Windows 10 Pro Insider Preview version 17692.1000 Breaks ClassicShell

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 12:46:38 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

For some reason, that tutorial shows up in my newsreader but not on the
tribal archives at http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-10

That link resolves to a URI at www.pcbanter.net, a website that scrapes
Usenet content and presents it as its own. You already know that.

Yes. I'm a very old hand at tribal archives. Very old.
I've been on Usenet since the early days, as have most of you.

And in the olden days, we had dejanews - but then it went to GG.
Ever since then, we have many threads on the tribal archive search topic as
it has come up a zillion times (as I'm sure you're well aware).

Here's just one post I found on the topic, but it's an age-old question.
http://www.pcbanter.net/showpost.php?p=3750226&postcount=11

I have been writing/archiving tutorials & helpful answers for decades.
I *search* first, and normally don't ask questions that have easy answers.

In order to search, we need a tribal knowledge archive.
That's easy for Windows XP, but not so easy for the rest.

So I asked here, and Frank kindly came up with the best answer.
Given that answer, I created the tinyurl for that best answer.

I've done this hundreds of times, for hundreds of newsgroups.
Who do you think *created* these tinyurls in the first place?
The Usenet fairy? (jk)

I've been creating them since the days when "dots" were allowed in the URL!
(Note: I'm not the only one creating them, as this thread attests to.)
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/Goe0pD9euXE/8mDicHGqBgAJ
The problem with that Url is that it's not intuitive.

BTW, nowadays we have to use dashes, unfortunately... for example:
http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-freeware
http://tinyurl.com/comp-sys-mac-apps
http://tinyurl.com/alt-home-repair
http://tinyurl.com/sci-electronics-repair
etc.

Some, like alt.useage.english got used by spammers and the tinyurl folks
shut them down, which is too bad. Spammers and trolls should all just die.

Surely, that isn't what you're referring to as a "tribal archive"?

There's nothing better than that.
If you know of it, we would have used what you know for the tinyurl.
In the end, we used what Frank knew because he knew best.

On a more serious note, if there's a "tribal archive" for Windows
topics, I haven't seen it. Maybe someone should start one so you'll have
a place to store your work products all in one place.

All my thousands of tutorials are already archived at...
http://tinyurl.com/alt-os-linux
http://tinyurl.com/comp-sys-mac-system
http://tinyurl.com/microsoft-public-windowsxp-gen --30 char limit!
http://tinyurl.com/alt-windows7-general
http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-8
http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-10
http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-android
http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-ipad
http://tinyurl.com/misc-phone-mobile-iphone
etc

It's what I do.

I ask tough questions. As people help me, I test out the valid suggestions.
I respond to each post. It's because I'm an excellent Usenet citizen that I
respond in kind to every post. I advance our combined tribal knowledge,
together, with your help. I summarize the results such that, together we
know more together than any one of us does alone.

I've been improving our tribal knowledge archives for decades.

The main difference you see with me is that I don't suffer trolls well.
My strategy is to confront the bully trolls head on.

I do that on purpose (don't ever think anything I do is by accident).
Just as every single file that I put on my system is exactly where I
designed it to be, every post follows the same strategy & tactics.

Nothing is by accident - not even this detailed response to your questions.
I'm vastly different than most Usenet posters.

That's because I don't use the chitchat model where you ignore threads
infested by the trolls because you don't care that they come to a solution.

I search first.
I ask questions with tons of detail (lots of pictures & screenshots).
Even the subject lines are immensely detailed for heaven's sake.
I test all viable suggested answers (if possible).
I write up step-by-step detailed responses to each tested scenario.
I confront the troll bullies but only when they infest the thread first.
Note: I ignore the troll bullies when they infest other threads.
And I summarize the technical results for the tribal archives.
Then I disappear, sometimes completely ... until the next question arises.

It's my MO.
It should take you all of ten seconds to figure out my posts.

In article , Arlen Holder
wrote:

I *search* first, and normally don't ask questions that have easy answers.

bull****. your questions invariably can be answered in a few *seconds*
of using a search engine, if that's even needed. many times, no search
is needed since the answers are obvious (except to you).

