Rocksolid provides free NNTP access as well as a web front end. Users
may access the service using a NNTP client or a web browser.

Signup: http://novabbs.org/common/register.php.

The instructions for using a client are located at:

http://novabbs.org/common/nodelist.php

Users must authenticate to post. Get credentials at the signup link.

Newsreader Access:

v77lu6t26velvaddm4gibyzd5sogskuczp7vwoc4vxmukvvaucva.b32.i2p
zkcvkb5xprurx5dvpanhyivneuzah6k6xayxgxd4h2ekklxgoi2x5aad.onion:119
news.novabbs.org:119 or 563

Say hello and thanks to the admin in one of the rocksolid.* groups.

Free Usenet Access <free@usenet.access> wrote:

> Rocksolid provides free NNTP access as well as a web front end. Users
> may access the service using a NNTP client or a web browser.
>
> Signup: http://novabbs.org/common/register.php.
>
> The instructions for using a client are located at:
>
> http://novabbs.org/common/nodelist.php
>
> Users must authenticate to post. Get credentials at the signup link.
>
> Newsreader Access:
>
> v77lu6t26velvaddm4gibyzd5sogskuczp7vwoc4vxmukvvaucva.b32.i2p
> zkcvkb5xprurx5dvpanhyivneuzah6k6xayxgxd4h2ekklxgoi2x5aad.onion:119
> news.novabbs.org:119 or 563
>
> Say hello and thanks to the admin in one of the rocksolid.* groups.

Two things are unclear to me just from the information shown above.

(Actually three things - but I don't know how to set up & use i2p
so I won't ask for that third thing until I look it up first.)

I consider myself a "normal" usenet person so they'd be unclear to others.

If I get a uname/password & point my newsreader to news.novabbs.org:119
there are two fundamental questions which aren't answered on those pages.

[1] Is it posting or just reading usenet newsgroups?
telnet news.novabbs.org 119
200 rocksolid2 InterNetNews NNRP server INN 2.6.3 ready (no posting)

[2] What are the newsgroups that can be read or posted to?
telnet news.novabbs.org 119
200 rocksolid2 InterNetNews NNRP server INN 2.6.3 ready (no posting)
list

[3] What the heck is i2p and how does one use it with an example?
(this is rhetorical at the moment because I didn't lmgtfy yet)

From that one test only, it seems that you can only read and not post.
Even if you do get a username and password?
Is that correct or am I wrong?

Whatever the answer is should be listed on those help pages, shouldn't it?
--
Please wear your mask!
Bugs are everywhere. :)
!__!
(@)(@)
\.'||'./
-: :: :-
/'..''..'\

On 3/2/23 11:19 AM, Bugsy wrote:
> [1] Is it posting or just reading usenet newsgroups? telnet
> news.novabbs.org 119 200 rocksolid2 InterNetNews NNRP server INN
> 2.6.3 ready (no posting)

I assume that if someone is offering Usenet / news server access that it
is for reading /and/ /posting/.

> [2] What are the newsgroups that can be read or posted to?

Each news server likely carries slightly different groups. This is
usually a try it and see if they have what you want, or ask as you have
done.

> [3] What the heck is i2p and how does one use it with an example?

i2p is a form of overlay network, conceptually similar, but technically
different than, Tor.

I believe that people that are looking for anonymity and / or trying to
shirk local restrictions are the ones most likely to be interested in
i2p / Tor / etc.

> From that one test only, it seems that you can only read and not post.

It is common for news servers to block posting until you authenticate to
them.

> Whatever the answer is should be listed on those help pages,
> shouldn't it?

As described above, some answers are assumed. Much like care owners
manuals don't list the speeds and types of roads that the care can drive
at / on.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

On 3/2/23 12:19, Bugsy wrote:
> Free Usenet Access <free@usenet.access> wrote:
>
>> Rocksolid provides free NNTP access as well as a web front end. Users
>> may access the service using a NNTP client or a web browser.
>>
>> Signup: http://novabbs.org/common/register.php.
>>
>> The instructions for using a client are located at:
>>
>> http://novabbs.org/common/nodelist.php
>>
>> Users must authenticate to post. Get credentials at the signup link.
>>
>> Newsreader Access:
>>
>> v77lu6t26velvaddm4gibyzd5sogskuczp7vwoc4vxmukvvaucva.b32.i2p
>> zkcvkb5xprurx5dvpanhyivneuzah6k6xayxgxd4h2ekklxgoi2x5aad.onion:119
>> news.novabbs.org:119 or 563
>>
>> Say hello and thanks to the admin in one of the rocksolid.* groups.
>
> Two things are unclear to me just from the information shown above.
>
> (Actually three things - but I don't know how to set up & use i2p
> so I won't ask for that third thing until I look it up first.)
>
> I consider myself a "normal" usenet person so they'd be unclear to others.
>
> If I get a uname/password & point my newsreader to news.novabbs.org:119
> there are two fundamental questions which aren't answered on those pages.

You cannot use it without a username and password. You must authenticate
to post.

> [1] Is it posting or just reading usenet newsgroups?
> telnet news.novabbs.org 119
> 200 rocksolid2 InterNetNews NNRP server INN 2.6.3 ready (no posting)

You must authenticate to post. Use the onion service. It will let you post.

Username is the email address you signed up with.

> [2] What are the newsgroups that can be read or posted to?
> telnet news.novabbs.org 119
> 200 rocksolid2 InterNetNews NNRP server INN 2.6.3 ready (no posting)
> list
>
> [3] What the heck is i2p and how does one use it with an example?
> (this is rhetorical at the moment because I didn't lmgtfy yet)

I2P is more secure than Tor for some things.

> From that one test only, it seems that you can only read and not post.

You must authenticate.

> Even if you do get a username and password?

You must authenticate.

> Is that correct or am I wrong?

You must authenticate.

> Whatever the answer is should be listed on those help pages, shouldn't it?

You must authenticate to post.

You might direct your questions to the admin of those servers or a
search engine might help, or post to rocksolid.* help group.

Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:

> On 3/2/23 11:19 AM, Bugsy wrote:
>> [1] Is it posting or just reading usenet newsgroups? telnet
>> news.novabbs.org 119 200 rocksolid2 InterNetNews NNRP server INN
>> 2.6.3 ready (no posting)
>
> I assume that if someone is offering Usenet / news server access that it
> is for reading /and/ /posting/.

