🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Oct13.115244.14565@vpnet.chi.il.us> lisbon@vpnet.chi.il.us (Gerry Swetsky) writes:
>In article <Bw0Jo8.CB@chinet.chi.il.us> randy@chinet.chi.il.us (Randy Suess) writes:
>>
>>	Then why has clout been down all weekend because someone tried
>>	to ftp mail many megabytes of code?  I think the last few months
>>	of statistics show that it is NOT working.  A few sites seem to
>>	have 99% of the outbound flow, in many tens of megabytes.
>
>    Being as you are one of only two people with the capability to have
>    gone down to the U of C and *fixed* clout when it was down, I'm
>    surprised that you posted this, Randy.
>
>    Because of your apparent lack of interest, one of our clout System
>    Administrators had to drive from Lisle into the city, pick up the
>    other key and drive to Hyde Park at midnight Sunday night to re-
>    start the Sun.  That's devotion to duty!

(I find myself actually agreeing with Randy here... oh no! :-)

Gerry, responses like yours are why I withdrew from participation from CLOUT 
in its entirety after being at only a few meetings.

Your complaining about Randy not getting in his car and going to reboot a
machine is COMPLETELY, 100% IRRELAVENT and out of line with regards to the 
point at hand which Randy had raised -- that FTPMAIL is overloading CLOUT 
modems and systems to the point of unusability or at least excessive volume.
I believe the point Randy made is that CLOUT (machine in reality?) >CRASHED< 
because someone tried to FTPMAIL a few tens of megs of code (or worse).

Perhaps what CLOUT needs is a smail filter which disallows SMTP connections 
from some sites (like the FTP MAIL servers :-)  I have such a patch which I 
use for other reasons if CLOUT is interested in using it.

CLOUT is a VOLUNTEER system.  When people believe things are free and 
unlimited they tend to abuse them.  When people then tolerate that abuse, 
it is encouraged.  Enough of this and the entire system breaks down and 
stops working for everyone.

This is why I made my own arrangements for my home machine, and why I am 
now going to pay my own money to get a real Internet link (yeah, Ddsw1.MCS.COM 
is going "live" soon).  Those who want to connect through me in that fashion 
will be able to do so.  But it will not be free.  I'm not going to get bashed 
in the head by people like yourself for providing a free service that costs 
me mucho dollars out of my own disposable income bucket.  

If someone's going to bash in my head, by Gods I'll at least try to break 
even on my investment!

I've had my share of idiots FTPMAILing things like alt.binaries.pictures.*
archives, or the MIT "X11" source -- some of them from YOUR system Gerry --
passing through ddsw1.  That's outrageous, expensive, and way, way beyond
what anyone anticipates on a "free" or "contributor" style system.  Anyone
who does not make and ENFORCE a policy on such a system, and then expects
to live off the largese of a volunteer organization or any free distribution
medium should be scalped.

The point Randy made remains valid -- there is what I (and he) characterize 
as abuse of FTPMAIL.  My position is that >any< third-party use of FTPMAIL
(that is, use on UUCP links without permission of ALL intervening
administrators who make dial calls and perform store-and-forward for you) 
is abusive and ought to be forbidden.  It certainly is abusive when it causes 
systems to fail.  The >reason< for the abuse is that people think that this 
stuff is both free and an unlimited resource.  Neither condition is true, 
especially in the land of time-based call charges.


Oh yeah, I'm not speaking for the company I work at during the day when I 
flame like this.  This is my own opinion, all warranties void on receipt, etc.

--
Karl Denninger 		Inet:  kdenning@hq.videocart.com
			       karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM