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.