Re: yEnc support in Gnus?

[Per Abrahamsen <abraham@dina.kvl.dk>]

Matthias Andree <ma@dt.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de> writes:

> You're missing the point. Of course, the whole bunch is solicited, but
> you don't get to choose individual articles or files (but you do with
> HTTP/FTP).

And this is significant because?

I believe it should be up to the server administrators to decide, for
whatever reasons they might have.

For example, using a client/server protocol like HTTP or FTP for very
popular files like pr0n and warez would be stupid from a technical
point of view, when a flooding protocol like Usenet is way more
efficient for that kind of stuff.  On the other hand, using Usenet for
technical discussions is hopelessly inefficient, the interest is low
enough that a peer to peer or client/server protocol in most cases
would be more efficient. 

Of course, mirrors and caching muddles this somewhat, as it makes HTTP
and FTP look more like a primitive flooding protocol.  And NNTP can
easily be used in a pure client/server setup, just avoid giving or
accepting feeds.

However, technical issues alone aren't (and shouldn't be) the deciding
factor.  Many ISP's feel that offering local access to textual
discussions on Usenet is a worthwhile added value.  And some don't
feel the same way about popular groups for binaries, even if it makes
more sense from a technical perspective.  Other factors such as user
expectations, available software, and habbits also play a role on what
parts of Usenet to offer.