I understand that you're saying we should be omnipotent, and that I'm
stupid, where I get it that you think I should know this stuff already.

But I don't.
Worse, I know stuff that provides a counterclaim (see below).

So I get it that you're expecting me to already know what I asked them
to document when you say if they call themselves a news server then they
should be available for posting.

That would be a normal assumption but I can list free news servers (like
news.dizum.net) which do not allow you to post (as far as I'm aware of).

telnet news.dizum.net 119
200 sewer InterNetNews NNRP server INN 2.6.3 ready (no posting)
>> [2] What are the newsgroups that can be read or posted to?
>
> Each news server likely carries slightly different groups. This is
> usually a try it and see if they have what you want, or ask as you have
> done.

The reason I was confused is that _some_ nntp servers aren't really nntp
servers (and this one seems to be in that same category of having one foot
inside of nntp with the other foot somewhere else, like i2p whatever that
is).

Given that it's not a "normal" nntp server, it might not carry normal
newsgroups.

If you think that doesn't happen, then you might want to recall that the
old news.mozilla.org:119 nntp server only carried the mozilla newsgroups.
mozilla.general
mozilla.support.firefox
mozilla.support.thunderbird

If you think that's a one-off of only carrying a very small subsection of
newsgroups, then you might want to recall that the gmane server is similar.
news.gmane.org:119

As far as I remember, that server only carried gmane groups, didn't it?
I don't remember actually, but then there's the dual purpose mixmin server
which is really a mail gateway anonymizer that acts like an nntp server.

Luckily, the telnet/list command shows a lot of newsgroups, but it's not
obvious which is why I'm asking for that so simply be documented better.

My confusion before I ran the list command was the way they describe their
hierarchy, which if you read what they say, they imply there's a
"rocksolid" Usenet hierarchy - which I have no idea what that even means.

To see what I'm talking about, go to this web page.
http://novabbs.org/common/nodelist.php

Then look for this line.
"Rocksolid is also available from any usenet news provider carrying the
rocksolid.* hierarchy"

I don't know what that means but I originally interpreted it sort of like
how the mozilla server only handled mozilla newsgroups and nothing else.

They even mention their own newsgroup so that's more of an indication.
rocksolid.shared.rocksolid

>> [3] What the heck is i2p and how does one use it with an example?
>
> i2p is a form of overlay network, conceptually similar, but technically
> different than, Tor.
>
> I believe that people that are looking for anonymity and / or trying to
> shirk local restrictions are the ones most likely to be interested in
> i2p / Tor / etc.

I'll check it out but it will take me a while since I have to start from
nothing. It would be nice if they assumed a user like me who knows only how
Usenet works with a typical news server and then they walk them through an
example setup with i2p for their rocksolid server.

They can assume an email of foo@bar.com & a password of foobar for example.
Then they can walk a typical user who has already installed the i2p tools
through the setup for their rocksolid server.

If they did that just once, the rest of us could follow their example.
I'm not blaming them. They're busy I'm sure.

It's just a suggestion.
I would write it myself but I don't even know what i2p is yet.
>> From that one test only, it seems that you can only read and not post.
>
> It is common for news servers to block posting until you authenticate to
> them.

Yes. I know.

Remember that I can give you examples that don't work the way you assume.

So all I'm asking is for it to be clear that posting is available after
authentication, which it does NOT yet say on this web page (AFAICT).
http://novabbs.org/common/nodelist.php

It's not a big deal but it's only one word "posting" that they can add to
that page to let people know it's not just a reader like dizum is.

>> Whatever the answer is should be listed on those help pages,
>> shouldn't it?
>
> As described above, some answers are assumed. Much like care owners
> manuals don't list the speeds and types of roads that the care can drive
> at / on.

What I'm asking for is more like where the spare jack & tire are located.
It's the kind of stuff _every_ owners manual should have because it's not
obvious in every case to every user the types of things that I'm asking.

And remember, I gave you a valid nntp countercase for EVERY one of my
requests so it's not like I'm making any of this up wearing my tin hat
(now where did I leave that faraday cage anyway?). ;->
--
Please wear your mask!
Bugs are everywhere. :)
!__!
(@)(@)
\.'||'./
-: :: :-
/'..''..'\

Free Usenet Access <free@usenet.access> wrote:

> You must authenticate to post.
>
> You might direct your questions to the admin of those servers or a
> search engine might help, or post to rocksolid.* help group.

I get it that you must authenticate to post, but it does NOT say that on
the web page (AFAIK) so you have to assume that is the case, that's all.
http://novabbs.org/common/nodelist.php

I can give counter examples (such as news.dizum.net) where you can only
read even if you authenticate (AFAIK) so that's why I asked that question.

All I'm asking is for it to _say_ on that web page that you must
authenticate to post. It's not a major request. It's a very minor one.

Also, as a noob, it doesn't describe what the difference is between
Rocksolid Light, retroBBS and novaBBS.

If they bother to have different names, then they're likely different.
But there's no link below the name with a paragraph explaining that.

I can guess though:
a. They're all the same usenet server.
b. They're all different usernet servers.
c. Some are the same, others are different.
d. All of the above.
e. None of the above.

It's not a big deal. It's just confusing to a noob. That's all.
I think a lot more would make sense if I set up the i2p that I already
installed but I'm looking for an example.

I could write the example for the company if I knew what I'm doing.
It would assume an email of foo@bar.com (for example).
And it would assume a password of foobar (for example).
And it would assume the i2p software is already installed.

Then it would walk me through the setup.
Remember how cable Internet used to have those setup instructions?

They'd have one page for IMAP servers, and another for POP servers and
another for NNTP servers (until they dropped the NNTP servers that is).

That one page of an i2p setup (assuming the software is installed)
would go a long way to helping noobs like I am to use the service.

I'll write it.
But I have to figure it out first.

--
Please wear your mask!
Bugs are everywhere. :)
!__!
(@)(@)
\.'||'./
-: :: :-
/'..''..'\

You can register, then go to
<https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=alt.privacy.anon-server>
and read this group from there. I'm replying to you right now using NovaBBS.

On 3/2/23 17:44, kuzvanechka2 wrote:
> You can register, then go to
> <https://www.novabbs.com/computers/thread.php?group=alt.privacy.anon-server>
> and read this group from there. I'm replying to you right now using
> NovaBBS.

