I spammed you & I apologize
CAPTA...@webtv.net
opportunities to get wet.
Rick
Jim Wyatt
the intent of advertising to you a SCUBA charter business that I am
planning to start up.
Today I sent out e-mail to many of you with the web site address for the
business I am attempting to start up. One of the recipients of this
e-mail took exception to my actions and called my attention to it. He
pointed out that I invaded your privacy and violated my Internet
Providers' rule of not sending unsolicitated e-mail.
There is no excuse for what I did other than ignorance. My intentions
were not to invade your privacy - however it is clear to me now that I
did just that. I thank the individual who called my attention to this
and want this public apology to him to be made.
Sincerely
Jim Wyatt
Rich Lesperance
For now......
Rich L
Jim Wyatt <j...@reef-divers.com> wrote in message
news:389A4F79...@reef-divers.com...
Michael J. Blitch
>Post it this NG. Many readers here will be glad to learn of new
>opportunities to get wet.
Actually, I believe for the most part, they won't appreciate it. You
have no idea what can of worms you are trying to open. If it were to
be allowed or even tolerated a few times, then the door would never be
able to be closed. Just as it should rightly be government to not
negotiate for hostages, our case would be similar. Everyone whom even
thinks that they have a remote interest in the sport will advertise
here and in any other newsgroup. Everyone such as instructors, travel
agents, dive shops, charters, certification organizations, dive
guides, equipment manufactures, etc. would be here in a flash. That is
just those DIRECTLY related to the industry. If they are allowed, why
not allow commercial ads from car dealerships (you need to drive to
the dive site), airlines (how many of us fly to the destination?),
boat makers, gas suppliers, restaurants (you do eat when you travel,
right?), hotels or campgrounds (not everyone sleeps in their car).
insurance companies (need to protect your family from the dangerous
sport of recreational SCUBA diving), etc.
Not only is the spamming or posting of commercial ads frowned upon by
the charters and FAQ of newsgroups in the usenet hierarchy, but ISPs
will enforce their TOS. If this guy posted the URL again, then he
would almost definitely have his account terminated. This is not an
attempt to stifle competition of any kind or to prevent commerce over
the internet. The groups we join are for discussion purposes and
information exchange, as was the original intention. Rules have been
established long ago by formal means as well as common law methods.
Users do NOT want to have to wade through tons of messages advertising
on or off topic materials in order to find content. Granted, sometimes
the groups wouldn't have much in the way of content anyway, but that
is beside the point.
Binaries are also not allowed in non-binary groups. True, modem speed
and bandwidth has increased and mail readers are greatly improved. No
longer does someone have to download all the message in order to read
just one or two. There are multiple groups dedicated to posting
underwater pictures. I suggest alt.binaries.images.underwater as it is
a nice group with several great pics passing through often. Small ISPs
often have severe limits as to how much they can hold as well as how
much bandwidth they have available. They will often not be able to
carry binary groups because of the size. Once a groups gets too big,
they may have to drop it for space. If a lot of binaries are seen in
the group, then they may automatically drop it. You can't just think
of the American sized network of big servers and fast modems. These
groups are global, to small countries or places in remote areas are
limited as well. They should have the same opportunity to gain the
access to information. Binaries take up hundreds of times more space
than any text message. One pet peeve for me now is the people whom
post in html. Granted, they often have no idea that they are doing it
since they know little about their mail programs, but a lot of readers
still cannot handle html. The html system adds nothing but more space
and increased hassle to read the message. If taken to an extreme, this
can be considered as posting a binary, but I don't know of anyone who
will push the point beyond a simple request to the poster.
All of these rules and policies of etiquette came over from the days
of the 2400 baud modem where you dialed into a hobbyist's BBS to chat
with people in the local area. There were a few forums where the BBSs
had to transfer files at night at incredibly slow rates. Being able to
send someone a message and having them see it within a few days was an
incredible jump in technology. Bandwidth and space was at a premium (I
remember feeling jubilant when I got a 40 meg hard drive. Whom would
ever need that much?) People are so use to the 20$ all you can eat
internet now and the services are being oversold. They are afraid to
raise the fees for fear of incredible backlash from users. Even I
cannot imagine how much space and bandwidth is wasted by the thousands
of messages of spam passing through the network each hour.
