On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 5:01 AM Peter Corlett via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:50:20PM +0100, Rob Jarratt via cctalk wrote: > [...] > > Easy, pictures of unidentified components, sending out schematics that > have > > been reverse engineered, documentation, pictures of scope traces when > trying > > to find a fault, all sorts. I would agree on a size limit though. > > The kind of size limit required to keep attachments small enough to not > annoy > people who are not interested in them would be too low for this purpose. > The > annoyance increases further when people with broken email clients (or who > just > never bothered to learn their tools) include senders' attachments in their > replies. > This is a tradeoff. - Allowing, let's say, 50MB attachments would enhance the experience for some people. I suspect there are many of them on this list. - Allowing any attachments at all would annoy some people. They tend to post a lot about how annoyed they would be. I suspect there are fewer of them than the others. - Allowing tiny attachments doesn't please anyone. A typical digicam or scanner produces multi-megabyte files. Reducing them in > size to fit within e.g. a 1MB limit would still cause the same level of > inconvenience to the sender as uploading it somewhere and posting a link as > well as reducing the quality and utility to those who are interested. I also note an inverse relationship between the size of an email and the > quality of its contents > Further, an orders-of-magnitude explosion in the resources used by this > list > would reduce the number of people willing to host it. My shell server > which I > use for mail is perhaps typical: it has a 20TB/month transfer cap which is > effectively infinite, but its 20GB disk would be eventually consumed by > all of > those attachments kept forever in the list archives that people also want. > A *person* willing to host it is the wrong approach. That makes the truck number 1. For redundancy you need to pay a service to host it, and have a few people with administrative rights. If people are scared of the service turning down and losing all history, they can personally archive every message.
