From: SugarBug <3883@sugar.bug>
Newsgroups: eternal-september.talk, alt.free.newsservers, alt.september
Subject: Looming Groupocalypse : The Google Groupsspaggheddon Cometh!
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 03:38:43 -0600

A Brain Candy Rant for Tin Hatters and Texters. (SyberShock!)
-------------------------------------------------------------

Looming Groupocalypse : The Google Groupsspaggheddon Cometh!
Tuesday, September 11088, 1993

-------------------------------------------------------------
List of Free Usenet Servers: https://sybershock.com/#usenet
-------------------------------------------------------------

Usenet is dead.
Usenet has always been dead.
Usenet is dying.
Usenet is always dying.
Live with it.

Long live Usenet!

Google Groups has provided Usenet access for many years
since Google acquired DejaNews 22 years ago, circa 2002.

For some of these years Google has allowed a non-stop spam
flooding, denial of service attack against the Usenet
network. Google and other large Usenet providers have
suborned a non-stop flood of zillions and bazillions of spam
articles over the years, making newsgroups unusable for many
end-users, causing much exodus from the Usenet network. Some
believe that this was not incompetence or negligence, but
intentional malice disguised as incompetence and negligence.
Pretending to serve a network while undermining it in deed
comports with the principle of "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish."
Some are firmly convinced this is the real cause of the spam.

A recent anti-spam campaign got a lot of people breathing
down Google's neck. Rather than end the flooding and denial
of service that it caused, Google has decided to stop
peering Usenet feeds altogether. Some have opined that this
is like amputating a leg to remedy a ingrown toenail. Google
users will lose Usenet posting access without recourse.

In February Google is pulling the plug. A large number of
Google users will no longer be able to access Usenet. Those
users will need to find some other way to access Usenet
newsgroups. I like to think of it as 'unplugment day'.

Some posters in the Usenet have been opining that it will
be an apocalyptic event similar to Eternal September when
hordes of AOL users were unleashed on Usenet decades ago.
Since the influx of ISP users decimated politeness on the
Usenet, it is said that September of 1993 never ended.
Usenetizens still call this era the 'Eternal September.'

Now a horde of Google Groups users will be potentially
unleashed on the other Usenet service providers, especially
the free providers. A swarm of new signups is expected. Some
free Usenet providers are already dealing with a spike in
new registrations.

That cutoff date is February 22, 2024. After that time the
Google users will no longer be able to access Usenet content.
In Eternal September time the cutoff date will be the 11131st
day of September, 1993.

Since many Google users are clueless, some likely won't
realize their Usenet access is sunset until the moment it is
cut off. Then there is potential for a search panic as they
try to discover why they cannot access Usenet groups via
Google Groups. It has been jokingly called the Google Groups
Apocalypse or the Google Groups Armageddon. Some users post
Usenet articles counting down the days to the cutoff date.

Some wordplay gives silly effect to these phrases:

groupocalypse ==> group + apocalypse
goopocalypse ==> google + apocalypse
groupsspagheddon ==> groups + spaghetti + armageddon

So now this ditty might make sense:

The 'groupocalypse' looms.
Google 'groupsspaggheddon' cometh.
There shall be zoomer weeping,
Karen wailing,
and boomer gnashing of dentures.

This is a spoof on verses from the books of Matthew and
Revelation:

"As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire;
so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man
shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of
his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do
iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there
shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."

"The merchants of these things, which were made rich by her,
shall stand afar off for the fear of her torment, weeping
and wailing ..."

"Weeping and wailing" becomes: "Zoomer weeping, Karen
wailing ..."

"Gnashing of teeth" becomes: "Boomer gnashing of dentures."

I suppose that the "merchants" could spoof for spammers. Yet
I doubt any spammers were, "made rich by her."

Since it is the end of yet another era for Usenet, it is
'apocalyptic' in a lampoon way, like the end of the Usenet
world when the month of Eternal September began. It is a
comical, cosmological holy day, an 'apocalypse' for which we
know the exact date of its coming. It is bombastic burlesque,
a rampant style of humor that runs riot on Usenet.

The impending cessation of Google Usenet peering may cause a
chaotic scramble to find Usenet access. Or it may go hardly
noticed, an anti-apocalyptic whimper in the night. The Google
Groupocalypse might signal a great shift, or it may mererly
result in less spam. That is a change I can live with.

Whether February 22, 2024 comes in like a lion or a lamb, that
day will always be September 11131, 1993. And one thing is
sure: If September is eternal, then Usenet is eternal, too.

--
1_|3_|7_|4_ 3883@sugar.bug | sybershock.com | alt.sources.crypto
1_|8_|7_|4_ sci.crypt | alt.random.noise | talk.politics.crypto
4_|8_|6_|7_ #CipherTag #WaffleTag #Cryptologer
4_|3_|6_|7_ fedi: @firefly@neon.nightbulb.net

Le 16/01/2024 à 10:19, Anton Shepelev a écrit :
> From: SugarBug <3883@sugar.bug>
> Newsgroups: eternal-september.talk, alt.free.newsservers, alt.september
> Subject: Looming Groupocalypse : The Google Groupsspaggheddon Cometh!
> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 03:38:43 -0600
>
> A Brain Candy Rant for Tin Hatters and Texters. (SyberShock!) [...]

TL;DR. All the same, I hope this move by Google doesn't damage Usenet
too much. It's good to have fora that aren't owned and controlled by
single companies.

On 16/01/24 22:40, Hibou wrote:
> Le 16/01/2024 à 10:19, Anton Shepelev a écrit :
>> From: SugarBug <3883@sugar.bug> Newsgroups: eternal-september.talk,
>> alt.free.newsservers, alt.september Subject: Looming Groupocalypse
>> : The Google Groupsspaggheddon Cometh! Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024
>> 03:38:43 -0600
>>
>> A Brain Candy Rant for Tin Hatters and Texters. (SyberShock!)
>> [...]
>
> TL;DR. All the same, I hope this move by Google doesn't damage Usenet
> too much. It's good to have fora that aren't owned and controlled by
> single companies.

Anton's rant does, however, help to make it clearer that Usenet
newsgroups will not be going away. Google Groups users -- at least,
those who can't figure out how to transition to an alternative solution
-- will lose access to newsgroups. The rest of us will remain unaffected.

The situation is clear to those of us who have never relied on Google
Groups. I've noticed, though, that those who are used to using Google
Groups are very confused about the situation, and stil have the
impression that newsgroups are being closed down.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

