An "announcement" from forum4designers.com

R

Richard Cornford

While gong through my browser history looking for a page I recently
visited I noticed the fromu4desingers.com URL and decided to have a
quick look to see if they were reporting the names of the Usenet groups
they exploit yet (they aren't).

I noticed that they had attached an "announcement" to the top of the
thread listings of each group and wondered if they had taken the
opportunity to tip the unfortunate soles who use their "service" off
about the Usenet conventions that to date they have demonstrated such an
ignorance of. Unfortunately it falls so far short that I thought it
worth posting and commenting on.

The announcement is reproduced here in full, quoted with leading pipe
characters ( | ).

<URL:
http://www.forum4designers.com/announcement.php?s=4e1ad7fa4963fadc5febd4
d1747b506b&forumid=22 >
(Will line wrap!)

Posted by:-
|dmitro1 - Administrator
|
|About these newsgroups forums! (01-01-04 until 12-26-04)
|----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|Attention Dear Forum4Designers members!
|
|
|We now offer an easy access to public usenet newsgroups that
|are related to web design
|
|
|The usenet has been around long before the web browser was even
|invented. Today, hunders of thousands of people from around the
|world still use public newsgroups as a way to communicate.
|
|Just like groups.google.com our web based access add benefits to
|users and usenet community. Here are just a few benefits:

"like groups.google.com our web based access add benefits to ... usenet
community"? That is an invitation for comparison with google and an
examination of the claim.

|Questions are answered faster because they are seen by many
|thousands of people all over the net, not just by visitors
|or one website.

Doesn't really change anything for the Usenet community, that was what
happened anyway.

|A forum based Search engine makes it easy to find topics

The forum4designers.com archive of comp.lang.javascript goes all the way
back to the start of December 2003 and does nothing more than list the
treads posted over a period. While the groups.google.com archive for
comp.lang.javascript starts somewhere near the beginning of 1996 and can
be searched by pretty much any criteria you can think of. Probably
nobody in the Usenet community would go anywhere but groups.google.com
for archive searching.

|Filter makes it possible to block offensive languate and spam

Obviously not relevant to the users of news software. Not that there is
much need for obscenity filtering in comp.lang.javascript, there aren't
many contributors that inarticulate.

|Not everyone has direct usenet access because not all ISP provide
|it and not all users are interested in setting up outlook express
|for access.

Hmm, it's hard to imagine anyone with a serious interest in javascript
being too idle to configure a newsreader. Though there might be some
need for web-based access, and there are even some sites doing a
reasonable job of it, including groups.google.com.

|Additional security for users because they don't need to register
|to read the posts.

I don't see the relationship there, it must be a very specialised
definition of security.

|Threads/posts are displayed in a forum format that most users are
|familiar with.

I have mentioned what I think of the way that form4designers.com's
HTML-centred presentation of comp.lang.javascript serves to render
posted code incomprehensible before. A specific example being:-

<br />
if( document.getElementById ) {<br />
expMonth = document.getElementById( 'Exp_Month' );<br />
} else if( document.all ) {<br />
expMonth = document.all[ 'Exp_Month' ];<br />
}<br />
<br />

- which was appropriately indented on Usenet but that information is now
gone. The "<br />" line brakes are quite amusing as well because they
appear in a page with a:-

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">

- doctype. So in addition to sorting out all of the nested tables and
presentational mark-up in this "forum format" the user's browser is
going to have to slog away error correcting nonsense HTML syntax.

But that is not the limit of the incompetent presentation of Usenet
inflicted on its users by form4designers.com. The following snippets
appear in their source code:-

<font face="verdana,arial,helvetica" size="1" ><b><font
color="#FFFFFF">Michae
l
Winter</font></b></font>
....
<font face="verdana,arial,helvetica" size="1" ><b><font
color="#FFFFFF">Richar
d
Cornfo
rd</font></b></font>
....
<font face="verdana,arial,helvetica" size="1" ><b><font
color="#FFFFFF">Lasse
Reichs
tein
Nielse
n</font></b></font>

- The effect of arbitrarily breaking names up and spreading them across
up to 5 lines of HTML source code is to turn them into:-
"Michae l Winter"
"Richar d Cornfo rd"
- and -
"Lasse Reichs tein Nielse n"

A "forum format" that so comprehensively garbles its source cannot be
justified by being "familiar".

|Web Based usenet access opens the doors to the wonderfull world of
|Usenet to new users that may not even know about usenet's existance.
|This in turn add more activity to usenet groups, therefore
|benefiting not only those using our website but also the rest of
|the usenet community by making their groups more active.