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 15:14:46 -0400, nospam wrote:

In article , Arlen Holder
wrote:

I *search* first, and normally don't ask questions that have easy
answers.

bull****. your questions invariably can be answered in a few *seconds*
of using a search engine, if that's even needed. many times, no search
is needed since the answers are obvious (except to you).

Who is this guy anyway? I see no posts from "Arlen Holder" beyond two-
three weeks ago - then the **** hit the fan. What pseudonym was he using
before?

In article , Sam Hill
wrote:

In article , Arlen Holder
wrote:
I *search* first, and normally don't ask questions that have easy
answers.

bull****. your questions invariably can be answered in a few *seconds*
of using a search engine, if that's even needed. many times, no search
is needed since the answers are obvious (except to you).

Who is this guy anyway? I see no posts from "Arlen Holder" beyond two-
three weeks ago - then the **** hit the fan. What pseudonym was he using
before?

way too many to list, but recent ones include bob jones, harry newton,
ultred ragnusen, stijn de jong and horace algier.

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 17:51:21 -0400, nospam wrote:

In article , Sam Hill
wrote:
In article , Arlen Holder
wrote:
I *search* first, and normally don't ask questions that have easy
answers.

bull****. your questions invariably can be answered in a few
*seconds*
of using a search engine, if that's even needed. many times, no
search is needed since the answers are obvious (except to you).

Who is this guy anyway? I see no posts from "Arlen Holder" beyond two-
three weeks ago - then the **** hit the fan. What pseudonym was he
using before?

way too many to list, but recent ones include bob jones, harry newton,
ultred ragnusen, stijn de jong and horace algier.

I see. Well, since he seems to *want* his posts recognized for some sort
of Nobel prizes, it would not make sense to keep changing his name. Mind-
boggling, eh?

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 22:18:40 -0000 (UTC), Sam Hill wrote:

I see. Well, since he seems to *want* his posts recognized for some sort
of Nobel prizes, it would not make sense to keep changing his name. Mind-
boggling, eh?

This group would benefit if the trolls nospam & Sam Hill trolled elsewhere.

To your idiotic assumption, nothing I do is by accident; everything is by
design. I've been posting HELPFUL tutorials to Usenet for *decades*.

I don't want recognition - I want privacy.
I want to help people. I want to learn. And I want privacy.

That you can't comprehend that is due to your utter lack of adult
comprehensive skills.

I've explained it so many times that I'm tired of explaining to you noobs.
All you *can* do, is troll.

You are responding to nospam for heaven's sake.
What value does nospam add to this newsgroup?

The answer is none.
Why not?

Three reasons:
a. Nospam has zero intention on being helpful, but worse,
b. Nospam has absolutely zero technical knowledge, and hence,
c. All nospam *can* do, is troll.

*You're no different of a mindless bullying troll, Sam Hill.*

You and nospam are simply wasting our valuable time with your trolls.
All you trolls like you and nospam can do is bully everyone else.

*You haven't added a shred of technical value in your entire life!*

You want to know why?
HINT: You can't. You can't add a single iota of on-topic technical value.
It's well beyond your capabilities, which, you prove, in every post.

This group would benefit if the trolls nospam & Sam Hill trolled elsewhere.

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 08:22:57 -0400, Big Al wrote:

How did you get that cascade menu in operation. I've never seen this
and I'd go as far to say that others haven't either.

OK. I figured out the likely problem with the tribal archives.

Use this URL, from the WinXP archives, which works:
http://tinyurl.com/microsoft-public-windowsxp-gen (30-character limit)
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general/eWU-jOkFRtU/N7S0Mw7yBgAJ

Don't use any other URL, all of which fail because the archival engines
don't like either the length of the detailed tutorial or the huge number of
well-annotated screenshots in the unique tutorial.

This is truncated:
http://al.howardknight.net Usenet archives
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?STYPE=msgid&A=0&MSGI=%3Cpgjhpj%24a5n%241 %40news.mixmin.net%3E

This just omits the detailed tutorial due to length or screenshot number.
http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-10 archives
http://www.pcbanter.net/showthread.php?t=1104476

Bear in mind that the tricks shown in the tutorial are found nowhere else
on Usenet (AFAIK); otherwise, people wouldn't be using Classic Shell to get
native Windows 10 to have the exact same Cascade Menus they had on Windows
XP.

