HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca (Ken Dykes)
Subject: Re: Ill-effects of a posting greater than 64k
Organization: Thinkage Ltd.
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 21:39:05 GMT

In article <Tm2JRB19w165w@mantis.co.uk> mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes:
>dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:
>>     I think the consensus is that as faster and better connections become
>> more common, the problem caused by big articles diminishes. I have seen MB
>> articles posted to alt that did not attract flames.
>
>Probably because they were posted to alt groups that nobody in UUCP-land gets
>-- like the alt.binaries.pictures hierarchy, for instance.
>
>
>mathew

dont underestimate Uucp-land

this company is uucp only

we have always received ALL alt.binaries and comp.binaries groups
in fact we receive all of alt/comp/rec/soc/sci, one modem, one feedsite

i believe, historically, the only true uucp argument against >64k
was that early uucp software would DIE at the 64k boundary because
it used silly sized integers.

-- 
   - Ken Dykes, Thinkage Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario, Canada    [43.47N 80.52W]
         postmaster@thinkage.on.ca  kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca  thinkage!kgdykes
         kgdykes@math.uwaterloo.ca  [129.97.128.1]      kgdykes@thinkage.com
Xref: sparky news.admin:7840 rec.video.satellite:5234 misc.forsale.computers:35354 biz.comp.services:269
From: munroe@dmc.com (Dick Munroe)
Newsgroups: news.admin,rec.video.satellite,misc.forsale.computers,biz.comp.services
Subject: Re: Usenet News via Satellite
Date: 29 Sep 92 20:53:28 EDT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Doyle, Munroe Consultants, Inc., Hudson, MA

In article <1992Sep29.004132.6494@clarinet.com>, brad@clarinet.com (Brad Templeton) writes:
> Not knowing the cost is indeed a major factor stopping people from getting
> such a service.
> 
> Netnews is a one-to-many medium, and satellite feeds are indeed a superbly
> efficient mechanism of distribution for the downward link.   After all,
> netnews is already flowing on many point-to-point links that happen to
> be going via satellite -- what a waste.
> 
> A Satellite feed, with a phone-line back channel to request articles that
> didn't make, it and to send out local postings and e-mail should be a big
> win.  Instant delivery for a flat fee anywhere in the country.
> -- 
> Brad Templeton, ClariNet Communications Corp. -- Sunnyvale, CA 408/296-0366

From my conversations with PageSys (who has been in business for 10+ years
and is using spare capacity on their uplink for transmission) this is pretty
much what they intend to put together.  Len Rose could probably fill in the
details.
-- 
Dick Munroe				Internet: munroe@dmc.com
Doyle Munroe Consultants, Inc.		UUCP: ...uunet!thehulk!munroe
267 Cox St.				Office: (508) 568-1618
Hudson, Ma.				FAX: (508) 562-1133

GET CONNECTED!!! Send mail to info@dmc.com to find out about DMConnection.
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: preventing articles from expiring
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 22:46:04 GMT
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology

In article <1992Oct2.181437.18855@schbbs.mot.com> mshah@next3.corp.mot.com writes:
>We have a news group that carries some standards which do not change
>frequently. They are set to expire in 365 days. Is there a way to 
>get around this and prevent this articles from expiring after the 
>set period of 365 days which is the max. allowable limit for the version of  
>news we are running...

I don't know what kind of weird system you are using -- certainly stock
C News, which is what your message ID would suggest, has no such limit --
but the fast answer is "you're going to have to fix the software".

If it's not a software limitation, just a question of overriding an
explicit expiry date, then C New's "retention period" feature -- see
the expire(8) manual page -- is exactly what you want.  (Amazing...
Somebody actually found a use for it... :-))
-- 
There is nothing wrong with making      | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
mistakes, but... make *new* ones. -D.Sim|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu  utzoo!henry
Xref: sparky news.admin:7821 rec.video.satellite:5201 misc.forsale.computers:35242 biz.comp.services:261
From: markz@ssc.com (Mark Zenier)
Newsgroups: news.admin,rec.video.satellite,misc.forsale.computers,biz.comp.services
Subject: Re: Usenet News via Satellite
Date: 28 Sep 92 17:33:40 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: SSC, Inc.,  Seattle, WA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger) writes:
: In article <1992Sep28.041839.28539@anomaly.sbs.risc.net> kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan) writes:
: >len@netsys.com (Len Rose) writes:

: >That, coupled with the high cost of initial hardware investment, makes this
: >a questionable investment, in my opinion.

