> I don't recall anyone proposing that we throw away type 2 in
 > favor of a type 3.

Then why propose a Type-3 in the first place? If it's not meant to replace
Type-2, what is it meant to do?

 > Most of the proposals go to great pains to ensure that both can
 > be used simultaneously

And my guess is that the reason is to be able to convert to Type-3 over a
period of time and not immediately require everyone to support Type-3.

 > Similarly with mailers and their handshakes; FTS-0001 will continue
 > to be the minimum handshake until/if no one uses it, at which
 > time it'll be a moot point.  It's a non-problem.

Irrelevant - if it's in the policy, it's in the policy. And we've seen how
well we've managed to change FidoNet policy.

---