Note that you can literally *copy* your WinXP menus over to Windows 10 and
the WinXP Cascade Menu will work perfectly on Win10 - if you follow the
tricks in the tutorial.

"Ken Blake" wrote in message
news

OK, but thinking about it and doing it are two different things.
I still think that what I said above is true.

Only partially, the greater impact is from those Msn and Live personnel
using a tiled approach for years that understood the monetization side of
the business many of which had decision making control over development and
marketing. Also a background of MSN and Live applications built on the same
C# code(unlike earlier Windows 7 and its predecessors which was C, some C+,
++ later) in Windows 10 for 'apps' development.

i.e. it all preceded the 'smartphone' mentality. Even the swipe feature
which is misinterpreted as smartphone based reasons for inclusion in
Win8x/10 was learned lessons from Apple's iPod era before they ever released
the first iPhone.

It's easy to look at Windows and believe it's UI and direction came from a
need for smartphone-like compatibility which is at most minimally correct,
it's much more rational to look at and follow the people who's background
and ideas drove the direction.


....w¡ñ§±¤ñ
ms mvp windows 2007-2016, insider mvp 2016-2018

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 18:52:48 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder
wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 12:46:38 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

For some reason, that tutorial shows up in my newsreader but not on the
tribal archives at http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-10

That link resolves to a URI at www.pcbanter.net, a website that scrapes
Usenet content and presents it as its own. You already know that.

Yes. I'm a very old hand at tribal archives. Very old.
I've been on Usenet since the early days, as have most of you.

And yet, you've picked a Usenet scraper and designated it as a "tribal
archive". Do you see the obvious problems with that? Could you have made
a worse choice? If you wanted the entire history of a newsgroup to be
contained in your "tribal archive", which already means it'll have
limited or no value due to the awful SNR, then why not use an NSP that's
known for its completion and retention? Scrapers are known for neither.

Besides, and here's the killer, you've said recently that you can't find
most of your contributions because you don't keep track of any
identifying details related to the posts. If you can't find them, how is
anyone else supposed to find them? This is a relatively young group but
it already has well over 70k posts. That's a big haystack, but it pales
in relation to other groups that have been around much longer.

I have been writing/archiving tutorials & helpful answers for decades.
I *search* first, and normally don't ask questions that have easy answers.

Yes, we've been over that. Things that a person knows are "easy", while
things that a person doesn't know are "hard". That's universal.

In order to search, we need a tribal knowledge archive.

No, of course not. You need a place and a mechanism to search, but your
use of the words "tribal knowledge" are incorrect. It's clear that no
effort has been made on your part to create any kind of "tribal
knowledge" archive and you're simply using the entire history of
specific newsgroups. There's nothing "tribal knowledge" about using the
entire posting history of a newsgroup.

That's easy for Windows XP, but not so easy for the rest.

Every major NSP, and most of the next tier of NSPs, boasts of 99%
completion and unlimited retention of text groups, so if the intent is
to designate everything ever posted to a newsgroup as a "tribal
archive", use the NSP. If 99% completion bothers you, use two or more
NSPs so each fills in the blanks of the other.

I've done this hundreds of times, for hundreds of newsgroups.
Who do you think *created* these tinyurls in the first place?
The Usenet fairy? (jk)

Sorry, no points for creating a tinyurl. The magic went out of that a
very long time ago. Besides, what did you gain? Are you embarrassed to
be using a scraper as your archive so you wanted to hide it behind a
shortened URL?

All my thousands of tutorials are already archived at...
http://tinyurl.com/alt-os-linux
http://tinyurl.com/comp-sys-mac-system
http://tinyurl.com/microsoft-public-windowsxp-gen --30 char limit!
http://tinyurl.com/alt-windows7-general
http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-8
http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-10
http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-android
http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-ipad
http://tinyurl.com/misc-phone-mobile-iphone
etc

Each of those is a scraped Usenet newsgroup! Is that seriously your idea
of a "tribal archive"?

Try applying your fond example of the potluck picnic. Where, amongst all
of the crap, is the good stuff? You're holding up the entire posting
history of a newsgroup and labeling it a "tribal archive". Newsgroup
archives already exist in numerous locations. You don't need to use a
scraped version, with all of its inherent limitations.

I've been improving our tribal knowledge archives for decades.

