I've been using Eternal September as my Usenet provider out of sheer
inertia. It's clearly dying, though, becoming more like Eternal Wait.
Sometimes it takes several tries to load a message.

Eternal September relies on donations (and I send it money
occasionally), so it's probably starved for cash. I've looked at
various paid Usenet providers, with an eye to a low price since I don't
use Usenet all that much and never download big attachments. Pure
Usenet, a Netherlands-based service, looks the best from a pricing
standpoint, and it gets decent reviews.

https://www.pureusenet.nl

I'm open to other suggestions. I connect to the Internet through
T-Mobile, which apparently has never heard of Usenet.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

On 11/7/2023 3:24 AM, Gary McGath wrote:
> I've been using Eternal September as my Usenet provider out of sheer
> inertia. It's clearly dying, though, becoming more like Eternal Wait.
> Sometimes it takes several tries to load a message.

I haven't had problems using it to load a new message from me, but I
do have to click an old message to get it to show new messages.
>
> Eternal September relies on donations (and I send it money
> occasionally), so it's probably starved for cash.  I've looked at
> various paid Usenet providers, with an eye to a low price since I don't
> use Usenet all that much and never download big attachments. Pure
> Usenet, a Netherlands-based service, looks the best from a pricing
> standpoint, and it gets decent reviews.
>
> https://www.pureusenet.nl
>
> I'm open to other suggestions. I connect to the Internet through
> T-Mobile, which apparently has never heard of Usenet.
>
Thanks for the information.

--Lee

Gary McGath wrote:

> I've been using Eternal September as my Usenet provider out of sheer
> inertia. It's clearly dying, though, becoming more like Eternal Wait.
> Sometimes it takes several tries to load a message.
>
> Eternal September relies on donations (and I send it money
> occasionally), so it's probably starved for cash. I've looked at
> various paid Usenet providers, with an eye to a low price since I don't
> use Usenet all that much and never download big attachments. Pure
> Usenet, a Netherlands-based service, looks the best from a pricing
> standpoint, and it gets decent reviews.
>
> https://www.pureusenet.nl
>
> I'm open to other suggestions. I connect to the Internet through
> T-Mobile, which apparently has never heard of Usenet.

https://news.individual.net/

€10 for the year

In article <uid6qk$vplf$1@dont-email.me>,
Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>I've been using Eternal September as my Usenet provider out of sheer
>inertia. It's clearly dying, though, becoming more like Eternal Wait.
>Sometimes it takes several tries to load a message.
>
>Eternal September relies on donations (and I send it money
>occasionally), so it's probably starved for cash. I've looked at
>various paid Usenet providers, with an eye to a low price since I don't
>use Usenet all that much and never download big attachments. Pure
>Usenet, a Netherlands-based service, looks the best from a pricing
>standpoint, and it gets decent reviews.
>
>https://www.pureusenet.nl
>
>I'm open to other suggestions. I connect to the Internet through
>T-Mobile, which apparently has never heard of Usenet.
>

Have a llok at nk.ca . The only caveat is that you have to VPN here.

>--
>Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Suffering will continue until we stop believing lies. -unknown Beware https://mindspring.com

In Message-ID:<uid6qk$vplf$1@dont-email.me>,
Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:

>use Usenet all that much and never download big attachments. Pure
>Usenet, a Netherlands-based service, looks the best from a pricing
>standpoint, and it gets decent reviews.
>
>https://www.pureusenet.nl
>
>I'm open to other suggestions.

I've been happy with Astraweb <https://www.astraweb.com/>. They have
block accounts. 10+ years ago I paid $25 for 180 GB. I recently had
to buy another block. But that one-time fee of $25 was all I paid
them for those 10 years. You could also go cheaper and pay only $10
for 25GB.

They have good retention, and I don't see some of the spam others do,
though some does get through their filters.

Note: You can't sign up without allowing scripting and some cookies.

