Post by Grant TaylorSo you agree that the content of the articles does have some value to
some people.
Same as binary MIME attachments to legit Usenet messages written by real
people. They have some value for me if they add to the conversation. Is
there really a reason to avoid them now when I literally use more memory
on my 256 GB iPhone to store pictures of random dogs and cats than I use
on my server to store 2 years of unfiltered text Usenet? By unfiltered I
mean completely unfiltered, all Google Groups spam and other junk
included.
I just find it technically much simpler to differentiate by the article
size. Bigger than some value - binary. Smaller - text Usenet.
Thus my advice.
Post by Grant TaylorPost by Neodome AdminI doubt that regular posting of 700+KB FAQ is doing any good.
What's your primary objection? The frequency or the size of the posts?
Post by Neodome AdminI doubt that anything in those FAQs is more useful than information
that can be found with Google or DuckDuckGo. We're not living in an
era of Altavista, after all. And if there is some kind of gem hidden
there, one simply don't need to post it to newsgroup regularly with
700+KB of irrelevant text.
I think that there is some value in having some unrequested
information put in front of you.
I've seen many things that I didn't know that I wanted to know put in
front of me.
I've also been mildly interested in something and seen something new
(to me) done with it that really peaks my interest and causes me to
actively investigate it.
I believe there is some value in things being put in front of me for
my perusal.
FAQs are little bit different story than other messages. Like I said, my
main problem with them is that they're not written by the people, and
thus I don't see the need to treat them any different than spam and
binaries. After all, all those binary messages also can be useful for
someone, maybe even bigger amount of people will find them more useful
compared to FAQs.
I think that legit text conversations in binary newsgroups bring more to
the Usenet as communication platform than bi-weekly FAQs in dead text
newsgroups, thus they are the ones that deserve to be preserved for the
future readers. BTW, currently it's not being done by text Usenet
servers.
Post by Grant TaylorPost by Neodome AdminPlus, I'm pretty sure that if there are any questions, one can just
ask a question in retro-computing group and expect an
answer... unless that group is dead, of course.
It's really hard to ask a question about something if you don't know
that said something exists.
I don't mind quarterly or even monthly posting of FAQs. I do have an
objection to super large FAQs. -- I think I have my server
configured to accept 128 kB articles.
Even at 1 MB, this is only a few seconds worth of audio / video as --
These messages really are not much to sneeze at. -- My news server
sees 50 or more of these messages worth of traffic per day. So, one
of these per month, much less quarter, not even worth complaining
about.
You are correct. If there are FAQs bigger than 64 Kb, the amount of data
they consume is miniscule compared even to the Google Groups
spam. Actually, thinking of it, I might receive them anyway from one of
the peers who set their newsfeeds incorrectly, and probably still didn't
fix it. I just never complained about it because it's not a problem from
technical point of view.