To: | [email protected] |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: LF: Why is this group not a Yahoo group with archives and web access? |
From: | ALAN MELIA <[email protected]> |
Date: | Sun, 7 Mar 2010 17:33:01 +0000 (GMT) |
Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=btinternet.com; s=s1024; t=1267983181; bh=ggWm9s5fTFL9TkZOOjQ96Q/TDyjrjDqf91CeS+eAHbc=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=XBXNsDr5i9M8qsy+qxtu74Sk2wi2ASExbauA+HSsRJ2zIfLRsjc2DW0wnKzBuUWqVIzD/0gHvaeRhPilJXcbCPAtnRVBUeTCKd/w2++TBvuFu/CxgUGdwu+STllkFZOVPXJ2sUUsVJkBd889Gz23kbSEz1ydpJbFDuxokZ56NXg= |
Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=btinternet.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=UU2mL+F7l+JB7pl1tGEu+cTbeOoZnKpCATRG7lpAoMvyFhJJPMRXUtYjgn+mh5eCTxIiHt8SU3Gzdd+/ehNekmxpneHnts5H8bmxCclJmDDJf9sphkyQggTUBcLZfxnZg1Q563Q1XMkF0uV1oGTgPeYEWu4A2Mc0iub9LUBeEFY=; |
Domainkey-status: | good (testing) |
In-reply-to: | <[email protected]> |
Reply-to: | [email protected] |
Sender: | [email protected] |
Hi Alberto, I will query this with John for the Web-master I suspect that the problem is the hosting. I believe this is not hosted on a big commercial super-computer cluster or "cloud" I think it may me hosted on the RSGB's machine together with the committee reflectors/internal email etc. In the early days before virussed adverts were available from Google and Yahoo via Adobe Flash one often had to pay for "lists"... :-)) Alan G3NYK --- On Sun, 7/3/10, Alberto di Bene <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Alberto di Bene <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: LF: Why is this group not a Yahoo group with archives and web > access? > To: [email protected] > Date: Sunday, 7 March, 2010, 17:02 > On 3/7/2010 4:47 PM, Roger Lapthorn > wrote: > > > Thanks for all the responses on this. Some decent > reasons have been > > given to leave things just as they are, so I'm OK with > that. > > Maybe just a little change could be done...the current size > limit for attachments seems to be perhaps a bit > restrictive... increasing it up to 60 - 70 kB could be > useful, and at the same it will still continue to be a > deterrent for not clogging the inboxes with oversize > messages... > > 73 Alberto I2PHD > > > > |
Previous by Date: | Re: LF: 8.97 kHz Grabber online (9 kHz line), rn3agc |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: LF: 8.97 kHz Grabber online (9 kHz line), Mike.WE0H |
Previous by Thread: | Re: LF: Why is this group not a Yahoo group with archives and web access?, Alberto di Bene |
Next by Thread: | Re: LF: Why is this group not a Yahoo group with archives and web access?, John Gould |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |