Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #59217
| From | billy@MIX.COM |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.system |
| Subject | Re: POP3 vs. IMAP |
| Date | 2014-05-09 16:20 +0000 |
| Organization | PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC |
| Message-ID | <lkiv7r$4c$1@reader2.panix.com> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <droleary-5FB83B.11434204052014@news.eternal-september.org> <lk8t1r$q5o$1@reader2.panix.com> <droleary-E218FD.12325106052014@news.eternal-september.org> <lke1fg$314$1@reader2.panix.com> <droleary-4836C7.15554608052014@news.eternal-september.org> |
Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> writes, quoting me:
> > Huh? Daily traffic is steadily increasing, and has gone from
> > about 3GB back when I worked on tin (ca 1994) to past 15TB(!)
> > today. How do you get to "continues to slide into obscurity"
> > from that?
>
> By looking at reality; not all traffic is equivalent. For someone
> who sees Usenet as limited to what tin can show
Tin (and presumably any other newsreader) can show anything and
everything that exists on any particular news server. Oh - you
want photos, or video? Fire up a web browser, video player, etc.
Tin can also save this junk to a file, for those who can't live
without it. Then, there are probably some web hosts that decode
all this stuff and offer it - an old friend had one (News2Me.COM)
up for a while, but I see it's no longer there. Just a guess,
but I'd suspect it was croaked by the DMCA.
> it is disingenuous for you to try to claim that massive binary
> postings support your point.
Why? When traffic is continually increasing, "slide into obscurity"
does not follow...
> Its function as a CDN is part of *my* argument.
...even when it's unwanted, abusive crap. People _are_ using it.
> As a social/information network, though, web sites have been kicking
> Usenet's ass for quite some time.
You should find that informative -- the audience you're seeking to
serve prefers web sites. Not to mention I personally would greatly
prefer they use them.
Usenet is doing quite well where access restrictions effectively reduce
the crap to a tolerable level. The Panix hierarchy (local groups only
available to Panix customers) is an excellent example.
> > Well, building a "better" newsreader is not going to solve that
> > problem, at all.
>
> It will if you can give people what they actually want from discussions.
> Especially now that we're seeing mobile apps replacing web sites as the
> front-end. A fresh coat of paint would do wonders for the public
> perception of Usenet.
I think you're confusing & conflating the quality of the tools with the
quality of the users. A "better" newsreader is not going to suddenly
transform an idiot into a polite, well-spoken human being.
> > And, there are already plenty of email user agents, and web browsers.
> > Not to mention web sites. What value do you see in distributing, for
> > example, web log content via Usenet? Or video, etc? Most of the 15TB
> > daily traffic is material that'd far better served elsehwere, by the
> > way.
>
> Would it, though? I again point to podcasts as a prime example.
> Especially video podcasts, which see a high rate of failure when the
> producer has to absorb all the distribution costs directly when they
> offer it through their own web site.
Well, pushing those costs onto third parties is not my idea of a
solution. If something fails, I think that's because it wasn't good
enough to carry its own weight. Usenet is not a charity...
> There could be better protocols for accomplishing the same task, but
> then we could also argue whether email is a good way to send files
> around. The point will remain that people will use the tools they have
> to get the job done. Usenet is a tool that can do *a lot* of things
> people keep reinventing on HTTP and other protocols. That's why it's a
> shame that so many people are stuck using software that hasn't really
> been updated in the last decade to appeal to new users.
Again, it's not the software, it's the content.
Why would we (maintainers of Usenet) pursue anything that's only going
going to pile yet more inappropiate load on a system that is not meant
to support any of it?
By the way... The Panix reader servers only carry (at this moment) 9550
text groups. There may be a few binary groups in these, but I doubt it.
> > In spite of this, propagation is quite good, but as far as I know it's
> > due to the generousity of many organizations hosting feeds that are not
> > (directly, at least) generating enough revenue to cover their costs.
>
> Like email, Usenet is not inherently a commercial medium, so nobody
> should expect it to have a return on investment.
