How much bandwidth is your site using each month?

[Buckshot]

I am interested in hearing how much bandwidth your site is using each month. What is your daily page average?

As of this month(24Jan04), I have used 18500 megabytes.

[jdsalr]

I have used 3,000,000 mb of bandwidth on one of my sites (not at hostgator). I wish I could host with them, but their servers don't support this kind of bandwidth

All my other sites combined, are using about 100,000mb.

[avalanch]

so far for this month 13743.02MB

[EarlyOut]

Holy Thread Resurrection, Batman!

[avalanch]

and you said that just to spam?

[soysce]

I think they said it because this thread is like 6 years old?

[avalanch]

he said nothing that contributed to the thread. I did when I replied.

[EarlyOut]

And a fine contribution it was. But I fear this vital information may soon be out of date. Could you be persuaded to provide us with daily updates?

[avalanch]

Yeah I looked at the date after I posted and realized it was old but I found it via the similar threads at the bottom of every thread. Time to get back on topic now.

[gwyneth]

Originally Posted by EarlyOut

Holy Thread Resurrection, Batman!

Originally Posted by avalanch

and you said that just to spam?

No, he said it because you dug up a thread that was SIX YEARS old, for reasons that are obscure.

The older a thread is, the more compelling should be the motivation for digging it up (necro-posting) and when it's that old, your reason had better be really good and you'd better explain what it is.

Plus, it's polite to acknowledge the age of the thread, or the gap between posts, by saying, "know it's old, but it was the only thing..." or "is this still true?" or making some observation that explains the resurrection.

Do not ever use the term 'spam' to describe a response by a regular member who is not posting just for the purpose of promoting an off-site link.

Do not say stuff like 'contribute nothing to the thread', especially in this context--a reference to your OWN behavior (digging up the old thread).

Finally, in response to this pre-warning, do not say anything if it doesn't involve an apology to EarlyOut.

[EarlyOut]

Now, now.... No harm done.

The real question is how one even finds a fairly generic six-year-old thread in the first place.

[gwyneth]

Originally Posted by EarlyOut

Now, now.... No harm done.

The real question is how one even finds a fairly generic six-year-old thread in the first place.

Well, Avalanch did explain how--it was at the bottom of a similar post.

S/he posted the explanation while I was working on the warning. It actually makes the entire recent exchange more understandable, and mitigates a good deal of the first part of my forum police warning ticket. (Ironically, I try to make and drink some tea between writing warnings and before sending them, which accounts for the seeming time lag.)

But Avalanch, the rest of the caution still applies (if somewhat toned down)--don't call a response 'spam' if it's not, and in general try to avoid disparaging the input of other members.

[Keith W]

Ahhhh thread necrophilia

I posted this in the suggestion section some time ago: Click