How are you authenticating? I signed up and now my new account stopped
working after I posted a test message. I never even had a chance to post
an actual message.

It rejects authentication now. I don't want to wasted any more time with
borked services. I think I'll go back to social media, which at least works.

Whatever <wut@eva.invalid> wrote:

[...]

> I think I'll go back to social media, which at least works.

It takes grit and determination to use Usenet;
it sorts out the men from the boys.

--
\|/
(((Ï))) – Mr Ön!on
When we shake the ketchup bottle
First none comes and then a lot'll.

On 3/2/23 3:41 PM, Bugsy wrote:
> I understand that you're saying we should be omnipotent,

Nope. I didn't say nor imply that at all.

> and that I'm stupid,

I did not say nor imply that in any way, shape, or form. I'll thank you
for not putting words in my mouth / keyboard.

> where I get it that you think I should know this stuff already.

Nope.

Everybody has to start from nothing and learn things.

Some things, like much of what you've asked about, are poorly ~> under
documented.

There are many things that people learn when they are learning something
new. Sometimes those things are learned from documentation. Some other
things are learned by trial and error. But they are still learned.

> But I don't.

That's fine.

> Worse, I know stuff that provides a counterclaim (see below).

I question the veracity of that.

> So I get it that you're expecting me to already know what I asked

No I am not expecting any such thing.

> them to document when you say if they call themselves a news server
> then they should be available for posting.

I maintain that if they are offering Usenet / news services then they
should be available for posting.

It may very well be that you can't post until after you authenticate.

There is also a good chance that some banners may not properly reflect this.

> That would be a normal assumption but I can list free news servers
> (like news.dizum.net) which do not allow you to post (as far as I'm
> aware of).

Dizum appears to be a special purpose NNTP server and not a general
purpose Usenet server.

> telnet news.dizum.net 119 200 sewer InterNetNews NNRP server INN
> 2.6.3 ready (no posting)

That's an example of the banner that is likely providing mis-information
and / or reflecting the fact that you've not yet authenticated.

> The reason I was confused is that _some_ nntp servers aren't really
> nntp servers

NNTP is the Network News Transfer Protocol. If a server speaks the NNTP
protocol, then it is an NNTP server.

Not all NNTP servers are Usenet servers.

> (and this one seems to be in that same category of having one foot
> inside of nntp with the other foot somewhere else, like i2p whatever
> that is).

i2p is a communications method. It's completely independent and
orthogonal to NNTP.

> Given that it's not a "normal" nntp server, it might not carry normal
> newsgroups.

I believe you mean "Usenet", not "NNTP".

> If you think that doesn't happen, then you might want to recall
> that the old news.mozilla.org:119 nntp server only carried the
> mozilla newsgroups. mozilla.general mozilla.support.firefox
> mozilla.support.thunderbird

Mozilla's news server was not a Usenet server. But it was very much an
NNTP server.

> If you think that's a one-off of only carrying a very small subsection
> of newsgroups, then you might want to recall that the gmane server
> is similar. news.gmane.org:119

Gmane's server is an NNTP server but not a Usenet server.

> As far as I remember, that server only carried gmane groups, didn't it?
> I don't remember actually, but then there's the dual purpose mixmin
> server which is really a mail gateway anonymizer that acts like an
> nntp server.

Mixmin is an NNTP server. But that doesn't mean that it's a Usenet server.

> Luckily, the telnet/list command shows a lot of newsgroups, but it's
> not obvious which is why I'm asking for that so simply be documented
> better.

That is a reasonable request.

But the most authoritative list of what newsgroups are carried is the
server itself. Documentation on a web page ends up out of date and
incorrect. So ... ask your news client or run the list command.

> My confusion before I ran the list command was the way they describe
> their hierarchy, which if you read what they say, they imply there's
> a "rocksolid" Usenet hierarchy - which I have no idea what that
> even means.

As you will learn as you spend more time in Usenet and / or other NNTP
servers, hierarchie names go from the left to right. So the rocksolid
hierarchy or "rocksolid.*" newsgroups, are specific to the rocksolid group.

So rocksolid is either a private NNTP server or it's a hybrid server
that includes private groups and public Usenet hierarchies.

> To see what I'm talking about, go to this web page.
> http://novabbs.org/common/nodelist.php

That's a list of NNTP servers that carry the rocksolid.* hierarchy.

> Then look for this line. "Rocksolid is also available from any usenet
> news provider carrying the rocksolid.* hierarchy"

Yes, what of it?

Not all Usenet servers carry the rocksolid.* hierarchy. Some do. Not
all do.

> I don't know what that means but I originally interpreted it sort
> of like how the mozilla server only handled mozilla newsgroups and
> nothing else.

Yes, that's correct. They were NNTP servers that carried hierarchies
that aren't part of general Usenet.

> They even mention their own newsgroup so that's more of an indication.
> rocksolid.shared.rocksolid

Fine.

Any news server is free to carry whatever hierarchies they want to carry.

News != Usenet
NNTP != Usenet

Usenet implies NNTP
Usenet can be carried over something other than NNTP.

> I'll check it out but it will take me a while since I have to start
> from nothing.

Ask questions.

There are some in the alt.privacy.anon-server newsgroup that use i2p. I
suspect they will be willing to answer questions.

Though I would encourage you to be less hostile.

> It would be nice if they assumed a user like me who knows only how
> Usenet works with a typical news server and then they walk them
> through an example setup with i2p for their rocksolid server.

I think that's the job of i2p client / community and not the Usenet
server providers.

> They can assume an email of foo@bar.com & a password of foobar for
> example. Then they can walk a typical user who has already installed
> the i2p tools through the setup for their rocksolid server.

Rocksolid is better off providing documentation for what the majority of
their users will need. i2p is quite niche and won't have many users
compared to NNTP.

> If they did that just once, the rest of us could follow their example.
> I'm not blaming them. They're busy I'm sure.
>
> It's just a suggestion. I would write it myself but I don't even
> know what i2p is yet.

I suspect they would appreciate that.

> Yes. I know.
>
> Remember that I can give you examples that don't work the way you
> assume.

I did say "common" and not "always".

There are some uncommon configurations that do allow posting without
authenticating. Almost all of which are a frequent source of abuse / spam.