Contrary to the anti-anti-spammers, there are ways to advertise that
are acceptable. Actually contributing to the group and having your
URL placed in the sig is the best method. If people are interested in
what the person is saying, they are much more likely to use their
service of go to the web page for more information. We have several
people contribute this group on a regular basis. Many folks on this
group like George and Ken operate a dive business (shop and charter
respectively). Because if their advice and information, if I were in
their area, I would most almost definitely go to them with my money
that anyone else. They are accessible for questions and would likely
be the type to tell you on some where else to go if they did not have
the merchandise or service you were looking for. Ken doesn't allow
nitrox on board, but I would bet anything that he would be happy to
point the customer to a nearby competing charter for the person who
wanted to use the gas. This is the type of camaraderie that diving
should have.
People should make a informative web page and use word of mouth or
search engines for hits. If people wanted to find dive shops in an
area, then they simply need to go to any search engine and type in the
location and they will find whatever it is they need.
Brian Wagner
>
> Actually, I believe for the most part, they won't appreciate it. You
> have no idea what can of worms you are trying to open. If it were to
> be allowed or even tolerated a few times, then the door would never be
> able to be closed. Just as it should rightly be government to not
> negotiate for hostages, our case would be similar. Everyone whom even
> thinks that they have a remote interest in the sport will advertise
> here and in any other newsgroup. Everyone such as instructors, travel
> agents, dive shops, charters, certification organizations, dive
> guides, equipment manufactures, etc. would be here in a flash. That is
> just those DIRECTLY related to the industry. If they are allowed, why
> not allow commercial ads from car dealerships (you need to drive to
> the dive site), airlines (how many of us fly to the destination?),
> boat makers, gas suppliers, restaurants (you do eat when you travel,
> right?), hotels or campgrounds (not everyone sleeps in their car).
> insurance companies (need to protect your family from the dangerous
> sport of recreational SCUBA diving), etc
This contention just isn't supported by the experience of newsgroups
that allow ads, both private and commercial. On many, ads are indicated
by defined prefixes such as FS, FA, AD (for commercial ones) and people
can easily ignore or filter them. The volume and relevance of the ads
are controlled by a simple little mechanism called the free market,
specifically by the principle that it's not wise to annoy potential
customers, and every merchant who avails themselves of such advertising
also knows they run the risk, should they mess up and fail to satisfy a
customer, of "trial by Usenet," which has been the undoing of more than
a few businesses.
It is also tiresome to hear the term "bandwidth" bandied about in
inappropriate context by people who really don't understand the meaning
of the word.
If people want rec.scuba to be commercial free, that's fine; just don't
use half truths and doubletalk to make it sound like some holy mission.
Just speak plainly; say "commercial posts are prohibited and we like it
that way," and be done with it.
Doug Frederick
*OFF* WITH HIS HEAD!
Just kidding.
I really appreciate the apology and a very proffesional attitude. Please E-mail
me directly with this information.
Popeye
I Dive, Therefore I Am (What I Am)
www.ssminnowcharters.com
My favorite dive boat
www.diverssupply.com
My favorite dive shop
JG
breeze
Brian Wagner wrote:
> This contention just isn't supported by the experience of newsgroups
> that allow ads, both private and commercial.
Could you supply specific information to support this?
>
> It is also tiresome to hear the term "bandwidth" bandied about in
> inappropriate context by people who really don't understand the meaning
> of the word.
Would you be kind enough to provide a proper definition for the rest of us? For
future reference.
Thanks,
JB
--
____________________
http://world.std.com/~breeze
Dan Bracuk
the business I am attempting to start up. "
Unless this was one of the ones I quickly deleted without reading, I
am feeling left out. I also noticed a couple of others who, since
they asked for an e-mail, were also left out.
Did anyone actually receive this commercial e-mail?
Dan Bracuk
Toronto, Canada
Join us on the Nekton Pilot 20 - 27 May 2000
rec.scuba faq http://scifi.squawk.com/scuba.html
Michael J. Blitch
<bwa...@mr.marconimed.com> wrote:
> It is also tiresome to hear the term "bandwidth" bandied about in
>inappropriate context by people who really don't understand the meaning
>of the word.
I apologize if I use this incorrectly. Please tell us the proper
definition, terminology, and context where this would be applicable.
Lee Bell
Regarding commercial posts in this newsgroup, Michael Blitch wrote:
> > Actually, I believe for the most part, they won't appreciate it . . .
and Brian Wagner responded:
> This contention just isn't supported by the experience of newsgroups
> that allow ads . . . .