Activity, of itself, is not necessarily a good thing. Funnelling
individuals into comp.lang.javascript without telling them where they
are going, what is expected of them, or even, originally, that it was
Usenet they were posting to, doesn't represent a contribution to the
community when it results in an increase in noise and nothing more. Now,
people who are willing to recognise and follow the Usenet conventions,
contribute and maybe open to learning something from time to time are
always welcome, but they seem to be able to find their way here on their
own.

comp.lang.javascript doesn't seem any more active than it was prior to
December last year, probably because it is so active anyway.

Forum4designers.com's contribution to the Usenet community is negligible
(and possibly negative) in comparison to groups.google.com.

|A few things to remember when posting and reading posts:
|
|Messages posted in these forums will also be uploaded to the usenet
|newsgroups that these forums mirror while messages posted to usenet
|newsgroups will also be downloaded to these forums (we will try to
|synchronize our forums with usenet every hour)
|
|These forums are not limited just to Forum4designers.com members
|anymore! Now tens of thousands of people from around the world will
|be able to see your posts, reply to your posts and you will be able
|to reply to theirs!

The use of "anymore" and "now" in that paragraph implies that something
has changed when in reality the only thing that seems to have changed on
forum4designers.com is that they are now admitting that their service is
nothing more than web based access to Usenet where they were previously
giving the impression that he whole thing was entirely their own work.

|Please remember a couple things:

Here it is, an opportunity for forum4designers.com to redeem themselves
(a little) by filling their users in on the more important Usenet
conventions, such as seeking, reading and following guidance of the FAQ
of technical groups prior to posting.

|First - posts you see in these forums are made by people other than
|forum4designers.com members. You may see someone using inappropriate
|language or flaming the forum. Remember - most of these people are
|not our members and we don't moderate these forums! Hey, we can't
|moderate the Internet!
|
|The good news is that our forum censorship filters still apply and
|some bad words will be replaced with XXXXXX.

"still apply" still implies that forum4desgners.com's former deception
was not a deception (which is itself a deception).

It is difficult to see how a censorship filter can be a good idea on a
group discussing a programming language as selectively replacing chunks
of otherwise legal identifiers is not going to promote the functionality
of posted code. Not that terms that may be subject of censorship are
often (if ever) used in identifiers in code posted to the group, but the
language does not forbid them. Though, given that the presentation of
comp.lang.javascript on forum4designers.com is already garbling its
source, it probably cannot make thing worse.

|Second - when you post to these forums, you are actually posting to
|usenet newsgroups. Every message sent to usenet from our forums will
|have your ExamNotes username -your email address will never be sent
|out.

(Don't tell PointedEars. :)

|A link to your profile on ExamNotes.net will also be included
|in the signature. Please use good netiquette and be courteous just
|like when you post to our regular forums.
|
|
|At these time we offer only a few newsgroups, but we'll add more to
|the list soon when we find usenet newgroups that we think will be
|beneficial to our members.

One of the advantages of accessing Usenet through a news server: My ISP
carries thousands of groups, I get to take my pick. They recently
added - alt.gothic.parenting -, my mind went to "The Turn of the Screw"
by Henry James and then on to the cancel button. :)

|In conclusion - use these forums just like you are using our other
|forums - read and reply to posts often!

So that is it. The opportunity squandered.

|I really hope you will find this feature a worthy addition to our
|community.

Forum4designers.com is a bad place to read comp.lang.javascript from and
looks like remaining a bad place to post to comp.lang.javascript from.

Richard.
 
D

Dr John Stockton

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, seen in
Richard Cornford
While gong through my browser history looking for a page I recently
visited I noticed the fromu4desingers.com URL and decided to have a
quick look to see if they were reporting the names of the Usenet groups
they exploit yet (they aren't).


|Filter makes it possible to block offensive languate and spam

Obviously not relevant to the users of news software. Not that there is
much need for obscenity filtering in comp.lang.javascript, there aren't
many contributors that inarticulate.

Well, not in that fashion, anyway.



|Not everyone has direct usenet access because not all ISP provide
|it and not all users are interested in setting up outlook express
|for access.

Hmm, it's hard to imagine anyone with a serious interest in javascript
being too idle to configure a newsreader. Though there might be some
need for web-based access, and there are even some sites doing a
reasonable job of it, including groups.google.com.


ISPs that do not provide, directly or by contract with another server, a
proper Usenet News service are inadequate ISPs. They should be
encouraged to die, by users moving elsewhere.

However, there are free Usenet servers, and ISTM that the FAQ should
mention the possibility.



|The good news is that our forum censorship filters still apply and
|some bad words will be replaced with XXXXXX.