Remember that it's a narrow band system so comparing the price to 
a wide band video system that's made in hundreds of thousands of 
units is an underestimate.  It would be more like cost of wideband 
system + cost of SCPC + cost of modem.  ( + bundled cost of service.)

: The question here is how many people buy the service + equipment.  If the
: number is large, you might get by with a much lower monthly cost.  If the
: number is small, then you might end up with a larger monthly cost, or no
: service at all!
: 
: Absent a guarantee that (1) the company will be around, and (2) that the
: news will continue to flow at some fixed price past the first year, this
: doesn't sound like anything other than a hell of a gamble.
: 
: Note that "Stargate" died, and so have the other "news by satellite" people
: which have come before.

Yes, but how many were piggybacking on the surplus resources of a company
already in the satellite data business.

But I have to agree that bundling the price looks like a future cash
flow problem to me.

Mark Zenier  markz@ssc.wa.com
From: ses@cmns-sun.think.com (Simon Edward Spero)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: who pays for USENET
Date: 29 Sep 92 22:10:29
Organization: What's your clearance, citizen?
	<1992Sep28.134442.4772@r-node.gts.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cmns-sun.think.com
In-reply-to: marc@r-node.gts.org's message of Mon, 28 Sep 1992 13:44:42 GMT

In article <1992Sep28.134442.4772@r-node.gts.org> marc@r-node.gts.org (Marc Fournier - Sys Admin) writes:

   In article <1a2chbINN7fq@nigel.msen.com> emv@msen.com (Edward Vielmetti) writes:
   >Who pays for USENET?  I pay for USENET.
   >
   >Every month I get a bill in the mail it says
   >
   >	USENET		$4,000,000,000.00

	   What do you get for this????  Is this a joke, or totally 
   serious??

Isn't it strange how you never see Ed and Bill Gates together? Every time 
I've seen Ed, he hasn't been driving a Porche 959, just like Bill doesn't.
Pretty suspicious, huh?

Simon
--
-----
Guest account at TMC 	|	Just Another  WAIS Hacker | DOD# 0612
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: who pays for USENET
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 23:28:47 GMT

cathyf@is.rice.edu (Catherine Anne Foulston) writes:

>This is not to say that I'm sure that reproaching people for stupid
>cross posts helps.  I am sure I'll be putting in a kill file entry
>for a certain news.admin cross-poster whose posts I don't care to
>read in news.admin.

This is exactly my point. It costs <some cost> to reproach people, and if
there is no benefit derived (as you have seen), then why bother? Most
USENET flames over this end up wasting more bandwidth flaming the 
crossposter than the crossposter wasted. (e.g. the "Fuck You All" 
crosspost that is STILL reverberating)


-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

   People who think they know all are often insufferable.
            Rather like those who imagine that they know nothing.
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Ill-effects of a posting greater than 64k
Organization: Amherst College, Amherst MA
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 19:24:08 GMT

In article <7441@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <1992Sep26.151349.1962@psg.com> randy@psg.com (Randy Bush) writes:
>>mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes:
>>> It causes UUCP systems using slow modems on noisy lines to waste ...
>>           ^ broken
>            ^ standard
             ^ standard broken?

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / "You are just naive and repressed because
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /  penis envy is here and it's now and it's
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /  all around you." -- Neal C. Wickham
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Ill-effects of a posting greater than 64k
Date: 29 Sep 92 18:05:20 GMT
Organization: negligable

In article <BvBrHs.IBM@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>
>Why hasn't the site in question placed "!alt.sex.pictures" in their
>sys file?  I think it would be a wise move under these dire
>circumstances.  Additionally, how many binaries groups which are NOT
>supposed to exist get traffic?