> So all I'm asking is for it to be clear that posting is available
> after authentication, which it does NOT yet say on this web page
> (AFAICT). http://novabbs.org/common/nodelist.php

Given that Usenet and / or news servers are almost always meant for
people to communicate, and seeing as how posting is required to be able
to do that, it's sort of implied that there is a way to post to such
servers.

> It's not a big deal but it's only one word "posting" that they can add
> to that page to let people know it's not just a reader like dizum is.
>
> What I'm asking for is more like where the spare jack & tire are
> located. It's the kind of stuff _every_ owners manual should have
> because it's not obvious in every case to every user the types of
> things that I'm asking.

I would expect any public Usenet operator to provide a page that tells
you what server name to point your client at, what security method is
supported, what ports to use, how to authenticate.

> And remember, I gave you a valid nntp countercase for EVERY one of my
> requests so it's not like I'm making any of this up wearing my tin hat
> (now where did I leave that faraday cage anyway?). ;->

I believe you are conflating NNTP and Usenet. They are similar but not
the same thing.

--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

Whatever wrote:
[...]
> I think I'll go back to social media, which at least works.

Getting an account is easy. I've got four paid block
accounts, two free accounts that I had to register with
to post, and I have access to an open server. Finding
anything worth reading is a different matter. You should
look elsewhere for that.

In article <dskML.1398522$iU59.506307@fx14.iad>,
bill.stickers@innocent.com says...
>
> Whatever wrote:
> [...]
> > I think I'll go back to social media, which at least works.
>
> Getting an account is easy. I've got four paid block
> accounts, two free accounts that I had to register with
> to post, and I have access to an open server. Finding
> anything worth reading is a different matter. You should
> look elsewhere for that.

I never got the confirmation email.

Skeeter wrote:
>
> In article <dskML.1398522$iU59.506307@fx14.iad>,
> bill.stickers@innocent.com says...
> >
> > Whatever wrote:
> > [...]
> > > I think I'll go back to social media, which at least works.
> >
> > Getting an account is easy. I've got four paid block
> > accounts, two free accounts that I had to register with
> > to post, and I have access to an open server. Finding
> > anything worth reading is a different matter. You should
> > look elsewhere for that.
>
> I never got the confirmation email.

I got the confirmation email straight away, (maybe yours
has gone to a spam folder), but I can't post with the
server, it refuses to authenticate. Not that I care. What
I meant was it's easy in general to get a usenet account.

Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:

> On 3/2/23 3:41 PM, Bugsy wrote:
>> I understand that you're saying we should be omnipotent,
>
> Nope. I didn't say nor imply that at all.

It's OK. I probably should have known it all but I think I figured it out
because people on this newsgroup "said" you can post. All I'm requesting is
for the web page to say that so people would know they can post after
authentication and not just read after authentication (like some servers).
>> and that I'm stupid,
>
> I did not say nor imply that in any way, shape, or form. I'll thank you
> for not putting words in my mouth / keyboard.

I didn't mean it as an insult. I just meant it as an acknowledgement on my
part that I probably should have known the answers to what I asked just by
guessing - but my point was that I can easily guess wrong because I know of
some sites which don't allow posting even after authentication (I'm not
sure, for example, what the netfront status is).

>
>> where I get it that you think I should know this stuff already.
>
> Nope.
>
> Everybody has to start from nothing and learn things.

Well, not really. The web page, I think, is great but it should add four
things which can be links so they don't clutter up the web page.
<1> It should state you can "post" after you authenticate (not just read)
<2> It should list the newsgroups that you can post to (using a link!)
<3> Somewhere it should mention binary newsgroups (not that I care myself)

> Some things, like much of what you've asked about, are poorly ~> under
> documented.

<4> It "could" point to a setup example for the i2P
It would assume the i2p software is already installed.
It can assume bogus authorization credentials.
Then it can show the user what buttons to press in the i2p setup.

> There are many things that people learn when they are learning something
> new. Sometimes those things are learned from documentation. Some other
> things are learned by trial and error. But they are still learned.

I agree since I've done torrents for example, which took me a long time to
figure out how the process works but which I could explain in ten lines
now.

Also it took me a long time in the beginning to get tor working with the
socks5 stuff and privoxy garbage where it's so complicated I just gave up.

Similarly with the orbox/orfox stuff on Android which was so complicated
that I just gave up. Same on trying to set up a Windows owncloud and/or
caldav server where sometimes it just turns out to be impossible (it works
on linux but not really on Windows kind of stuff you learn the hard way).

Same when I tried to set up my own vpn when all I really wanted was to use
an existing vpn service (which didn't exist long ago as they do now).

Lot's of things are complicated but almost all of them would be a lot
easier if someone who is providing the service provides a step by step.

I'm sure I even had this learning problem when I first set up tin maybe
twenty years or whatever ago, or when I first set up stunnel.
>> But I don't.
>
> That's fine.

An i2p example would go a looooooooooooooooooooooooong way to help noobs.

>> Worse, I know stuff that provides a counterclaim (see below).
>
> I question the veracity of that.

Well, take aioe then. It doesn't do alt.home.repair newsgroups.
Is that intuitive? Not to me it's not. Maybe to you but not to me.

The paga server doesn't do alt.checkmate (not that I care) but if I cared,
I'd want to know that, wouldn't I?

Those are minor but when you use the news.mozilla.org:119 server (which I
think they took down), it only carried like a half dozen newsgroups.

>> So I get it that you're expecting me to already know what I asked
>
> No I am not expecting any such thing.

Same with news.novabbs.org which only serves an IP address from Australia.
If they don't tell you that, how are you supposed to know that?

My only reason for saying this is three things
<1> They know it (the server admins)
<2> The rocksolid site doesn't say it
<3> And yet a noob like I am needs to know it

>
>> them to document when you say if they call themselves a news server
>> then they should be available for posting.
>
> I maintain that if they are offering Usenet / news services then they
> should be available for posting.

I don't disagree that you guessed that, and you guessed right, but take the
counter case of news.tambov.ru:119 which offers usenet news services
without needing login credentials.

It certainly works (as I've used it myself in the past) but can you post to
this newsgroup? You don't know. You can only guess. And that's the issue.

> It may very well be that you can't post until after you authenticate.

