Managing Google Groups headaches

[rusi]

On Friday, November 29, 2013 12:07:29 AM UTC+5:30, rusi wrote:
> On Thursday, November 28, 2013 11:59:13 PM UTC+5:30, Michael Torrie wrote:
> > On 11/28/2013 10:23 AM, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> > > Funny, I thought the sentiment of many here was, "let's just keep this 
> > > as a newsgroup, why do we need the mailing list also?" but I'll admit to 
> > > being confused about what people have been proposing for alternate 
> > > topologies.
> >
> > That may well be the majority sentiment here.  I only state my opinion.
> >
> > Seems like 90% of the problems on this list come from the unchecked
> > usenet side of things.  Such as trolls or spam.  For example a certain
> > iron-skulled person who posted his whining rants and threats from half a
> > dozen different addresses to the annoyance of all.  Despite many calls
> > to banish him from the list for his blatant disregard for list
> > etiquette, with usenet it's just not possible.  Although I'm sure some
> > would argue that's a good thing to be unable to kick offenders off the list.
>
> Do you realize that that person was not using GG?
>
> IOW we are unfortunately conflating two completely unrelated things:
> 1. GG has some technical problems which are fairly easy to solve
> 2. All kinds of people hop onto the list. In addition to genuine ones there are 
>    spammers, trolls, dicks, nuts, philosophers, help-vampires etc etc.

To add to that:
1. In this thread itself there is a quadruple-post
2. In an adjacent thread there is the mess due to html mail
3. Sometime ago there was a long argument around the old and unsettled:
   Reply vs Reply-all debate

All these are due to NON use of GG.
Does that mean everyone should use GG?
Heck no!

Just this: Technology will occasionally have problems and these can
usually be solved technically.