If only such "tribal knowledge" archives existed. But then, someone
would have to act as curator, which would not be an easy job.

The main difference you see with me is snip

That's like Whole Foods saying the main difference you see with them is
better quality food on their shelves, while asking nearly anyone else
would mostly get the answer,"whole paycheck." None of us get to define
how others perceive us.

(don't ever think anything I do is by accident)

Ok, so in that respect you're just like nearly everyone else on the
planet. Good to know.

On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 05:43:35 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder
wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 08:22:57 -0400, Big Al wrote:

How did you get that cascade menu in operation. I've never seen this
and I'd go as far to say that others haven't either.

OK. I figured out the likely problem with the tribal archives.

Use this URL, from the WinXP archives, which works:

The problem is that you're trying to use a URL instead of a Message-ID.

On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 07:23:04 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

And yet, you've picked a Usenet scraper and designated it as a "tribal
archive". Do you see the obvious problems with that?

I'm nothing but pragmatic.
Do you have something better?
(Remember, we asked this question *many* times in the past.)

In this situation, when there is nothing better (that I know of anyway),
you can complain but it's like complaining about the weather.

If you don't DO SOMETHING about it, then the complaint is perfectly valid
that it sucks - but if you don't have anything better to offer us by way of
tribal archives - then it's simply the best we have at this point.

Could you have made a worse choice?

I don't know of any other archives, but, remember, I asked the question of
everyone here - and Frank Slootweg was the one who kindly came to the
rescue with this archives.

As I recall, I asked everyone multiple times if that was the best we had
and if anyone had any objections - and you didn't bring up your objections
then, as I recall.

The point is that I'm trying to move us forward ... where your complaint is
perfectly valid (as someone said, for example, the Captcha for searching
that site is atrocious).

But without offering something better, your complaint, while perfectly
valid, doesn't help us move forward.

If you wanted the entire history of a newsgroup to be
contained in your "tribal archive", which already means it'll have
limited or no value due to the awful SNR, then why not use an NSP that's
known for its completion and retention? Scrapers are known for neither.

We've been through this exact discussion *many times*.
Hence, I've answered this exact complaint many times.

As I recall, many people suggest GigaNews, which isn't free, which archives
news for something like three or more years.

There's nothing wrong with someone *paying* for GigaNews (or some other
long-retention news server) and then searching their own personally
downloaded archives from that server, for topics of interest.

But I'm all about general solutions that help everyone.
The moment money is involved, the utility to everyone drops to nearly zero
simply because it's a specific solution that only helps those with that
explicit server.

Worse (far far far worse), there are no web-based archives that we can all
search upon (that I know of) to *find* those articles in order to present
everyone else with a single URL to any specific article.

We're wasting our time discussing this yet another time, because unless
*someone has a better answer* that is open to everyone, then the answer we
have is already the best we can come up with.

Trust me that I'll take a better idea from you - but the solution has to be
open to everyone freely and openly.

Besides, and here's the killer, you've said recently that you can't find
most of your contributions because you don't keep track of any
identifying details related to the posts.

Yup. I have so many thousands of posts under so many hundreds of privacy
headers that I wouldn't even know what header to search for in order to
find my own posts since all my headers are purposefully set up to foil
exactly that type of search engine!

The only header that is meaningful is the subject line (and body).

I did toy with the possibility of adding a coded keyword to each post,
perhaps a rot13-type word - but then I ditched that idea since it would
foil* my main privacy purpose.

If you can't find them, how is
anyone else supposed to find them?

Ummmmmmm.. errr ... that's the point of the privacy headers.

The BODY and SUBJECT and DATE aren't obfuscated.
But all the other headers are meaningless.

So any topical search should find them - but - as you can imagine, there
are literally thousands upon thousands upon thousands of individual topics.

This is a relatively young group but
it already has well over 70k posts. That's a big haystack, but it pales
in relation to other groups that have been around much longer.

Trust me. I've been there. I've done that. Just like we all have.

For example, I was on the following old-time groups & plenty of others...
http://tinyurl.com/alt-free-newsservers (now filled with spam)
http://tinyurl.com/news-software-readers
http://tinyurl.com/rec-photo-digital
http://tinyurl.com/alt-satellite-gps (almost defunct by now)
http://tinyurl.com/rec-autos-tech
etc.

