[nights] Like everything, it's been mostly full of crap since it started, but it's only been in the last few years that the crap has expressed a desire to leap down everyone's throat.

The big cautionary tale of the net is Usenet, which although some people manage to keep active newsgroups going (using I don't know what antispam measures), is now almost entirely spam. I've been working recently on a little predator/prey population interactives, and I wonder if the cycles of spam-genuine content follow a similar statistical pattern. i.e. the population of predators increases, diminishing the population of prey, which in turn leads to extinction for the predators...

[Projoy] I think part of the problem with Usenet is that most people aren't even aware it exists any more, and those who are aware of it, by and large, consider it too full of spam to be useful. For this reason, I don't think you'd find a cyclical pattern, but rather a gradual tail-off with time.

[Projoy] I see almost no spam at all on Usenet. I read mainly rec.arts.sf.* and a few others. Where do you get the idea that it's mostly spam? (Er, I probably won't see a reply to this for a couple of weeks -- off to Glasgow at the crack of dawn tomorrow.)

[Raak] Well, as you won't see this I can make any claim I like. :) I don't know, but I assume the admin of some newsgroups have anti-spam measures in place, or there are anti-spam measures at the ISP news server level. No idea, really. I also have frequented a rec.arts newsgroup or two (and I believe the drwho one still goes on strong). I used to read a group or two on the alt. hierarchy, but would not attempt it now. They were swamped in spam years ago.