-=> Nick Andre wrote to Dan Clough <=-

 DC> Well, at least two of the ZC's were right here having the
 DC> conversation in public.  Yes, there could have been some private
 DC> messages, but didn't really seem to be needed (yet).

 NA> As I wrote to August - Othernets work because they are Othernets,
 NA> they are not Fido. Fido is just too tarnished with too many bad
 NA> decisions and mistakes. Othernets work and are popular because
 NA> they learnt from Fido's mistakes.
 NA> Not because they just have one zone-number in the addressing.

Understood, and agreed.  Tarnish can be removed, though, with 
enough effort and willingness.

 DC> keeping everything the same is.  Nobody seems to WANT anything to
 DC> change, INCLUDING THE SOFTWARE, and the cumbersome/difficult
 DC> procedures for getting information on how to join FidoNet.

 NA> Its simple, really. Better software for newcomers and make it
 NA> dumbed-down and attractive enough so it catches on. Have a
 NA> simplistic display of messages with easy ways to reply. Make it a
 NA> little bit cool.

Well, not sure it needs to be dumbed-down, and I think a lot of 
young people already feel "retro" stuff (like FidoNet) is cool.  I 
think the MAIN focus of this whole thread is not so much that 
better software is needed, just better INFORMATION on FidoNet.  
Like how to join, and who to contact, and basic information such 
as a readily accessible nodelist and what software is needed.

 NA> Mystic isn't my cup of tea but I'm a huge fan of the "cool"
 NA> factor of everyone being able to install it and have a BBS up and
 NA> running in minutes. And have something to show off and others
 NA> think is cool. I'm on Fsxnet and cannot keep up with the volume
 NA> of Mystic-related messages. Everyone loves Mystic.

Yes, Mystic has a place and is well liked by those who use it.  
Not completely my cup of tea, either.  Again a little drift away 
from the intended topic of this thread.

 NA> It helps tremendously when we do not have people running out and
 NA> registering Fidonet domains and putting up websites in hopes that
 NA> their site is the "right place to come to" for information (see
 NA> fidonet.ca and fidonet.us as examples). The more websites, the
 NA> more confusion, because none are consistant, the SEO is all over
 NA> the place, and just a mess. I appreciate the effort with this
 NA> fidonet.io site but I think its a bit misguided and personified.

You're right that putting up websites willy-nilly doesn't help 
much.  I have only seen ONE new one (fidonet.io) put up recently.  
Again it always seems to come back to people being frustrated with 
the NON-availability of valid, up-to-date INFORMATION on FidoNet.  
I'm not sure how anyone who claims to want to promote/grow FidoNet 
could be opposed to such a thing.  Keeping dead websites around 
that contain nothing but dead links isn't helping anybody.  Is it?  
What is the logical answer, then?  Yes.  Put up a website with 
useful information that will HELP people instead of frustrate 
them.  I believe that's all that's going on here.



... She kept saying I didn't listen to her, or something like that.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.51
--- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux