Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again.

Rich Kulawiec (rsk@gsp.org)
Thu, 21 Jan 1999 08:33:27 -0500

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Eric Pement: "Re: Pay us a visit. # 8BE"
Previous message: Pat Berry: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
In reply to: Larry W. Virden: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
Next in thread: Rich Lafferty: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."

On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 09:47:41PM -0500, Larry W. Virden wrote:
> usenet here is taking 15% of our T1 link, and 12 gig (?) of disk space for
> our 1-5 day leaf node usenet holding. Of that, I suspect that more than 30%
> has to do with spam or hipcrime.

And how much of what's left is consists of misposted articles, excessive
quoting, warez, binaries in non-binary newsgroups, 50-line signatures,
etc., etc., etc.?

I'll make the guess -- and I emphasize that it's a *guess*, albeit one
based on a lot of Usenet experience -- that 5-10% of the content of Usenet
actually represents useful, correctly-posted, netiquette-observing articles.

It hardly seems worth it anymore.

---Rsk
Rich Kulawiec
rsk@gsp.org

Next message: Eric Pement: "Re: Pay us a visit. # 8BE"
Previous message: Pat Berry: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
In reply to: Larry W. Virden: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."
Next in thread: Rich Lafferty: "Re: spamgard(tm) in effect; try again."

[ Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive | Search Mail Archive | Authors | Usenet ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 ]