Brian, your experience differs from mine. My experience is that newsgroups
that are less agressively guarded are overloaded with advertising. This
group got over a thousand messages in the last week and I, for one, would
like to avoid adding a similar volume of advertisements.
FWIW, I responded to the apology directly, suggesting the poster join the
discussions here and, if he liked, include his name, business and website
URL in a reasonably sized signature.
Lee
I
NE333RO
>discussions here and, if he liked, include his name, business and website
>URL in a reasonably sized signature.
Thank you Lee, I for one appreciate it.
Jack Starmer
"CHARTER: rec.scuba.equipment
This group is for discussion of all topics related to scuba diving
equipment: its purchase, its use, and for the sharing of experiences that
others have had with it. Infrequent advertisements from private
individuals are acceptable but commercial advertising is not."
jack
--
replace "MYLASTNAME" with my last name to reply.
Brian Wagner
>
> Brian Wagner wrote:
>
> > This contention just isn't supported by the experience of newsgroups
>
> Could you supply specific information to support this?
rec.sport.triathlon - properly identified commercial and private party
ads are permitted, as long as repeat posting is kept to a minimum.
Violations are rare, and advertisers who don't conduct themselves
properly suffer for it, and usually either go away, or mend their ways.
> Would you be kind enough to provide a proper definition for the rest of us? For
> future reference.
>
Bandwidth is a term applicable to analog signals, and has no application
in this context. When speaking of Usenet capacity issues, transfer
rates and storage capacities are the resources of interest.
Brian Wagner
> Brian, your experience differs from mine. My experience is that newsgroups
> that are less agressively guarded are overloaded with advertising.
On rec.sport.triathlon, commercial ads are well less than 1% of the
posts.
> FWIW, I responded to the apology directly, suggesting the poster join the
> discussions here and, if he liked, include his name, business and website
> URL in a reasonably sized signature.
FWIW, most of the commercial ads on rec.sport.triathlon are by business
owners who are regular contributors. However, some of their posts are
purely advertising, including listings of items on special, etc. In
addition to the flaming of those who get excessive, businesses
advertising on the group are also subject to having their failures in
customer satisfaction trumpeted with equal coverage to their
advertising.
Bob Crownfield
>
> breeze wrote:
> >
> > Brian Wagner wrote:
> >
> > > This contention just isn't supported by the experience of newsgroups
> > > that allow ads, both private and commercial.
> >
> > Could you supply specific information to support this?
>
> rec.sport.triathlon - properly identified commercial and private party
> ads are permitted, as long as repeat posting is kept to a minimum.
> Violations are rare, and advertisers who don't conduct themselves
> properly suffer for it, and usually either go away, or mend their ways.
>
> > Would you be kind enough to provide a proper definition for the rest of us? For
> > future reference.
> >
> Bandwidth is a term applicable to analog signals, and has no application
> in this context.
OR to limiting bit rates, as in bandwith=1.44 mb.
> When speaking of Usenet capacity issues, transfer
> rates and storage capacities are the resources of interest.
--
Bob Crownfield, Crown...@Home.com
Photography, Flying, Delphi Rad Addict
Now diving the Pacific in the LA Area.
Brian Wagner
>
> > Bandwidth is a term applicable to analog signals, and has no application
> > in this context.
>
> OR to limiting bit rates, as in bandwith=1.44 mb.
No, as that property has no relation to a range of contiguous values in
frequency domain. Baud rate is not the same bandwidth.
Greg Mossman
news:389EF0A9...@mr.marconimed.com...
> Bandwidth is a term applicable to analog signals, and has no application
> rates and storage capacities are the resources of interest.
I think Webster would disagree with Wagner on this one:
Main Entry: band·width
Pronunciation: 'band-"width
Function: noun
Date: circa 1937
1 : a range within a band of wavelengths, frequencies, or energies;
especially : a range of radio frequencies which is occupied by a modulated
carrier wave, which is assigned to a service, or over which a device can
operate
2 : the capacity for data transfer of an electronic communications system
<graphics consume more bandwidth that text does>; especially : the maximum
data transfer rate of such a system
If as you say "transfer rates and storage capacities are the resources of
interest" and Webster defines bandwidth as "especially : the maximum data
transfer rate of such a system" then it seems that term bandwidth is
properly applied here. Furthermore, a living language continuously evolves.
