Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mailrus!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!xanth!abcfd01.larc.nasa.gov!tadguy
From: tadguy@abcfd01.larc.nasa.gov (Tad Guy)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: comp.binaries.amiga ---> too much coming?
Message-ID: <TADGUY.90Mar16120929@abcfd20.larc.nasa.gov>
Date: 16 Mar 90 17:09:29 GMT
References: <02362.AA02362@sosaria.imp.com> <132974@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Sender: news@cs.odu.edu
Organization: NASA/Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA
Lines: 28
In-reply-to: cmcmanis@stpeter.Sun.COM's message of 15 Mar 90 17:55:58 GMT

In article <132974@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> cmcmanis@stpeter.Sun.COM (Chuck McManis) writes:
> Keep the "rate" of binaries at some fixed limit of megabytes per
> week. That way you will always know what the maximum space is to
> reserve per week for the binaries and you can trim your archive once
> a week.

Scary.  I have been meaning to do this with my posting scripts.  This
has several advantages:

	o *huge* submissions dribble into the newsgroup slowly over
 	  time, instead of one large mass that could overflow
	  unprotected news spools...

	o the amount of traffic in c.{s|b}.a would be more consistant
	  in volume

	o I usually approve several submissions at a time, but only
	  post one or two a night (with exceptions).  this would allow
	  those approved-but-not-yet-posted submissions to actually be
	  posted without my having to do it (meaning that in the long
	  run more stuff gets out faster).

I suspect that implemening this would actually increase the traffic in
c.{s|b}.amiga in the long run (not what the original poster intended). 

This is a good suggestion, and I'll probably do it eventually...

	...tad