🚀 go-pugleaf

I started to write up my own version of the various arguments
for and against recent postings in comp.binaries.mac. But I
realized there is one important factor that I have no good
grasp on. To what extent does bandwidth have an effect on
comp.binaries.mac? Are sysadmins highly concerned with how
much comp.binaries.mac comes across overall? Certainly there
need to be some limits. We can't have too many hundreds of K
flowing to sites connected to uunet via 9600 baud modem. And
I hear the San Diego-to-Hawaii-to-Australia link is very
expensive as well.

However, intuitively it seems like we ought to be able to break
comp.binaries.mac into some number of sub-groups without incurring
too much extra cost for self-supporting or expensive sites.
comp.binaries.demo is an obvious group for sysadmins to drop due
to expense. But I have some other ideas that would probably be
contingent upon bandwidth issues. (In short, these ideas have to
do with groups called comp.binaries.mac.small and !!.big.)

Respond via whatever means seems appropriate; mail is welcome.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pete Gontier   | InterNet: 6600pete@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu, BitNet: 6600pete@ucsbuxa
Editor, Macker | Online Macintosh Programming Journal; mail for subscription
Hire this kid  | Mac, DOS, C, Pascal, asm, excellent communication skills