OT: How to actually complain to GOOGLE

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Owamanga, Feb 9, 2005.

  1. Owamanga

    Owamanga Guest

    Regarding the massive quantities of troll-induced responses the
    photography news-groups receive from innocent (if somewhat technically
    challenged) netzians on a range of non-photographic subjects I offer
    the following:

    Google is the entity that allows this person or people to create an
    account and then post articles of this type (follow-ups to different
    news-groups than the original) with no accountability. So far, they
    have done nothing to stop him. As far as I am can see, they have *all*
    originated from the googlegroups network.

    Having read the many Google complaint threads in
    news.admin.net-abuse.policy, and actually followed Google's guidelines
    to complaint myself, I have come to the conclusion that using Google's
    'complain here' URL is futile.

    Google have recently even taken the additional step of hiding the
    original poster's IP address, so the usual method of tracking back to
    an ISP is not possible. They simply don't care.

    I'm not suggesting people don't use the URL avenue, because there is a
    very slight chance that someone counts the traffic, but it's highly
    unlikely any human actually reads each complaint.

    If anyone feels the need to *really* complain to Google, I suggest you
    complain by fax, phone or email directly to one of the following PR
    staff, based on your geographic location & choice of language - or
    send a different email to all of them, your call:

    You can fax Google Inc, Mountain View California: (650) 618-1499

    Source: http://www.google.com/intl/en/contact/corporate.html

    If you feel like faxing them 20 pages of the headers (about 24 hours
    worth of the shite we have all to wade through daily) which show that
    the original message being replied to was from googlegroups, go ahead.

    Or phone/email the following:

    Corporate PR
    David Krane
    +1.650.623.4096


    Corporate PR
    Steve Langdon
    +1.650.623.4950


    International PR
    Debbie Frost
    +1.650.623.4660


    UK PR
    Ema Linaker
    +44.20.7031.3130


    Japan PR
    Kaori Saito
    +81.3.6415.5352


    France PR
    Myriam Boublil
    +33.0.1.56.60.54.40


    Germany PR
    Stefan Keuchel
    +49.40.80.817.9115


    Italy PR
    Stefano Hesse
    +39.02.6203.2200


    Also send a copy of any faxes or emails to your ISP (specifically,
    your usenet provider), which may provide them ammunition for a future
    UDP against Google.

    --
    Owamanga!
     
    Owamanga, Feb 9, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Ask your news provider to filter Google more aggressively. Their
    spam/troll floods are well known with admins.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Feb 10, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Owamanga

    Stacey Guest

    Kevin McMurtrie wrote:

    > Ask your news provider to filter Google more aggressively. Their
    > spam/troll floods are well known with admins.



    The problem is these aren't FROM google groups posters. Someone using google
    posts to another group and the sets the responces here so we get FLOODED
    with legitimate responders who don't realise they are being scammed into
    flooding this group. There is no good way to filter this garbage. Obviously
    a very childish person with WAY too much time on their hands doing this.
    --

    Stacey
     
    Stacey, Feb 10, 2005
    #3
  4. Owamanga

    Tom Guest

    "Stacey" <> wrote in message news:...
    > Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
    >
    > > Ask your news provider to filter Google more aggressively. Their
    > > spam/troll floods are well known with admins.

    >
    >
    > The problem is these aren't FROM google groups posters. Someone using google
    > posts to another group and the sets the responces here so we get FLOODED
    > with legitimate responders who don't realise they are being scammed into
    > flooding this group. There is no good way to filter this garbage.


    Nonsense. Google is perfectly capable of disallowing redirected
    follow up's. They are also perfectly capable of disallowing Usenet
    posting altogether, which is hopefully what will eventually happen
    if enough people yell loud enough.
     
    Tom, Feb 10, 2005
    #4
  5. Owamanga

    Stacey Guest

    Tom wrote:

    > "Stacey" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
    >>
    >> > Ask your news provider to filter Google more aggressively. Their
    >> > spam/troll floods are well known with admins.

    >>
    >>
    >> The problem is these aren't FROM google groups posters. Someone using
    >> google posts to another group and the sets the responces here so we get
    >> FLOODED with legitimate responders who don't realise they are being
    >> scammed into flooding this group. There is no good way to filter this
    >> garbage.

