Re: Re: %12s
By: echicken to HusTler on Wed Jul 24 2019 12:30 am

This bickering who's replying to who is getting old. Just make all
the groups anonymous if it's going to be a big deal.

Some people only scan certain subs for new messages addressed to them. This could be the difference between seeing and not seeing a reply.

Also, it's a useful point of clarification at times. I've seen threads get way out of whack with people losing track of who said what and when, with nasty results at times. Imagine how much of a clusterfuck it'd be if there

By default synchronet choses the last person to reply to the message in the "To" field. I don't have the time to figure out who said what to who. These are public message bases with public conversations. Not personal emails. I'll just make my replies to anonymous to avoid any conflicts. The reader will have to figure out who said what.
I might as well remove my signature to I guess.


HusTler
Havens BBS (havens.synchro.net)

---
þ Synchronet þ Havens BBS havens.synchro.net

Re: Re: %12s
By: HusTler to anonymous on Wed Jul 24 2019 08:26:24

By default synchronet choses the last person to reply to the message in the "To" field. I don't have the time to figure out who said what to who.

It chooses the "From" user of the message that you're replying to, which is good, and I (almost) always
go with that as well.

I don't think it's a big deal, and most of the time it doesn't really matter, but sometimes it makes a
difference.

These are public message bases with public conversations. Not personal

That doesn't really have any bearing on anything. We've had "To" fields in public messages for a long,
long time, and for reasons.

emails. I'll just make my replies to anonymous to avoid any conflicts.

"All" would be a better choice than "anonymous", as that's the typical way to address your message to the
entire group.

The reader will have to figure out who said what.

That's doing a disservice to the reader, but if you don't have the time for etiquette then so be it.

I might as well remove my signature to I guess.

Why? Maybe you feel under attack here, but please don't take it that way. This is a mostly
self-moderating forum and I think many of us just want clarity and to keep it orderly.

---
echicken
electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com
þ Synchronet þ electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com

From Newsgroup: alt.bbs.synchronet

To: AnOnyMOus
Re: Re: %12s
By: echicken to HusTler on Wed Jul 24 2019 09:41 am

in the "To" field. I don't have the time to figure out who said what
to who.

It chooses the "From" user of the message that you're replying to, which is good, and I (almost) always go with that as well.

I don't think it's a big deal, and most of the time it doesn't really matter, but sometimes it makes a difference.

Apparently it is "Big Deal" to some. To avoid petty ass problems caused by
a defaulty messaging system and users that have nothing better to do then
MAKE a big deal about it. I suggest everyone make their replies to Anonymous or All. That said maybe we should just remove quoting all together. Seems quoting can cause more problems then it worth.


HusTler
Havens BBS (havens.synchro.net)
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Linux NewsLink 1.110
* Havens BBS - New York, NY - telnet://havens.synchronetbbs.org
--- Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 NewsLink 1.110
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: BIG DEAL
By: HusTler to AnOnyMOus on Wed Jul 24 2019 10:40:30

Apparently it is "Big Deal" to some. To avoid petty ass problems caused by a defaulty messaging system and users that have nothing better to do then

There's nothing wrong with the default "To" addressing. The problem is confusion arising from replying
to nested quotes within a message.

Sometimes this is fine. Other times it obfuscates the source, making it seem as if the quote is
attributed to the person you're replying to. Putting words in their mouth, in a sense. Or confusing
other people who are following the thread.

I suggest everyone make their replies to Anonymous or All.

That's a bad suggestion and I'd hate to see it happen. Directing a message at a particular person can be
helpful, can keep things organized, and as I said earlier also interacts with new message scan features.

That said maybe we should just remove quoting all
together. Seems quoting can cause more problems then it worth.

Quoting is an extremely useful tool that most people (around here) use effectively, even if it takes some
a while to get the hang of it.

I could make a bunch of analogies about stuff we should get rid of because people some people can't use
them properly (Car accidents? No more cars!), but whatever.

Anyway, I can see that this has become a sore topic for you, and you don't seem to be absorbing anything
I say or making counterpoints. I'll step away unless I think i can provide further clarification.

---
echicken
electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com
þ Synchronet þ electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com

Re: Re: %12s
By: HusTler to anonymous on Wed Jul 24 2019 08:26 am

These are public message bases with public conversations. Not personal emails. I'll just make my replies to anonymous to avoid any conflicts. The reader will have to figure out who said what.