If it doesn't exist anymore then "!alt.sex.pictures" is meaningless and
you'll download the pictures anyway hand have them end up in the junk
directory (I think....)  Am I missing something here?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Oh I give my life so lightly		|
to my gentle lady.			|	-Richard Hartman	
Giving freely, and completely,		|	hartman@uLogic.COM
for my lady.				|
Xref: sparky news.admin:7817 news.admin.policy:102
From: tarl@sw.stratus.com (Tarl Neustaedter)
Newsgroups: news.admin,news.admin.policy
Subject: Why flame (was Re: who pays for USENET)
Date: 29 Sep 92 01:49:01 GMT
Followup-To: news.admin.policy
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Sep28.232847.1502@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>, dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:
> [...]
> This is exactly my point. It costs <some cost> to reproach people, and if
> there is no benefit derived (as you have seen), then why bother?

On the off-chance that the reproachee and other interested readers might
learn something. In some circles, this is known as "feedback".
-- 
         Tarl Neustaedter	tarl@sw.stratus.com
         Marlboro, Mass.	Stratus Computer
Disclaimer: My employer is not responsible for my opinions.
From: jon%vector0.UUCP@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US (Dazed N. Confused)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Hasan B Mutlu
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 92 11:02:59 PDT
Organization: Vector Zero

space@ncc1701.stgt.sub.org (Lars Soltau) writes:

> > Some people CAN'T "change it or drop it".  Your argument smacks of an
> > elitist mentality and has been used on the net before.
> 
> I am elitist insofar as I don't want things to stagnate because not everyone
> is able to follow the pace. I am an enemy of the "lowest common denominator".

     What EXACTLY is the point you're trying to argue, here?  Personally,
I always thought of killfiles as a silly (although useful) hack to
get rid of garbage threads.  *Not* threads you aren't interested in,
usually, but the idiot ramblings by a series of one-liners, John Palmer,
a cascade, or subject lines reading "test".

     The solution, ultimately, is to CLEAN UP THE NET.  Killfiles
aren't solving the problem, they're glossing over the symptom.  The
net, as volume increases, inevitably all becomes *noise*.  Unless
someone shoves some nettiquette down the posters' throats.

     I run Waffle.  Perhaps since I can't create a killfile I'm
forced to DEAL with the problem.  (If I ran Linux and Cnews and trn,
I'd *still* be wasting my disk space on the garbage posts -- or
are you saying you aren't going to wait for me to catch up to your
Gigabyte drives, too?)

--Jon

   jon%vector0@sactoh0.SAC.CA.US                Life is like a kiwi.
   PacBell.COM!sactoh0!vector0!jon              DOD #2600

Newsgroups: news.admin,rec.video.satellite,misc.forsale.computers,biz.comp.services
From: larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder)
Subject: Re: Usenet News via Satellite
Keywords: Usenet Satellite 9600bps
Organization: The Gator Conferencing System 219-289-3745 
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 13:46:25 GMT

kd1hz@anomaly.sbs.risc.net (Michael P. Deignan) writes:

>len@netsys.netsys.com (Len Rose) writes:

>> The system consists of a 45 cm dish,small receiver, and modem....
>.....
>> will be increasing the price to 2100.00 within 30 days. 

>Sounds awfully expensive for what appears to be a KU-band system. Similar
>setups have been running about $500 (less the "modem").

I was thinking the same thing -- there is lots of room for profit -
too much in my opinion 

I would rather spend the $2000 on phone calls -- since that way the 
link will be bidirectional -- let alone the prospect of
the uplink going out of business sticking endusers with some KU
downlink gear with no service (which btw has happened with at least
a dozen other DBS ventures)

-- 
Larry Snyder                                    internet: larry@gator.rn.com
keeper of the Gator                                  uucp: uunet!gator!larry
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: who pays for USENET
Date: 26 Sep 92 20:30:22 GMT
Organization: negligable

In article <1992Sep25.214623.928@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com> c23st@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos) writes:
>The cost IS there. But not to the extent that individual users will

By George! I think he's got it!  "The cost IS there."  (somewhere a choir
of angels sings...)

That's all we were trying to say.  Usenet costs.

>start seeing USENET: $29.30 after FICA and FED-TAXES. For a smaller

And whether there is a line-item on your paycheck or not the cost
is there.

