rjd@cs.brown.edu (Rob Demillo) (12/29/89)
Here's an interesting sidenote: I was on GEnie last night, attending the Atari ST RT discussions. (Every Wednesday night at 10:00 pm EST). I brought up the USEnet->GEnie transfer topic. Most people didn't know it existed, and those that did were *glad* that it stopped. It seems that the USEnet messages were saturating the Atari ST section. (Too much info, too fast.) People found they couldn't keep up, even for the few days (hours?) it was operating. This makes sense. When I was administering a UUCP site a year ago, we'd get about 5 MBytes/week of USEnet articles. comp.sys.atari.st is one of the more voluminous sections...I wonder if GEnie took that into account. :) Probably started filling up their disk space. - Rob DeMillo | Internet: rjd@brown.cs.edu Brown University | BITnet: DEMILLO%BRNPSG.SPAN@STAR.STANFORD.EDU Planetary Science Group | Reality: 401-273-0804 (home) "I say you *are* the Messiah, Lord! And I ought to know, I've followed a few!"
dsmall@well.UUCP (David Small) (12/30/89)
The basenote describes the GEnie Wednesday night conference and the mention of the USENET, err, discussion there. Rob, the comp.sys.atari uplink to GEnie has barely been mentioned in the ST area. Remember, it's in a *completely* different area,the Gadgets RT, which is like a whole nuther newsgroup. It certainly wasn't flooding the ST area; it couldn't,it was in the Gadgets area. We kept it well under control in the Gadgets Category 10 all by itself. GEnie has awesome disk space -- they just don't delete notes. There's stuff on there going back for years. Anyway, I'm sure you had good motives, and just wanted to clear this up lest someone unfamiliar with GEnie think we were wreaking havoc inthe Atari ST RT ... nope, just one category, of 14 or so, in the Gadgets area. -- thanks, Dave / Gadgets
rjd@cs.brown.edu (Rob Demillo) (01/03/90)
In article <15253@well.UUCP> dsmall@well.UUCP (David Small) writes: > >The basenote describes the GEnie Wednesday night conference and the mention >of the USENET, err, discussion there. > > Rob, the comp.sys.atari uplink to GEnie has barely been mentioned in >the ST area. Remember, it's in a *completely* different area,the Gadgets RT, >which is like a whole nuther newsgroup. It certainly wasn't flooding the ST >area; it couldn't,it was in the Gadgets area. Actually, Dave...I did know that. As I was pointing out in the original posting, I have never even *seen* the USEnet uploads on GEnie. What I had mentioned was the fears/complaints/suttlebutt-rumors/etc of people who were on the Wednesday night GEnie conference - nothing more. > > GEnie has awesome disk space -- they just don't delete notes. There's >stuff on there going back for years. Actually, I've been noticing that lately. (Stuff going clear back to 1987.) What is their total disk space allocation? > > Anyway, I'm sure you had good motives, and just wanted to clear this >up lest someone unfamiliar with GEnie think we were wreaking havoc inthe >Atari ST RT ... nope, just one category, of 14 or so, in the Gadgets area. > My original intent was to relay feedback on the subject from GEnie users to USEnet posters, so they could get some sort of a feel for what was going on there. - Rob DeMillo | Internet: rjd@brown.cs.edu Brown University | BITnet: DEMILLO%BRNPSG.SPAN@STAR.STANFORD.EDU Planetary Science Group | Reality: 401-273-0804 (home) "I say you *are* the Messiah, Lord! And I ought to know, I've followed a few!"
