X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fbb9d,fccbcd6f5d4eb2ea
X-Google-Attributes: gidfbb9d,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1995-02-28 11:34:44 PST
Path: bga.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.wwa.com!not-for-mail
From: flee@cse.psu.edu (Felix Lee)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.ascii
Subject: Talk: Net Cops :P
Date: 28 Feb 1995 13:34:44 -0600
Organization: Penn State Comp Sci & Eng
Lines: 24
Sender: boba@gagme.wwa.com
Approved: boba@wwa.com
Message-ID: <3ivtsk$mto@gagme.wwa.com>
References: <3idgoh$nk4@gagme.wwa.com> <3ini8m$d1c@gagme.wwa.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: gagme.wwa.com


R. M. Odom:
> It has been my experience on the net that far more server space is wasted
> on eight screensfulls of flame bait, or other unnecessary content, for a 
> two line "Up yours" reply than all the five to ten line .sigs could ever 
> hog.

umm, have you actually measured this?  if not, then please excuse me
for being a little skeptical.  useless reposts are one-shot deals.
signatures are a _systematic_ use of bandwidth.  your sig is 556 chars
in a 2408 char article, about 25% of your article.

last time I tried measuring this stuff, sometime in 1990, signatures
totalled only 4% of the disk space.

sigh.  I remember the good old days when I tried to convince people
that the Organization header was a waste of bandwidth because it's
often a) wrong; b) obvious from the return address; c) duplicated in
the signature.

oh well.  it's almost time to move the local news server to a machine
with more disk space anyway..
--