--
Arthur T. - ar23hur "at" pobox "dot" com

On 11/7/2023 5:24 AM, Gary McGath wrote:
> I've been using Eternal September as my Usenet provider out of sheer
> inertia. It's clearly dying, though, becoming more like Eternal Wait.
> Sometimes it takes several tries to load a message.
>
> Eternal September relies on donations (and I send it money
> occasionally), so it's probably starved for cash.  I've looked at
> various paid Usenet providers, with an eye to a low price since I don't
> use Usenet all that much and never download big attachments. Pure
> Usenet, a Netherlands-based service, looks the best from a pricing
> standpoint, and it gets decent reviews.
>
> https://www.pureusenet.nl
>
> I'm open to other suggestions. I connect to the Internet through
> T-Mobile, which apparently has never heard of Usenet.
>

That's strange. I've had absolutely no problem with ES. I know Ray has
updated hardware this year and recently split it between two servers,
one for peering and the other for users IIRC. Evidently it developed
there was some problem with running both on one. He his also working
hard on spam filtering.

I was having some problems some months back but I discovered it was TB
related.

On 11/7/2023 9:18 AM, Rafe Culpin wrote:
> I've had no problems at all with Eternal September.
>
> But I am using a*very* obscure reader.

I'm using Thunderbird.

--Lee

On 11/7/23 11:43 AM, Arthur T. wrote:

> I've been happy with Astraweb <https://www.astraweb.com/>. They have
> block accounts. 10+ years ago I paid $25 for 180 GB. I recently had
> to buy another block. But that one-time fee of $25 was all I paid
> them for those 10 years. You could also go cheaper and pay only $10
> for 25GB.

I'm afraid I don't understand block accounts. 25GB of what?

> They have good retention, and I don't see some of the spam others do,
> though some does get through their filters.
>
> Note: You can't sign up without allowing scripting and some cookies.

I've always accessed Usenet through a client app, currently Thunderbird.
Does that mean Astraweb allows only Web access?

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

On 11/7/2023 12:15 PM, Gary McGath wrote:
> On 11/7/23 11:43 AM, Arthur T. wrote:
>
>> I've been happy with Astraweb <https://www.astraweb.com/>. They have
>> block accounts. 10+ years ago I paid $25 for 180 GB. I recently had
>> to buy another block. But that one-time fee of $25 was all I paid
>> them for those 10 years. You could also go cheaper and pay only $10
>> for 25GB.
>
> I'm afraid I don't understand block accounts. 25GB of what?
>
>> They have good retention, and I don't see some of the spam others do,
>> though some does get through their filters.
>>
>> Note: You can't sign up without allowing scripting and some cookies.
>
> I've always accessed Usenet through a client app, currently Thunderbird.
> Does that mean Astraweb allows only Web access?
>
>

The block is the amount of data passed. If you do only text based groups
then, as Arthur said, 180 GB should last for a considerable time. 25 GB
a few years maybe.

You need scripting and cookies on just to sign up through a web browser.

On 11/7/23 1:08 PM, Lee Gold wrote:
> On 11/7/2023 9:18 AM, Rafe Culpin wrote:
>> I've had no problems at all with Eternal September.
>>
>> But I am using a*very*  obscure reader.
>
> I'm using Thunderbird.
>
> --Lee

So am I.
--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

In Message-ID:<uidvhm$14gn2$1@epsilon3.eternal-september.org>,
"Jay E. Morris" <morrisj@epsilon3.comcon> wrote:

>On 11/7/2023 12:15 PM, Gary McGath wrote:
>> On 11/7/23 11:43 AM, Arthur T. wrote:
>>
>>> I've been happy with Astraweb <https://www.astraweb.com/>. They have
>>> block accounts. 10+ years ago I paid $25 for 180 GB. I recently had
>>> to buy another block. But that one-time fee of $25 was all I paid
>>> them for those 10 years. You could also go cheaper and pay only $10
>>> for 25GB.
>>
>> I'm afraid I don't understand block accounts. 25GB of what?
>>
>>> They have good retention, and I don't see some of the spam others do,
>>> though some does get through their filters.
>>>
>>> Note: You can't sign up without allowing scripting and some cookies.
>>
>> I've always accessed Usenet through a client app, currently Thunderbird.
>> Does that mean Astraweb allows only Web access?
>>
>>
>
>The block is the amount of data passed. If you do only text based groups
>then, as Arthur said, 180 GB should last for a considerable time. 25 GB
>a few years maybe.
>
>You need scripting and cookies on just to sign up through a web browser.

