Hey Russell!

Feb 11 17:32 05, Russell Tiedt wrote to Maurice Kinal:

 RT> Well, that does not suprise me as he is 9-11 hours ahead of me, time 
 RT> wise ...

Yes, well those Aussies - especially the Kiwis pretending to be Aussies -
require a head start eh?  ;-)

 RT> A MSGID is a valued item here, especially when it comes to dupe 
 RT> checking, so 
 RT> if you are able to generate them fast enough, then please do so.

That isn't the problem.  The problem is the machine is generating them way
too fast which is why I think it should only generate one and then use that
as a base ID for multiple messages within a session.

 RT> A properly generated MSGID, is valuable, and if it comes down to a 
 RT> poorly 
 RT> generated MSGID, and none, the none is preferable, methinks

I agree wholeheartedly.  Now if it were a REAL standard, with some actual
meaning, that might serve to rectify the situation.  If it is unknown how
that was generated, or worse randomly generated, then it only serves to
slow down the scanning for dupes.  However an unique MSGID won't stop dupes
from happening all on it's own.  I've seen a BBS package toss old archived
messages with non compliant MSGIDs.  Those passed under everyone's radar.

Life is good,
Maurice

--- Msged/LNX 6.1.2