If I end up not replying to one of your messages because I missed your message in the new-to-me scan (because it wasn't addressed to me), don't go complaining to me then. Maybe I'll miss your complaint too, if it's not addressed to me.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: BIG DEAL
By: HusTler to AnOnyMOus on Wed Jul 24 2019 10:40 am

MAKE a big deal about it. I suggest everyone make their replies to Anonymous or All.

THat would probably cause more problems than it's worth.

That said maybe we should just remove quoting all
together. Seems quoting can cause more problems then it worth.

It seems you're taking this too personally.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: BIG DEAL
By: echicken to HusTler on Wed Jul 24 2019 12:39 pm

Sometimes this is fine. Other times it obfuscates the source, making it seem as if the quote is attributed to the person you're replying to. Putting words in their mouth, in a sense. Or confusing other people who are following the thread.

You can sorta tell that the quote might not be who they're replying to if there are multiple levels of quote characters (i.e., 2 '>' characters instead of 1), but it can make it a little confusing if you're casually reading messages. I find it a little bothersome when I get messages addressed to me in reply to things I didn't say (and the other person might not see that message becaues it wasn't addressed to them).

I suggest everyone make their replies to Anonymous or All.

That's a bad suggestion and I'd hate to see it happen. Directing a message at a particular person can be helpful, can keep things organized, and as I said earlier also interacts with new message scan features.

I agree. I've read newsgroups where all the messages are addressed to 'All' and sometimes it can be hard to tell who is addressing who (and natrually, none of those messages come up in a new-to-me message scan). Sometimes I've mentioned in those newsgroups about people addressing the right person, but sometimes they laugh it off.. I'm not sure if some newsgroups work differently where they have to address their messages to 'All'.

Quoting is an extremely useful tool that most people (around here) use effectively, even if it takes some a while to get the hang of it.

Yep. Quoting helps people follow the flow of the conversation. Another thing I've noticed happening more often lately is people replying and not quoting, and sometimes it's really hard to remember what they're talking about.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

O.o

like this? :)


My doctor said I have the body of a 25 year old ... and the mind of a 10 :-/

---
þ Synchronet þ AlleyCat! BBS - http://alleycat.synchro.net:81

Re: BIG DEAL
By: Nightfox to echicken on Wed Jul 24 2019 12:35:53

Sometimes I've mentioned in those newsgroups about people addressing the right person, but sometimes they laugh it off.. I'm not sure if some newsgroups work differently where they have to address their messages to 'All'.

It may not be unique to BBS-land, but it's a nice feature that we have and it doesn't exist everywhere
else.

In other forums, quoting tends to establish who the reply is (primarily) intended for. As in, I quote
your message and then add my own comments below, so I'm essentially writing back to you. Of course there
as well as here, other people are welcome to chime in.

thing I've noticed happening more often lately is people replying and not quoting, and sometimes it's really hard to remember what they're talking

I'm not so bothered by that as long as there's some kind of summary / something to jog my memory, but
more than often that's missing too.

Of course there's the flip side, people quoting an entire message (often including nested quotes) and
then adding their two cents in one line at the bottom - or worse, at the top.

---
echicken
electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com
þ Synchronet þ electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com

Re: BIG DEAL
By: Nightfox to HusTler on Wed Jul 24 2019 09:41 am

It seems you're taking this too personally.

Probably. It's been hotter then hell and my AC is sounds like a motor boat. I think the compressor is on it's way out. I don't scan for messages only to me. I just scan for NEW messages in all the areas. That said it's hard to insure I reply to the right person. I'm trying to be part of the "conversation" in that area. Maybe I'm doing it wrong but when I started BBSing quoting wasn't available. You had to follow the conversation. If you didn't want to participate in public then you sent the person private email. To me that defeats the purpose of message bases. If you went off topic you were asked to move the conversation to another area. We didn't have this "I didn't say that" BS. You replied to the wrong person. As long as you kept to the topic it didn't matter who you replied to. Anyway apparently I'm doing it wrong. I need to change what I'm doing and make changes accordingly.

---
þ Synchronet þ Havens BBS havens.synchro.net

Re: %12s
By: Nightfox to The Millionaire on Mon Jul 22 2019 12:45 pm

I'm just curious why you want a tablet to run a BBS though? They are
small and portable, but a Surface Pro can be expensive. If you just

true but i cant use the big ones anymore now. compacticity is the
new trend now.