My counterclaim is that some things that "look" like nntp services are more
complicated, like the news.gmane.org:119 situation where (as I recall) it
did NOT require a login/password so the credentials are blank/blank but you
had to be pre-approved by sending them an email request first.

That's not intuitive that it works that way, right?
Someone has to explain it to you as you'd never guess, right?

I think the easiest way to explain how (I remember) gmane to work is that
ALL groups are moderated by the gmane admin, not only moderated newsgroups.

> There is also a good chance that some banners may not properly reflect this.

I understand that a telnet isn't all that good of an indicator of posting
but it is an indicator of listing if it allows you to list the newsgroup.

But why should someone have to telnet and list to know that the
news.tambov.ru:119 or news.mozilla.org:119 authentication-free open servers
only carry something like a dozen newsgroups or that the paga server only
allows four posts every two days (or something like that, I don't recall).

Or that aioe doesn't allow posting to alt.privacy or some other oddball
restriction when you would "guess" completely different than the reality.

> Dizum appears to be a special purpose NNTP server and not a general
> purpose Usenet server.

I don't know that but I'll accept that you know that, but how do you know
that, and more to the issue at hand is how am I supposed to know that?

It looks like a 'normal' usenet server to me from the little I know of it.
It just doesn't work the way you would "guess" it to work, which is why I
brought it up as a counterclaim to the "omnipotence" requirement. :-)

>> telnet news.dizum.net 119 200 sewer InterNetNews NNRP server INN
>> 2.6.3 ready (no posting)
>
> That's an example of the banner that is likely providing mis-information
> and / or reflecting the fact that you've not yet authenticated.

I could try to post but I already know dizum doesn't allow posting but I
only know that from experience. Which is my issue with the rocksolid page.

It's not a major issue. But why should a noob have to guess?
They could add the four things I ask in a few minutes since they know it.

Then nobody after me needs to guess.

>> The reason I was confused is that _some_ nntp servers aren't really
>> nntp servers
>
> NNTP is the Network News Transfer Protocol. If a server speaks the NNTP
> protocol, then it is an NNTP server.
>
> Not all NNTP servers are Usenet servers.

See! I told you I was stupid. I didn't even realize that. It's OK.
Thanks. It's OK to be stupid as long as I can fix it with your help. :-)

>> (and this one seems to be in that same category of having one foot
>> inside of nntp with the other foot somewhere else, like i2p whatever
>> that is).
>
> i2p is a communications method. It's completely independent and
> orthogonal to NNTP.

I didn't know that but the only thing I am asking for is setup instructions
for a noob assuming bogus credentials and assuming i2p is already
installed.

Since they know that and since no noob knows that, it would be helpful for
them to link to a web page that says what the i2p setup to their server is.

>> Given that it's not a "normal" nntp server, it might not carry normal
>> newsgroups.
>
> I believe you mean "Usenet", not "NNTP".

See above. I equate them. But I never ran an nntp server. So I'm a noob.
>> If you think that doesn't happen, then you might want to recall
>> that the old news.mozilla.org:119 nntp server only carried the
>> mozilla newsgroups. mozilla.general mozilla.support.firefox
>> mozilla.support.thunderbird
>
> Mozilla's news server was not a Usenet server. But it was very much an
> NNTP server.

Well, that's not exactly true but I guess it's mostly true in that it
depends on how a noob thinks about it. You're thinking like an expert.

Are you talking about their NNTP server or web interface?
I'm posting via web interface just fine. Not sure about NNTP
server, never tried it.

I suggest asking in one of their groups, for example,
rocksolid.shared.helpdesk:

<https://www.novabbs.com/rocksolid/thread.php?group=rocksolid.shared.helpdesk>

I doubt their admin is reading AFN regularly.

William Stickers <bill.stickers@innocent.com> wrote:

> Skeeter wrote:
>>
>> In article <dskML.1398522$iU59.506307@fx14.iad>,
>> bill.stickers@innocent.com says...
>>>
>>> Whatever wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> I think I'll go back to social media, which at least works.
>>>
>>> Getting an account is easy. I've got four paid block
>>> accounts, two free accounts that I had to register with
>>> to post, and I have access to an open server. Finding
>>> anything worth reading is a different matter. You should
>>> look elsewhere for that.
>>
>> I never got the confirmation email.
>
> I got the confirmation email straight away, (maybe yours
> has gone to a spam folder), but I can't post with the
> server, it refuses to authenticate. Not that I care. What
> I meant was it's easy in general to get a usenet account.

FWIW it works for me.

--
‡

‡ <dd@dd.invalid> wrote:

> William Stickers <bill.stickers@innocent.com> wrote:
>
>> Skeeter wrote:
>>>
>>> In article <dskML.1398522$iU59.506307@fx14.iad>,
>>> bill.stickers@innocent.com says...
>>>>
>>>> Whatever wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> I think I'll go back to social media, which at least works.
>>>>
>>>> Getting an account is easy. I've got four paid block
>>>> accounts, two free accounts that I had to register with
>>>> to post, and I have access to an open server. Finding
>>>> anything worth reading is a different matter. You should
>>>> look elsewhere for that.
>>>
>>> I never got the confirmation email.
>>
>> I got the confirmation email straight away, (maybe yours
>> has gone to a spam folder), but I can't post with the
>> server, it refuses to authenticate. Not that I care. What
>> I meant was it's easy in general to get a usenet account.
>
> FWIW it works for me.

Retracted.

Apologies, I thought we were discussing a different server.

--
‡

On 3/3/23 1:53 PM, Bugsy wrote:
> It's OK. I probably should have known it all but I think I figured
> it out because people on this newsgroup "said" you can post. All I'm
> requesting is for the web page to say that so people would know they
> can post after authentication and not just read after authentication
> (like some servers).

I agree that documentation is better than no documentation. I'd suggest
sending a brief message the the administrator asking them to clarify the
documentation.

> I didn't mean it as an insult. I just meant it as an acknowledgement
> on my part that I probably should have known the answers to what I
> asked just by guessing - but my point was that I can easily guess
> wrong because I know of some sites which don't allow posting even
> after authentication (I'm not sure, for example, what the netfront
> status is).

I think it's perfectly natural to not know and to ask.

> Well, not really.

Yes, really. Everyone has to start from noting and learn things. You
certainly didn't know how to type before you could walk or recite the
alphabet.

