This is a public-interest archive. Personal data is pseudonymized and retained under GDPR Article 89.

Re: take pity...



No problem receiving your [extraordinarily clear] photo, Charles.
 
Regarding my plea to limit image size: it's not simply a matter of common netiquette, nor an expectation that others should "conform to the lowest power machine that tunes in".
 
FYI, I have a brand new,  top-of-the-line PC, and *can* receive anything (including much that's not wanted). However, am dangling at the bottom of the Balkans where there's little choice in internet access. At the moment, my connection speed has reached the staggering 'high' of 40kbps. This morning, writing on deadline, my mail system completely shut down due to several oversized (2000+) images from this list. As Marie noted, it makes for an unpleasant start to the day...
 
[CD: Why all the ?????s?]
Cheers, Elia 
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 7:53 PM
Subject: Re: take pity...

? ?? ?? ?? ?As one that does not post pictures to this forum, perhaps I can take the liberty of making an observation.

? ?? ?? ?? ?The notion that everybody on the forum has to conform to the lowest power machine that tunes in is ludicrous. I agree, there are some limits on size but let's exercise limits in both directions. There ought to be an agreeable minimum size. I do post pictures on two other forums and on my web page. My lower limit is 4 x 6 inches at 72 dpi.
? ?? ?? ?? ?If a person cannot receive these then whose fault is it? There are many ways to boost a person's computer capacity. If a forum like this is important to a person, then they should make the provision necessary so they can enjoy it.
? ?? ?? ?? ?I'm 83, on a retirement income which, while not munificent, is enough to allow me to make decisions over how I shall dispose of my "amusement" funds. And I must admit, the computer is high on my list.
? ?? ?? ?? ?I will post a picture here at 4x6 and 72 dpi. It is a bromeliad, Tillandsia deppeana. Perhaps Elia and Cathe would let me know if they have any trouble receiving it.
? ?? ?? ?? ?I know this is not a message that will receive an outpouring of popular support, but perhaps some consideration of maximum size is in order. I have already suggested my candidate. ? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?---Chas---
{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}[][][][][][][][]<><><><><><><><>///////////|||||||||||||\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\==========----------------------


It would help for viewing if the photos were made smaller before puttting into an e-mail...or in the e-mail---pull the corners to make them smaller.
Cathe'
----- Original Message -----
From: csaen
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 1:46 AM
Subject: take pity...

...on us who are stuck with high-rate dial-up connections. *Please*.
?
Isn't it possible to send images in a smaller format? I don't think that would hinder identification, and it wouldn't clog up one's e-mail.
?
This is such a helpful forum, it's a pity to have to keep deleting messages unread just because they're over 2000kb.
?
Also, I find many are being automatically deleted because my firewall considers the subject heading spammish. Is there some way to identify MediPlant mail as such?
?
Thanks, Eli.
******************************************************************
? ? ? ? It?s possible to disagree without being disagreeable.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles E. Dills ? ? 1371 Avalon? ? San Luis Obispo? ? CA ? 93405?
[Mac]? charlesdills@mac.com? 805-544-1731 www.charlies-web.com? ?
Climate, Calif-mediterranean? 30-80 deg? 20 inches rain in winter!
------------------------------------------------------------------
I can be forgetful. If I fail to do something I promised, tell me!
******************************************************************





Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index