>organization, USENET costs may be more noticeable, but so are benefits
>(how many small organizations can afford an on site GNU Emacs expert?)

Yaaaaaay!


However since some has brought up the fact that the whole costs
issue was brought up about the additional costs of unreasonable 
cross-posts maybe we should step back and say that the cost to
the user (now admitted) isn't the point anyway.  It is the cost
to the site.  Whether for disk space, long-distance phone charges,
network per-packet charges, administrator time or whatever.  Or even
employee time wasted rereading the same article (or even just reading
enough to remember to skip over it) time after time.

		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Fosters!  It's Australian for beer, mate!"
From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Ill-effects of a posting greater than 64k
Date: 23 Sep 92 12:52:52 GMT
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

dan@cubmol.bio.columbia.edu (Daniel Zabetakis) writes:
>     I think the consensus is that as faster and better connections become
> more common, the problem caused by big articles diminishes. I have seen MB
> articles posted to alt that did not attract flames.

Probably because they were posted to alt groups that nobody in UUCP-land gets
-- like the alt.binaries.pictures hierarchy, for instance.


mathew
Xref: sparky news.admin:7892 comp.mail.misc:3251 news.answers:3302
From: iiitac@PYR.SWAN.AC.UK (Alan Cox)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: clinton-gore.org
Date: 29 Sep 92 13:01:37 GMT


They are potentially breaking two things. I've not seen them break
anything yet, and I'd be suprised if they did so

1) They can't exactly use the nsfnet backbone for their services and
I've not seen anything going out from them across the whole world like
that

2) .gov sites and various other government concerns are probably
not permitted to carry their material in the US, because of the various
rules prohibiting government bodies from being involved in political
campaiging.


I don't see what the fuss is about.


And if they'll set up a finger entry or a DQ cookie server I'll be even
happier..

Alan
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: clayh@uum1.mn.org (Clayton Haapala)
Subject: Re: no more ``nonconforming news Message-IDs of last week''
Organization: UNIX Users of Minnesota
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 1992 21:06:04 GMT
Followup-To: news.software.b
Summary: Message-ID becomes MessageID?
Keywords: C-News Performance Xenix

In article <1asbftINNm7r@rodan.UU.NET> rsalz@rodan.UU.NET (Rich Salz) writes:
>Thank *you* Paul.  Just to make it public, INN uses a variant of Paul's
>Message-ID validating code.

That reminds me -- when I brought up C-News Performance Release under SCO
XENIX 386, all works find (and fast!) except that the message id fields
are hosed in the following manner:  as the article sits in
/usr/spool/news/in.coming, the Message-ID field read "MessageID" (no dash),
and relaynews then throws it away as bogus when it runs.

(I think I remember somebody running SVr4 having the same problem.)

I can't find the C-News module that generates that field, or, certainly, I
did not locate anything that I could see doing it *wrongly*.  Can anybody
shed any light?  Is is a bad sed or awk program?  Karma?  My old canoeing
injury?

Thanks,

-- 
Clayton Haapala (clayh@uum1.mn.org)
Assistant Mail Admin for MN.Org
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Wanted: MS-DOS-based UUCP Package & News
Date: 1 Oct 92 16:51:51 GMT
Organization: negligable

Can someone out there point me to a (preferebly ftp-able) package
to implement UUCP file transfer & News on a MS-DOS machine?



		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: lwk@engin.umich.edu (Lewis W Kellum)
Subject: AmeriCast.COM campaign92 groups
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 92 13:33:20 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: usa

I apologize if this has been asked before. Has anyone out their 
recieved the nptn.campaign92 groups? Are they legit? They come
from AmeriCast.COM as a free service, and claim to be campaign
statements from the democrat,republican, and libertarian national
campaigns.  Thanks - Woody
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Ill-effects of a posting greater than 64k
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:51:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: ulogic.326
Organization: negligable

In article <BvD4AD.L1y@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>In article <304@ulogic.UUCP> hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman) writes:
>
>>If it doesn't exist anymore then "!alt.sex.pictures" is meaningless and
>>you'll download the pictures anyway hand have them end up in the junk
>>directory (I think....)  Am I missing something here?
>
>Am I?  We have "!alt.sex.pictures", as well as "!alt.binaries", in our
>sys file, and C news simply refuses to receive articles posted to
>those groups.

