FYI: Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
 

I am a Verizon Online (DSL) subscriber and have just read their
announcement, quoted befow verbatim:-
================================================== ==============
Dear Verizon Online Customer,

As a Verizon Newsgroup service user, we wanted to let you know about
some important changes that we will soon be making to our Newsgroup
service.

On June 24, 2008, we will be modifying our Newsgroup offerings to only
offer groups in the Big-8 Newsgroup hierarchies, which are listed
below. The 0.verizon.* newsgroup hierarchy will also continue to be
available. Users will not be able to post or download from any other
newsgroups using our Newsgroup service.

comp.*
humanities.*
misc.*
news.*
rec.*
sci.*
soc.*
talk.*

More details regarding the Big 8 newsgroup hierarchies is available
at: http://www.big-8.org/.

This change will not affect your Internet access service. If you
would like to subscribe to newsgroups other than those we offer, you
will need to subscribe to a separate commercial news service. Please
note that your use of any such service is still subject to our Terms
of Service and Acceptable Use Policy.

There are no changes required to your software, but you will need to
unsubscribe from all Newsgroups other than the Big 8 hierarchies and
the 0.verizon.* hierarchy noted above. The following link explains
how to subscribe and unsubscribe in Outlook Express:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/171190

IMPORTANT: If you continue to subscribe to unsupported newsgroups, you
may experience poor computer performance and slow throughput speeds.
Failure to unsubscribe may also interfere with the functioning of the
Verizon network or use of the network by other Verizon users, which is
a violation of our Acceptable Use Policy.

We appreciate your business and look forward to continuing to serve
you in the future.

Sincerely,

Verizon Online
================================================== ====

Since the only alt. groups to which I subscribe are computer/console
hardware-related, this is not particularly discomforting for me. There
are alternate forums for such discussions. However, I sympathise with
those who subscribe to many of the (non-porn) social groups. Verizon
could have easily implemented fiters for the few dozen "nasties"
(sex/porn, binaries, etc ) in the many thousands of alt. newsgroups.
A sledgehammer to crack a nut....

However, for me there is also the practical problem of replying to
postings that may also have been crossposted to alt. groups. To comply
fully with the "IMPORTANT" paragraph in Verizon's directive, I believe
I will have to manually check the reply-header of all my replies to
eliminate any reference to the alt. domain if present. Thanks Verizon
for nothing.

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 unless
Verizon has a change of heart stimulated by pocket-book considerations
(which I doubt)

John Lewis

Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
 

Sounds like time to subscribe to ALL newsgroups they don't make available.

"John Lewis" wroted...

IMPORTANT:
Failure to unsubscribe may also interfere with the functioning of the
Verizon network or use of the network by other Verizon users

Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
 

It isn't just Verizon. There is a big list of the major ISP's doing
the same thing. This will eventually kill off Usenet since Usenet is
not based on central servers but is distributed across multiple ISP
newsgroup servers. This was part of the strength of using it to
distribute pirate binaries since shutting out one point only meant a
piece of the whole file was lost for awhile until it would be picked
up at another point. Now, if all the major ISP's agree to not carry
those pieces, then those groups eventually dry up and disappear. The
only problem is that it will probably start taking down other non-
related newsgroups. Usenet has been dying for years anyway. It used to
be the place for historical computer events a long time ago. Google
groups has a reference showing historical computer events that
happened on. This is one list of firsts that happened on Usenet:

http://yak.net/fqa/297.html

FYI: Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
 

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:45:34 GMT, (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.

FYI: Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
 

Folk wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:45:34 GMT, (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?

FYI: Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
 

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 13:22:03 -0400, Folk wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:45:34 GMT, (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.

I switched to Giganews years ago, but I also use it for binaries.

FYI: Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
 

"Mr.E Solved!" wrote in message
. ..
Folk wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:45:34 GMT, (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?

Just what the name says; Internet Service Provider. Everything else is a
bonus.

For email and web page I use 1&1. For usenet I use a couple of free ones
and Supernews..

Dave T

FYI: Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
 

Dave (The Other) wrote:
"Mr.E Solved!" wrote in message
. ..
Folk wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:45:34 GMT, (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?

Just what the name says; Internet Service Provider. Everything else is
a bonus.

For email and web page I use 1&1. For usenet I use a couple of free
ones and Supernews..


Got my vote. My ISP is embroiled in the phorm row you may have heard
of. They'll intercept and look at everything I do in order to serve me
targeted advertsising... and call this a service improvement!! I'd like
an ISP who just gives me a (private) gateway to the net. What I do with
that is my own business. If I need any other service then I'll find it.

FYI: Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
 

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:37:34 -0400, "Mr.E Solved!"
wrote:

Folk wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:45:34 GMT, (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.

It just seems odd to me that the OP would bid farewell to a newsgroup
just because his ISP decided to do something stupid.

FYI: Verizon are jerks.... eliminating the .alt groups
 

On Fri, 20 Jun 2008 13:43:50 -0400, Folk wrote:

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:37:34 -0400, "Mr.E Solved!"
wrote:

Folk wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 18:45:34 GMT, (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