Must be Americans, and monoglot. Perhaps we should be careful to put
variables such as "XXXXXX" and "mist" in our posted code, in matching
scopes; ISTR that the Rolls-Royce "Silver Mist" had poor sales in
Germany ...

|A link to your profile on ExamNotes.net will also be included
|in the signature. Please use good netiquette and be courteous just
|like when you post to our regular forums.

Why do they expect good manners of their users when they show none
themselves?

By reproducing, without permission from each author, articles published
by the authors in another medium, they are surely in breach of
copyright. Modifying articles makes it even worse.



Forum4designers.com is a bad place to read comp.lang.javascript from and
looks like remaining a bad place to post to comp.lang.javascript from.

I do not intend to answer questions posted through that route, though I
will be willing to criticise errors in material originating there.
 
R

Richard Cornford

However, there are free Usenet servers, and ISTM that the
FAQ should mention the possibility.

I will have to do some research and see if I can find some to recommend
(there is one obvious criteria). I am feeling motivated to put something
in discouraging the use of web based forums and that wouldn't be
reasonable without providing alternatives.

By reproducing, without permission from each author, articles
published by the authors in another medium, they are surely in
breach of copyright. Modifying articles makes it even worse.

I don't know, it's not my field of expertise. It might be difficult to
make a case given the very public nature of Usenet and the way nobody
objects to google reproducing everything. Though I wonder whether it
would be worth explicitly asserting copyright and then stating that
forum4designers.com do not have permission to reproduce posts, in those
posts.
I do not intend to answer questions posted through that route,
though I will be willing to criticise errors in material
originating there.

You won't be surprised to hear that forum4designers.com are not
reporting this thread. I didn't spot any obscenities so they have no
excuse for filtering it on those grounds. It could be argued to be
skirting the edges of being off topic, though talking about the best way
of accessing comp.lang.javascript on comp.lang.javascript seems OK to
me.

On the plus side we can now include failing to fully report the group to
the list of forum4designers.com's offences.

Richard.
 
D

Dr John Stockton

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, seen in
Richard Cornford
I will have to do some research and see if I can find some to recommend
(there is one obvious criteria). I am feeling motivated to put something
in discouraging the use of web based forums and that wouldn't be
reasonable without providing alternatives.

Berlin's http://news.individual.net is well spoken of.
I don't know, it's not my field of expertise. It might be difficult to
make a case given the very public nature of Usenet and the way nobody
objects to google reproducing everything.

Google Groups, AFAICS, is at least a reasonable approximation to a
standards-compliant news service (it is a pity that it cannot, or does
not, give location information in headers, as ordinary services do); for
those without access to a decent newsreader, it must be useful. I'd
encourage use of traditional news, and be more neutral to Google in this
respect, but would state that it provides full standards-compliant
access apart from (AIUI) being over-liberal in what it presents as
extant newsgroups.

However, News was designed as an ephemeral medium, and IMHO searching
and archiving services are in breach of copyright.

Though I wonder whether it
would be worth explicitly asserting copyright and then stating that
forum4designers.com do not have permission to reproduce posts, in those
posts.
Maybe.


You won't be surprised to hear that forum4designers.com are not
reporting this thread. I didn't spot any obscenities so they have no
excuse for filtering it on those grounds. It could be argued to be
skirting the edges of being off topic, though talking about the best way
of accessing comp.lang.javascript on comp.lang.javascript seems OK to
me.

On the plus side we can now include failing to fully report the group to
the list of forum4designers.com's offences.

In other words, that's censorship. They may also censor the writings of
their own users.

The news-posted c.l.j FAQ should certainly, a.s.a.p., include a warning
that some access providers suppress or mutilate articles; it could also
give examples of some that do not, or that could be said elsewhere. FAQ
sec 1 might be adjusted to make clear to even the most obtuse Web reader
hoe it relates to Usenet News and what a newsgroup is.
 
R

Richard Cornford

In other words, that's censorship.

Censorship is exactly what it is, and censorship on the grounds of
commercial expedience rather than any moral (or nationally legal)
criteria. Not that the latter would be desirable either but it would be
more justifiable than the former.
They may also censor the writings of their own users.
<snip>

I get the impression that they do censor the writings of their own
users, at the least obscenity filter them. But to some extent I think
that they might have to. I observe that they are posting through
giganews.com and if I am reading the giganews.com terms and conditions
correctly the account holder is held responsible for all of the material
posted via the account. And giganews.com has a policy against spam, off
topic postings (judging off-topicness by our FAQ apparently), abusive
postings and the like. Sufficient complaints or sufficiently serious
breaches and the account is withdrawn.

Richard.
 
