On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 23:07:24 +0000
Jules Richardson <julesrichardsonuk at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Jim Leonard wrote:
Jules Richardson wrote:
Google's usenet archive isn't what it
once was though, now
that they > obscure email addresses and only let you
contact
authors through their > site; if the author's using a
spam-trapped address or has changed > address format (but is
still at the same location) then it's next to > useless.
You can't view them directly, but if you click on Reply To
Author it does get the email to them.
Even if they've used a munged email address, as most people
posting to Usenet do these days? I can't imagine teams of
Google staff reading every single message posted daily to
Usenet and sanitising spam-trapped email addresses for the
purpose of their archives.
And what if you locate someone in a post from ten years back
who's no longer on that address? In the past, if the company
was obvious in the email address, I'd look up the company name
and politely contact them to see if the person I wanted to
reach was still there but just on a different address. That's no
longer possible now either...
What bugs me is that Google have taken a useful archive and
taken functionality away from the user. It's either Google
Groups and not linked to Usenet, or it's a Usenet interface and
should have the same functionality.
What *really* bugs me is that Google may well have the only copy
of such a historical archive of data, so it's not like you can
even take your business elsewhere to someone who understands
the historical importance of such an archive. If there was a
choice, I'd send a polite email to Google saying why I thought
they were muppets, and just go and use someone who gave you
actual access to a Usenet archive rather than an abbreviated
version of one.
The current vogue is to love and admire Google. Even though
they're gradually becoming the latest band of Madison Aveneuesque
businesspeople.