On Sep 26, 9:33 pm, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > George Sakkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sep 26, 9:30 pm, Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I read the group via NNTP, and I find that blocking all articles > > > posted from google.groups gets rid of all of the spam. > > > ... along with a far from trivial (I guess) percentage of non-spam, > > such as this post. > > As a Google user, you have (presumably) more clout with them than > those of us who are not. Please pressure your provider to reduce the > spam they output so the above drastic measure is not so attractive. > > Such pressure may be more effective if you *also* use an alternate > NNTP provider that isn't such a spam-haven. > > -- > \ “I put contact lenses in my dog's eyes. They had little | > `\ pictures of cats on them. Then I took one out and he ran around | > _o__) in circles.” —Steven Wright | > Ben Finney
I composed a thread to the end of voicing that sentiment. http://groups.google.com/group/Groups-Suggestions/browse_thread/thread/142ce723675bcad3# Feel free to follow this. For the record, I do find the fervor with which some netizens are denouncing Google somewhat provocative. I find them biased, more ardent than a classification heuristic with the same number of false negatives and false positives. That is, not purely objective in their advocacy. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