towns@atari.UUCP (John Townsend) (01/05/90)
in article <23792@brunix.UUCP>, rjd@cs.brown.edu (Rob Demillo) says: > > Here's an interesting sidenote: > > I was on GEnie last night, attending the Atari ST RT discussions. > (Every Wednesday night at 10:00 pm EST). I brought up the > USEnet->GEnie transfer topic. Most people didn't know it > existed, and those that did were *glad* that it stopped. > It seems that the USEnet messages were saturating the Atari ST > section. (Too much info, too fast.) People found they > couldn't keep up, even for the few days (hours?) it was operating. > The USEnet UPLINK wasn't in the ST Roundtable. It was located in the Gadgets by Small RT. Most of the ST users didn't even know about it. -- John Townsend ames!atari!towns Atari Corp, Systems Test
rjd@cs.brown.edu (Rob Demillo) (01/05/90)
In article <1925@atari.UUCP> towns@atari.UUCP (John Townsend) writes: >in article <23792@brunix.UUCP>, rjd@cs.brown.edu (Rob Demillo) says: || || Here's an interesting sidenote: || || I was on GEnie last night, attending the Atari ST RT discussions. || (Every Wednesday night at 10:00 pm EST). I brought up the || USEnet-|GEnie transfer topic. Most people didn't know it || existed, and those that did were *glad* that it stopped. || It seems that the USEnet messages were saturating the Atari ST || section. (Too much info, too fast.) People found they || couldn't keep up, even for the few days (hours?) it was operating. || | |The USEnet UPLINK wasn't in the ST Roundtable. It was located in the |Gadgets by Small RT. Most of the ST users didn't even know about it. | |-- John Townsend ames!atari!towns | Atari Corp, Systems Test OK, now I'm starting to get irritated. This is the third or forth response like this that my message generated. Don't some of you *read* the messages you respond to? I clearly stated that the topic was brought up in the ST RT *DISCUSSIONS* on Wednesday night...I wasn't talking about where the UPLINK was located! Secondly, I stated that *most people didn't know about it*. Thirdly, and lastly, I only mentioned this here so that USEnet people got some sort of a feel as to what the GEnie side of this thought about the situation. - Rob DeMillo | Internet: rjd@brown.cs.edu Brown University | BITnet: DEMILLO%BRNPSG.SPAN@STAR.STANFORD.EDU Planetary Science Group | Reality: 401-273-0804 (home) "I say you *are* the Messiah, Lord! And I ought to know, I've followed a few!"
chad@norge.enet.dec.com (01/06/90)
>| USEnet-|GEnie transfer topic. Most people didn't know it >|| existed, and those that did were *glad* that it stopped. >|| It seems that the USEnet messages were saturating the Atari ST ^^^^^^^ big implication..... >|| section. (Too much info, too fast.) People found they >|| couldn't keep up, even for the few days (hours?) it was operating. >|| >| >|The USEnet UPLINK wasn't in the ST Roundtable. It was located in the >|Gadgets by Small RT. Most of the ST users didn't even know about it. >| >|-- John Townsend ames!atari!towns >| Atari Corp, Systems Test >OK, now I'm starting to get irritated. This is the third or forth >response like this that my message generated. >Don't some of you *read* the messages you respond to? I clearly stated that >the topic was brought up in the ST RT *DISCUSSIONS* on Wednesday >night...I wasn't talking about where the UPLINK was located! Rob, Not to irritate you more, but don't *you* read your own replies??? You implied in your original posting that it (the Uplink) was saturating the ST RT when you said: >|| It seems that the USEnet messages were saturating the Atari ST >|| section. (Too much info, too fast.) People found they You said Atari ST section which heavily implies the Atari ST RT Chad DEC has no opinions... I've never even been on any pay service... ----------------------------------------------------------
rjd@cs.brown.edu (Rob Demillo) (01/06/90)
In article <7253@shlump.nac.dec.com> chad@norge.enet.dec.com () writes: > >Rob, > What? >Not to irritate you more, then why bring it up? Because you want to have "the last word?" > but don't *you* read your own replies??? You implied >in your original posting that it (the Uplink) was saturating the ST RT >when you said: > >>|| It seems that the USEnet messages were saturating the Atari ST >>|| section. (Too much info, too fast.) People found they > This is conviently taken out of context... No, what I was reporting here was that people who brought the topic up on the RT discussion (and there were not that many) said they were afraid of saturation of the section the material was being posted to. They were talking about it as though they had already made use of the uplink information. If they had, or if they hadn't but just said they had I have *no idea.* Once again...my little one paragraph comment was intended to briefly report on what I had heard on that discussion. I was at that discussion, you, Chad, were not. It was an informational paragraph for the benifit of USEnet users who did not have access to GEnie. I did *NOT* intend this to be a harange on *me* as to the validity of what was or was not said. Enough? >You said Atari ST section which heavily implies the Atari ST RT > Give me a break....play semantics on your own time. If you *knew* I was referring to the Gadgets RT, then why bring any of this up? To show that *you* knew the difference? - Rob DeMillo | Internet: rjd@brown.cs.edu Brown University | BITnet: DEMILLO%BRNPSG.SPAN@STAR.STANFORD.EDU Planetary Science Group | Reality: 401-273-0804 (home) "I say you *are* the Messiah, Lord! And I ought to know, I've followed a few!"