gmail
>>> >accounts having been lost or delayed.
>>> I am.
>> YMMV! ?:o)
>
>The receiver does not get notified, it's only the sender:

That is rather new, and as log as Google doesn't document this
behavior (which they won't do, they don't document anything), I still
assume that my past experience is true that some legitimate messages
get accepted and then silently dropped.

--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " |
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834

In article <TA_eRTZdNxWRUnqUUGYzOLgvccI@jntp>,
Eric M <conanospamic@gmail.com> wrote:
>Le 23/10/2023 à 03:31, David Ritz a écrit :
>
>> Unfortunately, likely the most effective way for users to report
>> Google Groups spam is limited to those with Google Groups account, via
>> the lame Google Groups interface. While one my view the archive,
>> without logging into https://groups.google.com/, no one who is not
>> logged in may use Google's substantially b0ken reporting system.
>
>Even with a Google account, I can tell you it almost never works, so as
>useless as the rest.

That is how useless Google groups is!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
When pride is the most valuable thing, then the life will be misery. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:05:14 +0200, Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net> wrote:
>>Thus spake snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
>>> Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>>> snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:
>>>> >I am not aware of any of my legitimate mail in any of my several Gmail
>>>> >accounts having been lost or delayed.
>>>> I am.
>>> YMMV! ?:o)
>>
>>The receiver does not get notified, it's only the sender:
>
>That is rather new, and as log as Google doesn't document this
>behavior (which they won't do, they don't document anything), I still
>assume that my past experience is true that some legitimate messages
>get accepted and then silently dropped.

classified . . . sanitized . . . etc . . . after deja was eliminated
12 feb 2001 googlegroups was noticeably sporadic, hit and miss; by 29
Nov 2004 with their "beta", select articles that were not posted from
googlegroups became unsearchable even irretrievable if not by message
id (oftentimes that didn't work either); for outsiders, gg had become
for all practical purposes unusable; for insiders, gg became a weapon

In article <72abf0a401804562f015cac5c95a2fc2@dizum.com>, D <J@M> wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:05:14 +0200, Marc Haber
><mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net> wrote:
>>>Thus spake snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
>>>> Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>>>> snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:
>>>>> >I am not aware of any of my legitimate mail in any of my several Gmail
>>>>> >accounts having been lost or delayed.
>>>>> I am.
>>>> YMMV! ?:o)
>>>
>>>The receiver does not get notified, it's only the sender:
>>
>>That is rather new, and as log as Google doesn't document this
>>behavior (which they won't do, they don't document anything), I still
>>assume that my past experience is true that some legitimate messages
>>get accepted and then silently dropped.
>
>classified . . . sanitized . . . etc . . . after deja was eliminated
>12 feb 2001 googlegroups was noticeably sporadic, hit and miss; by 29
>Nov 2004 with their "beta", select articles that were not posted from
>googlegroups became unsearchable even irretrievable if not by message
>id (oftentimes that didn't work either); for outsiders, gg had become
>for all practical purposes unusable; for insiders, gg became a weapon
>

This devolution is a real problem!
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
When pride is the most valuable thing, then the life will be misery. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 14:41:58 -0000 (UTC), doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) wrote:
>In article <72abf0a401804562f015cac5c95a2fc2@dizum.com>, D <J@M> wrote:
>>On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:05:14 +0200, Marc Haber
>><mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>>Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net> wrote:
>>>>Thus spake snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
>>>>> Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>>>>> snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:
>>>>>> >I am not aware of any of my legitimate mail in any of my several Gmail
>>>>>> >accounts having been lost or delayed.
>>>>>> I am.
>>>>> YMMV! ?:o)
>>>>
>>>>The receiver does not get notified, it's only the sender:
>>>
>>>That is rather new, and as log as Google doesn't document this
>>>behavior (which they won't do, they don't document anything), I still
>>>assume that my past experience is true that some legitimate messages
>>>get accepted and then silently dropped.
>>
>>classified . . . sanitized . . . etc . . . after deja was eliminated
>>12 feb 2001 googlegroups was noticeably sporadic, hit and miss; by 29
>>Nov 2004 with their "beta", select articles that were not posted from
>>googlegroups became unsearchable even irretrievable if not by message
>>id (oftentimes that didn't work either); for outsiders, gg had become
>>for all practical purposes unusable; for insiders, gg became a weapon
>
>This devolution is a real problem!

old timers called it mark of cain, schizo, mob rules, legion, etc., but
for the sake of levity the popular band Devo was named for "d-evolution"
and inspired by a sweet romantic beautiful world . . . beautiful people
everywhere; devo even did a cover of j rivers classic "secret agent man"

In article <uh60nm$2jdo$2@gallifrey.nk.ca>,
The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
>In article <72abf0a401804562f015cac5c95a2fc2@dizum.com>, D <J@M> wrote:
>>On Mon, 23 Oct 2023 11:05:14 +0200, Marc Haber
>><mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>>Ray Banana <rayban@raybanana.net> wrote:
>>>>Thus spake snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
>>>>> Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1118@zugschl.us> wrote:
>>>>>> snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:
>>>>>> >I am not aware of any of my legitimate mail in any of my several Gmail
>>>>>> >accounts having been lost or delayed.
>>>>>> I am.
>>>>> YMMV! ?:o)
>>>>
>>>>The receiver does not get notified, it's only the sender:
>>>
>>>That is rather new, and as log as Google doesn't document this
>>>behavior (which they won't do, they don't document anything), I still
>>>assume that my past experience is true that some legitimate messages
>>>get accepted and then silently dropped.
>>
>>classified . . . sanitized . . . etc . . . after deja was eliminated
>>12 feb 2001 googlegroups was noticeably sporadic, hit and miss; by 29
>>Nov 2004 with their "beta", select articles that were not posted from
>>googlegroups became unsearchable even irretrievable if not by message
>>id (oftentimes that didn't work either); for outsiders, gg had become
>>for all practical purposes unusable; for insiders, gg became a weapon
>>
>
>This devolution is a real problem!

FYI https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A7122352592692658177/?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A%28activity%3A7122352592692658177%2C7122915621796818945%29&dashCommentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Afsd%5Fcomment%3A%287122915621796818945%2Curn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A7122352592692658177%29
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
When we want to believe on our own terms, divisions will abound. -unknown https://mindspring.com