On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 04:10:06PM +0900, "Peņá, Botp" wrote:
> > 50kb is better than no limit, but I think everyone would 
> > agree that attachments of this size should be web-hosted 
> > instead.  I see no need to allow posts larger than 20kb.
> 
> again, 50k is my extreme value.
> 
> I agree. In fact, 10k limit is fine for me, too.

[http://www.ruby-talk.org/60668] for instance is quite bigger than 10KB.
Even text-only messages might be longer than 20KB (and certainly more
than 10KB). 


-- 
 _           _                             
| |__   __ _| |_ ___ _ __ ___   __ _ _ __  
| '_ \ / _` | __/ __| '_ ` _ \ / _` | '_ \ 
| |_) | (_| | |_\__ \ | | | | | (_| | | | |
|_.__/ \__,_|\__|___/_| |_| |_|\__,_|_| |_|
	Running Debian GNU/Linux Sid (unstable)
batsman dot geo at yahoo dot com

The only other people who might benefit from Linux8086 would be owners
of PDP/11's and other roomsized computers from the same era.
	-- Alan Cox