[Fot] Valve cover breather

[Mark J. Bradakis]

> Arrggh--another 4k bounce. Mark, you really should up that a little.

The vast majority of replies that bounce due to size limits are
because people include a bunch of crap in their replies that just
doesn't need to be there.

And quite aware of the irony, here's a previous exchange on this
subject.

mjb.
----


 -------- Original Message --------

Subject: 	Re: [Fot] List message sizes
Date: 	Mon, 22 Oct 2007 16:38:14 -0700
From: 	Bill Babcock <billb at bnj.com>
To: 	Mark J. Bradakis <mark at bradakis.com>
CC: 	fot at autox.team.net

	



Okay, makes sense, I'll do that.

I had assumed it was a storage issue, and since storage is
essentially free these days, or at least it's cheaper than I ever
could have imagined, I thought the concern might be a little
obsolete. Never thought about the archive and search issues. Of
course I imagine a pretty simple program that would clean that all up
as it sticks data in the archive, but I'm not volunteering to write
anything. I don't imagine anyone would be thrilled with software
written in Foxpro, which is the only language I remember, other than
some vague recollections of Pascal, C, and AWK.

On Oct 22, 2007, at 3:45 PM, Mark J. Bradakis wrote:

 > Finally getting around to answering an old question. Sorry for the
 > delay.
 >
 > Bill Babcock wrote:
 >
 >> First one bounced--too big. Hey Mark, isn't 4K a bit too restrictive?
 >>
 >>
 > Well, yes and no, sort of. It is an arbitrary limit I just
 > picked. On
 > some of the
 > other big lists, though, it is only 3K. Basically the problem lies in
 > the default
 > behavior of many popular email clients in use today. When people
 > respond
 > to a message, the *entire* message is added to the end of the
 > response.
 > Unlike
 > this message, which has only one pertinent line included, at the
 > beginning, where
 > it is clear to see the issue under discussion.
 >
 > So what happens is that as people continue discussion on a topic, the
 > messages
 > keep getting longer and longer and longer and longer. There may be
 > only two
 > or three lines still pertinent to the discussion or necessary for
 > context, but all
 > the useless verbiage keeps getting dragged along for the ride.
 >
 > Last time I actually ran some statistical programs on the Team.Net
 > lists,
 > about 70 - 80 percent of the character count of list messages was
 > text
 > that was included for no real reason at all. That's about the same as
 > buying
 > a 6 pack of your favorite beverage, and getting one or two that are
 > the
 > actual fresh, new beverage, the rest are, uh, recycled product.
 >
 > All this extra, useless text does is slow down the Team.Net network
 > line,
 > transmitting bits that it doesn't need to transmit. It slows down
 > the list
 > archiving processes, as they have to go over the same text again
 > and again.
 > Gee, nothing like getting 50 hits on your search only to find that
 > 48 of
 > them
 > are the same old paragraph added again and again and again to peoples
 > replies. The added replies slow down the mail processing, adding to
 > the delays in getting the messages out to the list.
 >
 > If the preceding paragraph is too much computer jargon for you to get
 > your mind around, then think of it this way - how would your race
 > car start
 > behaving if every time you crossed the start/finish line you had to
 > stop and
 > take on another 50 pounds of ballast?
 >
 > And of course, there is the time I have to spend cleaning up bouncing
 > addresses because all the clueless replies filled up the mailboxes of
 > hapless subscribers who've hit their limit.
 >
 > I know that I'm never going to be able to singlehandedly change human
 > behavior, but it sure would be nice if a few more folks spent an extra
 > few seconds on their list messages. Set your mailer to NOT include
 > the
 > original in your reply, just paste in the appropriate line or two
 > as I did
 > above. Or at least delete the text that serves no purpose in your
 > response,
 > rather than just absentmindedly trying to stuff it down the
 > Team.Net pipe
 > for no useful reason.
 >
 > If you do have a lot to say and your all-original message does hit up
 > against the size limit, I do try to stay somewhat current with admin
 > requests, and I'll approve such messages and get them on their way
 > as I have time.
 >
 > Gee, this message is getting kind of long. Wonder how many folks will
 > respond, and include it in its entirety in their response? For
 > now, I'll
 > just send it off and then spend some more time wading through the
 > 7,664 unread messages cuurently in my Team.Net admin mailbox.
 >
 > mjb.