In article <20240116131908.349f9af9f6ff356636336060@g{oogle}mail.com>,
Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote:
>From: SugarBug <3883@sugar.bug>
>Newsgroups: eternal-september.talk, alt.free.newsservers, alt.september
>Subject: Looming Groupocalypse : The Google Groupsspaggheddon Cometh!
>Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 03:38:43 -0600
>
> A Brain Candy Rant for Tin Hatters and Texters. (SyberShock!)
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Looming Groupocalypse : The Google Groupsspaggheddon Cometh!
> Tuesday, September 11088, 1993
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> List of Free Usenet Servers: https://sybershock.com/#usenet
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Usenet is dead.
> Usenet has always been dead.
> Usenet is dying.
> Usenet is always dying.
> Live with it.
>
> Long live Usenet!
>
> Google Groups has provided Usenet access for many years
> since Google acquired DejaNews 22 years ago, circa 2002.
>
> For some of these years Google has allowed a non-stop spam
> flooding, denial of service attack against the Usenet
> network. Google and other large Usenet providers have
> suborned a non-stop flood of zillions and bazillions of spam
> articles over the years, making newsgroups unusable for many
> end-users, causing much exodus from the Usenet network. Some
> believe that this was not incompetence or negligence, but
> intentional malice disguised as incompetence and negligence.
> Pretending to serve a network while undermining it in deed
> comports with the principle of "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish."
> Some are firmly convinced this is the real cause of the spam.
>
> A recent anti-spam campaign got a lot of people breathing
> down Google's neck. Rather than end the flooding and denial
> of service that it caused, Google has decided to stop
> peering Usenet feeds altogether. Some have opined that this
> is like amputating a leg to remedy a ingrown toenail. Google
> users will lose Usenet posting access without recourse.
>
> In February Google is pulling the plug. A large number of
> Google users will no longer be able to access Usenet. Those
> users will need to find some other way to access Usenet
> newsgroups. I like to think of it as 'unplugment day'.
>
> Some posters in the Usenet have been opining that it will
> be an apocalyptic event similar to Eternal September when
> hordes of AOL users were unleashed on Usenet decades ago.
> Since the influx of ISP users decimated politeness on the
> Usenet, it is said that September of 1993 never ended.
> Usenetizens still call this era the 'Eternal September.'
>
> Now a horde of Google Groups users will be potentially
> unleashed on the other Usenet service providers, especially
> the free providers. A swarm of new signups is expected. Some
> free Usenet providers are already dealing with a spike in
> new registrations.
>
> That cutoff date is February 22, 2024. After that time the
> Google users will no longer be able to access Usenet content.
> In Eternal September time the cutoff date will be the 11131st
> day of September, 1993.
>
> Since many Google users are clueless, some likely won't
> realize their Usenet access is sunset until the moment it is
> cut off. Then there is potential for a search panic as they
> try to discover why they cannot access Usenet groups via
> Google Groups. It has been jokingly called the Google Groups
> Apocalypse or the Google Groups Armageddon. Some users post
> Usenet articles counting down the days to the cutoff date.
>
> Some wordplay gives silly effect to these phrases:
>
> groupocalypse ==> group + apocalypse
> goopocalypse ==> google + apocalypse
> groupsspagheddon ==> groups + spaghetti + armageddon
>
> So now this ditty might make sense:
>
> The 'groupocalypse' looms.
> Google 'groupsspaggheddon' cometh.
> There shall be zoomer weeping,
> Karen wailing,
> and boomer gnashing of dentures.
>
> This is a spoof on verses from the books of Matthew and
> Revelation:
>
> "As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire;
> so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man
> shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of
> his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do
> iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there
> shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."
>
> "The merchants of these things, which were made rich by her,
> shall stand afar off for the fear of her torment, weeping
> and wailing ..."
>
> "Weeping and wailing" becomes: "Zoomer weeping, Karen
> wailing ..."
>
> "Gnashing of teeth" becomes: "Boomer gnashing of dentures."
>
> I suppose that the "merchants" could spoof for spammers. Yet
> I doubt any spammers were, "made rich by her."
>
> Since it is the end of yet another era for Usenet, it is
> 'apocalyptic' in a lampoon way, like the end of the Usenet
> world when the month of Eternal September began. It is a
> comical, cosmological holy day, an 'apocalypse' for which we
> know the exact date of its coming. It is bombastic burlesque,
> a rampant style of humor that runs riot on Usenet.
>
> The impending cessation of Google Usenet peering may cause a
> chaotic scramble to find Usenet access. Or it may go hardly
> noticed, an anti-apocalyptic whimper in the night. The Google
> Groupocalypse might signal a great shift, or it may mererly
> result in less spam. That is a change I can live with.
>
> Whether February 22, 2024 comes in like a lion or a lamb, that
> day will always be September 11131, 1993. And one thing is
> sure: If September is eternal, then Usenet is eternal, too.
>
>--
> 1_|3_|7_|4_ 3883@sugar.bug | sybershock.com | alt.sources.crypto
> 1_|8_|7_|4_ sci.crypt | alt.random.noise | talk.politics.crypto
> 4_|8_|6_|7_ #CipherTag #WaffleTag #Cryptologer
> 4_|3_|6_|7_ fedi: @firefly@neon.nightbulb.net

Google drops Usenet dues to Google incompetence!
--
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
Birthday 29 Jan 1969 Born Redhill , England, UK Beware https://mindspring.com

The Doctor wrote:

> Google drops Usenet dues to Google incompetence!

You can call Google many things, but "incompetent" is not one of them.

--
Bertel, Denmark

Bertel Lund Hansen to The Doctor:

> > Google drops Usenet dues to Google incompetence!
>
> You can call Google many things, but "incompetent" is not
> one of them.

Well, the Usenet part of Google Groups is certainly a broken
product made by incompetent people.

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:09:31 +0300, Anton Shepelev
<anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote:

>Bertel Lund Hansen to The Doctor:
>
>> > Google drops Usenet dues to Google incompetence!
>>
>> You can call Google many things, but "incompetent" is not
>> one of them.
>
>Well, the Usenet part of Google Groups is certainly a broken
>product made by incompetent people.

