Article View: news.admin
Article #3330Re: Ill-effects of a posting greater than 64k
From: Jonathan I. Kamens
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1992 13:45
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1992 13:45
52 lines
3166 bytes
3166 bytes
(Note cross-post and followup-to.)
In article <H.ea.xFXtDYYoWnQ@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca> jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca (John Henders) writes:
The other factor to consider is that requesting someone mail you
one part of a 10 part posting you missed is a heck of a lot easier
than asking for a complete file, and for many users at many sites,
who have restrictions on the size of mail they can recieve, the
latter is out of the question.
And now a word from the comp.sources.wanted net.police.... Quoting
from the news.answers "finding-sources" posting:
>2. "I know the name of the program I want, and I know which newsgroup
> it was posted in, but either (a) I didn't get some of the parts of
> it, or (b) I didn't save it when it was posted and now I find that
> I need it."
>
> DO NOT post a message to comp.sources.wanted saying, "I didn't save
> all of this when it was archived, could someone please send it to
> me?" If the code was posted in a source newsgroup, then it is
> archived somewhere. Follow the instructions below for retrieving
> code from Usenet source newsgroup archives.
If you think that the problem that caused you not to get part of the
package was more global than just your site, then send a mail message
to the poster of the package and let him know about it. If the
problem was, indeed, widespread, he will get several messages and will
repost the necessary parts himself.
There are two reasons not to post about it to the net:
1) If you post a message saying, "Would someone please mail me..." you
may very well get umpteen copies and they will fill your mailbox.
2) It's a waste of the network's resources. You can get the missing
parts yourself, without having to post a message to the entire Usenet.
(I'm not saying that John Henders meant to imply, in what he wrote
above, that people should post to the net asking for missing parts. I
don't know whether or not he did. I'm just making this point for
people who might interpret it that way.)
And now, back to our regularly scheduled broadcast.
--
Jonathan Kamens jik@MIT.Edu
MIT Information Systems/Athena Moderator, news.answers
(Send correspondence related to the news.answers newsgroup
{and ONLY correspondence related to the newsgroup}
to news-answers-request@MIT.Edu.)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<JIK.92Oct8094453@pit-manager.mit.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!athena.mit.edu!jikReferences:
<7441@lib.tmc.edu> <BvAz89.Cop@unix.amherst.edu> <1992Oct3.191106.18867@dscomsf.desy.de> <372@ulogic.UUCP> <H.ea.xFXtDYYoWnQ@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.admin.misc Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!athena.mit.edu!jik From: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) Subject: Re: Ill-effects of a posting greater than 64k In-Reply-To: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca's message of 6 Oct 92 20:18:56 GMT Message-ID: <JIK.92Oct8094453@pit-manager.mit.edu> Followup-To: news.admin.misc Sender: news@athena.mit.edu (News system) Nntp-Posting-Host: pit-manager.mit.edu Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology References: <7441@lib.tmc.edu> <BvAz89.Cop@unix.amherst.edu> <1992Oct3.191106.18867@dscomsf.desy.de> <372@ulogic.UUCP> <H.ea.xFXtDYYoWnQ@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 13:45:05 GMT Lines: 52