If an aggregator knew all my groups, they could probably algorithmically
find all my posts, if they knew what to look for, but it's too much trouble
for me to write up such a search sequence.

Yes, we've been over that. Things that a person knows are "easy", while
things that a person doesn't know are "hard". That's universal.

As you might note, I strive to ensure my threads *add value* to our overall
tribal knowledge. There are many ways to add value.

One way is to test out suggestions and report back to the team which ones
worked and which didn't, as we did in the thread that Paul and Carlos
helped a lot on recently where Ubuntu wouldn't dual boot with Windows. In
that case, we essentially broke new ground, where I made sure to summarize,
for the Windows 10 folks, the solutions that worked so that they could
stand on our shoulders.

In other cases, such as the ability to edit extensionless files, I was the
first (apparently, based on my searches and the response from others) to
figure out how to do that with a registry tweak (others used the
right-click context menu - which I think is sub par to doubleclicking).

Another case where I think I have broken new ground for most users here is
that it's shocking to me that people don't seem to know that they can
simply *copy* their Windows XP Cascade Menu over to Windows 10 and it will
work perfectly as is sans modifications.

If they're not as organized as I am with respect to hierarchies, then still
they can implement the native Windows 10 Cascade Menu as I showed them in
the tutorial - so - again - I think I *help* people.

Contrast what I do in ever ythread to what someone like "nospam" does in
every thread for example. He must have as many posts as I, but 1 out of
1,000 of his posts are purposefully helpful, where in my case *all* the
posts are purposefully helpful (where even my direct confrontation with the
troll bullies is intended to shut them up so that we all benefit).

Trust me on that.
Nothing I do is by accident.

If I post a thread specifically naming someone as a troll, there's a
strategic *reason* I do that tactic, and it's simple that reason. I want
worthless trolls like nospam to be shamed into stopping their trolling (the
recent infestation of trolling having been abated by my efforts is a
testament to the success of that tactic).

No, of course not. You need a place and a mechanism to search, but your
use of the words "tribal knowledge" are incorrect.

It's an old term. I use it as I have learned it.
It's the combined knowledge of the entire group since the beginning of
time.

Where is that combined knowledge searchable?
Whatever the answer to that question is, is where our combined tribal
knowledge resides.

You can take offense with the label - but let's try to stay pragmatic.
If you hate the label for our combined tribal knowledge, then simply come
up with a better label that we all can agree with.

But I think the label is the least of our issues.
We need a better searchable tribal knowledge archive that is accessible to
everyone, and we just don't have it.

If someone could get GG to archive this newsgroup, that would work.

It's clear that no
effort has been made on your part to create any kind of "tribal
knowledge" archive and you're simply using the entire history of
specific newsgroups. There's nothing "tribal knowledge" about using the
entire posting history of a newsgroup.

Um... er... duh. That's what a tribal knowledge archive means.


At least you show you clearly understand *exactly* how I'm using it.
So I'm not sure why you're complaining about it.

It's like complaining about the weather because I use the word "rain".

If you want to DO SOMETHING about it, let's all figure out how to get
Google to archive this newsgroup like they archive Windows XP:
http://tinyurl.com/microsoft-public-windowsxp-gen (30-char limit)

Every major NSP, and most of the next tier of NSPs, boasts of 99%
completion and unlimited retention of text groups, so if the intent is
to designate everything ever posted to a newsgroup as a "tribal
archive", use the NSP. If 99% completion bothers you, use two or more
NSPs so each fills in the blanks of the other.

We've been down this path so many times, I'm tired of hearing that you
think that a payware subscription-based solution that has absolutely no one
fixed search method and certainly it results in no fixed single URL to any
given post, is a 'solution'.

Do you have any concept whatsoever of what a global solution entails?

A global solution is something like this solution:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/microsoft.public.windowsxp.general

a. It's free (hence available instantly to everyone with zero barriers!)
b. It has a single well-known search input method (although it sucks)
c. It provides a single URL to any given post or thread

Your proposed solution is a farce, if you don't mind me repeating that for
the umpteenth time, simply because your proposed solution does *none* of
that.

I don't chastise you for proposing a solution, and certainly I completely
understand all your points (I'm not stupid - I understand everything except
when Paul assumes we're all as smart as he is - so I have to look up half
the acronyms he uses ... like TRIM and JBOD!).

Tell us all something we don't already know when it comes to tribal
archives that are available to everyone.

If someone could get Google to archive this newsgroup, *that* would solve
the problem instantly. Until then, this is all that we have (unless you can
suggest a better search URL?)
http://tinyurl.com/alt-comp-os-windows-10

Sorry, no points for creating a tinyurl. The magic went out of that a
very long time ago.

I'm not sure what the point is for your statement above, but my point is
that I've cared about searchable archives for hundreds of newsgroups over
the years, because everything I do is designed to be leveraged to everyone.

Unlike trolls like nospam, I'm purposefully helpful in all my posts.

Besides, what did you gain? Are you embarrassed to
be using a scraper as your archive so you wanted to hide it behind a
shortened URL?

Again, I think your emotions and personal projections are getting the
better of you.

I have two goals, which are separate:
a. Privacy
b. Leverage of knowledge to all

If you even consider that there are mentally unstable people like GoodGuy
on this newsgroup who thinks everone is a pedophile simply because that's
all he can think about, and if you realize there are stalkers like Snit who
will follow you all over the Internet and even post videos about you, like
this:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/misc.phone.mobile.iphone/PZuec56EWB0/FUdLMYM1BwAJ

With disgustingly creepy stalkers like GoodGuy and Snit on the net, privacy
is something that we all should desire.

Your statement that I'm "embarrassed" to provide people with a search
engine is just patently ridiculous. I can't even respond to it. It's like
you saying that I'm embarrassed to answer someone's question.

You are making no sense in that tack.
(Or, if you think you made sense, then I didn't comprehend your logic.)

Each of those is a scraped Usenet newsgroup! Is that seriously your idea
of a "tribal archive"?

You've got to be kidding.
What's your problem?
Did you purchase too many arguments this week?

You complain about the weather - but you do nothing about it.

That is, you complain about search engines, but yet, you provide absolutely
zero solutions to what you complain about.

You make no sense complaining that things as obviously useful as search
engines exist.

Try applying your fond example of the potluck picnic.

Now I know you simply bought too many arguments this week.
Remember, Char Jackson, I always respond in kind to the *intent* and *tone*
of the post. Your intent and tone is deteriorating. Fast.

What your statement shows is that you have innate personal problems.
I'm sorry about your personal problems.

But you're wasting our time discussing your personal problems here.

Where, amongst all
of the crap, is the good stuff? You're holding up the entire posting
history of a newsgroup and labeling it a "tribal archive".

Holy Mother of God. Your personal problems are immense if you think that an
openly available (to all!) search engine which archives all the posts (from
a given starting point anyway) isn't the very definition of the tribal
archives.

We've been through this topic so many times that it's amazing that you
still don't get it.

You can complain about hating umbrellas, but if it's raining outside, then
an umbrella is the best you have to keep the rain off your clothes.

To wit, you can complain about search engines all you want, but until you
come up with a solution that is better, then all you're doing is making a
complaint about something that we all already know about.

Remember, the exact question of "what is the best search engine archive" of
this newsgroup has been asked (and Frank Slootweg answered it).

You had your chance then, but you waited to complain until now?
And yet, you provide ZERO alternatives that fit the requirements?

Methinks you purchased too many arguments this week. Ask for a refund.

Newsgroup
archives already exist in numerous locations. You don't need to use a
scraped version, with all of its inherent limitations.

We've asked this exact question and you didn't give us a single answer.
Let's ask this question again, shall we?

Given the three requirements above for general use,
Q: What is the search engine that you suggest, Char Jackson?

If only such "tribal knowledge" archives existed. But then, someone
would have to act as curator, which would not be an easy job.

You bought too many arguments this week.
The best curator is Google.
If someone could get Google to archive this ng, we'd be golden.

Can you fix that for us?

On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 07:41:32 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

Use this URL, from the WinXP archives, which works:

The problem is that you're trying to use a URL instead of a Message-ID.

I'm not sure if you know something nobody else knows (including me), or if
you didn't understand the problem set.

How is a message ID gonna work when the main archive we use doesn't
accurately reproduce the post? http://al.howardknight.net

Do you have a secret Message-ID search engine nobody else has?

On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 15:37:34 -0000 (UTC), Arlen Holder
wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jun 2018 07:23:04 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

And yet, you've picked a Usenet scraper and designated it as a "tribal
archive". Do you see the obvious problems with that?
Could you have made a worse choice?

As I recall, I asked everyone multiple times if that was the best we had
and if anyone had any objections - and you didn't bring up your objections
then, as I recall.

Actually, I did.

As I recall, many people suggest GigaNews, which isn't free, which archives
news for something like three or more years.

Fair enough. "15+ years" falls within the definition of "three or more
years", but some of the significance is lost. And if you don't like GN,
there are many, many others.

Worse (far far far worse), there are no web-based archives that we can all
search upon (that I know of) to *find* those articles in order to present
everyone else with a single URL to any specific article.

That's where you lose me. I tend to think logically, so looking on the
web for Usenet content seems like looking for a lost quarter under a
street light because the light is better there. (Credit to Bazooka Joe)

What is your fixation on a URL? Usenet posts each have a unique
Message-ID. They don't have URLs.

On Sun, 24 Jun 2018 10:41:28 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

Fair enough. "15+ years" falls within the definition of "three or more
years", but some of the significance is lost. And if you don't like GN,
there are many, many others.

I probably don't have the skills required to have a meaningful conversation
with you on this topic, but let's see if we can move the ball forward so
that everyone benefits from our actions, shall we?

Let's state the obvious first so that we can stop stating it:
1. We all know that our NSP has an 'archive'.
2. If the NSP solved the stated problem set, we'd be done.
3. But the NSP does NOT solve the stated problem set.

OK. Are we clear on that?
(Probably not - but that's what I've been trying to get you to comprehend.)

Now let's move to the next obvious fact so we can stop stating it:
1. Everyone knows that Google "archives" some Usenet newsgroups.
2. But everyone knows that Google doesn't "archive" this Win10 ng.
3. So we need a 'similar archive for this newsgroup.

Are we ok on those obvious facts?
Again, probably not - but I don't have the skills to explain it better.

Now, let's move to a combination of those two situations above:
1. Since the NSP solution fails the "general-use" test,
2. And since the Google solution fails the "existence" test,
3. We're stuck without a 'good' solution.

Are we ok on that overall problem to solve?
(Probably not - but that's the logic I follow.)

Let's agree with some of your points, since there's nothing you've ever
said that I don't already know - so let's just be clear about how you seem
to think, shall we?

1. You think the NSP solution is just fine.
2. Great. I'm really happy for you. If it works for you, that's great.
3. But I think the NSP solution sucks for a bunch of reasons.

Do you see the disconnect?
You keep proposing a solution that we all already know about.
If it works for you ... that's great.

But it doesn't work for the problem set that I see, which is always to
leverage to everyone the same method, the same link, the same reference,
the same search engine, the same syntax, with zero barriers, with zero cost
(since cost is an astronomically huge barrier even if you don't think it
is, when you're trying to get everyone to use a method).

You don't seem to care about the same problem set that I care about.
I understand that.

I don't think you understand that - but I understand that.

That's where you lose me. I tend to think logically, so looking on the
web for Usenet content seems like looking for a lost quarter under a
street light because the light is better there. (Credit to Bazooka Joe)

What you fail to comprehend, I think, and which I'm getting tired of
repeating, is that you're looking at a completely different problem set
than I'm looking at.

If you seriously propose any one given NSP as the solution, then *clearly*
you're looking at a completely different problem set than I'm looking at.

I understand that. I always understood that.
You don't seem to understand that.

I can't repeat it enough for you to understand that.
I just can't.

What is your fixation on a URL? Usenet posts each have a unique
Message-ID. They don't have URLs.

You're showing now that you just want to play silly semantic games.
You don't seem to comprehend the problem set.

I can't explain it any more than I already have.
There's nothing you've said that we all don't already know.
And I can't tell you anything more than what I've repeated already.

Your solution solves YOUR limited-scope problem set - but it doesn't solve
the far bigger problem far more global problem set that I'm trying to
solve.

Some day, that fact will dawn upon you... and then we can work *together*
on solving the far bigger problem set.

*For example, if we spent this effort to get Google to archive this ng!*

In article , Arlen Holder
wrote:


I probably don't have the skills required to have a meaningful conversation

not probably.

you don't.