Henrik Laursen <nomail@dont-like-spam.com> wrote in
news:Xns9C5A101D7D592loaded247@193.202.122.133:
> KG96 <KG96@alpdehuez.com> wrote in
> news:0001HW.C698558A0004D14AB092496F@news.newsguy.com:
>
>> On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 07:57:27 -0400, KG96 wrote
>> (in article <0001HW.C698546700048D25B019F96F@news.newsguy.com>):
>>
>>> On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:56:01 -0400, Fishnet_Fred wrote
>>> (in article <a08575l4ubev2ps37049t5juv5a7omqgip@4ax.com>):
>>>
>>>> On 30 Jul 2009 11:06:12 GMT, DDMD <DDMD@DDMD@DDMD.COM> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I really think people posting RAR and PAR files is good for the
>>>>> group. Keeps things neater, giving us less to look through
>>>>> for what we want. But moreso than that, it keeps collections
>>>>> properly catalogued, and stops the problems with badly named
>>>>> files (mostly older sets, with filenames that don't represent the
>>>>> set number) and the hassle of trying to work out which files are
>>>>> from which set.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now that the links have been posted for MAC based RAR programs,
>>>>> hopefully it will continue and even expand to be used
>>>>> by all the posters, over time. :D
>>>>
>>>> It really doesn't matter to me how people post, I never knew there
>>>> was an issue with Macs n RaR's, but I'm glad there's a fix. If you
>>>> put every set in it's own folder, it is a lot easier to just bundle
>>>> a bunch of sets together.
>>>>
>>>> I probably won't post rars all the time, but for large posts
>>>> they're the only way to go.
>>>>
>>>> fred
>>>
>>> Fred...
>>>
>>> It's easier to view them as reg jpg's.
>>> Why bother to post rar's and par's then have to go into another
>>> program to see them.
>>>
>>> Recently you posted ChristinaUK.
>>> I never saw one of them. She is on the top 5 list of favorite women
>>> that I have seen here.
>>> I am hoping for a repost of those in the old fashion way.
>>> Thank you very much
>>>
>>> KG96
>>>
>> One more thing about rar's.
>> Each file is rather large, Some of us pay for a certain amount of
>> MB's GB's per month.
>> This may use up our monthly allotment.
>> Please rethink your reasoning.
>> I believe many people would agree with me.
>>
>> Thanks for all the great posts you have done in the past.
>> I always appreciate what you post.
>>
>> KG96
>>
>>
> My best suggestion then is to convert your accounts into unlimited
> accounts instead, since then you dont have to worry about running out
> of GBs. Such accounts also comes cheap today, $39 for 3 months
> unlimited, thats what you only have to pay at my provider, Astraweb.
>
Excellent advice. I for one have no sympathy for anyone who isn't
willing to help themselves first.
|
|