Jay interpreted what I said correctly. But for just text, 25 GB is
likely to last a lifetime.

And, as my headers show, I access Usenet via Forte Agent. I shudder
at the idea of a Web interface.

--
Arthur T. - ar23hur "at" pobox "dot" com

Arthur T. wrote:

> In Message-ID:<uidvhm$14gn2$1@epsilon3.eternal-september.org>,
> "Jay E. Morris" <morrisj@epsilon3.comcon> wrote:
> >
> > The block is the amount of data passed. If you do only text based
> > groups then, as Arthur said, 180 GB should last for a considerable
> > time. 25 GB a few years maybe.
> >
> > You need scripting and cookies on just to sign up through a web
> > browser.
>
> Jay interpreted what I said correctly. But for just text, 25 GB is
> likely to last a lifetime.

If you are just using Usenet for text newsgroups something like a 100 GB
block could even outlive the Usenet provider!

> And, as my headers show, I access Usenet via Forte Agent. I shudder
> at the idea of a Web interface.

The Devil's own invention!

On 11/8/2023 8:19 AM, Blueshirt wrote:
> Arthur T. wrote:
>
>> In Message-ID:<uidvhm$14gn2$1@epsilon3.eternal-september.org>,
>> "Jay E. Morris" <morrisj@epsilon3.comcon> wrote:
>>>
>>> The block is the amount of data passed. If you do only text based
>>> groups then, as Arthur said, 180 GB should last for a considerable
>>> time. 25 GB a few years maybe.
>>>
>>> You need scripting and cookies on just to sign up through a web
>>> browser.
>>
>> Jay interpreted what I said correctly. But for just text, 25 GB is
>> likely to last a lifetime.
>
> If you are just using Usenet for text newsgroups something like a 100 GB
> block could even outlive the Usenet provider!
>
>> And, as my headers show, I access Usenet via Forte Agent. I shudder
>> at the idea of a Web interface.
>
> The Devil's own invention!
>

Yeah, don't know what I was thinking there.

Unless there's a screw up on their spam filters and they let Google
Groups postings through. Then 180GB is about 2 days.

Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> writes:
> I'm afraid I don't understand block accounts. 25GB of what?

25GB of total data transferred. The main body of Usenet traffic these
days, unfortunately, is broadcasted warez, pirated movies, and pr0n. So
you can burn up a lot of transit that way. For text newsgroups 25GB is
nearly infinite.

In article <5atlkidednam3dmps5baj8v1ut54b7p2tv@4ax.com>,
Arthur T. <arthur@munged.invalid> wrote:
>And, as my headers show, I access Usenet via Forte Agent. I shudder
>at the idea of a Web interface.

Ditto.

I'm still using trn 4.0. I've found that it's installable
in Windows Subsystem for Linux. I *love* its kill file
feature, though I don't use it all that much. And it's
pure text; I defy anything short of The Blight to infect
my computer through that.

--
Mike Van Pelt | "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
mvp at calweb.com | -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
KE6BVH | Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston

On Friday, November 10, 2023 at 2:09:59 PM UTC-5, Mike Van Pelt wrote:
> In article <5atlkidednam3dmps...@4ax.com>,
> Arthur T. <art...@munged.invalid> wrote:
> >And, as my headers show, I access Usenet via Forte Agent. I shudder
> >at the idea of a Web interface.
> Ditto.
>
> I'm still using trn 4.0. I've found that it's installable
> in Windows Subsystem for Linux. I *love* its kill file
> feature, though I don't use it all that much. And it's
> pure text; I defy anything short of The Blight to infect
> my computer through that.
>
> --
> Mike Van Pelt | "I don't advise it unless you're nuts."
> mvp at calweb.com | -- Ray Wilkinson, after riding out Hurricane
> KE6BVH | Ike on Surfside Beach in Galveston
I use Groups.google.com/g/rec.music.filk for this group only usenet group I still visit.

