Rich Ulrich wrote:
>
> On Fri, 06 Apr 2001 13:34:03 GMT, Jerry Dallal
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It's worth noting that some lists have gateways to Usenet groups.
> > Usenet does not support attachments, so they will be lost to Usenet
> > readers. [ break ]
>
> - my Usenet connection seems to give me all the attachments.
> But if I depended on a modem and a 7-bit protocol, I would be
> pleased if my ISP filtered out the occasional, 100 kilobyte 8-bit
> attachment. (Some folk still use 7-bit protocols, don't they?)
I sit corrected. Better had I said that because of its history, many
Usenet readers access newsgroups in a way that attachments are lost
on them.
>> Also, even in the anything-goes early 21-st Century climate
>> of the Internet, one big no-no remains the posting of binaries to
>> non-binary groups.
>Right; that's partly because of size. My vendor has the practice,
>these days, of saving ordinary groups for a week, binary groups
>(which are the BULK of their internet feed) for 24 hours. Binary
>strings may be treated as screen-commands, if your Reader doesn't
>know to package them as an 'attachment' or otherwise ignore them.
No better way to get an ISP to change a group's status than by
routinely sending binaries through.
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