Why can't you use a bigger computer? Not enough space?

Or even better. A Raspberry Pi, which is far cheaper, and quite capable of running a BBS on the internet....

)))[Psi-Jack -//- Decker]

---
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com

Re: Re: %12s
By: The Millionaire to Gamgee on Mon Jul 22 2019 03:56 pm

but you need a kybrd for pi. i need a touchscreen.

That makes... Literally... And absolutely.... No sense. At all.

)))[Psi-Jack -//- Decker]

---
þ Synchronet þ Decker's Heaven -//- bbs.deckersheaven.com

Re: BIG DEAL
By: echicken to Nightfox on Wed Jul 24 2019 05:13 pm

Of course there's the flip side, people quoting an entire message (often including nested quotes) and then adding their two cents in one line at the bottom - or worse, at the top.

Yep.. And it's not really necessary to quote the entire message, usually.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: BIG DEAL
By: HusTler to ALL on Wed Jul 24 2019 07:47 pm

"conversation" in that area. Maybe I'm doing it wrong but when I started BBSing quoting wasn't available. You had to follow the conversation. If

I've been BBSing since 1992, and quoting has been around at least since then, as far as I remember. And I remember using message editors like IceEdit and DCTEdit (which I based SlyEdit on), and they always supported quoting.

How did you follow the conversation without quoting? Without quoting, I'd think you'd have to navigate back and forth through the messages to remember what was said and follow the conversation, and that might be difficult, depending on the BBS's reader interface (you may have to jump back multiple messages to see what they were replying to). It actually seems a little hard to imagine a message interface without quoting.

Also if you're replying to me, you can go ahead and address your messages to me instead of "All". Addressing your replies to "All" instead of the person you're replying to seems a bit impersonal, and honestly a little rude..

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

HusTler wrote to AnOnyMOus <=-

in the "To" field. I don't have the time to figure out who said what
to who.

It chooses the "From" user of the message that you're replying to, which is good, and I (almost) always go with that as well.

I don't think it's a big deal, and most of the time it doesn't really matter, but sometimes it makes a difference.

Apparently it is "Big Deal" to some.

I'd guess it's a big deal to most everyone who tries to hold a
rational discussion with others in this medium. Not following the
accepted norms makes that nearly impossible to do.

To avoid petty ass problems caused by a defaulty messaging system and users that have nothing better to do then MAKE a big deal about it.

That's un-necessarily antagonistic. Chill.

I suggest everyone make their replies to Anonymous or All.

That would be a Bad Idea. Ridiculous, even.

That said maybe we should just remove quoting all together.

And another dumb idea.

Seems quoting can cause more problems then it worth.

You're three-for-three.

It's really not that hard to quote correctly. Just pay attention
to the initials in front of what you're quoting, and use the
editor as necessary to make it clear. Thanks.


... He does the work of 3 Men...Moe, Larry & Curly
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

On 07-24-19 09:41, echicken wrote to HusTler <=-

"All" would be a better choice than "anonymous", as that's the typical
way to address your message to the
entire group.

And an easy way to do that is use NNTP via a newsreader.


... I was abducted by aliens and all I got was this lousy implant.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 07-24-19 10:40, HusTler wrote to AnOnyMOus <=-

Apparently it is "Big Deal" to some. To avoid petty ass problems
caused by a defaulty messaging system and users that have nothing
better to do then MAKE a big deal about it. I suggest everyone make
their replies to Anonymous or All. That said maybe we should just
remove quoting all together. Seems quoting can cause more problems then
it worth.

To be honest, I don't give a rat's arse 99% of the time. Only time is when someone attributes a comment to me that I didn't make, but even if the message is incorrectly addressed, that's relatively uncommon. I do keep track of my own threading, which works well on BBSs, but the necessity to read every message and thread on a web forum really makes it tough in that environment.

And removing quoting is even worse, because then you get a whole lot of replies that make no sense, because of lack of context.

Basically, stuff happens, I don't see any reason to get upset about it. :)


... Windows 3.1 - From the people who brought you EDLIN.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 07-24-19 12:39, echicken wrote to HusTler <=-

There's nothing wrong with the default "To" addressing. The problem is confusion arising from replying
to nested quotes within a message.

Sometimes this is fine. Other times it obfuscates the source, making
it seem as if the quote is
attributed to the person you're replying to. Putting words in their mouth, in a sense. Or confusing
other people who are following the thread.