Huh? I'm a very heavy user of email for commercial purposes. I pay
for it. How much do you think 15TB a day of email would cost?
Email is a mission-critical service, and is handled accordingly.
Usenet is not. Usenet is a best-effort service.
> Same is true of web support boards or social media outreach.
Anyone can generate income with a web site. Usenet is not a
commercial service. The charters of most groups forbid, or at
least discourage, commercial use.
> The key, I think, is that Usenet has failed to really make its
> case for ISPs to keep running a server. Functioning as a
> (legitimate) CDN would be one way to do that
Again, Usenet is not a commercial service. Further, I suspect
the massive load created by traffic Usenet was never intended to
support is a significant factor in many ISPs deciding to just
stop providing it, at all.
> and much of that mainly *is* about building a better newsreader.
> A newsreader so seamless that people don't even need to know that
> NNTP is used instead of HTTP.
What exactly is wrong with using HTTP to serve HTTP content?
Is it that it costs too much...
> > If I want to follow a URL in a Usenet article, I can easily invoke a
> > web browser. The site hosting it can pay for the resources necessary
> > to deliver it (video, photos, etc). Works for me.
>
> That's not sustainable without detailing the "pay for" economic model.
...so it seems.
Well, I don't want to pay for it, either.
> For most distribution/caching of content, a system like Usenet is going
> to be re-invented in one form or another. Either the case should be
> made for using Usenet going forward, or we should all completely abandon
> these groups for whatever is out there that does the job better.
I don't see any mutual exclusivity here.
> > Tin is just a newsreader. It's not a web browser, it's not an email
> > user agent, nor is it anything else. It does allow one to invoke a
> > web browser, and it does support some basic email functions (I can
> > easily mail myself articles I want to save, for example). It works
> > now, and will continue to work fine, even if it was not actively
> > maintained.
>
> It does not "work" for my mother.
She should use a web browser.
> It does not "work" for most Mac users.
Most can't build it, true, but it does compile fine on Mac OS. I
suppose I could build and offer the binaries to those who'd like to
use it. If someone hasn't already (I haven't looked). I could also
easily add a script to invoke the terminal emulator and run it.
> It *definitely* does not work for people with an iPhone.
Well, yea, of course not.
> The only question the developers should be asking is whether or not
> any *part* of their code could be functionally useful to other users
> or developers. If so, it would be beneficial to re-factor out the
> parts that can be decoupled and reused, instead of having the legacy
> code be an anchor around the whole thing. Clearly *every other*
> newsreader developer has seen fit to ignore that basic principle of
> software design.
Here you want us to be charitable, but elsewhere you want us to buy
(or at least fund the development of) your "open source." Nobody is
paid anything for their work on tin, or slrn. Nothing. Not one cent.
> Not me, though. NNTP.framework is what I started on Day 1:
>
> drwxr-xr-x@ 1 droleary staff 264 Mar 3 15:54
>
> compared to when I finally got around to starting to put an app on top
> of it:
>
> drwxr-xr-x@ 1 droleary staff 264 Mar 30 16:58
And this will execute under how many different operating systems?
Tin builds and runs on plenty of them - http://www.tin.org/builds.html
> > I think slrn's sources may be more instructive, at least more easily
> > parsed by you.
> Ugh, no. They, too, seem unable to spell out "article"
Again, I must say, geez. Feel free to fire up your prefered search
and replace tool and regex your way to happiness.
> and just looking at art.h makes it clear they have no abstraction
> of what a article/message is independent of their newsreader. What
> I'm looking to find is something that could be reasonable factored
> out to create a libnntp. I didn't see that in *any* open source
> newsreader, and so I had to write my own.
You can't call it open source if you want to sell it.
> > Tin pre-dates Next Step.
>
> If you're pushing it as something people should be using today, you
> don't get to point to tin's birthday as being an excuse for its current
> state.
Why not? It still works perfectly.
> [...] using the label "bitmap" to describe any of that should not
> have passed review.
Well, after you've patched art, have a whack at bitmap.
