On Sat, Jul 13, 2002 at 11:22:57AM -0400, Beartooth wrote:
> I've always excluded pix from the lists I run manually...
> Are there any rules of thumb from people's experience as to
> how much more bandwidth a list carrying pix eats, as compared to
> one that excludes them?
I can offer a small anecdotal data point: I run a medium-sized (I
suppose) list, about 2K subscribers, maybe 100 of which actively
post, maybe 10-40 total articles/day. I allow gif images, but not
jpgs, as gifs are a lot more efficient for the charts that are
appropriate for this list. However, I restrict the article size,
including all attachments, to 15K, so they have to make that chart
really count! My list gets relatively few images, maybe one every
3-4 days. I don't allow html at all.
I'm a member of another list devoted to the same topic that allows
unlimited posting of anything, html, you-name-it. Some of the jpg
charts on that list (that should have been gifs) can run to 400K, and
I simply remove them at my ISP so they don't clog my fetchmail queue.
I also strip the html off that list as I retrieve it.
Even with my various prunings, and the fact that I tend to keep
most of the content from my own list (for no good reason :), I
find there's at least ten times the bandwidth on the unlimited list.
I should mention that that other big list is quite well regulated,
on-topic, etc. The posts tend to run: someone posts a chart and
some discussion of it, then ten others chime in with text-only
posts. Neither list is a "pix" list per se; it's just that often
a chart is useful to help make the author's point.
Pix are large... :)