Hello Michael.

03 Nov 02 19:29, you wrote to me:

 RR>> You are playing quite the fool you know. I guess you have never looked
 RR>> at my nodelisting.

 MG> I know what your nodelisting is like. You are the fool for thinking that
 MG> Pvt doesn't cause any problems; and despite you flying the Pvt flag
 MG> yourself, you continue to promote the needs of POTS mailers over the
 MG> needs of IP mailers, which just further points out how backwards your
 MG> thinking is. By accepting a kludge that causes confusion and hinders IP
 MG> communications, you willingly participate in a situation that hinders
 MG> further development of IP based technologies, and causes the few who are
 MG> still actually /developing/ such software to become frustrated and
 MG> discouraged with the prospects for the future of this network.

That is rather foolish, tell me what IP software doesn't read the protocol
flags and ignore the Pvt flag at the beginning? What IP software is going to
screw up because of the Pvt flag?

You have developers out there both past and present whose software is
specifically designed to operate under these conditions yet all you can do is
condemm it and promote listings that no software supports.

 MG> EVERY node /must/ be treated equally! No dual meanings for flags based
 MG> on differing connection methods, no accomodations on one side's part
 MG> without any accomodation on the other side's part. IP nodes have been
 MG> doing /all/ the accomodating for years now, without /any/ accomodation
 MG> for the IP node's needs on the part of POTS nodes. If IP nodes can put
 MG> their system's DNS name in the BBS name field as an accomodation for
 MG> POTS nodes, when it'd probably be so much easier to just put it in the
 MG> phone number field, why is it so *blamed* hard for POTS nodes to make a
 MG> small accomodation by agreeing that /any/ 000-* listing in the phone
 MG> number field will indicate IP only node, and thus agree that all POTS
 MG> nodes will block it out???

Then why were you using 1-000 prefix and yet now advocate a 000- prefix?

 MG> It's time to recognize that cooperation is needed in the nodelist on
 MG> /both/ sides. Any less is not fair to the members of this network; a
 MG> class system has /no/ place in the technical aspects of this hobby, and
 MG> by "towing the party line", you are promoting a class
system in this
 MG> network. While you may be happy in your blissful ignorance of the harm
 MG> your attitude causes to this network, I /refuse/ to be a party to that.

No, its time to activate a central organisation of developers who not only
can propose standards but also work towards adjusting and creating software
to support those standards. It is useless promoting a self-styled method if
not only the majority don't accept it but also no software supports it.

I prefer to travel the path and listen to the developers rather then telling
everybody what I think the ideal method should be. I am quite prepared to use
the standards they have proposed and agreed upon and use software that
supports those standards. With those standards then it is possible to connect
to anyone with no manual intervention.

Btw, I notice your /10 address dissappeared from the last nodelist. You gone
back to being just a POTS node?

Cheers,
                Rick

... Itsdifficulttobeverycreativewithonlyfiftysevencharacters.

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5 - Debian/GNU