It's not a problem, if you keep the attribution headers and make sure your quoting style shows who is who. That's one of the strengths of BBS messaging, if used well, compared to Usenet/email style quoting, where you really have to look hard to work out who said what in a long thread.

Anyway, I can see that this has become a sore topic for you, and you
don't seem to be absorbing anything
I say or making counterpoints. I'll step away unless I think i can provide further clarification.

FWIW, you're making perfect sense to me.


... Cats are purrfect
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 07-24-19 09:41, Nightfox wrote to HusTler <=-

Re: BIG DEAL
By: HusTler to AnOnyMOus on Wed Jul 24 2019 10:40 am

MAKE a big deal about it. I suggest everyone make their replies to Anonymous or All.

THat would probably cause more problems than it's worth.

It would actually be useable. Afterall, this is effectively what Usenet and email mailing lists do, and have done for decades. But why limit BBS messaging to the lowest common denominator when we don't have to?


... At a store: In God we trust; all others pay cash.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 07-24-19 12:35, Nightfox wrote to echicken <=-

Re: BIG DEAL
By: echicken to HusTler on Wed Jul 24 2019 12:39 pm

Sometimes this is fine. Other times it obfuscates the source, making it seem as if the quote is attributed to the person you're replying to. Putting words in their mouth, in a sense. Or confusing other people who are following the thread.

You can sorta tell that the quote might not be who they're replying to
if there are multiple levels of quote characters (i.e., 2 '>'
characters instead of 1), but it can make it a little confusing if
you're casually reading messages. I find it a little bothersome when I get messages addressed to me in reply to things I didn't say (and the other person might not see that message becaues it wasn't addressed to them).

Or in this example above, if the attributions are preserved, and your software initials quotes like Multimail (which I'm using) does, it's not hard to follow at all.

I agree. I've read newsgroups where all the messages are addressed to 'All' and sometimes it can be hard to tell who is addressing who (and natrually, none of those messages come up in a new-to-me message scan).
Sometimes I've mentioned in those newsgroups about people addressing
the right person, but sometimes they laugh it off.. I'm not sure if
some newsgroups work differently where they have to address their
messages to 'All'.

The to "All" on gated newsgroups is because BBSs need something in that To field, and "All" makes the most sense. On the Usenet side, there is no To: field. Articles are simply "posted" to the group by the From: author, like putting up a notice on a public notice board.

Yep. Quoting helps people follow the flow of the conversation.
Another thing I've noticed happening more often lately is people
replying and not quoting, and sometimes it's really hard to remember
what they're talking about.

That is particularly annoying, because there's no context to what's being said, which leads to a lot of misunderstandings.


... It was completely quiet in the stadium - but noisy.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 07-24-19 17:13, echicken wrote to Nightfox <=-

In other forums, quoting tends to establish who the reply is
(primarily) intended for. As in, I quote
your message and then add my own comments below, so I'm essentially writing back to you. Of course there
as well as here, other people are welcome to chime in.

I am known to quote multiple people in the same post and make reference to them. Done that on newsgroups, mailing lists and web forum posts - the latter often have really good quoting tools with excellent attribution, if a bit clunky to access (a clickfest ;) ). I've even quoted multiple on a BBS post, and it works, because of the extra attribution (quoting headers and initialed quotes). BBS quoting is probably midway between Usenet and web forum quoting in its clarity, though somewhat software dependent. One thing Multimail doesn't do that Bluewave did is nest multiple quotes. While it looks cleaner this way, it does make it harder to establish the order of who said what, when.

thing I've noticed happening more often lately is people replying and not quoting, and sometimes it's really hard to remember what they're talking

I'm not so bothered by that as long as there's some kind of summary / something to jog my memory, but
more than often that's missing too.

Something to establish context - a summary works for me too.

Of course there's the flip side, people quoting an entire message
(often including nested quotes) and
then adding their two cents in one line at the bottom - or worse, at
the top.

Or just adding:

"Me too"

. :)


... You can tell a real programmer by the keyboard dents in his face.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: BIG DEAL
By: Tony Langdon to Nightfox on Thu Jul 25 2019 10:01 am

MAKE a big deal about it. I suggest everyone make their replies to
Anonymous or All.

THat would probably cause more problems than it's worth.

It would actually be useable. Afterall, this is effectively what Usenet and email mailing lists do, and have done for decades. But why limit BBS messaging to the lowest common denominator when we don't have to?

I've seen newsgroups with messages addressed to specific names.. So I'm not entirely sure what the limitation is there. But I agree, I don't think we should limit BBS messaging to the lowest common denominator when we don't have to.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

On 2019 Jul 24 12:35:52, you wrote to echicken:

I agree. I've read newsgroups where all the messages are addressed to 'All'

that's BBS/gating thing... news articles (their proper name) to not have a To: field at all... when news articles are gated to a BBS or a message network, they have to put something in the To: field because something is expected there...

remember, news groups are little more than digital newspapers with living ongoing discussions...

)\/(ark

Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set
them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
... Anyone can use your recipe but no one else can bake your cake.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 2019 Jul 24 17:43:34, you wrote to HusTler:

Also if you're replying to me, you can go ahead and address your
messages to me instead of "All". Addressing your replies to "All"
instead of the person you're replying to seems a bit impersonal, and honestly a little rude..

posts cannot be addressed to anyone if one is using the NNTP news interface of a BBS to participate... there simply is no To: field in news articles...

)\/(ark

Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set
them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
... With the wisdom of conformity, I say you are fatally irrational.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: BIG DEAL
By: Tony Langdon to echicken on Thu Jul 25 2019 10:14 am

I am known to quote multiple people in the same post and make reference to them. Done that on newsgroups, mailing lists and web forum posts - the

you are known to do that huh? never heard of ya!

anyways, when you do this, choose ALL when replying.

it's not that hard, guys.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: BIG DEAL
By: mark lewis to Nightfox on Thu Jul 25 2019 02:46 pm

I agree. I've read newsgroups where all the messages are addressed
to 'All'

that's BBS/gating thing... news articles (their proper name) to not have a To: field at all... when news articles are gated to a BBS or a message network, they have to put something in the To: field because something is expected there...

I've seen newsgroups where articles have a 'To' field with a name though..

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: BIG DEAL
By: mark lewis to Nightfox on Thu Jul 25 2019 03:10 pm

Also if you're replying to me, you can go ahead and address your
messages to me instead of "All". Addressing your replies to "All"
instead of the person you're replying to seems a bit impersonal, and
honestly a little rude..

posts cannot be addressed to anyone if one is using the NNTP news interface of a BBS to participate... there simply is no To: field in news articles...

I don't know if Hustler was using a NNTP news reader, but normally he used to address his replies to the author's name. So I doubt he was using a NNTP news reader before, and I'm not sure if he's using one now. He had addressed some replies to 'anonymous' recently, so I'm wondering if he just manually changed the 'To' name when replying.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: BIG DEAL
By: MRO to Tony Langdon on Thu Jul 25 2019 04:34 pm

you are known to do that huh? never heard of ya!

You've never seen Tony Langdon post on Dove-Net? I've seen him on here for quite a while.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

On 07-25-19 09:09, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

I've seen newsgroups with messages addressed to specific names.. So
I'm not entirely sure what the limitation is there. But I agree, I
don't think we should limit BBS messaging to the lowest common
denominator when we don't have to.

Were you reading them on Usenet? Because I've never seen a To: name in a newsgroup post when reading on Usenet (with a newsreader on a NNTP server). If it's gated, two possible sources are JAMNNTPd (which can reconstruct a To field) or someone on a BBS replying to a post on your side of the gateway. And even if it's just on the one BBS, JAMNNTPd will still work out the To address from anyone who replies (technically in Usenet speak, posts a followup) there.


... Swallowing your pride seldom leads to indigestion.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 07-25-19 14:46, Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-

Re: Re: BIG DEAL
By: MRO to Tony Langdon on Thu Jul 25 2019 04:34 pm

you are known to do that huh? never heard of ya!

You've never seen Tony Langdon post on Dove-Net? I've seen him on here for quite a while.

I just gave it the contempt it deserved. ;)


... The truth will set you free. But first it'll piss you off.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: BIG DEAL
By: Nightfox to mark lewis on Thu Jul 25 2019 14:42:41

I agree. I've read newsgroups where all the messages are addressed
to 'All'

that's BBS/gating thing... news articles (their proper name) to not have a To: field at all... when news articles are gated to a BBS or a message network, they have to put something in the To: field because something
is expected there...

I've seen newsgroups where articles have a 'To' field with a name though..

not on usenet you haven't... not true news groups read with a true news client... if you have, i'd like to know where so i can go see it :)

)\/(ark
--- SBBSecho 3.07-Linux
* Origin: SouthEast Star Mail HUB - SESTAR (1:3634/12)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: BIG DEAL
By: Nightfox to mark lewis on Thu Jul 25 2019 02:42 pm

Re: BIG DEAL
By: mark lewis to Nightfox on Thu Jul 25 2019 02:46 pm

I agree. I've read newsgroups where all the messages are addressed
to 'All'

that's BBS/gating thing... news articles (their proper name) to not have a To: field at all... when news articles are gated to a BBS or a message network, they have to put something in the To: field because something is expected there...

I've seen newsgroups where articles have a 'To' field with a name though..

There's a couple of "hacks" that use the "apparently-to" or "x-comment-to" header fields and treat them the same as "to".

Synchronet's nntp server does export the "to" field in news articles (and not "apparently-to" or "x-comment-to" and Windows Mail displays its contents as a "CC" header field value, so it works, kinda.

digital man

This Is Spinal Tap quote #34:
We'd love to stand around and chat, but we've gotta sit down in the lobby Norco, CA WX: 95.3øF, 34.0% humidity, 13 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs ---
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: %12s
By: HusTler to ALL on Tue Jul 23 2019 18:54:23

Re: Re: %12s
By: Rampage to HusTler on Tue Jul 23 2019 06:04 pm

ummm... there are over 200 echos in fidonet... the one you are missing for the rPi is RBERRYPI and is gated from usenet by
a
system in Zone 3 ;)

If its the newsgroup that you want I vam going to be configuring it soon and anyone that has fidonet mail will be able to get it. I am running a dedicated linux server with 200 Up/Down intnernet connection. If you want it just send a nemail message to me.

Phillip TAylor

---
þ Synchronet þ sbbs.dynu.net 2025

@MSGID: <5D3A3950.5288.sync@vert.synchro.net>
@REPLY: <5D3A2B3B.5281.sync@vert.synchro.net>
@TZ: 0258
Hi! Tony,

On 07/26/2019 07:43 AM, you wrote to Nightfox:

I've seen newsgroups with messages addressed to specific names.. So
I'm not entirely sure what the limitation is there. But I agree, I
don't think we should limit BBS messaging to the lowest common
denominator when we don't have to.

Were you reading them on Usenet? Because I've never seen a To: name
in a newsgroup post when reading on Usenet (with a newsreader on a
NNTP server). If it's gated, two possible sources are JAMNNTPd
(which can reconstruct a To field) or someone on a BBS replying to a
post on your side of the gateway. And even if it's just on the one
BBS, JAMNNTPd will still work out the To address from anyone who
replies (technically in Usenet speak, posts a followup) there.

Much like this one.

BTW, there is a version of JamNNTPd that also does Msg & Squish messagebases as
well as JAM. None for SMB (Syncro), unfortunately.

Cheers,
Paul.

--- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
* Origin: What are you looking down here for? Read the message. (3:640/1384.125)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: BIG DEAL
By: Tony Langdon to Nightfox on Fri Jul 26 2019 07:43 am

I've seen newsgroups with messages addressed to specific names.. So

Were you reading them on Usenet? Because I've never seen a To: name in a

I don't remember.. It has been a while.

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: BIG DEAL
By: Nightfox to MRO on Thu Jul 25 2019 02:46 pm

Re: Re: BIG DEAL
By: MRO to Tony Langdon on Thu Jul 25 2019 04:34 pm

you are known to do that huh? never heard of ya!

You've never seen Tony Langdon post on Dove-Net? I've seen him on here for quite a while.

in my mind i group them all into about 3 people. and i dont give those
people names.

so there's you, digitalman, phil and maybe echicken that i recognize as existing posters on dovenet aside from the dovenet nameless drones.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: BIG DEAL
By: Tony Langdon to Nightfox on Fri Jul 26 2019 08:18 am

On 07-25-19 14:46, Nightfox wrote to MRO <=-

Re: Re: BIG DEAL
By: MRO to Tony Langdon on Thu Jul 25 2019 04:34 pm

you are known to do that huh? never heard of ya!

You've never seen Tony Langdon post on Dove-Net? I've seen him on here for quite a while.

