Posting pictures on this group

"Marco Leon" wrote in message
ups.com...
Well, if a newsgroup provider can only turn on/off binaries as a group,
then that makes sense. My point was that images in rec groups would add
a negligible volume. However. if that means allowing all binaries on
all text-only groups then I agree, that's a bad idea.

An ISP committed to the idea could easily implement a per-newsgroup policy.
In fact, they would probably simply flag the text newsgroup where binaries
are allowed as a binary newsgroup (there's no restriction on text messages
within a binary newsgroup).

The real issue is that there are genuine reasons for not allowing binaries
in a text-only newsgroup. It's much more wasteful than you seem to realize.

In a previous article, "Peter Duniho" said:
"Marco Leon" wrote in message
oups.com...
Well, if a newsgroup provider can only turn on/off binaries as a group,
then that makes sense. My point was that images in rec groups would add
a negligible volume. However. if that means allowing all binaries on
all text-only groups then I agree, that's a bad idea.

An ISP committed to the idea could easily implement a per-newsgroup policy.

And hire about 8 more full time news admins to keep these per-newsgroup
policy flags up to date.

In fact, they would probably simply flag the text newsgroup where binaries
are allowed as a binary newsgroup (there's no restriction on text messages
within a binary newsgroup).

Or they could put all the newsgroups that allow binaries in one place -
i.e.: alt.binaries.*, so we can control expire times, spool space and
feeds with one configuration.

Oh wait, that's what we already do.



--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
chown -R us /yourbase
- Simon Slavin

In article ,
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

Or they could put all the newsgroups that allow binaries in one place -
i.e.: alt.binaries.*, so we can control expire times, spool space and
feeds with one configuration.

Oh wait, that's what we already do.

Circa 1996 there was a guy running a cancelbot on "large" binaries
in non-binary groups (Richard somethingorother). Is that still
happening or did he give that up?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

Or they could put all the newsgroups that allow binaries in one place -
i.e.: alt.binaries.*, so we can control expire times, spool space and
feeds with one configuration.

Oh wait, that's what we already do.

Circa 1996 there was a guy running a cancelbot on "large" binaries
in non-binary groups (Richard somethingorother). Is that still
happening or did he give that up?


He probably gave up because most servers stopped accepting cancel messages.

In a previous article, Bob Noel said:
In article ,
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

Or they could put all the newsgroups that allow binaries in one place -
i.e.: alt.binaries.*, so we can control expire times, spool space and
feeds with one configuration.

Oh wait, that's what we already do.

Circa 1996 there was a guy running a cancelbot on "large" binaries
in non-binary groups (Richard somethingorother). Is that still
happening or did he give that up?

I run cleanfeed to delete binaries in non-binary groups. However it
hasn't been updated in a while, so I don't think it woks on yenc.


--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
Everywhere I go I'm asked if I think the university stifles writers. My
opinion is that they don't stifle enough of them. There's many a bestseller
that could have been prevented by a good teacher. -- Flannery O'Connor

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
An ISP committed to the idea could easily implement a per-newsgroup
policy.

And hire about 8 more full time news admins to keep these per-newsgroup
policy flags up to date.

Well, I *did* say "committed to the idea". I'm not saying it'd be a *good*
idea, just that there's no reason it can't be done.

[...]
Or they could put all the newsgroups that allow binaries in one place -
i.e.: alt.binaries.*, so we can control expire times, spool space and
feeds with one configuration.

Not if they want to implement a per-newsgroup policy, they couldn't.

Oh wait, that's what we already do.

Then you obviously don't implement a per-newsgroup policy. So?

Pete