|
|
Posted by Bill Vermillion on 01/29/07 22:15
In article <so0uq2hc4pfgmc6esfbf0b8mrca07ii13d@4ax.com>,
MassiveProng <MasiveProng@yourhiney.org> wrote:
>On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 19:07:56 -0800, "Richard C."
><post-age@spamcop.net> Gave us:
>>"MassiveProng" <MassiveProng@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in
>>message news:rnntq21sbpteo5aofqpo7o8v3er9c46tkg@4ax.com...
>>
>>> No. One DOWNLOADS posts, then reads, dumbass (at least if you have
>>> half a brain). ANY of you idiots that actually tried to read as it
>>> downloaded were even more stupid that the top postingf twits with
>>> their top posted twit mentalities.
>>
>>===============================
>>You do not know how a newsreader works......................
> Yes, I most certainly do. I RAN a newsserver back in 96.
> I HAD paying customers (called subscribers).
> I bulk DL'd all the groups THEY subscribed to several times a day.
Hm - back in the mid-80s we did message exchange with ihave/sendme
protocols - over dialup uucp.
By 1995 when 'net connnectivity was readily available for running
news servers, we did the same thing but with nntp protocols and
we'd exchange articles - if anyone posted any locally they'd be
sent upwards - several times PER HOUR.
> THEY bulk DL'd them in turn and THEN they read their news OFFLINE
>(exactly where the term came from), made their replies OFFLINE, and
>THEN they posted their replies in bulk.
Hm. I've seen many who read the headers and then just download and
read in real time.
> THAT is how anyone with any brains did it back then, so shut the
>fuck up RichTARD, you know absofuckinglutely nothing about it or me.
We didn't. It didn't make much sense to do anything other than in
real-time with a DS3 for transport.
But with anything in the 'net world [ and I've always run Unix
systems ] there are as many ways to do something as there
are admins to set them up.
Bill
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|