🚀 go-pugleaf

User address authentication is in force for the soc.genealogy.surnames.*
groups.
You might discuss implementation with that admin.
I see NO spam in them.

RB

Kim DeVaughn wrote in message <6pjg1d$96k$1@nntp1.ba.best.com>...
>In article <6pjeh1$13p$1@machaut.medieval.org>,
> Todd Michel McComb <mccomb@medieval.org> wrote:
>|
>| In article <6pjd18$79r$1@nntp1.ba.best.com>,
>|   Kim DeVaughn <kimdv@best.com> wrote:
>| >
>| >What "plan" are you speaking of?
>
>| >Such issues aside, I still maintain that any such change to existing
>| >usenet *practices* would take place extremely slowly
>|
>| I think we're closer to a "backbone cabal" right now than we had
>| been for several years.
>
>Heh ... shades of "seismo" ...
>
>
>| The transport (that the user doesn't really
>| see) moves fairly quickly in quasi-unison.  If something isn't
>| propagated there, it will be extremely spotty, but there will
>| definitely be random pockets for years.
>
>Ah.  The old "drag them kicking and screaming" strategy.  Should be fun
>to watch ... :-) ...!
>
>
>| I expect munged posts to be dropped from all the big sites within
>| about 2 years.  (I call that soon, because I reject "Internet time"
>| as a valid concept. :-) )
>
>Do it in 18 months, and you can blame any "fallout" on y2k :-) .
>
>Seriously though, do you not see a performance problem with the massive
>number of authentications that will need to be performed?
>
>/kim
>
>===========================================================================
====
>"It is a mistake to allow any mechanical object to realize you are in a
hurry."
>                                      --Ralph's Observation