M51

beavith wrote:
BEAUTIFUL! what kind of rig do you have?

maybe i'm selfish, but i don't have a big problem with bandwidth
(earthlink newstest with up to 3 months backup) or download speed (DSL
and Cable) so, while i'm only one guy, the odd picture is OK by me.


It's definitely OK by me, also.
I pay extra for my bandwidth, and the convenience of seeing a
beautiful picture here & now is what bandwidth is all about.

I don't understand something. My newsreader shows the size of the
message in the header listing. Are the lo-bandwidth users too dumb to
see the message size and stay away? If they must catch a glimpse of the
text, can't they push the STOP download button?

Ah, I do understand. Human nature. Logic has nothing to do with it,
the whiners have to have their cheese.

Winfield

Hi Winfield You have it right. I don't even have a "real" computer,and
I don't mind. A picture saves a thousand words. Who is kidding "WHO"
I hate when people tell us what is best for us. I don't mind eating my
salad with a regular fork. (go figure) I love those pictures and to
me that is more important than a person that is a snipper Bert

In message 0kGJa.68115$Dr3.46650@fed1read02, WinField
writes

beavith wrote:
BEAUTIFUL! what kind of rig do you have?
maybe i'm selfish, but i don't have a big problem with bandwidth
(earthlink newstest with up to 3 months backup) or download speed (DSL
and Cable) so, while i'm only one guy, the odd picture is OK by me.


It's definitely OK by me, also.
I pay extra for my bandwidth, and the convenience of seeing a
beautiful picture here & now is what bandwidth is all about.

I don't understand something. My newsreader shows the size of the
message in the header listing. Are the lo-bandwidth users too dumb to
see the message size and stay away? If they must catch a glimpse of
the text, can't they push the STOP download button?

Ah, I do understand. Human nature. Logic has nothing to do with it,
the whiners have to have their cheese.

It's not just a question of bandwidth, but the way Usenet is organised,
and in particular the way ISPs organise the space they allocate to
different newsgroups and different types of group.
Also, some people have systems that download the whole file without
actually "looking" at it.
But did Jim actually post his picture on alt.binaries.pictures.astro? It
would be most welcome there. And if he's reading this, start the subject
line with ASTRO: because most people have their readers set to ignore
anything that doesn't start with ASTRO:. Keeps out the spam.
--
Greetings from Airstrip One!

Mail to jsilverlight AT merseia.fsnet.co.uk is welcome.
Or visit Jonathan's Space Place http:\\www.merseia.fsnet.co.uk

"WinField" wrote...
in message news:0kGJa.68115$Dr3.46650@fed1read02...

beavith wrote:
BEAUTIFUL! what kind of rig do you have?

maybe i'm selfish, but i don't have a big problem with bandwidth
(earthlink newstest with up to 3 months backup) or download speed (DSL
and Cable) so, while i'm only one guy, the odd picture is OK by me.


It's definitely OK by me, also.
I pay extra for my bandwidth, and the convenience of seeing a
beautiful picture here & now is what bandwidth is all about.

I don't understand something. My newsreader shows the size of the
message in the header listing. Are the lo-bandwidth users too dumb to
see the message size and stay away? If they must catch a glimpse of the
text, can't they push the STOP download button?

Ah, I do understand. Human nature. Logic has nothing to do with it,
the whiners have to have their cheese.

Winfield

Winfield, you bonehead...

Bandwidth is just one part of it. The problem seems to be that
some newusers are too dumb to read up on UseNet etiquette
before they post. UseNet is organized a certain way. And every
ISP warns their newusers to read up on "netiquette." But do they?

Every netiquette brief i've read has something in it about not posting
images to text-only groups. So either newusers don't read them, or
they need to improve their reading-comprehension skills.

Or maybe they're just boneheads... like some people we know?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Lessons of time
in the presents of rhymes...
The essence of time
is the presence of primes.

Indelibly yours,
Painius

"Painius" wrote in message ...
"WinField" wrote...
in message news:0kGJa.68115$Dr3.46650@fed1read02...

beavith wrote:
BEAUTIFUL! what kind of rig do you have?

maybe i'm selfish, but i don't have a big problem with bandwidth
(earthlink newstest with up to 3 months backup) or download speed (DSL
and Cable) so, while i'm only one guy, the odd picture is OK by me.


It's definitely OK by me, also.
I pay extra for my bandwidth, and the convenience of seeing a
beautiful picture here & now is what bandwidth is all about.

I don't understand something. My newsreader shows the size of the
message in the header listing. Are the lo-bandwidth users too dumb to
see the message size and stay away? If they must catch a glimpse of the
text, can't they push the STOP download button?

Ah, I do understand. Human nature. Logic has nothing to do with it,
the whiners have to have their cheese.

Winfield

Winfield, you bonehead...

Bandwidth is just one part of it. The problem seems to be that
some newusers are too dumb to read up on UseNet etiquette
before they post. UseNet is organized a certain way. And every
ISP warns their newusers to read up on "netiquette." But do they?

Every netiquette brief i've read has something in it about not posting
images to text-only groups. So either newusers don't read them, or
they need to improve their reading-comprehension skills.

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

"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?

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.

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?

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.

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

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

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
If the binary system is Love,
then the decimal system's an Orgy!

Paine Ellsworth

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

"Painius" wrote in message ...
"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

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?

No, because most ISPs in the world do not have separate
servers for the alt.binaries hierarchy. It doesn't matter where a
binary is posted, it takes the same amount of space.

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.

Absolute nonsense. Again, the notion that binary posts are limited
to groups with "binaries" in their names is a recent fabrication by a
relatively small group of news admins, primarily in the U.S.

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.

More absolute nonsense. Yes, they do. And no, they don't.

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?

Because Usenet Charters cannot be changed, and because
certain news admins are trying to isolate binary Usenet posts
into one hierarchy.

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.

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

This group is not "text only". Binaries posted to this group are
not improper as they are not prohibited by the Charter. You
should stop confusing your own ISP's rules with established
Usenet protocol. End of story.

RickW

Your world is an illusion, Rick. The real world is very different
from that which you perceive. I suggest a reality check and a
good enema!

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Twinkle twinkle little star,
I don't wonder whatch you are,
What i *really* want to see...
Is there someone there like me?

Paine Ellsworth