Subject: Re: Attachment Binaries

From: Paul O Bartlett <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 1996 18:34:02 -0500

On Sat, 13 Jan 1996, Paul Johnson wrote:

> Does anyone know if it is possible to attach a binary using Pine so that 
> it can be sent to someone at AOL?  When I've tried, I get an error 
> message that the message is too long.  Can pine be old to break it up?

    Pine as such probably cannot (although I won't swear to it).  One 
possible circumvention is to use UUENCODE, presuming your recipient has 
the corresponding UUDECODE.  Some versions of UUENCODE will break a file 
into segments of no more than a specified size.  You could email each 
segment as an included file (not as an attachment).  The recipient would 
then extract and concatenate all the segments in order and UUDECODE it.  
A bit of a kludge, I admit, but it should work.

Paul                             <[email-masked]>
----------------------------------------------------------
Paul O. Bartlett, P.O. Box 857, Vienna, VA 22183-0857, USA
Finger, keyserver, or WWW for PGP 2.6.2 public key 
Home Page:  URL: http://www.access.digex.net/~pobart

---

From: [email-masked] (Jacques Marcoux)
Date: 16 Jan 1996 07:53:12 -0500

Gee whiz it was probably refering to the lenght of your signature ...

>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Johnson <[email-masked]> writes:
In article <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Paul Johnson) writes:

    Paul> Does anyone know if it is possible to attach a binary using
    Paul> Pine so that it can be sent to someone at AOL?  When I've
    Paul> tried, I get an error message that the message is too long.
    Paul> Can pine be old to break it up?

    Paul> Suggestions?

    Paul> Thanks,

    Paul> Paul -- Paul Johnson [email-masked] [email-masked]
    Paul> [email-masked] [email-masked] (after 1/96,
    Paul> assuming that Compuserve returns the money they overcharged
    Paul> us last year.  It turns out that they have been chargin us
    Paul> $28.80/hour at a time when other serices were charging $2.50
    Paul> to $3.00 for the same service.  That's a 10 TIMES surcharge
    Paul> for using Compuserve.  If you have a Compuserve account, we
    Paul> urge you to check your bill!!)  [email-masked] (on the rare
    Paul> occasions that the Microsoft Network is up and running and
    Paul> will process email.  Due to the flakey nature of the
    Paul> Microsoft Network, it is not always possible to log on
    Paul> there, so this is the least reliable way to send email.
    Paul> Actually, since the "upgrade" to Microsoft Network
    Paul> downloaded on 1/10/95 trashed our computer, we have been
    Paul> unable to connect to MSN.  According to Microsoft Tech
    Paul> "Support," we must re-install Windows 95, for the 17th time,
    Paul> and then download the "upgrade" again if we want to access
    Paul> MSN.  Ask us if we like Windows 95).

-- 
    _______    _______    _______    _______    _______    _______    _______ 
 __/\______\__/\______\__/\______\__/\______\__/\______\__/\______\__/\______\
/\_\/______/\_\/______/\_\/______/\_\/______/\_\/______/\_\/______/\_\/______/
\/_/       \/_/       \/_/       \/_/       \/_/       \/_/       \/_/        

     Jacques Marcoux         [email-masked]           514.421.4794

---

From: [email-masked] (Paul Johnson)
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 18:32:45 GMT

Jacques Marcoux ([email-masked]) wrote:

: Gee whiz it was probably refering to the lenght of your signature ...

Jacques,

For all of the time I have been on the internet, I have conformed to the 
netettiquete guidlines of four lines per signature (to which I note you 
do not adhere).  Recently, however, I feel that we (my company and 
myself) have been so sorely used, cheated, deceived and scammed by both 
Microsoft and Compuserve, in different but equally sleazy ways, that I 
have no other recourse than to do everything in my power to warn others 
in the computing community to how these behemoths are behaving.

If either company sees fit to rectify the situation, I will be only to 
happy to return to my humble, four line sig.  But other than shaming them 
on the net, I have no real power against these giants.  I choose not to 
bend over and pretend I enjoy it, like so many others I see.

Regards,

Paul
-- 
Paul Johnson 
[email-masked] 
[email-masked] 
[email-masked]
[email-masked] (after 1/96, assuming that Compuserve returns the
  money they overcharged us last year.  It turns out that they have been
  chargin us $28.80/hour at a time when other serices were charging $2.50
  to $3.00 for the same service.  That's a 10 TIMES surcharge for using
  Compuserve.  If you have a Compuserve account, we urge you to check your
  bill!!)
[email-masked] (on the rare occasions that the Microsoft Network is up and
  running and will process email.  Due to the flakey nature of the
  Microsoft Network, it is not always possible to log on there, so this is
  the least reliable way to send email.  Actually, since the "upgrade" to
  Microsoft Network downloaded on 1/10/95 trashed our computer, we have
  been unable to connect to MSN.  According to Microsoft Tech "Support,"
  we must re-install Windows 95, for the 17th time, and then download the
  "upgrade" again if we want to access MSN.  Ask us if we like Windows
  95).