To be considered to be "competant", they must make some attempt to do
something and not be able to do it because of their inadequacy.

In this case, there's no indication that they've tried to do anything
they've failed to be able to do.

Google is "uncaring" or "uninterested", not "incompetant'.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando,Florida

In article <uo5vs5$1f48u$1@dont-email.me>,
Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
....
>The situation is clear to those of us who have never relied on Google
>Groups. I've noticed, though, that those who are used to using Google
>Groups are very confused about the situation, and stil have the
>impression that newsgroups are being closed down.

Because from their point of view, it is.

From their point of view, Usenet is (i.e., will be) no more.

--
To my knowledge, Jacob Navia is not a Christian.

- Rick C Hodgin -

On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:33:58 -0500, TonyCooper
<tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Jan 2024 20:09:31 +0300, Anton Shepelev
><anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote:
>
>>Bertel Lund Hansen to The Doctor:
>>
>>> > Google drops Usenet dues to Google incompetence!
>>>
>>> You can call Google many things, but "incompetent" is not
>>> one of them.
>>
>>Well, the Usenet part of Google Groups is certainly a broken
>>product made by incompetent people.
>
>To be considered to be "competant",
S/b "incompetent" they must make some attempt to do
>something and not be able to do it because of their inadequacy.
>
>In this case, there's no indication that they've tried to do anything
>they've failed to be able to do.
>
>Google is "uncaring" or "uninterested", not "incompetant'.
--

Tony Cooper - Orlando,Florida

Peter Moylan used thar keyboard to writen:
> On 16/01/24 22:40, Hibou wrote:
>> Le 16/01/2024 à 10:19, Anton Shepelev a écrit :
>>> From: SugarBug <3883@sugar.bug> Newsgroups: eternal-september.talk,
>>> alt.free.newsservers, alt.september Subject: Looming Groupocalypse
>>> : The Google Groupsspaggheddon Cometh! Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024
>>> 03:38:43 -0600
>>>
>>> A Brain Candy Rant for Tin Hatters and Texters. (SyberShock!)
>>> [...]
>>
>> TL;DR. All the same, I hope this move by Google doesn't damage Usenet
>> too much. It's good to have fora that aren't owned and controlled by
>> single companies.
>
> Anton's rant does,

SugarBug's rant. It's not clear that the rhetoric is endorsed by
Anton, although I take it he endorses the practical advice (which is a
very thin part of the post).

I'm also not sure if SugarBug is parodying the panic of GG users, but I
suspect they are. The language is certainly overblown.

" Some have opined that this is like amputating a leg to remedy a
ingrown toenail". Come on, it's conservation of resources. As long as
usenet could be handled with minimum effort, it fit into Google's
operations. But at a time when Google is laying off thousands,
diverting resources to plug leaks on something only a small portion of
its users care about ... isn't going to happen.

> however, help to make it clearer that Usenet
> newsgroups will not be going away. Google Groups users -- at least,
> those who can't figure out how to transition to an alternative solution
> -- will lose access to newsgroups. The rest of us will remain unaffected.
>
> The situation is clear to those of us who have never relied on Google
> Groups. I've noticed, though, that those who are used to using Google
> Groups are very confused about the situation, and stil have the
> impression that newsgroups are being closed down.

Well, Metrist's replies in That Other Thread suggest he hasn't really
absorbed the idea that there are alternatives to GG, but certainly PTD
is aware of that, whether he knows how to accomplish it or not. And
others have posted that there are other web-based ways to read, and for
some, to post, usenet messages.

/dps "I may have to ask Janet for more commas"

--
Rule #0: Don't be on fire.
In case of fire, exit the building before tweeting about it.
(Sighting reported by Adam F)

In article <uo6bv0$1halm$1@dont-email.me>,
Bertel Lund Hansen <gadekryds@lundhansen.dk> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote:
>
>> Google drops Usenet dues to Google incompetence!
>
>You can call Google many things, but "incompetent" is not one of them.
>

I disagree!

>--
>Bertel, Denmark

--
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
Birthday 29 Jan 1969 Born Redhill , England, UK Beware https://mindspring.com

On 1/16/24 11:35, The Doctor wrote:
....
> Google drops Usenet dues to Google incompetence!

I don't think so. Ever since Google took over being the dominant Usenet
archive from DejaNews, every change they've made has removed working
functionality from their usenet interface. I've reluctantly concluded
that they are deliberately sabotaging it, in the hope that people will
stop using it, possibly because it's expensive to maintain. If it is
deliberate, it doesn't require incompetence. If they had added
capabilities that were badly designed, that would be a sign of
incompetence, but all they've done is remove features.

On 16-Jan-24 18:45, Kenny McCormack wrote:
> In article <uo5vs5$1f48u$1@dont-email.me>,
> Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
> ...
>> The situation is clear to those of us who have never relied on Google
>> Groups. I've noticed, though, that those who are used to using Google
>> Groups are very confused about the situation, and stil have the
>> impression that newsgroups are being closed down.
>
> Because from their point of view, it is.
>
> From their point of view, Usenet is (i.e., will be) no more.

An up to date version of:
"Fog in channel. Continent Isolated!"

--
Sam Plusnet

In article <o8GpN.1462$idBb.459@fx08.ams1>, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>On 16-Jan-24 18:45, Kenny McCormack wrote:
>> In article <uo5vs5$1f48u$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
>> ...
>>> The situation is clear to those of us who have never relied on Google
>>> Groups. I've noticed, though, that those who are used to using Google
>>> Groups are very confused about the situation, and stil have the
>>> impression that newsgroups are being closed down.
>>
>> Because from their point of view, it is.
>>
>> From their point of view, Usenet is (i.e., will be) no more.
>
>An up to date version of:
>"Fog in channel. Continent Isolated!"

Exactly. That was the old cliche/joke line that I had in mind.
I just couldn't quite remember the phrasing. Thanks.

--
The last time a Republican cared about you, you were a fetus.

On 2024-01-17, Kenny McCormack <gazelle@shell.xmission.com> wrote:
> In article <o8GpN.1462$idBb.459@fx08.ams1>, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
>>An up to date version of:
>>"Fog in channel. Continent Isolated!"
>
> Exactly. That was the old cliche/joke line that I had in mind.
> I just couldn't quite remember the phrasing. Thanks.

Problem is, what if Google Groups had been, as it were, the continent?

Good heavens, perish the thought!

--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
NOTE: If you use Google Groups, I don't see you, unless you're whitelisted.

Kenny McCormack wrote:

>>The situation is clear to those of us who have never relied on Google
>>Groups. I've noticed, though, that those who are used to using Google
>>Groups are very confused about the situation, and stil have the
>>impression that newsgroups are being closed down.
>
> Because from their point of view, it is.
>
> From their point of view, Usenet is (i.e., will be) no more.

Not quite correct. They (probably) don't know what Usenet is, and a lot
of the groups that they are using, remain unchanged because they are
pure Google groups.

In a sense, Usenet has never existed for some of them.

--
Bertel, Denmark

The Doctor wrote:

>>You can call Google many things, but "incompetent" is not one of them.

> I disagree!

See Tony Coopers answer to Anton Shepelev.

--
Bertel, Denmark

James Kuyper:

> If they had added capabilities that were badly designed,
> that would be a sign of incompetence, but all they've done
> is remove features.

They have also introduced bugs, such as the one that casued
posts to .c++ appear in .c . But assigning incompetent
developers to Google Groups may have been a deliberate
decision as well... Yet where Google /do/ want to compete,
they ususally do so quite well.

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

In article <uo5vs5$1f48u$1@dont-email.me>,
peter@pmoylan.org.invalid says...
>
> On 16/01/24 22:40, Hibou wrote:
> > Le 16/01/2024 à 10:19, Anton Shepelev a écrit :
> >> From: SugarBug <3883@sugar.bug> Newsgroups: eternal-september.talk,
> >> alt.free.newsservers, alt.september Subject: Looming Groupocalypse
> >> : The Google Groupsspaggheddon Cometh! Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024
> >> 03:38:43 -0600
> >>
> >> A Brain Candy Rant for Tin Hatters and Texters. (SyberShock!)
> >> [...]
> >
> > TL;DR. All the same, I hope this move by Google doesn't damage Usenet
> > too much. It's good to have fora that aren't owned and controlled by
> > single companies.
>
> Anton's rant does, however, help to make it clearer that Usenet
> newsgroups will not be going away. Google Groups users -- at least,
> those who can't figure out how to transition to an alternative solution
> -- will lose access to newsgroups. The rest of us will remain unaffected.
>
> The situation is clear to those of us who have never relied on Google
> Groups. I've noticed, though, that those who are used to using Google
> Groups are very confused about the situation, and stil have the
> impression that newsgroups are being closed down.

