Rod, at 10:04 on Thu, Feb 09 1995, you wrote to Bill Grimsley ...

RS> I think its quite the wrong way to do it with a complex 
RS> twitter that can say just drop messages from a particular 
RS> person in a particular area or drop messages on a particular 
RS> subject in a particular area.

BG> I'd have thought that to be the ideal form for an end-user or 
BG> QWK user.  If I was going to twit somebody, it would mean that 
BG> I have no interest in their messages whatsoever, and would 
BG> logically prefer them to be physically removed from my message 
BG> base, permanently.

RS> You have had a brain fart here. That discussion was about 
RS> what is the best way to do a COMPLEX twitter, where you DONT 
RS> just have a very simple rule for what constitutes a twit. 

OK, I wasn't following the thread too closely before jumping in with my
opinion, but I was distinguishing between an end-user such as a QWK reader
or point, and a full-on mail system where the messages are being echoed,
and therefore cannot be removed from the database.

RS> Yes, if you have a very simple rule it may well be adequate 
RS> to just drop those messages forever with no possibility of 
RS> recovering them. BUT if you have a more complex twitter, say 
RS> one which drops messages in particular areas only, or 
RS> attempts to twit on what the message is about, THEN you need 
RS> more safety, because you will inevitably have more risk of 
RS> stuffing the rules up and want to change your mind or try 
RS> tuning the rules for best results.

Sure, but almost all software has the ability to be destructive in the case
of operator error, or even an incorrect command.  The more complex such a
twitter becomes, the more error checking needs to be employed.  I see your
point, but if somebody cocks up in the config, then it's basically their
fault, so stuff 'em, I say.

BG> Agreed, although by their very nature, the add-on apps only work on 
BG> the message base itself, which to me is the best method anyway. 
BG> Lump them together in a batch file, and away you go.

RS> I dont believe in these addon utes myself in general. They are 
RS> viable if there is no alternative but IMO its a function that 
RS> should be part of a fully integrated mail reader, not an addon 
RS> ute.

Given that this is a feature which most people would rarely, if ever use
(do you ever twit people, 'cos despite what I tell RTL et al, I don't
really?), a complex twitter would in most cases be useless extra baggage in
the form of redundant code.  Probably far better to have say the reader AND
twitter written by the same author, but as separate (but integratable)
programs, and leave the ultimate choice up to the user.

BG> Sure, but don't these just make the twitted name transparent to the 
BG> reader, rather than physically deleting the message in toto?

RS> Yes, mostly. And IMO thats the only sensible way to go with 
RS> a complex twitter for the reasons given up the top. Some of 
RS> them will actually twit like you like, just not put the 
RS> twitted messages into the database from the QWKs at all.

Fine for QWK, where you can always recover the original message if
required, but a bit severe if the message is deleted permanently.  In fact,
although NetMgr has the ability to remove messages, I prefer to COPY them
to a specific area for later perusal, and then delete them if necessary. 
It's just my own fail-safe method, which I've only ever used a couple of
times anyway.  It's easier just to press N most times.

Regards, Bill

--- Msgedsq/2 2.2e