    >
    > Nonsense. Google is perfectly capable of disallowing redirected
    > follow up's. They are also perfectly capable of disallowing Usenet
    > posting altogether, which is hopefully what will eventually happen
    > if enough people yell loud enough.


    Google doesn't care is the problem. trolls is just more traffic and hits to
    their site. It doesn't affect their bottom line and like I said there is
    no way for your ISP to filter this stuff as there is nothing about google
    in the headers.
    --

    Stacey
     
    Stacey, Feb 10, 2005
    #5
  6. Owamanga

    paul Guest

    Tom wrote:
    >
    > ...Google is perfectly capable of disallowing redirected
    > follow up's. They are also perfectly capable of disallowing Usenet
    > posting altogether, which is hopefully what will eventually happen
    > if enough people yell loud enough.


    That should be very doable to disallow followup to different groups than
    the original posting. It's an odd configuration that would seldom have
    legitimate use. For that matter, cross posting could be disabled without
    any great suffering.

    In the mean time, mozilla allows me to ignore a thread by simply typing
    "K" and I never see it again so it's not been that much trouble for me.
    Not sure the shortcut for Outlook but it's worth learning.
     
    paul, Feb 10, 2005
    #6
  7. Owamanga

    Don Dunlap Guest

    Would it help if everyone on the forum sent an e-mail to Google saying that
    they would not use the Google search site unless something was done to
    correct the problem? We would have to also say that we would actively
    campaign other forums to do the same. I know most people on the forum
    wouldn't follow through, but maybe enough would to make it effective.
    Google makes their money when people use their site to navigate to business
    sites.

    Is this worth a try?

    Don

    "paul" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Tom wrote:
    >>
    >> ...Google is perfectly capable of disallowing redirected
    >> follow up's. They are also perfectly capable of disallowing Usenet
    >> posting altogether, which is hopefully what will eventually happen
    >> if enough people yell loud enough.

    >
    > That should be very doable to disallow followup to different groups than
    > the original posting. It's an odd configuration that would seldom have
    > legitimate use. For that matter, cross posting could be disabled without
    > any great suffering.
    >
    > In the mean time, mozilla allows me to ignore a thread by simply typing
    > "K" and I never see it again so it's not been that much trouble for me.
    > Not sure the shortcut for Outlook but it's worth learning.
     
    Don Dunlap, Feb 10, 2005
    #7
  8. Owamanga

    Owamanga Guest

    On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 03:28:29 -0500, Stacey <> wrote:

    >Tom wrote:
    >
    >> "Stacey" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
    >>>
    >>> > Ask your news provider to filter Google more aggressively. Their
    >>> > spam/troll floods are well known with admins.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> The problem is these aren't FROM google groups posters. Someone using
    >>> google posts to another group and the sets the responces here so we get
    >>> FLOODED with legitimate responders who don't realise they are being
    >>> scammed into flooding this group. There is no good way to filter this
    >>> garbage.

    >>
    >> Nonsense. Google is perfectly capable of disallowing redirected
    >> follow up's.


    Yes, this would by BLINDINGLY simple for them to do. But they refuse.

    >>They are also perfectly capable of disallowing Usenet
    >> posting altogether, which is hopefully what will eventually happen
    >> if enough people yell loud enough.

    >
    >Google doesn't care is the problem. trolls is just more traffic and hits to
    >their site. It doesn't affect their bottom line and like I said there is
    >no way for your ISP to filter this stuff as there is nothing about google
    >in the headers.


    Ah, but they do have something in common:

    References: <>

    Google's name is on every reply. They are the source of the evil.

    Until it's fixed, killfile the whole damn network.

    --
    Owamanga!
     
    Owamanga, Feb 10, 2005
    #8
  9. Owamanga

    Guest

    Sorry, f-up ignored since I don't read rec.photo.digital

    Stacey <> writes:

    > Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
    >
    >> Ask your news provider to filter Google more aggressively. Their
    >> spam/troll floods are well known with admins.