Your definition corresponds to the 1937 version; I hope all your speech
isn't that archaic since you'd have a hard time making yourself understood
about diving.
Brian Wagner
>
> Main Entry: band·width
> Pronunciation: 'band-"width
> Function: noun
> Date: circa 1937
> 1 : a range within a band of wavelengths, frequencies, or energies;
> especially : a range of radio frequencies which is occupied by a modulated
> carrier wave, which is assigned to a service, or over which a device can
> operate
> 2 : the capacity for data transfer of an electronic communications system
> <graphics consume more bandwidth that text does>; especially : the maximum
> data transfer rate of such a system
>
> If as you say "transfer rates and storage capacities are the resources of
> interest" and Webster defines bandwidth as "especially : the maximum data
> transfer rate of such a system" then it seems that term bandwidth is
> properly applied here. Furthermore, a living language continuously evolves.
> Your definition corresponds to the 1937 version; I hope all your speech
> isn't that archaic since you'd have a hard time making yourself understood
> about diving.
The first definition is the proper scientific meaning of the term. The
second is the colloquial use born of misunderstanding overheard
technical usage. Furthermore, the data transfer rates in question are
not those of the "system," but of your personal modem.
Luap Notnuats
The second definition is the current 2000 alternative version of the word,
and if anything is used far more frequently than the original version.
Since when does the origin of a word give it any more credence than any
other. Language is a living thing defined by popular usage, not some stone
tablets. If you want to live in the past do so. 'Bandwidth' has been applied to
describe data transfer capacity since at least the early eighties and is a good
way to describe this concept. Furthermore, the modem is part of the "system"
in question and is likely to have the least 'bandwidth' and is therefore most
relevant to the point: Stop wasting my 'bandwidth'.
--
Luap (the 'bandwidth' waster).
JG
Brian Wagner
"alone" also have no set meaning in today's society either. BTW, the
modem is part of YOUR system, and its limitations are YOUR limit. It
does not place a burden on the Usenet in general. Modem specifications
are stated in baud rate, rather than bandwidth, because that is the
proper technical term. Living language does not apply in hard sciences
as it does in everyday street conversation, which is why Latin is often
used in such fields. You may bandy words like insane, or even
schizophrenic, around in the context of a conversation in a bar, but
they have fixed legal and diagnostic meanings not subject to your whims.
Greg Mossman
> Linguistic deconstruction lives on. Of course, the words "is" and
> "alone" also have no set meaning in today's society either. BTW, the
> modem is part of YOUR system, and its limitations are YOUR limit. It
> does not place a burden on the Usenet in general. Modem specifications
> are stated in baud rate, rather than bandwidth, because that is the
> proper technical term. Living language does not apply in hard sciences
> as it does in everyday street conversation, which is why Latin is often
> used in such fields. You may bandy words like insane, or even
> schizophrenic, around in the context of a conversation in a bar, but
> they have fixed legal and diagnostic meanings not subject to your whims.
Gee Brian, I hate to disagree again, but isn't baud rate just a bit archaic?
Maybe that was fine back when 9600 was considered fast, but modern modem
speed is measured in bit per second: bps usually exceeds baud rate since
more than one bit can be carried on one signal, and is therefore a more
relevant term. Please keep up. You keep talking like you do and soon
nobody will be able to understand you without breaking out the dictionary of
archaisms. (Oh, sorry, "breaking out" in this context means "taking off the
shelf and opening" for those speaking Old English.) I'd recommend the
Canterbury Tales to you, but they might be too modern. Try Beowulf for real
English.
JG
Greg Mossman wrote:
You could tell him this:
"In feith, squier, thow hast thee wel yquit
And gentilly. I preise wel thy wit,
Considerynge thy yowthe,
So feelyngly thou spekest, sire, I allow the!"
G. Chaucer
Brian Wagner
>
> Gee Brian, I hate to disagree again, but isn't baud rate just a bit archaic?
> Maybe that was fine back when 9600 was considered fast, but modern modem
> speed is measured in bit per second: bps usually exceeds baud rate since
> more than one bit can be carried on one signal, and is therefore a more
> relevant term.
Well, in your world where colloquial misuses of technical terms supplant
their meanings, the terms baud and bps would be interchangeable, as they
have become in common parlance. I was merely using your own convention
for the nature of meaning.