R

Randy Webb

Dr said:
JRS: In article <[email protected]>, seen in
Richard Cornford



I wonder whether giganews requires compliance with other parts of FAQs?

Other parts of what FAQ's? FAQ's, by nature, are nothing but a list of
Frequently Asked Questions. By trying to get giganews to comply with
any/all FAQ's is an absurd postulation, for no other reason than *whose*
FAQ? And, you do *not* have to agree with an FAQ to post in Usenet.
ISTM that the next FAQ might include the assertion that Internet-
standards-compliant news services should be used, reproducing all
submitted articles without alteration.

So now, instead of being a technical group dealing with javascript, we
should also become a technical group that decides what software one
should use to access it?

BTW, I use giganews via comcast, and guess what software they "strongly
recommend" for news access? (Comcast's suggestion). Outlook Express.
When you go through the registration to gain news access, it has
directions on how to set it up, with only one reader - Outlook Express.
If there has ever been a non-compliant newsreader, OE is it.
is now getting articles
from people at <[email protected]>, example :
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
which have malformed line terminators.

Then one should complain to discussions.microsoft.com (or whatever
mechanism they offer to complain). But, with MS' past as an indicator,
don't wait on it to get fixed.
 
D

Dr John Stockton

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, seen in
Richard Cornford
I observe that they are posting through
giganews.com and if I am reading the giganews.com terms and conditions
correctly the account holder is held responsible for all of the material
posted via the account. And giganews.com has a policy against spam, off
topic postings (judging off-topicness by our FAQ apparently), abusive
postings and the like. Sufficient complaints or sufficiently serious
breaches and the account is withdrawn.

I wonder whether giganews requires compliance with other parts of FAQs?

ISTM that the next FAQ might include the assertion that Internet-
standards-compliant news services should be used, reproducing all
submitted articles without alteration.

is now getting articles
from people at <[email protected]>, example :
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
which have malformed line terminators.
 
R

Randy Webb

Richard said:
You may not have to agree with the FAQ to post to Usenet but by the
giganews terms and conditions you do have to comply with the FAQ (at
least to the extent of not generating complaints) to post to Usenet
through giganews.

Can you link me to that? I just spent more time than I wanted to reading
the giganews TOS and don't see a reference to "abiding by an FAQ" in it.
I see where it says that one should review the group and get a feel for
whats "acceptable" and whats not, but nothing about abiding by its
official FAQ.
The FQA in question would have to be an official FAQ and would have to
include instructions on what was acceptable/correct in posts rather than
exclusively quick answers. In the case of our FAQ, for example, the
injunction against posting job advertising would qualify.

Job advertisements I can agree with. But to say "You can't post here
because you use/dont use newsreader XXX" is absurd. You addressed that
below though.
<snip>

I am not sure if such a requirement could be worded in a way that would
be meaningful. But I am fairly sure that deliberately modifying the FAQ
with the intention of directly harming anyone (regardless of how
objectionably they behave) would not be moral. So I will not be doing
this unless there is widespread and publicly expressed support for the
idea (and I don't expect there will be).

This is another of those endless arguments about standards that can go
on forever. I can't see Comcast allowing my News account to be
suspended/terminated by giganews if I use the software that Comcast
tells the average new user to use - OE - simply because the c.l.j FAQ
tells me I can't. Hence my term of "absurd" for the whole idea.

In fact, the day they came to install my cable access, the tech
attempted to set up OE as my newsreader and email client and I had to
stop him. Took me almost an hour to convice the idiot of two things:
1) I did NOT want OE on here.
2) I had the sense to set up the software I wanted.

He did ask me why I have shortcuts to 14 browsers on my taskbar but no
link to IE on it :)

But, for the record:
Do I wish people would use proper newsreaders? Absolutely.
Do I think it should be part of the FAQ? No. Its getting way beyond the
scope of what the FAQ should be about.
Could it be advantageous to offer links to a few free newsreaders? Sure.
But not to the point where it says "You *must* use a standards compliant
reader"
 
R

Richard Cornford

Other parts of what FAQ's? FAQ's, by nature, are nothing but a
list of Frequently Asked Questions. By trying to get giganews
to comply with any/all FAQ's is an absurd postulation, for no
other reason than *whose* FAQ? And, you do *not* have to agree
with an FAQ to post in Usenet.

You may not have to agree with the FAQ to post to Usenet but by the
giganews terms and conditions you do have to comply with the FAQ (at
least to the extent of not generating complaints) to post to Usenet
through giganews.

