I miss MTR :(

[hbelkins]

Is anybody else going to mention that actually reading Usenet gives one a visually-induced headache compared to thread-based forum discussion, or am I on this plank alone? Hell, I first got on the web in 1995, and didn't enjoy reading Usenet or newsreaders at all. Too difficult for my eyes to read, cumbersome to wade though, and repetitious due to copious over-quoting. Slow as could be, limited search ability...it lost me very quickly.

I used to read Usenet with Free Agent for PC. For the last several years, I've read it via a Web interface provided by my news server. I have used Thoth and Unison for Mac, but am not crazy about reading text-based newsgroups with either app. They are better for downloading binaries, IMHO.

[J N Winkler]

If memory serves, the version of Thunderbird that was current when I was reading MTR had threads enabled by default for newsgroups.  I started posting to MTR in the DejaNews days (2001) and it was threaded even back then.  Part of the problem was that if you wanted to dodge the flamewars without constantly hitting "Ignore" whenever a thread went sour, you needed some form of rule-based filtration that worked on the content of posts, not just post author.  Mark Roberts had such a setup and described it at some length in several posts in MTR, but it was based on piping MTR posts through a separate filtration engine on an Unix-based system.  I don't think there was, at the time, a major Windows email and news client with similar capabilities (Thunderbird, for example, did not have content-based filtering, despite a bug request five years outstanding for it).

[dlainhart]

The Usenet groups I still read have pretty much agreed to stop arguing politics, and now that there aren't a hoard of new readers every September that pretty much works out.

R.I.P. Endless September
1993-2013

Also: DE 1 = I-995?

Dylan T. Lainhart / Binghamton, N.Y.

[dlainhart]

They are better for downloading binaries, IMHO.

BINARIES ON USENET?? You take that back. Right now.

Dylan T. Lainhart / Binghamton, N.Y.

[hbelkins]

BINARIES ON USENET?? You take that back. Right now.

Between the first iteration of Napster and various Usenet MP3 binary groups, I managed to digitize just about all of my very extensive vinyl collection from the late 1970s through the late 1980s/early 1990s, when I started buying CDs exclusively.

[bandit957]

BINARIES ON USENET?? You take that back. Right now.

Between the first iteration of Napster and various Usenet MP3 binary groups, I managed to digitize just about all of my very extensive vinyl collection from the late 1970s through the late 1980s/early 1990s, when I started buying CDs exclusively.

Instead of finding digitized copies online of stuff I had on vinyl, I just hooked a cable from my turntable up to my computer and digitized my vinyl that way.

[dlainhart]

Instead of finding digitized copies online of stuff I had on vinyl, I just hooked a cable from my turntable up to my computer and digitized my vinyl that way.

There are frequently differences between the vinyl and CD releases. Downloading MP3s is replacement, not digitization. Trust me, I've spent a lot of time on the latter and it is no joke.

Dylan T. Lainhart / Binghamton, N.Y.

[hbelkins]

Instead of finding digitized copies online of stuff I had on vinyl, I just hooked a cable from my turntable up to my computer and digitized my vinyl that way.

I've done that with a few albums that I couldn't find MP3s for, but it's time consuming. I used to record every album I had onto cassette to play in the car.

There are frequently differences between the vinyl and CD releases. Downloading MP3s is replacement, not digitization. Trust me, I've spent a lot of time on the latter and it is no joke.

The most egregious example of this was how the original six or seven ZZ Top albums were remastered for CD. I prefer the old versions better; the new versions sound like the drums are in an echo chamber.

[dlainhart]

The most egregious example of this was how the original six or seven ZZ Top albums were remastered for CD. I prefer the old versions better; the new versions sound like the drums are in an echo chamber.

Another reason why the Beatles remasters that finally dropped in 2009 were great - they didn't mess with the mix. No dynamic compression, no boosting the gain, just lots of painstakingly hard work in Pro Tools cleaning up the legendary sonic art of a band, of which half the members have passed away.

On that note: Rest in piece, Lou Reed.

If this was Usenet, this is where the thread could easily fork into an OT general discussion of audiophilia and whatnot, and with no need for moderators at all. Conversely, if someone stepped in and did it to this thread, it would kill what could turn into a very fun conversation dead in its tracks.

(tracks, get it, harharhar, ...)

Dylan T. Lainhart / Binghamton, N.Y.

[Brandon]

The most egregious example of this was how the original six or seven ZZ Top albums were remastered for CD. I prefer the old versions better; the new versions sound like the drums are in an echo chamber.

Another reason why the Beatles remasters that finally dropped in 2009 were great - they didn't mess with the mix. No dynamic compression, no boosting the gain, just lots of painstakingly hard work in Pro Tools cleaning up the legendary sonic art of a band, of which half the members have passed away.

On that note: Rest in piece, Lou Reed.

If this was Usenet, this is where the thread could easily fork into an OT general discussion of audiophilia and whatnot, and with no need for moderators at all. Conversely, if someone stepped in and did it to this thread, it would kill what could turn into a very fun conversation dead in its tracks.

(tracks, get it, harharhar, ...)

Dylan T. Lainhart / Binghamton, N.Y.

If this were Usenet, this would've already been crossposted to several newsgroups including rec.music.rock, rec.music.1960s, rec.music.1970s, rec.music.1980s, and alt.fan.art-bell.  Why?  Because alt.fan.art-bell.   