> > [Usenet is] a _text_ CDN, yes.
>
> No, it is a *legacy* 7-bit CDN. It moved away from both plain text and
> on to a full 8-bit a long, long time ago. Again, it's not my fault if
> tin hasn't been keeping up with how people in 2014 make use of Usenet.
Tin is not going to cater to how people _ABUSE_ Usenet. Not in 2014,
not ever. I seriously doubt slrn ever will, too.
I think you need some experience maintaining NNTP and NNRP servers.
> The best thing you can do for it is stop making excuses for it and push
> for it to be better (or do as I've done and start writing something new).
I'm very happy with it as it is. I _don't want_ photos, video, et cetera.
Just say it with words, and perhaps a cite or two, and I'll be happy.
> > > And the people who use it deserve to be more than a few characters
> > > in a From: header.
> >
> > For example, what?
>
> Photos, for a start. With a camera on every phone, you just can't have
> a social network without *at least* allowing users to post a picture of
> themselves in some manner. X-Face only goes so far, and updates like
> Face are also horribly limited, so the right solution is to support
> external standards.
This is what HTTP does so well.
> In general, the presentation of Usenet is group-centric, but a lot of
> how people approach social networks these days is user-centric. Just
> like Kibo demonstrated long ago, performing a pivot in perspective can
> radically change how people participate.
So, use a non-group-centric protocol.
> > And what about all the other technologies, protocols, et cetera?
>
> What about them? They all have their niches. That fact that Usenet
> traffic is still growing in some areas shows that it does certain
> things well. Unfortunately, much of that is illicit/illegal use
Yes, it is. Does that justify your piling yet more load on a service
never intended to support (any of) it?
> The fact is that I could put an important file up on Usenet today and
> be fairly certain I could get at it from the other side of the world
> both tomorrow and for at least the next 5 years.
No - most servers expire stuff, and in particular, expire the material
you'd like to clog them with quite rapidly. There are some archives,
but for the the text groups.
> The cost is lower than any of the "cloud storage" that's out there
No, the cost is essentially the same. Just because no one is forcing
you to pay for it does not mean no one at all has to cover the costs.
Somebody is absolutely, positively paying for it.
> and who knows if the company you went with will even be around next
> year?
DejaNews. R.I.P.
There are some people who save things, ala olduse.net - but are they
going to want to archive massive amounts of your data? I think not.
> Usenet is *fucking great* for that sort of thing. The possibilities
> are there, for anyone willing to look beyond what tin does.
Again, who is going to pay for all this?
> > Nobody has ever gotten rich implimenting or maintaining Usenet.
>
> And that's the shame of it all. Facebook gets to throw around piles of
> cash for invading their user's privacy, but Usenet gets no love. I'd
> hope the reasons for the disparity are obvious by now but, hell, I
> expected there'd be a libnntp by now, too.
We don't care. We're happy with what we have, and don't like freeloading
interlopers piling on the work, and expenses, of maintaining the system.
> > I'm speaking about, in this particular case, dealing with various server
> > quirks. You can read, and learn, or do it that hard way - write something
> > and then deal with complaints and bug reports from your users when they
> > enounter the same stuff.
>
> But nobody is going to deep-dive into tin's code to find those things.
Huh? All it takes is a quick, and shallow, perusal of the sources.
> > > Go ahead and try and talk your tin friends into getting them to factor
> > > out a libnntp that can used, at the very least, to simply process Usenet
> > > URLs.
> >
> > I'm just speculating, but I'd expect they'd say, "You're the one who wants
> > it, so get busy and write it yourself."
>
> In other words, exactly the kind of unprofessional behavior that plagues
> most open source projects.
Huh? You want to sell your own code, but you want us to write it for free?
Speaking of unprofessional.
> But if they show no signs of wanting to *themselves* improve the core
> of their project, when I decide to write it myself, it should be no
> surprise that my efforts won't be based on tin.
I merely suggested you give it a look, and benefit from their decades of
experience creating a newsreader that works well in the real world.
> > Well..... If you can get the IETF and others involved to add what you
> > want to the Usenet standards and best practices, I'm quite confident
> > tin and slrn will follow. To their credit, tin's maintainers adhere
> > to them extremely well. And I'd bet slrn does, too.
>
> All the more reason that it's a shame nobody involved had the foresight
> to factor out a libnntp before they started.
How does the existence a transportable library relate to getting the
IETF, et al., to agree to support your intended uses of Usenet?
> Because, having to start from scratch, I can pretty much guarantee
> that I'm going to have some silly bugs and non-standard behavior in
> my framework.
Again, you can avoid a lot of that by simply observing what others have
done to fix or work around them.
> > > Like I said, my experience with poorly run software development
> > > is that the people involved aren't interested in fixing what's
> > > wrong, and so I prefer not to get involved with their mutual
> > > back-patting sessions. I just laugh and walk away from
> > > "brogrammers" who think committing code is the most important
> > > thing in the world, yet the code they're cranking out is all
> > > garbage that they think "works, and works well".
> >
> > ...but, I've got to say I think this is a rather distorted point
> > of view.
>
> But that's my experience. You can see it played out not so long ago in
> the GNUstep newsgroups after their failed Kickstarter. The problem with
> tin, too, probably isn't with the code itself, but simply with its
> organization and/or the aims of the project/management itself.
I don't see how you can say that - you don't know any of them, nor how
they work, nor what they want to accomplish. Speaking of disingenuous.
Billy Y..
--
sub #'9+1 ,r0 ; convert ascii byte
add #9.+1 ,r0 ; to an integer
bcc 20$ ; not a number
Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-04-27 17:25 -0700
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-04-27 20:29 -0400
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-04-27 18:05 -0700
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? bill van <billvan@delete.shaw.ca> - 2014-04-27 18:10 -0700
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-04-27 18:53 -0700
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? billy@MIX.COM - 2014-04-28 16:47 +0000
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-04-28 11:32 -0700
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? android <here@there.was> - 2014-04-28 21:30 +0200
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-04-29 09:17 +1200
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-04-29 03:02 +0000
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-30 17:04 -0400
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? billy@MIX.COM - 2014-04-28 22:22 +0000
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-28 19:23 -0400
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-04-28 18:32 -0700
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-30 16:38 -0400
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-04-29 03:00 +0000
POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2014-04-29 08:36 +0200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-04-29 19:10 +1200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2014-04-29 10:49 +0200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-04-30 09:21 +1200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-02 17:23 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-05-02 17:27 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Howard.not@home.com (Howard) - 2014-04-30 15:28 +0100
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-04-30 14:52 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-30 16:28 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-30 16:39 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-04-29 03:18 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-04-29 19:22 +1200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-04-29 10:05 +0100
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Invid Fan <invid@loclanet.com> - 2014-04-29 10:23 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-04-30 09:16 +1200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-04-29 17:28 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-30 16:28 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-04-29 20:47 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2014-04-29 20:27 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-04-29 21:42 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-04-30 14:19 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Tim McNamara <timmcn@bitstream.net> - 2014-04-30 17:50 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-04-30 23:36 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-04-30 17:50 -0700
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-05-01 13:13 +1200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2014-04-30 21:15 -0700
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-05-01 18:22 +1200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-02 17:11 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-02 17:09 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2014-04-30 08:41 +0200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-04-30 03:17 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2014-04-30 09:47 +0200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-04-30 04:54 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2014-04-30 11:32 +0200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-04-30 06:51 -0700
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-05-01 09:27 +1200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-30 18:00 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2014-05-02 10:00 +0200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-02 09:48 +0100
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-02 10:07 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-02 17:16 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-04-30 14:09 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-02 17:14 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-04-30 14:14 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2014-04-30 19:18 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-30 17:06 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP (Was: Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence?) John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> - 2014-05-01 18:56 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2014-05-02 12:23 +1200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> - 2014-05-02 10:34 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP nmassello@yahoo.com (Neill Massello) - 2014-05-01 18:25 -0600
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-02 01:46 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-05-02 05:48 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-05-02 03:20 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP android <here@there.was> - 2014-05-02 10:50 +0200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-05-02 06:04 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP android <here@there.was> - 2014-05-02 12:14 +0200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-02 17:39 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-02 18:32 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-02 10:55 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-02 16:50 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-03 11:30 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-03 16:45 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-04 11:43 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-05 20:41 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-06 12:32 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-05-06 17:41 +0000
Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-07 12:25 -0500
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-08 00:10 +0000
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-07 20:32 -0400
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2014-05-08 04:29 +0000
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) dyera@not.freeshell.org.invalid - 2014-05-08 14:40 +0000
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-05-10 07:16 -0700
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-08 16:14 -0500
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-08 21:42 +0000
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-09 12:15 -0500
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-09 18:42 +0000
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-10 16:42 -0500
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-11 01:08 +0000
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-11 16:40 -0500
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2014-05-11 17:52 -0700
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-12 11:39 -0500
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Invid Fan <invid@loclanet.com> - 2014-05-11 21:25 -0400
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-12 11:53 -0500
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-12 10:29 +0000
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-09 03:45 +0000
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 09:30 -0400
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2014-05-09 18:17 -0400
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-09 19:28 -0400
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-05-10 13:30 +1200
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2014-05-12 00:12 +0000
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Invid Fan <invid@loclanet.com> - 2014-05-11 21:32 -0400
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Ant <ant@zimage.comANT> - 2014-05-12 04:00 -0700
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2014-05-08 11:42 +0200
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-08 16:33 -0500
Re: Of what value is Usenet? (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-09 03:43 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-07 19:27 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-08 15:55 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-05-08 22:16 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-09 11:35 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-09 16:20 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-10 13:43 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-11 04:20 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-11 15:01 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-12 14:27 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-12 17:24 +0100
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-12 17:38 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-12 20:58 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-12 21:33 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-05-02 17:17 +0000
Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-03 12:10 -0500
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-05-03 23:13 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-08 03:49 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-08 16:02 -0500
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-05-09 09:22 +1200
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-09 01:20 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-09 11:43 -0500
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-09 18:36 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-10 17:47 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-11 19:38 +0100
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-11 19:05 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-11 20:13 +0100
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-11 23:17 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-12 10:01 +0100
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-12 10:48 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-12 15:24 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-12 17:22 +0100
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-12 20:34 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-12 20:57 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-12 02:20 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-11 15:14 -0500
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-10 13:53 -0500
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-10 20:29 +0000
Re: Usenet enters the ring! NNTP vs. (Re: POP3 vs. IMAP) Doc O'Leary <droleary@8usenet2013.subsume.com> - 2014-05-11 16:21 -0500
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP android <here@there.was> - 2014-05-04 20:08 +0200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-02 13:17 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-02 22:08 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-02 18:35 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-03 00:02 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-03 09:37 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-05-03 17:09 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-03 13:23 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> - 2014-05-05 13:30 -0700
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP John White <jccw@comcast.net> - 2014-05-05 16:41 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-02 13:55 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP android <here@there.was> - 2014-05-02 16:10 +0200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> - 2014-05-02 10:37 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-05-02 10:48 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-02 11:09 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP billy@MIX.COM - 2014-05-02 17:06 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-05-02 17:23 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-02 17:34 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-05-03 12:01 +1200
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP dyera@not.freeshell.org.invalid - 2014-05-02 17:00 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-02 13:19 -0400
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP dyera@not.freeshell.org.invalid - 2014-05-03 16:29 +0000
Re: POP3 vs. IMAP Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-03 12:46 -0400
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-04-30 16:35 -0400
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-02 17:27 +0000
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-02 17:41 -0400
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-02 22:14 +0000
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-02 18:46 -0400
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2014-05-02 23:33 +0000
Re: Obnoxious noises in Apple Mail - how to silence? Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2014-05-02 19:48 -0400
csiph-web