The FQA in question would have to be an official FAQ and would have to
include instructions on what was acceptable/correct in posts rather than
exclusively quick answers. In the case of our FAQ, for example, the
injunction against posting job advertising would qualify.
So now, instead of being a technical group dealing with
javascript, we should also become a technical group that
decides what software one should use to access it?
<snip>

I am not sure if such a requirement could be worded in a way that would
be meaningful. But I am fairly sure that deliberately modifying the FAQ
with the intention of directly harming anyone (regardless of how
objectionably they behave) would not be moral. So I will not be doing
this unless there is widespread and publicly expressed support for the
idea (and I don't expect there will be).

Richard.
 
D

Dr John Stockton

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript said:
Other parts of what FAQ's?

The agreed FAQs of the newsgroups, naturally; together with other cited
authorities. Read ours, and you will see what I mean.

FAQ's, by nature, are nothing but a list of
Frequently Asked Questions.

Read ours, and you will see that such includes questions on the
newsgroup itself, including applicable etiquette,
By trying to get giganews to comply with
any/all FAQ's is an absurd postulation, for no other reason than *whose*
FAQ? And, you do *not* have to agree with an FAQ to post in Usenet.

From the third-level quote above, giganews already require compliance
with at least some parts of our FAQ; therefore, they may choose to
require compliance with other parts of it. From your post, it appears
that it is possible to generate a standards-compliant post using
giganews. But it is the user's responsibility to use standards-
compliant services.

So now, instead of being a technical group dealing with javascript, we
should also become a technical group that decides what software one
should use to access it?

That the software be standards-compliant, yes, certainly. That must be
what is wanted, though minor breaches by those of excusable ignorance
should certainly be tolerated. Ignorance on the part of a "service
provider" is not excusable.

BTW, I use giganews via comcast, and guess what software they "strongly
recommend" for news access? (Comcast's suggestion). Outlook Express.
When you go through the registration to gain news access, it has
directions on how to set it up, with only one reader - Outlook Express.
If there has ever been a non-compliant newsreader, OE is it.

OE is not fully compliant; but it is at least a newsreader. It can
generate news articles acceptable to all normal newsreaders. But I
would not recommend it to anyone with the ability to use a better
product.


Then one should complain to discussions.microsoft.com (or whatever
mechanism they offer to complain). But, with MS' past as an indicator,
don't wait on it to get fixed.

One informs the users of that "service" that their articles are too
corrupt when shown in standard newsreaders to be worth reading.

That statement was posted as an example of what we may see here, if
d.m.c starts gatewaying away from Certainly the FAQ,
in its guidance to users, needs to continue to guide against posting
unreadable material.
 
R

Richard Cornford

Can you link me to that? I just spent more time than I wanted
to reading the giganews TOS and don't see a reference to "abiding
by an FAQ" in it. I see where it says that one should review the
group and get a feel for whats "acceptable" and whats not, but
nothing about abiding by its official FAQ.

There is no doubt that it is a matter of interpretation, the part I am
interpreting that way is in the acceptable usage policy (which applies
to personal accounts so may not be applicable, though I doubt that their
commercial accounts don't retain, or transfer exactly the
responsibilities):-

<URL: http://www.giganews.com/comps/aup.mhtml >

I don't see much point in it mentioning the FAQ in the section entitled
"Net Etiquette and Abuse" as reflecting "consensus of those who
regularly use the newsgroup" and then not using that FAQ when resolving
(at least some) questions of abuse.

In any event actions that do not generate complaints will not become
questions of abuse.

Job advertisements I can agree with. But to say "You can't post
here because you use/dont use newsreader XXX" is absurd. You
addressed that below though.
<snip>

It would be absurd and I cannot see any reasonable human in the giganews
abuse department considering it grounds for cancelling someone's account
(possibly just advising them to stay out of such an unreasonable group).

On the other hand I have just discovered that the numerous bizarrely
mislocated response posts that I have seen originating on
forum4designers.com are not, as I had assumed, the results of their
authors/posters being halfwits (though that possibility is not excluded)
but are in fact because the forum4designers.com positing mechanism is
failing to conform with RFC 1036 - "Standard for Interchange of USENET
Messages" (1987). And that is a really important standard in this
context.

It is unlikely that any existing newsreader (or any other competently
authored system for posting to Usenet) would fail to technically comply
with RFC 1036 (it is 16 years old after all). Indeed software that
failed to comply could reasonably be classed not-a-newsreader. So it
actually doesn't seem too unreasonable for a Usenet group to require
that messages posted to it comply with the "Standard for Interchange of
USENET Messages", that really should go without saying.

Richard.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,770
Messages
2,569,584
Members
45,075
Latest member
MakersCBDBloodSupport

Latest Threads

Top