Jules Verne Forum

<jvf@Gilead.org.il>

JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec 19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012

Re: Master of the World

From: Patrick Sheffield <psheffield~at~earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 07:36:20 -0700
To: Jules Verne Forum <jvf~at~gilead.org.il>

5MB seems reasonable - 10MB will bounce from most mail servers…

Patrick

On May 8, 2012, at 6:04 AM, Bernhard Krauth wrote:

> Following the request of Nadav:
>
> It is normaly no problem to reduce digital images in size and resolution to a well-fitting size without a high loss by regarding it on a screen. But 60,000 bytes is really nothing, but a no-limit or high limit like the mentionned 50 MB is also not reasonable. A reasonable size to be allowed today in my opinion would be 5 MB for attachements – everything larger have to be reduced or splitted, or simply uploaded somewhere else and then to be followed by a link.... The forum basically should serve for communication, special informations like attachments should be restricted to a reasonable size. In my opionion reasonable is 5 MB, but probably others have an other opinion of it.
>
> Bestr regards and greetings to all around
>
> Bernhard
>
>
>
>
> mail from:
>
> Bernhard Krauth
>
> have a look at:
>
> www.jules-verne.eu
> www.jules-verne-club.de
> www.bernhard-krauth.de
> www.bremerhavenpilot.de
>
> From: Nadav Har'El
> Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 2:47 PM
> To: Jules Verne Forum
> Subject: Re: Master of the World
>
> On Tue, May 08, 2012, Craig Weatherhill wrote about "Re: Master of the World":
> > I've now tried twice to send in a message with an attached jpg.
> > photo (of Table Rock, Morganton, aka The Great Eyrie). Can anyone
> > tell me why it isn't getting through?
> >
> > Craig
>
> Hi, sorry, the mailing list software sets a configurable limit on the size
> of each message. Beyond this limit, the message needs manual confirmation
> by the mailing list administrator (which is me...) before it will be delivered.
> You (the sender of the message) were supposed to get back a mail saying this -
> that your mail has been detained because of its size.
>
> The message size limit is currently set at 60,000 bytes, which should be
> more than enough for any text messages, but is obviously not enough for
> images. I guess my father's original intention was to discourage
> attaching large images to messages, as links could be posted instead.
> Large images could annoy people with slow connections (remember 56Kbps
> modems?) and small mail quotas (remember hotmail's 2 MB quota, just 8
> years ago?). These issues are no longer as serious on today's Internet,
> but it's also not hard to post links to images - so I'd appreciate some
> comments from the members - would you like me to increase this 60,000
> byte limit? Increase it to what? I assume people still won't appreciate
> getting sent a 50 MB video clip from he mailing list...
>
> In any case, I just manually accepted now your original message (the first
> one), and it will be delivered as usual to everyone, with its attached image.
> I assume no need to pass through also your second post, with (presumably?)
> the same image?
>
> Let me know if you have any other problems with the mailing list.
>
> Nadav.
>
> --
> Nadav Har'El | Tuesday, May 8 2012,
> nyh~at~math.technion.ac.il |-----------------------------------------
> Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |The message above is just this
> http://nadav.harel.org.il |signature's way of propagating itself.
Received on Tue 08 May 2012 - 17:36:27 IDT

JV.Gilead.org.il
Copyright © Zvi Har’El
$Date: 2012/05/08 16:00:04 $$