The "Other" Newsgroup

S

Sam Elowitch

Regarding this newsgroup (microsoft.public.mac.office.entourage) and what I
believe is an older newsgroup (microsoft.public.office.mac.entourage):

Why is the latter still hanging around on the MS news server? Doesn't that
sow confusion? Wasn't there an official announcement that the group was
being renamed (several months ago)?

My biggest sign that microsoft.public.office.mac.entourage is an oddball is
that there are no others like it for Excel, Word, or PowerPoint; there is no
microsoft.public.office.mac.word, for example, but there is
microsoft.public.mac.office.word -- that was how I figured this out.

And, more broadly, does anybody clean up Usenet groups that have fallen into
disuse or which are so full of spam as to be of questionable value?

Comments?

-Sam
 
A

Adam Bailey

Sam Elowitch said:
Regarding this newsgroup (microsoft.public.mac.office.entourage) and what I
believe is an older newsgroup (microsoft.public.office.mac.entourage):

Why is the latter still hanging around on the MS news server?
Click to expand...

That's a matter of some question and debate. No one around here really
knows.

Because the microsoft.* newsgroups are being fed outside of
msnews.microsoft.com, Microsoft has limited control over them.
Microsoft could delete the group from msnews, but it would continue to
exist on other ISPs' servers. It's very difficult to truly make a
newsgroup go away.
 
P

Paul Berkowitz

That's a matter of some question and debate. No one around here really
knows.

Because the microsoft.* newsgroups are being fed outside of
msnews.microsoft.com, Microsoft has limited control over them.
Microsoft could delete the group from msnews, but it would continue to
exist on other ISPs' servers. It's very difficult to truly make a
newsgroup go away.
Click to expand...

And there also older versions of the other apps' newsgroups too. In the case
of Word there are several (I think microsoft.public.word.macword2001,
microsoft.public.word.macword98, microsoft.public.word.word5-6) and also
microsoft.public.excel.macintosh. Don't forget that Word and Wxcel Mac
existed before there was an Office Mac, whereas Entourage was a late-comer
in 2001, so the older NGs for Word and XL don't have "office" in the name.
But there also was a microsoft.public.office.mac! Partly because it was so
confusing and scattered about (you didn't even see those) was why the change
was made a couple of years ago when Office X came out.

All those older NGs are defunct. As Adam says, it's fruitless to take them
off the MS server because they're mirrored on thousands of ISP and other
news servers. At last this way they sill have some control over material. MS
used to send out a reminder every week about being defunct, redirecting
people here. No one could "hang around" for more than a few days without
seeing that notice. I don't understand why they stopped sending it. The
Entourage one and the general office ones are indeed the most confusing
since the names look so similar.

--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>

Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.

PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.
 
S

Sam Elowitch

And there also older versions of the other apps' newsgroups too. In the case
of Word there are several (I think microsoft.public.word.macword2001,
microsoft.public.word.macword98, microsoft.public.word.word5-6) and also
microsoft.public.excel.macintosh. Don't forget that Word and Wxcel Mac
existed before there was an Office Mac, whereas Entourage was a late-comer
in 2001, so the older NGs for Word and XL don't have "office" in the name.
But there also was a microsoft.public.office.mac! Partly because it was so
confusing and scattered about (you didn't even see those) was why the change
was made a couple of years ago when Office X came out.

All those older NGs are defunct. As Adam says, it's fruitless to take them
off the MS server because they're mirrored on thousands of ISP and other
news servers. At last this way they sill have some control over material. MS
used to send out a reminder every week about being defunct, redirecting
people here. No one could "hang around" for more than a few days without
seeing that notice. I don't understand why they stopped sending it. The
Entourage one and the general office ones are indeed the most confusing
since the names look so similar.
Click to expand...

Thank you for those interesting remarks, Paul.

Do you think this points to a weakness in Usenet in general? Perhaps new,
emerging standards might replace the current newsgroup system, much in the
way we hope that Sender ID will transform e-mail, IPv6 will alter
networking, and so on.

Personally, I'd like to see newsgroups be much more transparent and
governable. Right now, it sure looks like a mess to me.

-Sam
 
A

Adam Bailey

Sam Elowitch said:
Personally, I'd like to see newsgroups be much more transparent and
governable. Right now, it sure looks like a mess to me.
Click to expand...

Many would argue that the *benefit* of newsgroups is that they *aren't*
easily governable. There are downsides, but you have the advantage of
near-total freedom.
 
S

Sam Elowitch

Many would argue that the *benefit* of newsgroups is that they *aren't*
easily governable. There are downsides, but you have the advantage of
near-total freedom.
Click to expand...

Functionality is foremost for me, not "freedom" per se.

-Sam
 
Top