Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!think!ames!ncar!boulder!tramp!swarbric
From: swarbric@tramp.Colorado.EDU (Frank Swarbrick)
Newsgroups: news.misc
Subject: Re: Request for clarification
Message-ID: <6203@sigi.Colorado.EDU>
Date: 24 May 88 03:41:53 GMT
References: <560@n8emr.UUCP> <759@fig.bbn.com>
Sender: news@sigi.Colorado.EDU
Reply-To: swarbric@tramp.Colorado.EDU (Frank Swarbrick)
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Lines: 22

To Rich Salz:

   (Sorry, my terminal has incomplete VT100 emulation so it's hard for me to
quote little bits of long articles.)

   Anyway...  I agree with everything you said about USENET's binaries vs.
files on BBS's except for the part about BBS's cost money.  I have yet to
spend any money calling BBS's, and I have been calling them for three years.
(Well, just recently I donated $5 to one of my favorites because the sysop
was moving and couldn't afford to get a second phone line, but anyway...)
Most BBS's don't charge money.  And because there are over 200 BBS's in the
Denver/Boulder area I have no reason to call long distance boards.  I know
Denver has one of the largest (if not *the* largest) local BBS populations,
but I'm sure most areas can get most popular files from at least one local
BBS.  Personally, I see no reason for there to be any non-mainframe-based
binaries, but I'm certainly not going to worry about it.  It doesn't affect
me.  I just ignore the binary groups.

Frank Swarbrick (and, yes, the net.cat)           swarbric@tramp.Colorado.EDU
...!{ncar|nbires}!boulder!tramp!swarbric
Who needs a Net.Rabbit when you can have a net.cat?
sorry...