    >
    >
    > The problem is these aren't FROM google groups posters. Someone using google
    > posts to another group and the sets the responces here so we get FLOODED
    > with legitimate responders who don't realise they are being scammed into
    > flooding this group. There is no good way to filter this garbage.


    That depends on your newsreader. I now kill all messages which are
    posted via googlenews, and all messages which refer to another message
    posted via googlenews. The effect is dramatic. I will miss one or the
    other reasonable article posted via googlenews, but it appears as if
    this is a rather small number.

    > Obviously
    > a very childish person with WAY too much time on their hands doing this.


    Yes, and google is happily accepting it.

    Matthias
    > --
    >
    > Stacey
     
    , Feb 10, 2005
    #9
  10. Owamanga

    Ben Thomas Guest

    Don Dunlap wrote:
    > Would it help if everyone on the forum sent an e-mail to Google saying that
    > they would not use the Google search site unless something was done to
    > correct the problem? We would have to also say that we would actively
    > campaign other forums to do the same. I know most people on the forum
    > wouldn't follow through, but maybe enough would to make it effective.
    > Google makes their money when people use their site to navigate to business
    > sites.
    >
    > Is this worth a try?


    I sent a complaint and suggested they block posts that have follow-ups only set
    to groups other than the group the original post was posted to.

    --
    --
    Ben Thomas - Software Engineer - Melbourne, Australia

    My Digital World:
    Kodak DX6490, Canon i9950, Pioneer A05;
    Hitachi 37" HD plasma display, DGTEC 2000A,
    Denon 2800, H/K AVR4500, Whatmough Encore;
    Sony Ericsson K700i, Palm Tungsten T.

    Disclaimer:
    Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
    relate to the official business of my employer shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
     
    Ben Thomas, Feb 10, 2005
    #10
  11. Owamanga

    Bill Rude Guest

    On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 21:50:02 GMT, Ben Thomas <> wrote:

    >I sent a complaint and suggested they block posts that have follow-ups only set
    >to groups other than the group the original post was posted to.


    Send another complaint and tell them that should trun off the poster's ability
    to control follow ups to avoid a UDP.
     
    Bill Rude, Feb 10, 2005
    #11
  12. Owamanga

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 07:55:49 -0500, in rec.photo.digital "Don Dunlap"
    <> wrote:

    >Would it help if everyone on the forum sent an e-mail to Google saying that
    >they would not use the Google search site unless something was done to
    >correct the problem? We would have to also say that we would actively
    >campaign other forums to do the same. I know most people on the forum
    >wouldn't follow through, but maybe enough would to make it effective.
    >Google makes their money when people use their site to navigate to business
    >sites.
    >
    >Is this worth a try?


    You could also use the X-No-Archive: yes tag to stop Google from archiving
    your posts. And set your newreader to preserve this setting if you reply to
    someone who has done this. Personally, I do this as I object to the google
    groups copywright/terms of use statements. It's gotten less obtrusive with
    time, but is still more than I believe is the minimum necessary for their
    service.
    ----------
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf, Feb 10, 2005
    #12
  13. Owamanga

    Confused Guest

    wrote:

    > Newsgroups: rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
    > Subject: Re: OT: How to actually complain to GOOGLE
    > Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:28:06 +0100
    > Organization: CERN - European Laboratory for Particle Physics
    > Message-ID: <>
    > NNTP-Posting-Host: pcitps345.cern.ch
    > X-Trace: sunnews.cern.ch 1108042091 20457 (None) 137.138.33.76
    >
    > Sorry, f-up ignored since I don't read rec.photo.digital


    Thanks for pointing out the bloody obvious!

    Kill file users who cross post!

    Jeff
     
    Confused, Feb 11, 2005
    #13
  14. In article <>,
    Stacey <> wrote:

    > Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
    >
    > > Ask your news provider to filter Google more aggressively. Their
    > > spam/troll floods are well known with admins.

    >
    >
    > The problem is these aren't FROM google groups posters. Someone using google
    > posts to another group and the sets the responces here so we get FLOODED
    > with legitimate responders who don't realise they are being scammed into
    > flooding this group. There is no good way to filter this garbage. Obviously
    > a very childish person with WAY too much time on their hands doing this.


    The source is Google. The floods we see here are followups to spam
    having a follow-up header set here.

