On 2014-11-04 00:21:06 +0000, Clive said:
> On Mon, 3 Nov 2014 09:54:17 -0500, Jim S <JStrat@mail.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2014-11-03 02:06:44 +0000, Clive said:
>>
>>> would be to use the
>>> bandwidth for stuff not recently posted. I also think this request is
>>> a perfect example of when Steve Caner's FTP site is an excellent place
>>> to visit. If you don't have any luck getting them there, ask again in
>>> a few weeks and I'll try to assist.
>>
>>
>> Thanks - I may take you up on that. And I'll check out Steve Caner's site too.
>>
>> On the subject of bandwidth I think it is more effective to post
>> individual clips (as a set of rar's or whatever) than these monster
>> posts of many GB. I have a BW cap so I like to be selective via the
>> contact sheets. Even the "many" can be posted to one message. Just
>> separate rar's within that.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> J
>
> I understand, or at least I think I do. I have 2 NG feeds that I use -
> 1 unlimited and 1 metered (20 gb a month). The unlimited is fast and
> has more groups, but as posts begin to age, their completion % drops
> quickly. I use the metered mostly for backup and older posts I want.
> Nice thing about the ftp site is that is doesn't count against my
> metered. So, when you talk about having a BW cap, not sure if you mean
> that, or that your connection isn't too fast.
>
> At any rate, I've set them aside for you. If things are slow here,
> I'll just go ahead and post them unless you get them from Steve's FTP
> site first. FYI, I had most of these already, so when I downloaded
> large groups, I delete many duplicates. Even if I only got 1 film that
> I didn't have it's worth it to me.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Clive
Thanks Clive. By cap I mean my ISP. 150 GB / month.
J
|
|