| 1 |
On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 16:59:33 +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> You and I do the same thing in the end. The difference is that you |
| 4 |
> waste bandwidth, need to set up filters every time you subscribe to a |
| 5 |
> new list |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Which takes about ten seconds usually. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
>, need to unsubscribe when you don't want to receive email |
| 10 |
> anymore, |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Which takes about half that time, and both of these are infrequent |
| 13 |
occurrences. For lists that I had only a transient interest in, I would |
| 14 |
look at usenet versions. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> need hard disk space to store all the downloaded messages, |
| 17 |
> don't have access to messages from the time you weren't subscribed yet, |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
No, but I do have access to Google :) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> So in the end, we end up doing the same thing, by I do it in a saner |
| 22 |
> way that was designed to do exactly that. :) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
No, you do it in a different way that suits your needs. That doesn't make |
| 25 |
you right and people with other needs wrong. It just illustrates the |
| 26 |
benefits of choice. I did not insult your choice, why assume that you |
| 27 |
know better than me what I need? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> It appears it only has |
| 30 |
> pros and no cons, so I don't see a reason to use email instead. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
How do you read messages without an Internet connection? |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Everything has pros and cons. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Walk softly and carry a fully charged phazer. |
Archives