I disagree with this comment: > We should be happy that they have done anything, the more likely outcome was for no comprehensive archive ever to have been mad

I disagree with this comment: > We should be happy that they have done anything, the more likely outcome was for no comprehensive archive ever to have been made. I think that's not the case, I think the existence of Google Groups is regarded as "good enough" by groups that might otherwise be doing archiving (Internet Archive, for one). That Groups started out with good intentions isn't surprising, but it has evolved into something completely different. If the intent was to archive an important part of the history of the internet, viewing posts wouldn't be behind a login-wall.