Re: [Freetype] Could people avoid sending attachments to the list?

[Peter Montgomery]

Sander,

> Mmm.. imagine somebody on a GPRS network. Every byte has to be paid
> for. And it is leading eadge technology...

Yes, and imagine that I have a 300 baud modem.  What exactly is the
point? That the most underused and over priced network scheme should
prevent someone from sending a trivial 20 KB attachment in the year
2001?   Given that many people have DSL,  56K modems are less than $50,
and typical ISP charges less than $25 a month unlimited, and a huge
number of people probably receive this list at work, I'm not seeing why
we're even discussing this.   am curious how many people on this list
download their email from a GPRS network.  If possible, could those who
do use a GPRS to access their email (and haven't figured out how to set
up rules such as preventing the download of large email messages or
messages with attachments)  please send a note to this list so that we
might have a show of hands.  BTW, can anyone calculate a typical cost
for a 20 KB attachment on a GPRS network?

I think you're working mighty hard to find a reason to prevent something
as simple as email attachments.  Look ,the person who sent the large one
has already apologized and mentioned it was an accident.  Since that ONE
time, there have been two, count them two entire 20 KB images attached.
Sander, do you personally have a problem with a pair of 20 kb
attachments?

> Another option migth be a separate list for binaries/images, if the
> filtering options isn't feasable.

Can you explain the benefit of creating separate lists just so that we
can prevent the passage of 40 kb of data?  Here's my suggestion - forget
about it.  The number of attachments that have been sent on this list
hardly warrant multiple list or people setting up FTP sites.  Frankly,
it doesn't warrant the amount of email that has been sent.

    Thanks,
    PeterM