Re: Why can't we just "reset" Usenet?

On 2/25/25 7:15 AM, Paul W. Schleck wrote:

"Usenet, having been around for several decades now has gotten to the
point where you can't just host your own server. While I get the reason
behind that, why is not a good idea, to perhaps split away from the
current dataset and start a new feed of Usenet servers without the older
data and without binaries? The current Usenet would still be present,
but it would allow for people not only to go back to self-hosting
Usenet, but would also get rid of some of the 'junk' that people don't
want. And removing binaries from the new one, doesn't stop people from
using the old Usenet to continue doing so.
 Why would this be a bad idea?" - quilnux
 https://www.reddit.com/r/ClassicUsenet/comments/1it5bf5/why_cant_we_just_reset_usenet/
 

The source for this appears to be here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40868924
I question the author's premise that "you can't just host your own server" and I wonder if the author doesn't fully understand the Usenet and Big-8 concepts; that it isn't necessary for any server to accept binary material.
Author acknowledges possible ignorance on the subject in this followup reply, dated 7 months ago:
"I guess what I mean is, there is a lot of things that Usenet does because back in the 90's we didn't have a lot of the technology we have today. Today there are more solutions then there was which means Usenet doesn't need to be the host for things like binaries, and the like, which tend to be most of the storage consumption problems that would keep people from self-hosting on the existing network. If we started over, not utilizing binary storage and a few other things, would that not make Usenet a better service with less storage requirements? Or am I just missing it completely?"
***
Question for Paul Schleck: what was your interpretation or opinion of this author's writing, and his knowledge of Usenet?