Hello everyone!
Today I just found this free host with:

- 250 MB of Disk Space
- 100 GB Bandwidth
- Your own domain hosting
- cPanel Control panel
- Over 500 website templates ready for download
- Free POP3 Email Box and Webmail access
- FTP and Web based File Manager
- PHP, MySQL, Perl, CGI, Ruby.
- No Ads at all !

Check it out Here: http://www.000webhost.com/34013.html

On 30 Mar 2008, oputra2 <oputra2 [at] gmail.com> wrote:

> Today I just found this free host
>
> - 250 MB of Disk Space
> - 100 GB Bandwidth

That certainly seems an odd combination of disk space and bandwidth to
me...

--
Neredbojias
http://www.neredbojias.com/
Great sights and sounds

On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 19:28:21 +0000 (UTC), Neredbojias
<me [at] http://www.neredbojias.com/_eml/fliam.php> wrote:

>On 30 Mar 2008, oputra2 <oputra2 [at] gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Today I just found this free host
>>
>> - 250 MB of Disk Space
>> - 100 GB Bandwidth
>
>That certainly seems an odd combination of disk space and bandwidth to
>me...

IMHO .... 100GB is not a bandwith but the Traffic limit per month

Your website may not exceed 250Mbytes of disk space AND you visitors
may not produce a traffic greater than 100GB/month

it's written in the text:
Look what we offer totally free: 250 MB disk space, 100 GB data
transfer,
located on the page http://www.000webhost.com/

On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:42:17 -0700 (PDT), oputra2 <oputra2 [at] gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>Hello everyone!
>Today I just found this free host with:
>
>- 250 MB of Disk Space
>- 100 GB Bandwidth
>- Your own domain hosting
>- cPanel Control panel
>- Over 500 website templates ready for download
>- Free POP3 Email Box and Webmail access
>- FTP and Web based File Manager
>- PHP, MySQL, Perl, CGI, Ruby.
>- No Ads at all !
>
>Check it out Here: http://www.000webhost.com/34013.html

I have tested it ....and using a form finishing with a php mail()
action will not permit the sending a mail to an e-mail adress ending
with [at] yahoo.fr :-(

oputra2 wrote:

> Hello everyone!
> Today I just found this free host with:

Are you Mike? Did you get a new nym and affiliate account because you
broke the TOS with the last one?

> Check it out Here: hXXp://www.000webhost.com/spamnumber.html

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Vista

On 30 Mar 2008, Raymond.Schmit [at] pircarre.be (Raymond SCHMIT) wrote:

>>> Today I just found this free host
>>>
>>> - 250 MB of Disk Space
>>> - 100 GB Bandwidth
>>
>>That certainly seems an odd combination of disk space and bandwidth to
>>me...
>
> IMHO .... 100GB is not a bandwith but the Traffic limit per month
>
> Your website may not exceed 250Mbytes of disk space AND you visitors
> may not produce a traffic greater than 100GB/month

I understood that and have seen it termed "bandwidth" although not saying
the label is accurate.

--
Neredbojias
http://www.neredbojias.com/
Great sights and sounds

Neredbojias wrote:

> On 30 Mar 2008, Raymond.Schmit [at] pircarre.be (Raymond SCHMIT) wrote:
>
>>>> Today I just found this free host
>>>>
>>>> - 250 MB of Disk Space
>>>> - 100 GB Bandwidth
>>>
>>>That certainly seems an odd combination of disk space and bandwidth to
>>>me...
>>
>> IMHO .... 100GB is not a bandwith but the Traffic limit per month
>>
>> Your website may not exceed 250Mbytes of disk space AND you visitors may
>> not produce a traffic greater than 100GB/month
>
> I understood that and have seen it termed "bandwidth" although not saying
> the label is accurate.

Yes, it's an accepted term for that.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

On 31 Mar 2008, Blinky the Shark <no.spam [at] box.invalid> wrote:

>>>>That certainly seems an odd combination of disk space and bandwidth
>>>>to me...
>>>
>>> IMHO .... 100GB is not a bandwith but the Traffic limit per month
>>>
>>> Your website may not exceed 250Mbytes of disk space AND you visitors
>>> may not produce a traffic greater than 100GB/month
>>
>> I understood that and have seen it termed "bandwidth" although not
>> saying the label is accurate.
>
> Yes, it's an accepted term for that.

I thought so... Actually, though, isn't it a misnomer?