On Tue, 7 Nov 2023 06:24:51 -0500, Gary McGath wrote:

> I'm open to other suggestions. I connect to the Internet through
> T-Mobile, which apparently has never heard of Usenet.

<https://news.individual.net/>

You pay 10 euro/year (use PayPal) and it filters spam for you.

--
s|b

On 11/7/23 6:24 AM, Gary McGath wrote:
> I've been using Eternal September as my Usenet provider out of sheer
> inertia. It's clearly dying, though, becoming more like Eternal Wait.
> Sometimes it takes several tries to load a message.
>
> Eternal September relies on donations (and I send it money
> occasionally), so it's probably starved for cash.  I've looked at
> various paid Usenet providers, with an eye to a low price since I don't
> use Usenet all that much and never download big attachments. Pure
> Usenet, a Netherlands-based service, looks the best from a pricing
> standpoint, and it gets decent reviews.

My search hasn't been going well, but just this morning I changed the
server I'm using on Eternal September to news.eternal-september.org ,
and it's working much better. I hadn't updated the server name in years,
so I was probably accessing some old machine of theirs which they'd
nearly forgotten they still have.

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

On 11/7/23 6:24 AM, Gary McGath wrote:
> I've been using Eternal September as my Usenet provider out of sheer
> inertia. It's clearly dying, though, becoming more like Eternal Wait.
> Sometimes it takes several tries to load a message.
>

My search for other providers has been a nightmare. First I signed up
with Astraweb. I immediately got a message saying my account had been
cancelled. It appeared to work anyway. However, I got errors trying to
post, saying posting wasn't allowed on my server. A search indicates
that's the usual state of affairs with Astraweb. I explicitly cancelled
my account. Nonetheless, they charged my credit card for their worthless
service and my account still showed as active this morning. I cancelled
again and told them to remove the charge.

Pureusenet was no better. Again, I couldn't post. I contacted support
and was told I had to select a deeply-buried option to be able to post.
I went to the indicated page and was told I couldn't enable posting
because I didn't have a paid account, although I had signed up and given
my credit card information. I replied to the support email explaining
this problem. It's been 24 hours with no response. I cancelled the
account. So far I haven't seen a charge from Pureusenet on my credit card.

This is very disturbing. How can two providers that come with
recommendations stay in business offering a service whose restrictions
make it completely worthless?

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

In article <uj7uag$2r66r$1@dont-email.me>,
Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>On 11/7/23 6:24 AM, Gary McGath wrote:
>> I've been using Eternal September as my Usenet provider out of sheer
>> inertia. It's clearly dying, though, becoming more like Eternal Wait.
>> Sometimes it takes several tries to load a message.
>>
>
>My search for other providers has been a nightmare. First I signed up
>with Astraweb. I immediately got a message saying my account had been
>cancelled. It appeared to work anyway. However, I got errors trying to
>post, saying posting wasn't allowed on my server. A search indicates
>that's the usual state of affairs with Astraweb. I explicitly cancelled
>my account. Nonetheless, they charged my credit card for their worthless
>service and my account still showed as active this morning. I cancelled
>again and told them to remove the charge.
>
>Pureusenet was no better. Again, I couldn't post. I contacted support
>and was told I had to select a deeply-buried option to be able to post.
>I went to the indicated page and was told I couldn't enable posting
>because I didn't have a paid account, although I had signed up and given
>my credit card information. I replied to the support email explaining
>this problem. It's been 24 hours with no response. I cancelled the
>account. So far I haven't seen a charge from Pureusenet on my credit card.
>
>This is very disturbing. How can two providers that come with
>recommendations stay in business offering a service whose restrictions
>make it completely worthless?
>

Mine is easy. Get a VPN subscription and

At least you can access our USenet server.