I just gave it the contempt it deserved. ;)

"Don't you know who i am?! I'm Tony fucking Langdon"
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Re: %12s
By: Phil Taylor to HusTler on Thu Jul 25 2019 11:09 pm

Re: Re: %12s
By: HusTler to ALL on Tue Jul 23 2019 18:54:23

Re: Re: %12s
By: Rampage to HusTler on Tue Jul 23 2019 06:04 pm

ummm... there are over 200 echos in fidonet... the one you are missing for the rPi is RBERRYPI and is gated from usenet by
a
system in Zone 3 ;)

If its the newsgroup that you want I vam going to be configuring it soon and anyone that has fidonet mail will be able to get it. I am running a dedicated linux server with 200 Up/Down intnernet connection. If you want it just send a nemail message to me.

so you will be flooding fidonet and maybe dovenet with dupe messages from usenet. or vice versa.

i thought that was robert wolfe's job.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

On 07-26-19 09:09, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

Much like this one.

BTW, there is a version of JamNNTPd that also does Msg & Squish messagebases as well as JAM. None for SMB (Syncro), unfortunately.

I was tempted to try it on my Mystic system, but the need to maintain two configurations (Mystic and NNTPd) puts me off.


... The test of the morality of a society is what it does for its children.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 07-25-19 16:55, Nightfox wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

Re: Re: BIG DEAL
By: Tony Langdon to Nightfox on Fri Jul 26 2019 07:43 am

I've seen newsgroups with messages addressed to specific names.. So

Were you reading them on Usenet? Because I've never seen a To: name in a

I don't remember.. It has been a while.

OK, that makes it impossible to explain it. Too many variables. :)


... Stay back! I have a modem and I know how to use it!
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

I was tempted to try it on my Mystic system, but the need to maintain two configurations (Mystic and NNTPd) puts me off.

No need to do that, Mystic has a built in NNTP server that serves up the message bases.

|15frank |08// |15netsurge
|07disksh0p|08!|07bbs |08% |07bbs.diskshop.ca |08% |07mystic goodness |11SciNet |03ftn hq |08% |07https://diskshop.ca/scinet

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
* Origin: % disksh0p!bbs % bbs.diskshop.ca % SciNet ftn hq % (1:229/101)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 07-26-19 01:23, Netsurge wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

I was tempted to try it on my Mystic system, but the need to maintain two configurations (Mystic and NNTPd) puts me off.

No need to do that, Mystic has a built in NNTP server that serves up
the message bases.

True, but Mystic's NNTP server doesn't reconstruct the To: address when you followup with a newsreader, AFAIK.


... Does the Little Mermaid wear an algaebra?
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

@MSGID: <5D3A9843.5302.sync@vert.synchro.net>
@REPLY: <5D3A8CE4.5297.sync@vert.synchro.net>
@TZ: 0258
Hi! Tony,

On 26 Jul 19 14:50, you wrote to me:

I was tempted to try it on my Mystic system, but the need to maintain
two configurations (Mystic and NNTPd) puts me off.

I have a plan B on hold for a Mystic install which would have a JamNNTPd test facility. In practice (theory) there's no need to toy with a JamNNTPd config once its established in conjunction with a tosser (Mystic), unless changes are made in the tosser. It's a priority #99 project and can wait.

There's plenty of adventures afoot since bringing my second Xubuntu/64 system online. (The first one has the Lubuntu/32 Fidonet VM system... oh, this thing I'm using now.) This arvo I've got Samba working with the AD/DC Canonical 'downgrade' (what a hopeless PoS!) and just got the BOINC/SETI jobs going again. Fun. :)

Cheers,
Paul.

... finer temptress, Through the ages she's heading west,
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130515
* Origin: Quinn's Rock - Live from Paul's Xubuntu desktop! (3:640/1384)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 07-26-19 15:53, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

Hi! Tony,

On 26 Jul 19 14:50, you wrote to me:

I was tempted to try it on my Mystic system, but the need to maintain
two configurations (Mystic and NNTPd) puts me off.

I have a plan B on hold for a Mystic install which would have a
JamNNTPd test facility. In practice (theory) there's no need to toy
with a JamNNTPd config once its established in conjunction with a
tosser (Mystic), unless changes are made in the tosser. It's a
priority #99 project and can wait.