Everyone has to learn $TOPIC from a zero starting point. How quickly
they learn, what they learn from, who teaches them, those are all
different for each person. But they all start from nothing.

> The web page, I think, is great but it should add four things which
> can be links so they don't clutter up the web page.
> <1> It should state you can "post" after you authenticate (not just read)
> <2> It should list the newsgroups that you can post to (using a link!)
> <3> Somewhere it should mention binary newsgroups (not that I care myself)

Binary newsgroups are sort of like the 3rd rail for some news servers
for various different reasons.

If the news server carries binary groups or not is up to them. How they
publish that is up to them.

The existence of binary newsgroups can be somewhat addressed by #2.

> <4> It "could" point to a setup example for the i2P
> It would assume the i2p software is already installed.
> It can assume bogus authorization credentials.
> Then it can show the user what buttons to press in the i2p setup.

My opinion is that i2p setup & configuration is beyond the support that
news servers should be expected to provide. If anything, I'd expect
news servers to provide something that said "point your i2p client
$HERE" type thing.

> I agree since I've done torrents for example, which took me a long
> time to figure out how the process works but which I could explain
> in ten lines now.
>
> Also it took me a long time in the beginning to get tor working with
> the socks5 stuff and privoxy garbage where it's so complicated I just
> gave up.

Things tend to get more complicated, at least multiplicative, for each
technology that you add. It's almost as if the complexity is raised to
the power of the number of technologies that you are combining.

> Lot's of things are complicated but almost all of them would be a lot
> easier if someone who is providing the service provides a step by step.

Providing step by step directions is harder than you may realize. If
nothing else, you probably need to provide them for the X most common
client(s). And you need to keep them up to date.

Documentation is notorious for falling out of date.

Services that barely have time / money / resources to do the primary
function of the service usually don't have time / money / resources to
continue maintaining documentation.

It's a sad state, but it's a very common state in the industry.

> I'm sure I even had this learning problem when I first set up tin
> maybe twenty years or whatever ago, or when I first set up stunnel.

Sure. You started with something new from a green field. You had to
learn everything.

> An i2p example would go a looooooooooooooooooooooooong way to help
> noobs.

I suspect that there are examples on sites dedicated to i2p.

I provide Tor service for my remailer, but I'm not going to take time to
write documentation for how to install / configure / use Tor. -- I'm
not even qualified to do so. I simply have it functioning as a
communications method with my remailer.

I've looked at i2p and have decided not to do it (yet) because of
personal bias against Java. -- Seeing as how this is effectively a
donation of my time / server resources / effort, people get something
they can connect to using other documentation.

> Well, take aioe then. It doesn't do alt.home.repair newsgroups.
> Is that intuitive? Not to me it's not. Maybe to you but not to me.

If you asked me if AIOE carried alt.home.repair -- assuming their server
was working -- I would open my client, go to newsgroup management,
refresh, and search to see if it was there. I'd actually do that before
going to AIOE's site to find a page listing the newsgroups they carry
because I both know how to quickly do that in my news reader and because
documentation tends to get out of date so the query is probably more
authoritative anyway.

> The paga server doesn't do alt.checkmate (not that I care) but if I
> cared, I'd want to know that, wouldn't I?

(See above.)

> Those are minor but when you use the news.mozilla.org:119 server (which
> I think they took down), it only carried like a half dozen newsgroups.

The Mozilla news server used NNTP to provide access to private
newsgroups. The Mozilla news server was not a general Usenet news server.

> Same with news.novabbs.org which only serves an IP address from
> Australia. If they don't tell you that, how are you supposed to
> know that?

I would expect a news server that is country specific to say that
somewhere and to refuse to create an account if you are outside of the
country.

> My only reason for saying this is three things
> <1> They know it (the server admins)
> <2> The rocksolid site doesn't say it
> <3> And yet a noob like I am needs to know it

If memory serves, you could access the rocksolid.* hierarchy through
multiple other providers beyond just NovaBBS.

> I don't disagree that you guessed that, and you guessed right, but
> take the counter case of news.tambov.ru:119 which offers usenet news
> services without needing login credentials.

There are multiple -- what I'll call -- open news servers that don't
require accounts to be able to read or post. These servers are often
sources of spam and are generally frowned upon by many in the news
community because of the spam problems that tend to plague them.

> It certainly works (as I've used it myself in the past) but can you
> post to this newsgroup? You don't know. You can only guess. And that's
> the issue.

You don't have to guess. You can test to find out.

> My counterclaim is that some things that "look" like nntp services
> are more complicated, like the news.gmane.org:119 situation where
> (as I recall) it did NOT require a login/password so the credentials
> are blank/blank but you had to be pre-approved by sending them an
> email request first.

If you speak NNTP to the server, then it *IS* an NNTP server. Period.
No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

NNTP is simply a protocol to exchange news articles with a server.

Much like HTTP is a protocol to talk to a web server being completely
independent of the type of web pages that the server hosts.

> That's not intuitive that it works that way, right? Someone has to
> explain it to you as you'd never guess, right?

I vaguely remember reading some documentation on Gmane's site years ago
when I last set up a client to access them. I was able to successfully
connect using the documentation that they provided at the time.

> I think the easiest way to explain how (I remember) gmane to work is
> that ALL groups are moderated by the gmane admin, not only moderated
> newsgroups.

I always viewed Gmane as a read-only archive of many different mailing
lists. If you wanted to post to one of the lists, you had to do so via
the mailing list.

> I understand that a telnet isn't all that good of an indicator of
> posting but it is an indicator of listing if it allows you to list
> the newsgroup.

Probably. Maybe not. It depends.

> But why should someone have to telnet and list to know that the
> news.tambov.ru:119 or news.mozilla.org:119 authentication-free open
> servers only carry something like a dozen newsgroups or that the paga
> server only allows four posts every two days (or something like that,
> I don't recall).

Because they are /news/ servers. The /primary/ protocol that they speak
first and foremost is NNTP. They may not speak any other protocol.

Seeing as how you're dipping your toes into the news ecosystem, you will
be doing a LOT of investigation using NNTP or telnet.

Grant Taylor <gtaylor@tnetconsulting.net> wrote:

>> Same with news.novabbs.org which only serves an IP address from
>> Australia. If they don't tell you that, how are you supposed to
>> know that?
>
> I would expect a news server that is country specific to say that
> somewhere and to refuse to create an account if you are outside of the
> country.

