On Thu, 8 Mar 2007 18:14:58 -0500, "Dee Flint"
wrote:


"KH6HZ" wrote in message
...
"KC4UAI" wrote:

You mean he was not told this in "advance" because the e-mail he
quoted clearly says that the thread was closed and that was why his
post was automatically rejected. Which is part of what I didn't snip
out of the original message.

To be fair to John, though, it would appear the thread was only alive for
2 days. The first post on 3/4 at 12:49, the last post 3/6 1:07pm.

Is 49 hours a legitimate amount of time to allow a thread to be alive in
any newsgroup, given USENET message propagation characteristics?

I would probably side with John on this one, personally. Unless you're
talking about a thread which has a certain timeliness (i.e. announcing a
special event this weekend and it is currently Thursday) it would seem a
thread should be open for discussion longer than 49 hours.

73
kh6hz


I was told by one of the moderators that there seems to be some type of
issue that causes this rejection when the thread gets too long or too deeply
nested.

I've suggested that they have it autopost a final message when a thread is
closed so that we know to simply start anew.

ROTFLMAO

One can readily tell that band space is a problem in the ng with all
the posting going on over there.