* Reply to msg in LOCUSER

You know how damn easy that was to do?  Go Alt-N instead of Alt-Q.  BTW,
this negates most of your flimsy argument immediately!  :-)

 AM> As an addition to my already opinionated comments on this 
 AM> point shit stuff... ;)

PE> Aren't you interested in finding out about what an entire
PE> suite of software is all about?

 AM> In this case, no, funnily enough.  I have to draw the line 
 AM> somewhere, and the software that goes to a bit of trouble in 
 AM> its user interface will get me every time.  However it 

It was always a great mystery to me all this Binkley blah blah rubbish
people used to talk about.  I for one am glad that it's now a tool instead
of a god.

 AM> becomes an absolute chore to even read mail with this 
 AM> software, let alone modify configuration, or god forbid set 

Hmmm, I'd better document how to add new areas.

 AM> it up initially.  I also refuse to accept that it is
 AM> impossible to make the majority if not all of the 
 AM> configuration 'menu driven', for want of a better term.  

Sure, but when it comes to a choice between that and Version 7 nodelist
support, I'd rather update the config file.  Much easier to ship config
files too.

 AM> Seriously Paul, have a look in your various config files and 
 AM> see if you honestly can tell me that most of it can't be put 
 AM> into some sort of 'configuration program'. After all, there 
 AM> is a finite number of allowable config keywords, and for 
 AM> instance the nodelist is available in easily machine 
 AM> readable form.  The only excuse is that much of it is 
 AM> shareware, and the problems that implies.

Some of it isn't even shareware, but free for non-commercial use.  In fact
all of what I am using is in that category (binkley, squish, max, msged).

 AM> However, if you look at something like KWQ/2, you learn a 
 AM> thing or two about usable user interfaces - it might not be 
 AM> the most featureful reader available (yet), but reading mail 
 AM> 'aint no problem, that's for sure!  And so what if I can 

Nor is reading mail with msged a problem.

 AM> only have 25 line subjects - every bloody one else mostly 
 AM> uses OLRs, so there really is no benefit in that sort of 
 AM> regard!  In fact, the only benefit that exists for me is 
 AM> the message base capability, which will soon be a feature of
 AM>  KWQ/2 anyway. Connect time is not a consideration for me.

We'll see about this message base capability.  It's not a good idea to
gloat about vaporware.

 AM> Anyway, Brenton stood me up, so it looks like I'll be 
 AM> swapping saturday morning for sunday afternoon to have 
 AM> another look at this stuff.  Wish me luck - I will need it!

And you did need it, and you didn't get much of it, but all those stresses
have gone into an updated version of minosqwk!  :-)  BFN.

Paul

---