--
Neredbojias
http://www.neredbojias.com/
Great sights and sounds

On Tue, 1 Apr 2008 05:17:31 +0000 (UTC), Neredbojias
<me [at] http://www.neredbojias.com/_eml/fliam.php> wrote:

> I thought so... Actually, though, isn't it a misnomer?

Yup, I'd agree with that. But the use is so widespread that pedants
like me are stuck with it.
--
Steven

Neredbojias wrote:

> On 31 Mar 2008, Blinky the Shark <no.spam [at] box.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>>That certainly seems an odd combination of disk space and bandwidth
>>>>>to me...
>>>>
>>>> IMHO .... 100GB is not a bandwith but the Traffic limit per month
>>>>
>>>> Your website may not exceed 250Mbytes of disk space AND you visitors
>>>> may not produce a traffic greater than 100GB/month
>>>
>>> I understood that and have seen it termed "bandwidth" although not
>>> saying the label is accurate.
>>
>> Yes, it's an accepted term for that.
>
> I thought so... Actually, though, isn't it a misnomer?

It just lacks a time constraint. But most people to whom such a parameter
would be useful (their transfer rate per month) know what it means as
casually stated.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

On 31 Mar 2008, Steven Saunderson <phelum [at] Syd.au> wrote:

> On Tue, 1 Apr 2008 05:17:31 +0000 (UTC), Neredbojias
> <me [at] http://www.neredbojias.com/_eml/fliam.php> wrote:
>
>> I thought so... Actually, though, isn't it a misnomer?
>
> Yup, I'd agree with that. But the use is so widespread that pedants
> like me are stuck with it.

Same here though it would've been nice if they'd've come up with a
different word.

--
Neredbojias
http://www.neredbojias.com/
Great sights and sounds

On 01 Apr 2008, Blinky the Shark <no.spam [at] box.invalid> wrote:

>>>> I understood that and have seen it termed "bandwidth" although not
>>>> saying the label is accurate.
>>>
>>> Yes, it's an accepted term for that.
>>
>> I thought so... Actually, though, isn't it a misnomer?
>
> It just lacks a time constraint. But most people to whom such a
> parameter would be useful (their transfer rate per month) know what it
> means as casually stated.

Yeah, I "got it" first time, though that was without thinking. Had I
thought about it, there could've been a problem...

--
Neredbojias
http://www.neredbojias.com/
Great sights and sounds

On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 00:13:34 GMT, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
<a.nony.mous [at] example.invalid> wrote:

>oputra2 wrote:
>
>> Hello everyone!
>> Today I just found this free host with:
>
>Are you Mike? Did you get a new nym and affiliate account because you
>broke the TOS with the last one?
>
>> Check it out Here: hXXp://www.000webhost.com/spamnumber.html

Er, do you mean me? (Because it isn't.) I haven't seen another Mike
on here recently. *IF* so, wotavidun?

Mike Barnard wrote:

> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
>
>> oputra2 wrote:
>>
>>> Hello everyone!
>>> Today I just found this free host with:
>>
>> Are you Mike? Did you get a new nym and affiliate account because
>> you broke the TOS with the last one?
>>
>>> Check it out Here: hXXp://www.000webhost.com/spamnumber.html
>
> Er, do you mean me? (Because it isn't.) I haven't seen another Mike
> on here recently. *IF* so, wotavidun?

No, not you, Mike the Fireman... :-) There was another(?) Google Group
spammer here calling himself Mike a bit ago touting the same message, an
affiliate link to this free web hosting company. Apparently, if you
click it, and sign up for services, the affiliate spammer receives $5.00
(but doesn't get any money until 20 people have done it in a month's
time).

I was just suggesting that this oputrid2 and that Mike were the same
person.

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Vista

On Tue, 1 Apr 2008 06:20:04 -0500, "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
<a.nony.mous [at] example.invalid> wrote:

>spammer here calling himself Mike a bit ago touting the same message, an
>affiliate link to this free web hosting company. Apparently, if you
>click it, and sign up for services, the affiliate spammer receives $5.00
>(but doesn't get any money until 20 people have done it in a month's
>time).
>
>I was just suggesting that this oputrid2 and that Mike were the same
>person.

Solongasitsnotme. :)

Neredbojias wrote:
> On 31 Mar 2008, Blinky the Shark <no.spam [at] box.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>> That certainly seems an odd combination of disk space and bandwidth
>>>>> to me...
>>>> IMHO .... 100GB is not a bandwith but the Traffic limit per month
>>>>
>>>> Your website may not exceed 250Mbytes of disk space AND you visitors
>>>> may not produce a traffic greater than 100GB/month
>>> I understood that and have seen it termed "bandwidth" although not
>>> saying the label is accurate.
>> Yes, it's an accepted term for that.
>
> I thought so... Actually, though, isn't it a misnomer?