If you ever do get it going, I'd be interested. But for me, maintining one set of area configurations is tedious enough, teo is just asking for trouble. :)

There's plenty of adventures afoot since bringing my second Xubuntu/64 system online. (The first one has the Lubuntu/32 Fidonet VM system...
oh, this thing I'm using now.) This arvo I've got Samba working with
the AD/DC Canonical 'downgrade' (what a hopeless PoS!) and just got the BOINC/SETI jobs going again. Fun. :)

Hmm, you've got your hands full. I'm not aware of the "downgrade" you're talking about. Is that for when you're using Samba as an AD DC?


... In some cases non-violence requires more militancy than violence.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

@MSGID: <5D3ABEFB.5305.sync@vert.synchro.net>
@REPLY: <5D3A9D10.5304.sync@vert.synchro.net>
@TZ: 0258
Hi! Tony,

On 07/26/2019 04:24 PM, you wrote:

This arvo I've got Samba working with the AD/DC
Canonical 'downgrade' (what a hopeless PoS!)

Hmm, you've got your hands full. I'm not aware of the "downgrade" you're talking about. Is that for when you're using Samba as an AD DC?

Aw, I'm just referring to Samba 4's complexity. Previous iterations could be tamed with a simple smb.conf file, which I had eventually evolved using suggestions from an on-line personality named Joe Collins (on YT).

Canonical's Samba 4 requires an additional package called 'system-config-samba'
which brings with it a GUI methodology of management of sharing requirements. Maximum obscuration points for something that used to only require a simple text config file.

Have you done battle with it yet? I would recommend a YT video if you're interested. Its guides have helped me with both Lubuntu and Xubuntu so far. Interested?

Cheers,
Paul.

--- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
* Origin: Hey! Pull my finger. (3:640/1384.125)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

On 07-26-19 18:27, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

Aw, I'm just referring to Samba 4's complexity. Previous iterations
could be tamed with a simple smb.conf file, which I had eventually
evolved using suggestions from an on-line personality named Joe Collins (on YT).

Yes, I certainly remember smb.conf :)

Canonical's Samba 4 requires an additional package called 'system-config-samba' which brings with it a GUI methodology of
management of sharing requirements. Maximum obscuration points for something that used to only require a simple text config file.

Have you done battle with it yet? I would recommend a YT video if
you're interested. Its guides have helped me with both Lubuntu and Xubuntu so far. Interested?

I don't find video a useful tool for detailed learning. It's good for an overview, but the constant delivery rate doesn't fit my highly variable rate of taking it in - sometimes much faster, sometimes much slower.


... Law of Supply: It's yours if you don't need nor want it.
=== MultiMail/Win v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
* Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
þ Synchronet þ Vertrauen þ Home of Synchronet þ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Re: %12s
By: MRO to Phil Taylor on Thu Jul 25 2019 23:41:41

so you will be flooding fidonet and maybe dovenet with dupe messages from usenet. or vice versa.

No, that will not happen.

---
þ Synchronet þ sbbs.dynu.net 2025

Re: Re: %12s
By: MRO to Phil Taylor on Thu Jul 25 2019 23:41:41

Re: Re: %12s
By: Phil Taylor to HusTler on Thu Jul 25 2019 11:09 pm

Re: Re: %12s
By: HusTler to ALL on Tue Jul 23 2019 18:54:23

Re: Re: %12s
By: Rampage to HusTler on Tue Jul 23 2019 06:04 pm

ummm... there are over 200 echos in fidonet... the one you are missing for the rPi is RBERRYPI and is gated from
usenet
by
a
system in Zone 3 ;)

If its the newsgroup that you want I vam going to be configuring it soon and anyone that has fidonet mail will be able to
get
it. I am running a dedicated linux server with 200 Up/Down intnernet connection. If you want it just send a nemail message to
me.

so you will be flooding fidonet and maybe dovenet with dupe messages from usenet. or vice versa.

i thought that was robert wolfe's job.

Mro

What does that have do with Dovenet? It will not cause any duplicated messages if I have only the newsgroup and not fidonet and its not included in Dovnet. By the way I did not see the newsgroup name match in Dovnet.

---
þ Synchronet þ sbbs.dynu.net 2025

MRO wrote to Nightfox <=-

you are known to do that huh? never heard of ya!

You've never seen Tony Langdon post on Dove-Net? I've seen him on here for quite a while.

in my mind i group them all into about 3 people. and i dont give
those people names.

so there's you, digitalman, phil and maybe echicken that i
recognize as existing posters on dovenet aside from the dovenet
nameless drones. ---

Luckily, nobody cares what you "recognize"!



... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL