rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson) (05/26/87)
I'm now a 'paying' USENET member (by virtue of the uunet experiment),
I've been watching my phone costs using Jack Bonn's 'uucost' program.
I've subscribed to all the source groups. Tonight I waited while 45
minutes of traffic came in over comp.sources.misc. I could hardly
-------
contain myself waiting to see what new goodies the net had brought
me. Well, I was struck down with disappointment when I discovered
that the $2.25 I just spent was:
1) A REPOST of
2) A UUENCODED, BINARY copy of
3) A SHAREWARE program (ARC520), which
4) You can get on nearly any local RBBS
This came through a MODERATED group. I was under the impression that
items 2) and 3) were strictly forbidden on the net. And I thought
that the delays of having a moderated group were supposed to be
balanced by the benefits of eliminating these sort of postings.
I certainly didn't want to spend the money for this. Any net-guru's
care to comment?
Give USENET source, or give it death!
--
Rick Richardson, President, PC Research, Inc.
(201) 922-1134 (voice, nights) OR (201) 834-1378 (voice, days)
seismo!uunet!pcrat!rick
ihnp4!castor!pcrat!rickchuq%plaid@Sun.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) (05/26/87)
>I'm now a 'paying' USENET member (by virtue of the uunet experiment), >I've been watching my phone costs using Jack Bonn's 'uucost' program. >I've subscribed to all the source groups. Tonight I waited while 45 >minutes of traffic came in over comp.sources.misc. I could hardly > ------- >contain myself waiting to see what new goodies the net had brought >me. Well, I was struck down with disappointment when I discovered >that the $2.25 I just spent was: > 1) A REPOST of > 2) A UUENCODED, BINARY copy of > 3) A SHAREWARE program (ARC520), which > 4) You can get on nearly any local RBBS > >This came through a MODERATED group. I was under the impression that >items 2) and 3) were strictly forbidden on the net. And I thought >that the delays of having a moderated group were supposed to be >balanced by the benefits of eliminating these sort of postings. >I certainly didn't want to spend the money for this. Any net-guru's >care to comment? Yes, we had this argument, what, a year ago? Lots of yelling, the result being that (basically) this is a net with lots of different people and interests, and not everything out there is going to be (or should be) of interest to everyone. That's the breaks. You found a case of something that you can't use, but is of use to lots of other people. That happens. So, two comments: o Isn't it wonderful that we live in a world where so many needs can be serviced at a relatively low cost? And that there ARE so many different viewpoints and sources of informations? o If we ARE going to restart this argument, can someone please let me know when it is over so I can resubscrive to the group? (As a side comment, traditionally when these flame wars start up, the argument takes up a LOT more net bandwidth than the original "problem" and gets a lot less accomplished) Enjoy diversity! chuq Chuq Von Rospach chuq@sun.COM [I don't read flames] There is no statute of limitations on stupidity
campbell@maynard.UUCP (05/27/87)
In article <315@pcrat.UUCP> rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson) gripes about: > 1) A REPOST of > 2) A UUENCODED, BINARY copy of > 3) A SHAREWARE program (ARC520), which > 4) You can get on nearly any local RBBS I agree. I, also, was annoyed to have spent real money and tied up valuable disk space for binaries for a machine I don't even own, and even if I did it wouldn't be running the "operating system" (I'm using the term *very* loosely) for which the aforementioned program was intended. Please let's keep binaries off the net. -- Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc. Internet: campbell@maynard.BSW.COM 120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109 uucp: {husc6,mirror,think}!maynard!campbell +1 617 367 6846
jeff@necntc.UUCP (05/28/87)
In article <922@maynard.BSW.COM> campbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes: >I agree. I, also, was annoyed to have spent real money and tied up valuable >disk space for binaries for a machine I don't even own, and even if I did >it wouldn't be running the "operating system" (I'm using the term *very* >loosely) for which the aforementioned program was intended. This is a very narrow view of things - you are not forced to accept any and all news groups that exist; that is what the backbones are there for. Ask you feeds not to transmit the binary groups and your 'gripe' is mute. Any other group you don't like can receive a similar fate. Some things take a long time to sink in... enough said, jj -- Jeff Janock - NEC Electronics +1 617 655 8833 jeff@necntc.NEC.COM {ames, decvax, harvard, linus, mit-eddie}!necntc!jeff
sl@van-bc.UUCP (05/28/87)
In article <***@*******.***.***> ********@*******.**** (***** ********) writes: >In article <***@*****.****> ****@*****.**** (**** **********) gripes about: > >> 1) A REPOST of >> 2) A UUENCODED, BINARY copy of >> 3) A SHAREWARE program (ARC520), which >> 4) You can get on nearly any local RBBS > >I agree. I, also, was annoyed to have spent real money and tied up valuable >disk space for binaries for a machine I don't even own, and even if I did >it wouldn't be running the "operating system" (I'm using the term *very* >loosely) for which the aforementioned program was intended. > If nothing else UUNET promises to bring some reality into this net. The backbone sites have been complaining about this for ages. All they got for their troubles was flame after flame after flame. I mean we all have the RIGHT to post this stuff don't we. Quit complaining guys. You're in the same boat as the backbone and everyone else who pays for their feed. And yes you will continue to get stuff that you really don't want. You also knew the types of things that your where likely to get when you signed up for UUNET. The whole rational behind Usenet is transporting a lot of junk around so that you find the pearl hidden inside. If everyone had the same ideas about what constituted a valuable posting we could get rid of 95% of the traffic. Unfortunately everyone has a different idea about what they want to send and receive. So we get a large volume of traffic most of which is only marginally interesting to a small number of people. As far as I can see the problem is probably going to get worse before it gets better. However sites like UUNET may actually help reduce your costs. Because they are being PAID to do so they will carry anything and everything (within reason) that there is a demand for. But YOU don't have to download it. Just tell them what groups you want. Of course this only works well if you are not a backbone site yourself. But even if you are, with some scrutiny of your user base (including the users downstream) you may be able to reduce your load. I think we will find the structure of Usenet changing over the next year or so. The current backbone sites are getting to the point of not wanting to carry the load. UUNET if it succeeds will show them how to gracefully back out. So a year or two from now we will all probably be paying a small amount for our news, rather than a few sites paying large amounts. This will be a good thing for Usenet. It will force an appreciation of the net on more of the users. As with most things you enjoy most what you work and pay for. Things that are free are easily abused and discarded when your interest lags. -- Stuart Lynne ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vision!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532
campbell@maynard.UUCP (05/28/87)
In article <5164@necntc.NEC.COM> jeff@necntc.NEC.COM (Jeff Janock) writes:
]
] In article <922@maynard.BSW.COM> I wrote:
] ] I, also, was annoyed to have spent real money and tied up valuable
] ] disk space for binaries for a machine I don't even own...
]
] This is a very narrow view of things - you are not forced to accept
] any and all news groups that exist; that is what the backbones are
] there for. Ask you feeds not to transmit the binary groups and
] your 'gripe' is mute...
You're forgetting that the original posting about which we complained
was in comp.SOURCES.misc. If it was in a binaries only newsgroup I
wouldn't have minded, since we junk those groups.
Maybe we need a comp.binaries.ibmpc?
--
Larry Campbell The Boston Software Works, Inc.
Internet: campbell@maynard.BSW.COM 120 Fulton Street, Boston MA 02109
uucp: {husc6,mirror,think}!maynard!campbell +1 617 367 6846rick@pcrat.UUCP (05/28/87)
In article <5164@necntc.NEC.COM>, jeff@necntc.NEC.COM (Jeff Janock) writes: > In article <922@maynard.BSW.COM> campbell@maynard.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes: > >I agree. I, also, was annoyed to have spent real money and tied up valuable > >disk space for binaries for a machine I don't even own ... > This is a very narrow view of things - you are not forced to accept > any and all news groups that exist; that is what the backbones are > there for. Ask you feeds not to transmit the binary groups and > your 'gripe' is mute. The group it was posted to was the "moderated" comp.sources.misc group, the replacement for the old net.sources(?). I don't see anything in the name that suggests that this is a binary group, nor anything in the description of it. I don't think it is too much to ask that sources groups restrict themselves to sources only. -- Rick Richardson, President, PC Research, Inc. (201) 922-1134 (voice, nights) OR (201) 834-1378 (voice, days) seismo!uunet!pcrat!rick ihnp4!castor!pcrat!rick
merlin@hqda-ai.UUCP (David S. Hayes) (05/29/87)
Rick Richardson complained about finding a binary posting in comp.sources.misc. In article <5164@necntc.NEC.COM>, jeff@necntc.NEC.COM (Jeff Janock) writes: > Ask you feeds not to transmit the binary groups and your 'gripe' > is mute. This gripe is mute. Rick paid to transfer what was listed as a SOURCES group. There is no way for him to know, in advance, that a binary posting was lurking in there. Dropping this newsgroup from his feed will not solve his problem at all. -- David S. Hayes, The Merlin of Avalon PhoneNet: (202) 694-6900 UUCP: *!seismo!sundc!hqda-ai!merlin ARPA: merlin%hqda-ai@seismo.css.gov
alvitar@madhat.UUCP (05/30/87)
In article <315@pcrat.UUCP>, rick@pcrat.UUCP writes: > > I'm now a 'paying' USENET member (by virtue of the uunet experiment), > ... Tonight I waited while 45 minutes of traffic came in over > comp.sources.misc ... > [complaint about binary, uuencoded sharware posted to comp.sources.misc] > I certainly didn't want to spend the money for this. We are also paying to get comp.sources.* via UUNET and I was also unhappy about paying for something which should have gone to comp.binaries and for which I have absolutely no use. I appreciate the work the moderator is doing, but I hope in the future he will accept only source. BTW, we are VERY happy with the UUNET service. I hope many sites will subscribe so that the service will survive. It is the best hope many remote sites have for getting news at a reasonable cost. Remember, if you don't support UUNET now, it may not be there when you need it. I guess I'm beginning to sound like a UUNET commercial? :-) -- Live: Phil Harbison USPS: 3409 Grassfort Drive, Huntsville, AL 35805-5421 Uucp: {akgua,clyde,uunet}!madhat!alvitar Bell: 205-881-4317
alvitar@madhat.UUCP (Phil Harbison) (06/01/87)
In article <922@maynard.BSW.COM> campbell@maynard.UUCP writes: > I agree. I, also, was annoyed to have spent real money and tied up > valuable disk space for binaries for a machine I don't even own... In article <5164@necntc.NEC.COM>, jeff@necntc.NEC.COM (Jeff Janock) writes: > This is a very narrow view of things - you are not forced to accept > any and all news groups that exist; ... Ask you feeds not to transmit > the binary groups and your 'gripe' is mute. You are missing the point. Our complaint is not that binaries were posted to the net, but that they were posted to comp.sources.misc. Feel free to post all the binaries you wish to comp.binaries.*, but don't defeat our choice not to pay to receive binaries by posting them in the wrong group. I'm sure this only happened because Brandon is new at the job, and being a very rational fellow, probably won't let it happen again. I certainly hope this criticism is being taken constructively. Overall, he is doing a very good job. -- Live: Phil Harbison USPS: 3409 Grassfort Drive, Huntsville, AL 35805-5421 Uucp: {akgua,clyde,uunet}!madhat!alvitar Bell: 205-881-4317