You've got me ... are you not getting posts because you have
the !group in your sys file or because the group doesn't exist
anymore and your feed site isn't relaying them.... Or does the
group still exist?  Someone said they thought it didn't (which
was what prompted my query.)

For all I know I could put !alt.fnord in my sys file and it 
would not complain and when somebody actually created an alt.fnord
group I would not get it ... I guess the question was whether
the sys file was being verified for existing groups or not....

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
But I am frightened for you, children,		|
that the life that we are living is in vain,	|	-Richard Hartman	
and the sunshine we've been waiting for		|	hartman@uLogic.COM
has turned to rain....				|
From: randy@psg.com (Randy Bush)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: what's this alt.znet stuff?
Date: 27 Sep 92 01:04:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: psg.1992Sep27.010445.29420
Organization: Pacific Systems Group, Portland Oregon, US

Every few days, I get this blob of a hundred or so messages in junk.  They are
all from alt.znew.fnet using some completely bogus FidoNet looking address in
Australia.  The content is adolescent.

Anybody have any idea what this garbage is and how to stop it?

Example header:
From: Steven.Scavone.@Fnet.593@p0.f260.n771.z3.fido.nacjack.gen.nz (Steven Scavone @Fnet 593)
Newsgroups: alt.znet.fnet
Subject: Falcon video
Date: 22 Sep 92 12:43:44 GMT
Organization: Z*Net South Pacific, Wellington NZ
-- 
randy@psg.com   ...!uunet!m2xenix!randy
From: roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: Junk mail pests
Date: 3 Oct 92 22:47:28 GMT
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN

gtoal@cursci.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:

> This is a copy of a letter I've sent to postmaster@emory.edu

And it's followed by a full quote of the offending e-mail.  This is the
second such _full quote_ I have seen in this thread.

> I can easily delete unwanted mail, but I have to *pay* real money
> for incoming mail and frankly I object.

I, too, can easily delete unwanted e-mail... but this is news.  Would
you care to explain why you have posted exactly that which you objected
to receiving via e-mail?  If you didn't want to read it, and you truly
believe it violates net.guidelines, why do you perpetuate it?

Or do you secretly get a cut from Global's sales?

Complaining is one thing.  Shipping the very object you're complaining
about around the world is quite another.

> Thank you for your consideration,

And you, for yours in the future.
--
Roy M. Silvernail --    [my machine ] "Sometimes, you're the windshield....
roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu  [my opinions]            sometimes, you're the bug!"
cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu  [my $0.0275 ]                      --Mark Knopfler
Newsgroups: news.admin
From: bishop@rahul.net (Mike Sherwood)
Subject: MX site wanted
Keywords: MX UUCP
Organization: a2i network
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 16:48:42 GMT

I'm looking for a site that will MX for a domain and I've heard rumors of sites
that will do this and pass the mail along via a bangpath to the site.  The
same rumor indicated that this would be the appropriate place to ask about such
things since the comp.mail.uucp.need.{mailfeed,newsfeed,mx,ns} newsgroups
aren't available on this site yet. =)  Anyway, if you happen to admin such a
site and would be willing to do this for me, it would be greatly appreciated.
-Mike

ps, for those who didnt catch it, i was being sarcastic in mentioning the
comp.mail.uucp.need... groups - don't add them to your .newsrc =)
--
Mike Sherwood
bishop@rahul.net
--
Mike Sherwood <bishop@rahul.net>
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.admin
Subject: Re: who pays for USENET
Date: 26 Sep 92 20:23:53 GMT
Organization: negligable

Please see my article in a parallel branch of this thread for my
response about your idea of separate budgets.  In brief: all budgets
are a subset of the main budget from which all money flows.  It's
all tied together and money spent on personnel is money not spent
getting better food in the cafeteria (or verse-visa).


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Philosopher and plowman			|
each must know his part			|	-Richard Hartman	
to build a new mentality		|	hartman@uLogic.COM
closer to the heart!			|