>--
>Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com
>

--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Lest we forget 11 Nov 2023 Beware https://mindspring.com

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <uj7uag$2r66r$1@dont-email.me>,
> Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
> >
> > Pureusenet was no better. Again, I couldn't post. I contacted support
> > and was told I had to select a deeply-buried option to be able to
> > post. I went to the indicated page and was told I couldn't enable
> > posting because I didn't have a paid account, although I had signed up
> > and given my credit card information. I replied to the support email
> > explaining this problem. It's been 24 hours with no response. I
> > cancelled the account. So far I haven't seen a charge from Pureusenet
> > on my credit card.
> >
> > This is very disturbing. How can two providers that come with
> > recommendations stay in business offering a service whose restrictions
> > make it completely worthless?
>
> Mine is easy. Get a VPN subscription and

Doesn't everyone use a VPN these days?

It should be the first rule of using the internet.
> At least you can access our USenet server.

Nah... there are better Usenet services out there. 'NetKnow IS' propagates
spam to newsgroups I frequent and the news admin doesn't seem to want to
do anything about it!

Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> writes:
> It appeared to work anyway. However, I got errors trying to post,
> saying posting wasn't allowed on my server.

Lots of those providers have separate servers for reading and posting.
Maybe you needed to use a different server from them? Yeah they do
sound lame.

I think those companies' customers mostly want bulk download feeds for
binaries, rather than wanting to post.

IIRC when I first enrolled with eternal september, I wasn't allowed to
post, and I had to apply for posting privileges separately. Or that
might have been on Octanews, which I used before Eternal September.
Octanews was pretty good until it went out of business N years ago.

Paul Rubin wrote:

> Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> writes:
> > It appeared to work anyway. However, I got errors trying to post,
> > saying posting wasn't allowed on my server.
>
> Lots of those providers have separate servers for reading and posting.
> Maybe you needed to use a different server from them? Yeah they do
> sound lame.
>
> I think those companies' customers mostly want bulk download feeds for
> binaries, rather than wanting to post.

Yes. When I used Newshosting you had to request the ability to post to
text newsgroups as it wasn't enabled by default. IIRC, back then you had
to have had a Newshosting account for a month as well, so you couldn't
just sign-up and post to text groups. Not that too many people who paid
for their service required that anyway, as it was all about binaries and
searching NZB's, etc.

Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>
>This is very disturbing. How can two providers that come with
>recommendations stay in business offering a service whose restrictions
>make it completely worthless?

The vast majority of Usenet users today want to download warez from binary
groups and care nothing at all about discussion groups or text. You picked
two servers that cater to them.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article <nnd$7bc8ec37$42bf54b5@0aa4687090104251>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote:
>
>> In article <uj7uag$2r66r$1@dont-email.me>,
>> Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Pureusenet was no better. Again, I couldn't post. I contacted support
>> > and was told I had to select a deeply-buried option to be able to
>> > post. I went to the indicated page and was told I couldn't enable
>> > posting because I didn't have a paid account, although I had signed up
>> > and given my credit card information. I replied to the support email
>> > explaining this problem. It's been 24 hours with no response. I
>> > cancelled the account. So far I haven't seen a charge from Pureusenet
>> > on my credit card.
>> >
>> > This is very disturbing. How can two providers that come with
>> > recommendations stay in business offering a service whose restrictions
>> > make it completely worthless?
>>
>> Mine is easy. Get a VPN subscription and
>
>Doesn't everyone use a VPN these days?
>
>It should be the first rule of using the internet.
>
>> At least you can access our USenet server.
>
>Nah... there are better Usenet services out there. 'NetKnow IS' propagates
>spam to newsgroups I frequent and the news admin doesn't seem to want to
>do anything about it!

Drunk as ususal Blueshirt.
--
Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising!
Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
Merry Christmas 2023 and Happy New year 2024 Beware https://mindspring.com