Hello Janis.

09 Feb 07 20:15, you wrote to me:

 JK> Hi Jeff,

 >> I would have to echo Mark's questions. I don't consider there
 >> to be any actual privacy in routed netmail. So if I am sending a
 >> netmail that I need or desire to remain confidential I either need
 >> to send it direct (Which you are preventing) or via email. For those
 >> that do not have or choose not to use email you leave them with no
 >> other options.

 JK> True.. I always update my echos with email.. I would never route it
 JK> via fidonet netmail, since what's the point?  The whole idea of the
 JK> echolist is to maintain a password protected record in the database.
 JK> Now I know my links to Thom would be "safe" but do others
enjoy that
 JK> security?

      Initially I followed what was specified on Thom's Elist website which
currently is " All messages should be addressed to ECHOlist (or ECHObase) at
1:1/21". I made the assumption that if he is directing people to update their
echos via netmail that he would be accepting direct netmail at that Fidonet
address. I tried sending an update via direct netmail to that Fidonet
address.
I got "NO ANSWER" at the nodelisted phone number for 1:1/21.

    Thom informed me that the 1:1/21 node was made private some months ago.
While I acknowledge that email can be used to submit updates. It just seems
that if Thom is wanting to provide an Elist service to people that happen
to be Fidonet members that he would make his Elist system available via
direct netmail. I would tend to think that those wishing to update their
echos would prefer using direct netmail since it is more secure than routed.

    I can certainly understand that Thom would prefer not dealing with a
number of people here in Fidonet and that as a result Fidonet matters are
rather low on his list of priorities. But to me the bottomline is that IF
a service is being offered it should be offered using the default
communication method of that network.

    I fear that that probable result of his limiting his connectability will
be that fewer and fewer people will concern themselves with his Elist. So
essentially he is just shooting himself in the foot.

 >> It would seem to me that if you are providing a service that
 >> involves communication. You would make your service available to as
 >> many people as possible using as many forms of communication that
 >> are possible. Yet you choose to refuse communication via one of the
 >> primary forms of communication in Fidonet. That being direct
 >> netmail.

 JK> Yes. I figure the best fix right now is to use my phone number and
 JK> such in the listing, then the next step is to figure out a way to
 JK> route all that traffic to Thom.. at this point I haven't had time to
 JK> look at the setup with BBBS to see if it will be easy or a pia.  If
 JK> it's a pia, I figure to let Thom know..

 JK> I am hoping this is a temporary fix though.. If Thom can't eventually
 JK> be contacted via fidonet, that's pretty bad to me.


     Agreed.

 JK> Take care,
 JK> Janis

 JK> --- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag

Jeff

--- FMail/Win32 1.60