-> I'm very familiar with the process.  I do it quite regularly with
-> great success
-> with my local Internet/Fidonet gateway.  I also remember quite clearl
-> the good ol' days when I had easy access to both Internet and Fidonet
-> it many times, exactly as outlined and exactly as I do it today.
Besides, which is going to be faster and more reliable, sending directly
to a node (like my BBSs UUCP acount), or sending to a Gate that will
then route the message thru 10 or more systems to get it where it's
going?
-> Then what is the point?  The FACT is that this particular Fido-Intern
-> gateway no longer exists.  Claiming that its lack of continued exista
-> fault or choice of Fidonet (as opposed to a single man) goes beyond t
The lack of a Fido-Internet gate is WHOLELY on the person who was doing
the gating.  He put unreasonable restrictions on the traffic, AND on the
recourse when hundreds of thousands of messages were forced thru te
gate.  Downlinks could NOT bounce anything, and the Gate itself
wouldn't.  I'd like to see him try the same rules on an ISP and see if
they'd accept it.
-> I'm curious to know where you learned this FACT, as the mail I receiv
-> that the reason he was shutting down was due to so many idiots forgin
-> list subscriptions, sending mass mailings, and trying to get around t
-> limitations he put in place.  And the unofficial speculation of the
-> time was that the organization that had been paying for the
-> mainframe access had stopped, leaving him to foot the bill.
What Bill ALSO fails to mention is the downturn in Usenet messages.
Volume there has dropped by as much as 50% in less than 2 years (more
of a decline than Fido echomail), mainly due to an explosion in websites
and on-line games. And it probably won't change back.
--- Platinum Xpress/386/Wildcat! v1.3
---------------