Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
Newsgroups: alt
Subject: Re: FYI: Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
Message-ID: <485c8f9d.10222330@news.verizon.net>
References: <48595183.5445472@news.verizon.net> <735l54p5r1ef0s14kjrkf7dt8veu1kr44g@4ax.com> <0eKdnZR4UJwVKMfVnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@comcast.com> <2sqn54dm7m6ssc9rf34an14sohlsr3blb4@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.11/32.235
Lines: 63
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 05:33:30 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.111.172.213
X-Complaints-To: abuse@verizon.net
X-Trace: trndny01 1214026410 71.111.172.213 (Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:33:30 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 01:33:30 EDT
X-Original-Bytes: 3961
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt:749
On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 13:43:50 -0400, Folk <Folk@folk.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:37:34 -0400, "Mr.E Solved!"
><Iamsingle@askme.out> wrote:
>
>>Folk wrote:
>>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:45:34 GMT, john.dsl@verizon.net (John Lewis)
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Verizon provides me a near fault-free service with no bandwidth caps
>>>> or erratic upload bandwidth, so I have no real inclination to change
>>>> ISP providers [...] So, I say farewell to a couple of my favorite alt. groups..
>>>
>>> I never understood people who based their ISP decisions on the quality
>>> of their Usenet service. Most folks long ago wised up and went with a
>>> third-party email service so that changing ISP's or crappy ISP related
>>> mail service wasn't a big issue, so why don't they do the same with
>>> Usenet? If all you're interested in is text based groups, then there
>>> are scores of independent Usenet providers who can hook you up for
>>> next to nothing. Even premium Usenet provider who offer all the
>>> groups and no download limits (or at least reasonable download limits)
>>> can be had for around $10/month.
>>
>>
>>By your logic ISPs should not even offer email, nor should anyone pick
>>an ISP based on their email service.. since you can get email at any
>>third party provider.
>>
>>Regardless of the breach of contract by cutting out an enumerated
>>service, regardless of the same old witch-hunt war-cry of child-sex
>>vagaries, this is an attack on the free exchange of information.
>>
>>Not everyone has the same priorities as you Folk, nor do they roll over
>>as easily when they tell you you're in for a rogering.
>>
>>Tell us Folk, what services exactly should ISPs provide for the end user?
>
>Looks like a couple of people already provided the answer that you
>already knew (based on my post ) that I would provide.
>
>My main point though is that using third-party providers for email and
>Usenet insulates you from the eventual ISP change. Some people put up
>with crappy ISP service because "it's too much of a hassle to change
>my email address". To me, that's not a valid reason.
>
A very valid reason actually, for those of us who have long-term
memorable email addresses and excellent spam filters.
>It just seems odd to me that the OP would bid farewell to a newsgroup
>just because his ISP decided to do something stupid.
Traffic on the particular alt. (computer/console-hardware) groups to
which I subscribe has shrunk significantly over the past year or two,
so the loss to me is not great and there are other forums available in
which I actively participate. The Verizon decision to eliminate ALL
alt. groups from their newservers instead of selectively filtering
well-known culprit-groups - a technically trivial task - bears the
hall-marks of a truly arrogant company that does not put their
customers first.
John Lewis
|
|