I snipped what I thoroughly agreed with and which I had nothing more to
add. On this one news.novabbs.org:119 setup, there are no credentials
required that I know of.

You just have to know that if your IP address geolocates outside of
Australia, they won't pass on your posts (as far as I'm aware).

My only point in bringing that up is that's why documentation helps.

> There are multiple -- what I'll call -- open news servers that don't
> require accounts to be able to read or post. These servers are often
> sources of spam and are generally frowned upon by many in the news
> community because of the spam problems that tend to plague them.

I'm well aware of the many lists of supposedly open free public news
servers where the reality isn't as great as the lists tend to imply.
free.xsusenet.com:119
gail.ripco.com:119
hufu.ki.iif.hu:119
killfile.org:119
maddog.stanford.edu:119
news.ausics.net:119
news.cn99.com:119
news.freedyn.de:119
news.grc.com:119
news.samoylyk.net:119
news.skz.or.jp:119
news.uni-stuttgart.de:119
news.wieslauf.de:119
news2.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de:119
news2.neva.ru:119
post.usenet.com:119
pubnews.gradwell.net:119
remote5bge0.ripco.com:119
test.news.mediaways:119
textnews.news.cambrium.nl:119
tor-nn1-ca.netcom.ca:119
tulanet.com:119
www.an.cc.mn.us:119
and now
news.novabbs.org:119

>> It certainly works (as I've used it myself in the past) but can you
>> post to this newsgroup? You don't know. You can only guess. And that's
>> the issue.
>
> You don't have to guess. You can test to find out.

Allow me to take the example of an app you're considering installing on
your phone. You can install the app and test it out, and then hate it.
Or, most of the time you can just READ what it does, and you know it's not
for you from the documentation. It's more efficient that way.

>> That's not intuitive that it works that way, right? Someone has to
>> explain it to you as you'd never guess, right?
>
> I vaguely remember reading some documentation on Gmane's site years ago
> when I last set up a client to access them. I was able to successfully
> connect using the documentation that they provided at the time.

Me too. But you have to know that gmane did things differently.
So does this nova rocksolid group seem to do things different.
It helps when that's documented, that's all.

>> I think the easiest way to explain how (I remember) gmane to work is
>> that ALL groups are moderated by the gmane admin, not only moderated
>> newsgroups.
>
> I always viewed Gmane as a read-only archive of many different mailing
> lists. If you wanted to post to one of the lists, you had to do so via
> the mailing list.

I definitely posted using Gmane, Mozilla, Dizum (in the past) and Mixmin
via my newsreader settings. I've never sent anything through the email.

>> Or that aioe doesn't allow posting to alt.privacy or some other
>> oddball restriction when you would "guess" completely different than
>> the reality.
>
> In the news / NNTP world, try it and see if it works.

It's not that simple when, for example, you get a badword from paganini or
when you get a bad group when you respond to someone elses' post on aioe.

Paganini, for example, won't tell you the badword and there is never a bad
word, per se, it's always a mistake but you can't do anything about it. You
have to carefully send the same message a dozen or more times (depending on
the length of course) to figure out which paragraph has the badword.

In every case, there is no bad word but it thinks there was one.

It's similar with aioe's groups where luckily you're only posting to a
handful of groups at a time at most, so when you respond to a post that has
multiple groups and when aioe blocks it, you can drop the groups out out
one by one.

It's the price you pay for a free news server.

>> I could try to post but I already know dizum doesn't allow posting
>> but I only know that from experience. Which is my issue with the
>> rocksolid page.
>
> Hence why I say try things via NNTP. If they work, great. If they
> don't, oh well. You might ask for help in various places or try other
> things.

Well, I do sometimes test things out with telnet. For example,
telnet news.neodome.net 119
Trying 95.216.243.224...
Connected to neodome.net.
Escape character is '^]'.
200 news.neodome.net InterNetNews NNRP server INN 2.6.3 ready (posting ok)

help
200 news.neodome.net InterNetNews NNRP server INN 2.6.3 ready (posting ok)
100 Legal commands
ARTICLE [message-ID|number]
AUTHINFO USER name|PASS password|GENERIC program [argument ...]
BODY [message-ID|number]
CAPABILITIES [keyword]
COMPRESS DEFLATE
DATE
GROUP newsgroup
HDR header [message-ID|range]
HEAD [message-ID|number]
HELP
IHAVE message-ID
LAST
LIST [ACTIVE [wildmat]|ACTIVE.TIMES [wildmat]|COUNTS
[wildmat]|DISTRIB.PATS|DISTRIBUTIONS|HEADERS
[MSGID|RANGE]|MODERATORS|MOTD|NEWSGROUPS
[wildmat]|OVERVIEW.FMT|SUBSCRIPTIONS [wildmat]]
LISTGROUP [newsgroup [range]]
MODE READER
NEWGROUPS [yy]yymmdd hhmmss [GMT]
NEWNEWS wildmat [yy]yymmdd hhmmss [GMT]
NEXT
OVER [range]
POST
QUIT
STARTTLS
STAT [message-ID|number]
XGTITLE [wildmat]
XHDR header [message-ID|range]
XOVER [range]
XPAT header message-ID|range pattern [pattern ...]
Report problems to <use...@neodome.net>.
..

group alt.free.newsservers
211 6388 1364 8211 alt.free.newsservers

group alt.free.newsservers
211 6388 1364 8211 alt.free.newsservers
next
body
post
340 Ok, recommended message-ID <kha21v$6wbn$1@neodome.net>
from: foo@bar.com
subject: This is a test.
message-id: <kha21v$6wbn$1@neodome.net>
newsgroups: alt.free.newsservers

This is a test.
..

quit

> Mozilla and Gmane were NNTP servers. They were not Usenet servers.
>
> Usenet is a network of news servers exchanging articles over a fairly
> common newsgroup list. Usenet servers /usually/ use NNTP to exchange
> articles. However there are other protocols that they can use to
> exchange articles. So Usenet doesn't /imply/ NNTP, it only /strongly/
> /suggests/ it.

This is a wonderful clarifcation. Thanks.

>> Are they brand new like paganini? Or old but new again like blueworld?
>> Or even old but nobody knew about like maddog.stanford.edu?
>
> I would not consider paganini to be new, much less brand new.