Perhaps Google is encouraging that false impression
because many of their clients also use gmail for email,
unaware of the existence of superior ISPs.

Janet

Janet wrote:

> Perhaps Google is encouraging that false impression
> because many of their clients also use gmail for email,
> unaware of the existence of superior ISPs.

I think it's difficult in Denmark not to find out that there are other
possibilities. Companies usually supply their own email addresses to
their employers, and they are seen by customers who may not have gotten
one themselves.

--
Bertel, Denmark

In article <mn.832a7e81f46d37fd.127094@snitoo>,
snidely.too@gmail.com says...

> /dps "I may have to ask Janet for more commas"

I'll put you on the waiting list.

As you know,I run a famous Usenet charity care home
for orphaned, divorced and unwanted commas. Most of them
have been rescued from online slavery, abuse, cruelty and
neglect. My intention is to rehabilitate them and
establish a robust new strain, resistant to sloppy editing
by illiterates. Later, if all goes well, we hope to
release breeding pairs back into the wild.

Janet

Bertel Lund Hansen:

> I think it's difficult in Denmark not to find out that
> there are other possibilities.

It should be glabally so, because internet is the same
everywhere.

> Companies usually supply their own email addresses to
> their employers,

Then those accounts are not yours but your employer's, and
are terminated with the employment.

Notice that you dropped two newsgroups in your post...

--
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

On 17 Jan 2024, Janet wrote

> In article <mn.832a7e81f46d37fd.127094@snitoo>,
> snidely.too@gmail.com says...
>
>> /dps "I may have to ask Janet for more commas"
>
> I'll put you on the waiting list.
>
> As you know,I run a famous Usenet charity care home
> for orphaned, divorced and unwanted commas. Most of them
> have been rescued from online slavery, abuse, cruelty and
> neglect. My intention is to rehabilitate them and
> establish a robust new strain, resistant to sloppy editing
> by illiterates. Later, if all goes well, we hope to
> release breeding pairs back into the wild.

Where they can blend seamlessly into the landscape of common usage,
like comma chameleons?

--
Cheers, Harvey

In article <XnsB0FC8C789C725whhvans@135.181.20.170>,
office@REMOVETHISwhhvs.co.uk says...
>
> On 17 Jan 2024, Janet wrote
>
> > In article <mn.832a7e81f46d37fd.127094@snitoo>,
> > snidely.too@gmail.com says...
> >
> >> /dps "I may have to ask Janet for more commas"
> >
> > I'll put you on the waiting list.
> >
> > As you know,I run a famous Usenet charity care home
> > for orphaned, divorced and unwanted commas. Most of them
> > have been rescued from online slavery, abuse, cruelty and
> > neglect. My intention is to rehabilitate them and
> > establish a robust new strain, resistant to sloppy editing
> > by illiterates. Later, if all goes well, we hope to
> > release breeding pairs back into the wild.
>
> Where they can blend seamlessly into the landscape of common usage,
> like comma chameleons?

Come and go, come and go

Janet

Janet <nobody@home.com> wrote:

> In article <mn.832a7e81f46d37fd.127094@snitoo>,
> snidely.too@gmail.com says...
>
> > /dps "I may have to ask Janet for more commas"
>
> I'll put you on the waiting list.
>
> As you know,I run a famous Usenet charity care home
> for orphaned, divorced and unwanted commas. Most of them
> have been rescued from online slavery, abuse, cruelty and
> neglect. My intention is to rehabilitate them and
> establish a robust new strain, resistant to sloppy editing
> by illiterates. Later, if all goes well, we hope to
> release breeding pairs back into the wild.

That is clearly a case of 'mopping with the tap open'.
More effort should go into early abortion of unwanted commas,

Jan