[hbelkins]

If this was Usenet, this is where the thread could easily fork into an OT general discussion of audiophilia and whatnot, and with no need for moderators at all. Conversely, if someone stepped in and did it to this thread, it would kill what could turn into a very fun conversation dead in its tracks.

Naah, It would just get split off into its own separate thread.

[apjung]

Cox discontinued newsgroups in June 2010 so I stopped using it. I could have gone thru Google Groups but figured it wasn't worth the hassle since people are mostly going to Web based message boards where I can find refuge from flamers and trolls.

[kkt]

My ISP discontinued their newsfeed about the same time.  I found a newsfeed that doesn't charge.  They welcome donations but don't bug you for them.

[dlainhart]

Naah, It would just get split off into its own separate thread.

Where, by killing the momentum, it would wither on the vine.

That's a crucial difference in the dynamics of Usenet vs webboards.

Dylan T. Lainhart / Binghamton, N.Y.

[Scott5114]

After I split a thread, generally both threads gain more participation. This is because the originating thread is now back on track, and the new topic is more easily discoverable as its own thread. You might not expect to find a general discussion about, say, different specifications of Kansas route shields in a thread about a specific project in Nebraska, so if you were interested in Kansas route shields, you probably wouldn't find the discussion unless you happen to be interested enough in Nebraska road projects to look at that thread.

Thread splitting is a feature, not a bug.

[vdeane]

Yeah, especially for those of us that don't read every forum post.  If there's a conversation X in thread Y, and I'm not interested in subject Y, I won't know about conversation X.  Likewise, if I was interested in thread Y, but not conversation X, I might stop reading thead Y altogether.

[hbelkins]

Meanwhile, on MTR today...

Title: Demographics of MTR
Author: Carl Rogers <postmaster@wwtl.info>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 17:10:53 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <0019aca7-f45c-422e-a232-a6b4ddd5b762@googlegroups.com>



A certain truth about roads is that politics created them. Why was the road created? For what industries or interests did the road benefit? Which cities were decided to be connected by a roadway? Based on your views, you'll decide what value to give a certain road.

Perhaps you will defend the importance of a road based on your views and values. Or perhaps ague for its improvement.

So without getting into battles of morality here, let's get to know the people who contribute here. Your views of roads will be shaped by your demographics. A few questions you can answer to us are:

(1) Where do you live? Urban or rural?
(2) In what field do you personally work?
(3) What are your political leanings?

To kick things off, let me answer that I'm a liberal Californian urbanite who works in the high tech industry. To me, it's all about getting to the destination quickly and efficiently, whether it be the next large city or coastal hotspot.

So how about you?

Let's set some ground rules. Hate speech is not allowed here. Please respect the views of others; a difference of opinion does not meet someone is attacking you. Do your part and ignore those who try to agitate and make personal arguments. Keep it high-level and keep it fun. Let's understand the perspectives and see what brings people together to discuss roads.

Cheers,

Carl Rogers
"Environment first, transportology second"

[vdeane]

What happened to starting with "Hello Viatologists!"?

[US71]

What happened to starting with "Hello Viatologists!"?

Maybe he finally grew up?

[hbelkins]

I probably left that out of the copy-and-paste job.

[english si]

Let's set some ground rules. Hate speech is not allowed here. Please respect the views of others; a difference of opinion does not meet someone is attacking you. Do your part and ignore those who try to agitate and make personal arguments. Keep it high-level and keep it fun. Let's understand the perspectives and see what brings people together to discuss roads.

Guessing this paragraph got slammed.

"this is hate speech"
"it's my view that you should shut up - please respect that"
"I try and ignore, but you won't stop posting"
"This isn't fun"
"I know what breaks people up from discussing roads: trolls like you"
etc

[Mdcastle]

So did anyone figure out what the deal was with Tom from Ohio?

I looked back on my old MTR posts, from 98 until my goodbye post in late 2010, when Comcast forced me to switch to them as an ISP and as a result newsgroup access and hosting space for my web site disappeared. It was sad to pull the plug, but life moves on. There were several other Minnesota web sites, but I did kind of find a niche as far as abandoned stuff. I was always better at taking pictures than making decent looking html, and storage space was always a huge problem,  so now that Flickr has an outrageous amounts of space I'm kind of gradually consolidating photos there and almost creating a North Star Highways II / North Star Signals type of place.   


I think Mark Roberts (who I have on Facebook) John A Weeks III, and John Landsford are the three MTR notables that aren't on here (or at least don't post regularly under their names).

[NE2]

So did anyone figure out what the deal was with Tom from Ohio?

He did us all a favor and FUCKED OFF.

[US71]

I can't say I miss it much. My ISP dropped usenet and I went to Eternal September which was a PIA for me.  It had its moments and I met a lot of people through it, but the BS level got to be too much for me.

I went back a few weeks ago just to look around and and I wasn't impressed.

[oscar]

I think Mark Roberts (who I have on Facebook) John A Weeks III, and John Landsford are the three MTR notables that aren't on here (or at least don't post regularly under their names).

Ditto Scott Kozel and Larry Gross, who were constantly in tussles with each other and John Lansford.

I don't miss MTR that much, the signal-to-noise ratio was getting pretty bad.  But what happened to some of my other favorite newsgroups clinched my decision to give up on Usenet -- one was abandoned by almost everyone with worthwhile posts, while a moderated group was apparently abandoned by its moderators so its posting volume went to zero.