🚀 go-pugleaf

blakenospam@newsguy.com wrote in message news:<bjo7eo02l30@drn.newsguy.com>...
> >This is a lie, and a damn one at that considering the newsgroups are
> >mostly echoes of lists (hence the "bit.listserv..."). For example, the
> >feeder list for bit.listserv.skeptic is SKEPTIX, joinable at
> 
> Huh, why don't you go back and review my reply and the initial poster's
> question, before you start throwing around accusations you retard.


What a nice ad hominem approach to things.

> Bit.* is a 'newsgroup' hierarchy, so if you want to access the 'newsgroup' you
> couldn't do this via email. Obviously they are tied with mailing lists, pretty
> evident considering 'listserv' appears within the group name and any others that
> fall under bit.listserv.*.

You just figured that out, eh?
 
> The whole point of having a bit.* newsgroup is to access in that format, as
> opposed to an associated mailing list, which many, including myself, find to be
> a tedious format for discussion. Particularly when there is a high volume of
> message traffic. 

Learn about list digests.

>Furthermore, there are bit.* newsgroups that facilitate message
> traffic from multiple mailing lists, not just one such as may be the case in
> this instance.

This is true, and a nice point brought up by you.

> Oh, and taking your comments out of context, like you did mine, "considering the
> newsgroups are mostly echoes of lists". Talk about lies, and damn ones at that.
> What are you talking about? There are well over 30,000 'newsgroups' within the
> Usenet network, less than 100 of which are dedicated towards gateways to
> exchange message traffic with mail lists.

I was, of course, speaking solely about the bit. newsgroup hierarchy.