Bob Crownfield
Are you losing the big picture?
bandwidth analog means the max rate
at which you can transmit analog information through the channel.
now we go digital.
bandwidth digital means the max rate
at which you can transmit digital information through the channel.
Robert Wood
Greg Mossman wrote:
> Gee Brian, I hate to disagree again, but isn't baud rate just a bit archaic?
> Maybe that was fine back when 9600 was considered fast, but modern modem
> speed is measured in bit per second: bps usually exceeds baud rate since
> more than one bit can be carried on one signal, and is therefore a more
> relevant term. Please keep up. You keep talking like you do and soon
> nobody will be able to understand you without breaking out the dictionary of
> archaisms. (Oh, sorry, "breaking out" in this context means "taking off the
> shelf and opening" for those speaking Old English.) I'd recommend the
> Canterbury Tales to you, but they might be too modern. Try Beowulf for real
> English.
Baud rate is different from
bits-per-second. The latter is the actual information data
rate. Baud rate is the rate of symbols, or link tranmsission
rate. Each symbol can carry many bits. Thus the baud rate
for a 16QAM signal is one quarter the data rate, in bits per
second. Class dismissed.
[\] Robert Wood
2 Million gates, bah, humbug.
mailto:rw...@spacebridge.com
The St. Lawrence River - fresh, arm, visible diving.
OHD
Gee Brian, I hate to disagree again, but isn't baud rate just a bit archaic?
Maybe that was fine back when 9600 was considered fast, but modern modem
speed is measured in bit per second: bps usually exceeds baud rate since
more than one bit can be carried on one signal, and is therefore a more
relevant term.
""Baud" and "data rate" do not mean the same thing, yet they are often used synonymously. So what's the difference? The term "bps" expresses the data signaling rate; baud is a measure of modulation rate. A voice line can accomodate 2400 signal changes per second (baud). Higher speed modems encode two or more data bits in each signal change. The bps rate corresponds to the number of data bits per signal, multiplied by the baud."
baud = signal changes per second
bps = (data bits group) x baud rate
"Bandwidth is the information-carrying capacity of a transmission facility. Bandwidth defines a range of frequencies. measured in Hertz (cycles per second), that it can accomodate without significant signal degradation."
Sorry guys, just couldn't resist 'diving*' in.
OHD
* To fulfil rec.scuba content requirements.
Brian Wagner
>
> bandwidth analog means the max rate
> at which you can transmit analog information through the channel.
No, bandwidth analog does not mean max rate.
Bob Crownfield
not everyone seems to agree with you.
Perhaps your definition belong to the analog age.
check http://www.siliconpost.com/support/def_band.htm
which describes t1 lines bandwidth in max bits per second.
Ross Bagley
Brian Wagner <bwa...@mr.marconimed.com> wrote:
>Greg Mossman wrote:
>>
>> Gee Brian, I hate to disagree again, but isn't baud rate just a bit archaic?
>> Maybe that was fine back when 9600 was considered fast, but modern modem
>> speed is measured in bit per second: bps usually exceeds baud rate since
>> more than one bit can be carried on one signal, and is therefore a more
>> relevant term.
>
>their meanings, the terms baud and bps would be interchangeable, as they
>have become in common parlance. I was merely using your own convention
>for the nature of meaning.
Baud is an obsolete term that was wildly confused even among modem
manufacturers. The original meaning of the term has now been replaced
by "symbols/sec" or "symbol rate". Several bits are coded into each
symbol, and the number of bits/symbol along with the symbol rate
defines the bandwidth of the connection.
The first 9600bps modems were 2400baud (2400 symbols/sec) devices
running 16 QAM (4 bits/symbol). QAM, pronounced "kwam", stands for
"Quadrature Amplitude Modulation" which basically means that by
changing the phase and amplitude (volume) of the carrier signal,
several bits of data can be coded into each symbol sent across the
radio signal (or light/microwave/etc. signal). The symbol rate is
limited by the frequency of the carrier and the signal/noise ratio
at the receiving end.
The newer terms "symbol rate" and "QAM" are now very widely used when
discussing wireless network implementations (which I learned when
Nortel was my client last year). These same terms apply to modern
modems as well (with some additional complications that we don't need
to go into here).
Baud, as a term, is dead.
Now back to your regularly scheduled diving discussion.
-- Ross Bagley & Associates http://www.rossbagley.com
"We don't write your software, we help you write your software better!"