If "bandwidth" means "limit on number of units of data per unit of
time", it can be thought to apply whether the limit is physical or
contractual and whether the unit of time is one second or one month.

On 01 Apr 2008, Harlan Messinger <hmessinger.removethis [at] comcast.net> wrote:

>>>>>> That certainly seems an odd combination of disk space and bandwidth
>>>>>> to me...
>>>>> IMHO .... 100GB is not a bandwith but the Traffic limit per month
>>>>>
>>>>> Your website may not exceed 250Mbytes of disk space AND you visitors
>>>>> may not produce a traffic greater than 100GB/month
>>>> I understood that and have seen it termed "bandwidth" although not
>>>> saying the label is accurate.
>>> Yes, it's an accepted term for that.
>>
>> I thought so... Actually, though, isn't it a misnomer?
>
> If "bandwidth" means "limit on number of units of data per unit of
> time", it can be thought to apply whether the limit is physical or
> contractual and whether the unit of time is one second or one month.

Hmm, okay, that sounds reasonable. Bandwidth it is.

--
Neredbojias
http://www.neredbojias.com/
Great sights and sounds

On 2008-04-01, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
....
> No, not you, Mike the Fireman... :-) There was another(?) Google Group
> spammer here calling himself Mike a bit ago touting the same message, an
> affiliate link to this free web hosting company. Apparently, if you
> click it, and sign up for services, the affiliate spammer receives $5.00

Any time I see one of those I remove the affiliate ID from the URL
before going to it.

--
Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster <http://Woodbine-Gerrard.com>
============================================================ =======
Author:
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

> Mike Barnard wrote:
>
>> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
>>
>>> oputra2 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello everyone!
>>>> Today I just found this free host with:
>>>
>>> Are you Mike? Did you get a new nym and affiliate account because
>>> you broke the TOS with the last one?
>>>
>>>> Check it out Here: hXXp://www.000webhost.com/spamnumber.html
>>
>> Er, do you mean me? (Because it isn't.) I haven't seen another Mike
>> on here recently. *IF* so, wotavidun?
>
> No, not you, Mike the Fireman... :-) There was another(?) Google Group
> spammer here calling himself Mike a bit ago touting the same message, an
> affiliate link to this free web hosting company. Apparently, if you
> click it, and sign up for services, the affiliate spammer receives $5.00
> (but doesn't get any money until 20 people have done it in a month's
> time).

And lemme guess...he just stumbled upon that site one day and thought
we should be told about it. :)


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net

Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:

> On 2008-04-01, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
> ...
>> No, not you, Mike the Fireman... :-) There was another(?) Google
>> Group spammer here calling himself Mike a bit ago touting the same
>> message, an affiliate link to this free web hosting company.
>> Apparently, if you click it, and sign up for services, the affiliate
>> spammer receives $5.00
>
> Any time I see one of those I remove the affiliate ID from the URL
> before going to it.

Oh yes. Me too.

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Vista

In article <zxTIj.123920$cQ1.31345 [at] bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous [at] example.invalid> wrote:

> Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
>
> > On 2008-04-01, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
> > ...
> >> No, not you, Mike the Fireman... :-) There was another(?) Google
> >> Group spammer here calling himself Mike a bit ago touting the same
> >> message, an affiliate link to this free web hosting company.
> >> Apparently, if you click it, and sign up for services, the affiliate
> >> spammer receives $5.00
> >
> > Any time I see one of those I remove the affiliate ID from the URL
> > before going to it.
>
> Oh yes. Me too.

I assume this is more than just about stopping people get some rewards.
To discourage spamming?

--
dorayme

dorayme wrote:

> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" wrote:
>> Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
>>> On 2008-04-01, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote: ...
>>>> No, not you, Mike the Fireman... :-) There was another(?) Google
>>>> Group spammer here calling himself Mike a bit ago touting the same
>>>> message, an affiliate link to this free web hosting company.
>>>> Apparently, if you click it, and sign up for services, the
>>>> affiliate spammer receives $5.00
>>>
>>> Any time I see one of those I remove the affiliate ID from the URL
>>> before going to it.
>>
>> Oh yes. Me too.
>
> I assume this is more than just about stopping people get some
> rewards. To discourage spamming?

Take away their hit count. Take away their rewards. Take away their
reason for doing it.

--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Vista