On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 14:25:21 GMT, "Painius"
wrote:

"Rick" wrote in message...
...

Hold on a minute there, Sparky. Binaries are just fine in any Usenet
group as long as they aren't prohibited by an individual group's official
Charter. The notion of "text-only" groups exists only in the minds of
some news admins who for the last few years have been trying to
isolate binary posts to the alt.binaries.* hierarchy.

In the case of alt.astronomy there is absolutely nothing in the Charter
that prohibits binary posts. See:
ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/control...t.astronomy.gz

RickW

Well, then, Rick, i suppose we'll have to inform all of the ISPs
that allocate their server space in part based upon whether or
not a group is text-only or binary?

yo. P. i think i understand where you're coming from. OK. the thing
that makes me scratch my head is the requisite formality of any
charters that don't take into account the down spiralling cost of
computing, servers and memory, and the increase in user power, speed
and storage. the times, they're a changin.

Binary groups have "binary" in their names, Rick, and these
groups allow both text and image posts. I suppose there may
be groups that do not have "binary" in their names that may
allow images, yet these groups would have to so-state this in
their charters AND would have to inform ISPs of this.

ok

Binaries do NOT have to be specifically prohibited by a
notation within a newsgroup's charter. Binaries do have to be
specifically authorized by the charter.

Alt.astronomy is a text-only newsgroup. It's sister newsgroup,
alt.binaries.pictures.astro, is where images related to astronomy
are welcomed. If your premise is correct, then why do you think
a.b.p.a was created in the first place?

lack of space, lack of power, general interest rather than focused
targeting.

There is also the option of creating a web presence and posting
images on your website. Then html hyperlinks can be posted to
newsgroups. I see these and visit them all the time. Sometimes
i comment and sometimes i don't.

this is OK and a good idea anyway. if you don't beat your own drum,
who's going to beat it for you?

The occasional posting of a small image can be tolerated to some
degree. The beef that i have even with this is that newcomers see
this and think it's okay to post images of any size anytime. So it's
easy for this to get out of hand. ISPs will only tolerate so much of
this before they may exercise their option of dropping the newsgroup
from their server.

as i'm no computer guru, i find myself skeptical on this point. if
anything, the usenet has got to be growing exponentially, due to the
exterior reality. for the folks that don't have cable, dsl or
satellite access, its a beautiful world in here.

This is why many people feel strongly enough to
inform an image poster's ISP about improper posting of an image to
a text-only newsgroup.

getting out my crystal ball (my bald head), i can see this falling by
the wayside as time goes by. the distinction between any newsgroup
will be the community that resides there, not the title of the group
that was set up when the net was young.

This is almost always against the ISP's rules.
I personally know of no exceptions.

of course, i have been known to wrong.

And don't call me Sparky g (haven't been called that since
tindergarten)

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

lighten up Sparky! g