Dale Shipp wrote in a message to Thom Lacosta:

 -=> On 06-29-04  09:37,  Thom Lacosta <=-
 -=> spoke to Dale Shipp about test! <=-

 TL> I think that anyone who gates a fidonet echo needs to ascertain
 TL> whether or  not the moderator of the echo(es) in question allow gating.

 DS>    I definitely agree.

Great minds think alike (g).

 TL> I'm not convinced that any of the echoes I moderate should
 TL> be gated if there are not neasures taken to prevent 
 TL> unlimited posting to them by folks over which the gateway 
 TL> operator has no control.

 DS>    The last phrase in what you say above is the key issue.  If the
 DS> BBS    Sysop distributes the messages and allows posting by those
 DS> over who    he/she has no control, then it could quickly become a
 DS> bad scene.    This is certainly one of the prime reasons why many
 DS> moderators are    against gating of their echos -- it is my primary
 DS> reason. 

I;ve alwqys subscribed to the Moderators owns the echo, therefore sets the
conditions outlook.

 TL> There is a field in the echolist description that allows moderators to
 TL> indicate whether or not they allow their echoes to be 
 TL> gated...and I suggest that moderators with concerns make 
 TL> use of that field.  That type of usage would allow a
 TL> gateway operator to quickly ascertain whether or not they 
 TL> have permission to gate the echo.

 DS>   I just looked at my submission and notice that I have GATE NO. 
 DS> The   restriction against gating of the echo I help moderate is
 DS> also in the   rules file which is distributed each month.  Guess
 DS> that covers me:-}} 

Some of mine are listed that way...and I suppose they all will be that way.

 DS>   There is one additional point though.  Not everyone agrees as to
 DS> what   constitutes "gating".

 DS>   In my view, it is distributing an echo to another system via non 
 DS> fidonet distribution methods and/or receiving input for the echo in
 DS> a   similar manner from other systems.  I am strongly against such 
 DS> actions in either direction.

 DS>   In my view, making the BBS message data base available for users
 DS> in a   variety of formats (Web page, NNTP, QWK packets, etc.) is
 DS> *NOT*   gating.  I am not against such actions, so long as the
 DS> potential   format differences are handled in a reasonable manner.


Not only format differences, but also access.  As many times over the years
that I've had to resort of feed cuts that involve a BBS where I can netmail
the sysop and his/her uplink, the thought of wide-opem internet posting
access to the echo with no security features is not acceptable. 


cya,
thom
http://www.tlchost.net/echolist/ 
--- GEcho 1.20/Pro