 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Cancer / January 2007alt.support.cancer Charter
and FAQ http://www.cancersupporters.com/asc/ If nothing else, it seems to stop (some) automated spamming. Saw one on the prostate cancer newsgroup which skipped this one. alt.support.cancer.testicular,alt.support.cant Now I have to go see what alt.support.cant is about, because I'm curious. No such newsgroup. Software glitch. J > and FAQhttp://www.cancersupporters.com/asc/ > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Now I have to go see what alt.support.cant is about, because I'm curious. > No such newsgroup. Software glitch. Are you sure about that? Where did you get the authoritative list of all groups? It sounds like you may be misunderstanding the nature of Usenet. It is a heterarchical construct with a very high local autonomy, including over what groups are available. Just because the Usenet server or archive you use doesn't list a group does not in any way mean that the group isn't real, it just means that your server/archive doesn't support it. I've found some evidenced of the group "alt.support.cant" as well as much for "alt.support.cant.urinate.in-public". While it's possible (very likely, in fact) that references to the former are from mutilated references to the latter, they may well both exist. FWIW, Google Groups, one of the most popular archives, doesn't support either. Do you happen to know how groups are created, and how that process differs depending on the top level (alt, comp, rec, etc.)? --- CSM > > and FAQhttp://www.cancersupporters.com/asc/ > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > references to the latter, they may well both exist. FWIW, Google > Groups, one of the most popular archives, doesn't support either. It does now, as in no "does not exist". J > csm7...@hotmail.com wrote: > > > and FAQhttp://www.cancersupporters.com/asc/ [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > references to the latter, they may well both exist. FWIW, Google > > Groups, one of the most popular archives, doesn't support either.It does now, as in no "does not exist". Google Groups still doesn't support either of the above named groups. AFAICT, it never has. Try the group searching mechanism in GG, and you won't find any a.s.cant* entries. Interestingly (to me), you will find an entry for a.s.csm, but it unfortunately has nothing to do with me, nor the character from whom I stole my handle. --- CSM > > csm7...@hotmail.com wrote: > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > AFAICT, it never has. Try the group searching mechanism in GG, and you > won't find any a.s.cant* entries. Results 1 - 10 of 42 for group:alt.support.cant* (probably all crossposted) http://tinyurl.com/2q3tlv J > csm7...@hotmail.com wrote: > > > csm7...@hotmail.com wrote: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > AFAICT, it never has. Try the group searching mechanism in GG, and you > > won't find any a.s.cant* entries. Results 1 - 10 of 42 for group:alt.support.cant* (probably all crossposted)http://tinyurl.com/2q3tlv Yes, these were all crossposted, and the listed group is not alt.support.cant in any of them. Check out http://groups.google.com/ groups/dir?&sel=33577511&expand=1 for a list of groups supported by Google Groups. We're on it, but not any .cant* groups. If that URL doesn't work, try it up to "dir", and follow the yellow brick links from there. --- CSM |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.