On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 6:37 AM, Leo Mauler <
webgiant@yahoo.com> wrote:
--- On Tue, 7/8/08, Jeffrey Watts <
jeffrey.w.watts@gmail.com> wrote:
> And I'm pointing out that it's wasteful, and poorly
> designed for today's modern 24/7 Internet.
And the ISP is the one providing the service, so they get to decide. Cope.
> I don't care if it's more useful for you, it's not
> good for the ISPs.
Depending on the definition of "not good". If you lose clients because you don't have a news server, then having one is good.
They would lose whom? You and your couple of buddies? I don't think they'll care.
> You seem to forget that this stuff costs money, and
> a service has to be good for both the servers as well
> as the clients. Netnews is not,
Not good for the ISPs, great for the clients.
ISPs are the ones providing the service. They get to decide. Cope.
> and that's why it's slowly going away. This is a
> good thing.
Only if the ISPs don't hemorrhage users away to ISPs with news servers
Who? You and your couple of buddies? I don't think they'll care. Again, cope.
> > There's a difference between supporting something
> and just admiring its technological advantages to the end
> user. I support NetNews' text-only groups, but I
> merely admire the system of binary distribution through
> NetNews. I'd still want text-only NetNews to stick
> around, and if the price is binary NetNews vanishing, then
> so be it, despite its technological advantages to end users
> in the sharing of binary files.
>
> You've obviously never run a production INN server.
> There is NOTHING admirable about how it works.
There's plenty admirable from the end user side of things, regardless of what you've seen on the server end.
No one cares but you. Just shut the fuck up already.