In article <rXVB2.26211$>,
TaskManager <> wrote:

:I have included a copy of my new Real Time Multi-Tasking Executive.
:Please use it and let me know your thoughts and ideas.
:begin 666

Please let me help:

-From: Frequently Asked Questions
-Subject: Do not post binaries directly

13. *****
 Q: May I just go ahead and post binaries to discussion newsgroups?

 A: Let me offer some hopefully useful information about
distributing material as binary postings on the Usenet news.
   First of all this should not be taken as a recrimination against
any individual poster of binaries to a discussion newsgroup, but
rather as a reminder to all of us of the potential problems
involved. Because this information is at the same time intended to
help the well-meaning posters of binaries, there are pointers at the
end of this item on how to make your binary available in the proper
   If someone sees these things differently, ok, but please note
that I would rather not get flaming, indignant arguments crashing in
over this issue. I'd prefer not to waste the time with the
bickering. All civilized views are naturally always welcome. The
best place to debate the issue is
First, however, please see "The Bincancel FAQ by Shaun Davis-Gluyas" and "Cancel Messages:
Frequently Asked Questions by Tim Skirvin" available on the WWW as
   Also please note that it does not make a decisive difference
whether these posting in fact just contains sources and no
executables. The problems are similar whatever (binary posting or
something else) we decide call this method of distribution. The same
applies whether the binary posting is a short or a long one. This is
not just a simple question of "bandwidth" (a term some users are so
in love with :-).
   I know and understand that most of who do this mean well, and
wish to contribute to the general usefulness of the Usenet news. We
all appreciate that. Nevertheless, I would strongly advise against
posting binaries to unmoderated discussion newsgroups. On top of
that the net rules don't allow it, let's look at this from a purely
practical point of view. If other netters follow suit and start
posting binaries to discussion newsgroups not meant for this
purpose, there are several potential problems:
    1) The traffic will soon explode, since it is bound to be more
       or less haphazard. This is bound to invoke action sooner or
       later from the systems along the feed and/or net
    2) There are no guarantees against trojans and other nasties.
       (This does not mean that the other methods are absolutely
       safe, but the likelihood is smaller by far.)
    3) The probability of pirated commercial material being posted
       over the net increases, with all the consequent
    4) The idea is very wasteful of net resources. Remember that
       many newsgroups easily have over 100000 readers. Much better
       to put/get stuff into/from the orderly moderated groups, or
       use anonymous ftp, WWW pages, mail servers, or good BBSes.
    5) Even should the binary posting be just a short minor one, it
       may easily snowball by invoking others. Even if a single
       binary posting need not be harmful in any way per se, the
       danger of the snowballing effect must be kept in mind.
    6) Posting binaries to discussion newsgroups is futile, since in
       these days the misplaced binary postings will quickly
       disappear. There are automatic cancelling systems in effect,
       the best known being Richard Depew's bincancels.
Now what to do if you have a useful binary you want to distribute. A
much better avenue than posting it, is telling where the utility is
available. Or if it is not yet available anywhere on the net, first
upload it to a suitable ftp site, make the material available
through your WWW page or send it to the relevant moderator of the
binary postings (provided there is a suitable binary group on the
net). If you wish to have the instructions for submitting material
to the MS-DOS & Windows archives I'll be happy to
send you our upload instructions if you email me for them. Or if you
wish to FTP the instructions directly, they are available as and the submission formula as

 A2: It is quite usual that some users facing this information tend
to counter with something along the lines "But that was a very
useful binary". This is missing the actual point. These postings
often include very useful material. But this does _not_ exempt any
binary posting, however useful, from the problems listed above.
Furthermore, the "ban" on posting binaries to discussion newsgroups
is an established net code of conduct. It is not just my view, even
if I happen to concur. I am just providing the information for the
potential posters.

 A3: Alan Brown offered this additional point. "Many sites are
connected via uucp using 2400bps modems over LD links. They
generally don't take binaries groups because of the cost involved in
getting them and/or a lack of hard drive space. Posting a binary to
a discussion group directly costs them a considerable amount of
money and may cause their disks to overflow."

 A4: When I post this (or similar information) as a followup to a
misplaced binary posting on the Usenet news, it often elicits what I
call "the bandwidth myth". It usually goes, somewhat aggressively,
like this. "Isn't your followup posting as much a waste of bandwidth
as the original posting?" This is a fallacy. The comparison is
mismatched. The comparison should be not only with the original,
misplaced posting but also with all the potential others it helps to
redirect to the proper channels. Besides, the purpose is to help
users to find their way, not to complain.

   All the best, Timo

Prof. Timo Salmi   Co-moderator of news:comp.archives.msdos.announce
Moderating at ftp:// & archives
Department of Accounting and Business Finance  ; University of Vaasa <>  ; FIN-65101,  Finland

Spam foiling in effect.  My email filter autoresponder will return a
required email password to users not yet in the privileges database.
Advice on spam foiling at



In article <rXVB2.26211$> wrote...
> I have included a copy of my new Real Time Multi-Tasking Executive.
> Please use it and let me know your thoughts and ideas.

My first thought is that you're going in the killfile for uploading an
enormous binary which contains source code that won't even compile.

Mike{*word*106}son, Black Cat Software Factory, Edinburgh, Scotland
fax 0131-271-1551 - Columnated Ruins Domino - Mellotron M400 #996


>I have attached a copy of my new Real Time Multi-Tasking Executive.
>Please use it and E-mail me with your thoughts and ideas.

Man, learn to use your Poster!
Stupid enough you posted a binary here, you even did it twice!
And then no full sources...

please remove the P in my email-adress to answer me
take a look @ my homepage:


JRS:  In article <V1WB2.26213$>
of Sat, 27 Feb 1999 12:25:52 in news:comp.lang.pascal.borland,

TaskManager <> wrote:
>I have attached a copy of my new Real Time Multi-Tasking Executive.
>Please use it and E-mail me with your thoughts and ideas.

>    Task Man

>[ A UUEncoded file ( was included here. ]

Not all anonymous posters are incompetent; nevertheless it's a
reasonable working rule.

John Stockton, Surrey, UK.    Turnpike v4.00    MIME.
  Web <URL:> -- Timo Salmi's Usenet Q&A.
  Web <URL:>  -  about usage of News.
  No Encoding. Quote before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

Other Threads