I only heard of them within the past year or less.
It's not like blueworld where Jesse was here a lot & then gone & then back.
Had you heard of paganini bofh much earlier than only a few months ago?

> Be aware that there have been spates of spam in the recent months and
> news administrators have been actively fighting it trying to get it
> stopped or at least slowed down. There is a very real chance that
> they've not finished, much less updated the documentation to reflect the
> recent changes that they've been trying.

I feel sorry for the news server admins because of the horrible spammers,
and I mean that. They ruin everything for everyone and they enjoy doing
that.

> Having been around cars, machines, and batteries, I'll say this: they
> have batteries in them and batteries have a 3-5 year lifespan. As such
> it seems natural to me that they would eventually fail.
>
> I think it's unfair to complain about something that's only guaranteed
> to work for three years after five years.

You just elicited the exact problem I'm talking about, but I am not here to
chastise you but to just make my point known that to guess is always wrong.

The guarantee is nothing but lies, in terms of what it implies. For
example, what good is a bandaid from J&J guarranteed to be sterile?

It's complete bullshit. right? What are they going to do if it's not
sterile? Give you your finger back?

Marketing preys on people assuming things that aren't spoken. You assume
it's sterile if they "guarantee" that it's sterile. You assume that the
charger will start your car when you need to if you watch an advertisement
on mount kimanjaro where the car starts right up with the thing.

Almost every marketing ad is bullshit leading people to guess in the
direction that the marketing people want you to guess in.

Bugsy <bugsy@zimage.comBUGSY> wrote:

> I snipped what I thoroughly agreed with and which I had nothing more to
> add. On this one news.novabbs.org:119 setup, there are no credentials
> required that I know of.
>
> You just have to know that if your IP address geolocates outside of
> Australia, they won't pass on your posts (as far as I'm aware).

Typo. news.ausics.net:119 allows posting by Australia IP addresses only.
You just have to know this as they don't require login credentials.
Just IP geolocation. (AFAIK)

If something isn't documented, and if you happen to know about all these
corner cases, then your guess is wildly inaccurate since there are so many
of them (like standards).

--
Please wear your mask!
Bugs are everywhere. :)
!__!
(@)(@)
\.'||'./
-: :: :-
/'..''..'\

On 3/4/23 22:11, Bugsy wrote:
> I feel sorry for the news server admins because of the horrible spammers,
> and I mean that. They ruin everything for everyone and they enjoy doing
> that.

require authentication for all posting AND reading. otherwise trolls
will do bandwidth attacks

have clear TOS that doxing, harassment, dogpiling, racial and homophobic
slurs aimed at any user are prohibited

have designated groups for authenticated bot posts, (alt.news.bot) and
prohibit use of bots in all groups not marked with .bot in the groupname

put all new users in moderation for a short time before marking them
unmoderated

immediately lock out users that violate TOS

refuse to peer with all servers that don't have and enforce same
policies ... open servers can have their own open server network that
does not cross over to the polite and authenticated network

then all the trolls will just be abusing each other on their own echo
chamber open network

the open network would be useful only for leaks, so as not to risk
identifying the authors

usenet becomes a civil place

profit!

On Mar 4, 2023 at 10:39:39 PM CST, "Civitas" <civil@ized.example> wrote:

<snip>

> refuse to peer with all servers that don't have and enforce same
> policies ... open servers can have their own open server network that
> does not cross over to the polite and authenticated network
>
> then all the trolls will just be abusing each other on their own echo
> chamber open network
>
> the open network would be useful only for leaks, so as not to risk
> identifying the authors
>
> usenet becomes a civil place
>
> profit!

I agree with much of your original post, until these points. That doesn't
sound like Usenet, but rather a closed network that only select individuals
get to participate in.

For better or worse, that is not what Usenet is supposed to be about.

Civitas <civil@ized.example> writes:

> On 3/4/23 22:11, Bugsy wrote:
>> I feel sorry for the news server admins because of the horrible spammers,
>> and I mean that. They ruin everything for everyone and they enjoy doing
>> that.
>
> require authentication for all posting AND reading. otherwise trolls
> will do bandwidth attacks
>
> have clear TOS that doxing, harassment, dogpiling, racial and
> homophobic slurs aimed at any user are prohibited
>
> have designated groups for authenticated bot posts, (alt.news.bot) and
> prohibit use of bots in all groups not marked with .bot in the
> groupname
>
> put all new users in moderation for a short time before marking them
> unmoderated
>
> immediately lock out users that violate TOS
>
> refuse to peer with all servers that don't have and enforce same
> policies ... open servers can have their own open server network that
> does not cross over to the polite and authenticated network
>
> then all the trolls will just be abusing each other on their own echo
> chamber open network
>
> the open network would be useful only for leaks, so as not to risk
> identifying the authors
>
> usenet becomes a civil place
>
> profit!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_II

On Mar 4, 2023 at 10:11:19 PM CST, "Bugsy" <bugsy@zimage.comBUGSY> wrote:

>>> Are they brand new like paganini? Or old but new again like blueworld?
>>> Or even old but nobody knew about like maddog.stanford.edu?
>>
>> I would not consider paganini to be new, much less brand new.
>
> I only heard of them within the past year or less.
> It's not like blueworld where Jesse was here a lot & then gone & then back.
> Had you heard of paganini bofh much earlier than only a few months ago?

Paganini was around before I started (the first time lol).

On 3/5/23 00:19, Jesse Rehmer wrote:
> On Mar 4, 2023 at 10:39:39 PM CST, "Civitas" <civil@ized.example> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> refuse to peer with all servers that don't have and enforce same
>> policies ... open servers can have their own open server network that
>> does not cross over to the polite and authenticated network
>>
>> then all the trolls will just be abusing each other on their own echo
>> chamber open network
>>
>> the open network would be useful only for leaks, so as not to risk
>> identifying the authors
>>
>> usenet becomes a civil place
>>
>> profit!
>
> I agree with much of your original post, until these points. That doesn't
> sound like Usenet, but rather a closed network that only select individuals
> get to participate in.

Which points don't you agree with, and why?

> For better or worse, that is not what Usenet is supposed to be about.

Then Usenet is a sewer in which the vast majority of sane people will
never participate. It leaves two classes present on the network:
nostalgics and virulent trolls. Everyone else is excluded.

What exactly is Usenet supposed to be about?