    Google has several security problems that make them an excellent
    resource for Usenet abusers.

    - They hope to defer abuse handling by showing the poster's IP address.
    That could work to a small extent but they accept postings from
    unmaintained networks.

    - Abuse complaints are not handled in a timely manner, or even at all.
    Forgeries are not cancelled and unmaintained networks are not blocked
    from posting.

    - Account verification works with malformed and deceptive e-mail
    addresses. It accepts
    "Spoofed Name <spoofed@address>"<verification@address>

    - Outgoing spam detection is weak or nonexistent.
     
    Kevin McMurtrie, Feb 11, 2005
    #14
  15. "Ed Ruf" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 07:55:49 -0500, in rec.photo.digital "Don Dunlap"
    > <> wrote:
    >
    > >Would it help if everyone on the forum sent an e-mail to Google saying

    that
    > >they would not use the Google search site unless something was done to
    > >correct the problem? We would have to also say that we would actively
    > >campaign other forums to do the same. I know most people on the forum
    > >wouldn't follow through, but maybe enough would to make it effective.
    > >Google makes their money when people use their site to navigate to

    business
    > >sites.
    > >
    > >Is this worth a try?

    >
    > You could also use the X-No-Archive: yes tag to stop Google from archiving
    > your posts. And set your newreader to preserve this setting if you reply

    to
    > someone who has done this. Personally, I do this as I object to the google
    > groups copywright/terms of use statements. It's gotten less obtrusive with
    > time, but is still more than I believe is the minimum necessary for their
    > service.


    FYI, the way Google Groups2-Beta now treats X-No-Archive will more than
    likely still result in the post getting archived.

    You see, the post will still be available on Google Groups for seven days.
    Now, assuming no one actually quotes the post in seven days--only then the
    post will be no longer be available and will never be searchable (at least,
    that's what Groups2-Beta help seems to lead me to believe).

    Realistically, all it takes is for one person to quote the post, and guess
    what--it's archived as part of someone else's reply.
     
    Daniel W. Rouse Jr., Feb 11, 2005
    #15
  16. Owamanga

    Ernie Klein Guest

    In article <>,
    Kevin McMurtrie <> wrote:

    > In article <>,
    > Stacey <> wrote:
    >
    > > Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
    > >
    > > > Ask your news provider to filter Google more aggressively. Their
    > > > spam/troll floods are well known with admins.

    > >
    > >
    > > The problem is these aren't FROM google groups posters. Someone using google
    > > posts to another group and the sets the responces here so we get FLOODED
    > > with legitimate responders who don't realise they are being scammed into
    > > flooding this group. There is no good way to filter this garbage. Obviously
    > > a very childish person with WAY too much time on their hands doing this.

    >
    > The source is Google. The floods we see here are followups to spam
    > having a follow-up header set here.
    >

    I simply told my newsreader filter that if the 'From:' contains 'google'
    OR if the 'Organization:' contains 'google', OR if the 'References:'
    contain 'google' then kill the article. Instead of seeing 500+ unread
    articles, most being junk, I now only see about 140, most of which are
    legitimate. Most legitimate posters don't use google so the chance of
    killing a good article is a chance I am willing to take in order to
    eliminate the junk. Most (good) newsreaders have a similar filter
    option.

    --
    -Ernie-

    "There are only two kinds of computer users -- those who have
    suffered a catastrophic hard drive failure, and those who will."

    Have you done your backup today?
     
    Ernie Klein, Feb 13, 2005
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. m.chauhan7

    Bill complain still no reply

    m.chauhan7, Feb 19, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    588
    Thund3rstruck_N0i
    Feb 19, 2004
  2. Replies:
    9
    Views:
    429
    shido xavier
    Feb 22, 2006
  3. Jim Garner

    Where to I complain about my Pentax?

    Jim Garner, Nov 10, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    595
    Samuel Paik
    Nov 12, 2003
  4. Cernovog

    Who to complain to about DVDSoon.com?

    Cernovog, Mar 22, 2006, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    925
    anthony
    Mar 23, 2006
  5. Fred

    How do I complain to google?

    Fred, May 7, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,961
    Complainaboutgoogle
    Dec 8, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page