Ol>  JC> FTS-1026 recommends it to be a per-connection configurable option as
 Ol>  JC> have shown here, which is implemented in Mystic.  It is not an  Ol>   Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> JC> option BINKD  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> and if it  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> were, this  Ol>  JC>  Ol>   Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> JC> would not  Ol>  JC>  Ol>   Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> JC> be a  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> problem  Ol>  JC>   Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> Ol>  JC> for  Ol>  JC> JC> Paul.   Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> Ol>   Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC>  Ol>   Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> JC>  Ol>  JC> JC> Those are the   Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> Ol>  JC>  Ol>  JC> facts.
 Ol> 
 Ol> Do you really believe everyone is too stupid to recognize your discussion
 Ol> strategy?

I have a two part answer to this:

1) There is no strategy. I quoted the FTS and I linked it, you can't get more clear than that. There is no animosity between BINKP developers. We're not trying to make incompatible software. There is no competition. We all want our software to work together; its literally the point of integrating BINKP in our products.

This idea you've dreamed up that we have a "strategy" is not a conclusion any rational person would come to.  I've done all I can do on the Mystic side for Paul, its up to BINKD to do more if they choose to.  I'll even do it myself and submit a pull request if they will accept it.

When it was brought to my attention by Frank (Netsurge), I looked into it and admitted I should have implemented the per-session escaping option and then I did within a day or so.  I could have done it better, and when I realized I should have, I changed it.  This is where BINKD is now (or not, up to them).

2) I have received multiple netmails TODAY ALONE from prominent FidoNet authors and hubs within the community, all of which cite you as being a problem in the way you behave.  I think that confirms your question.  You are an unreasonable person to deal with regardless of the situation.

And its sad that you convinced non-FTN-techincal people like Paul and Deon that you are some sort of subject matter expert (when everyone who actually does this stuff knows you're a subject matter idiot).  They seem like good guys who fell into your web of bullshit, and you used it to get away with hurting a community that needs all the help it can get.

 Ol> It always was and still is \x##.

The FTS (that you accuse me of ignoring) disagrees with you as it specfically says some mailers implement the \## and that it should be an option.  My own communities' testing confirms it.  Just stop making shit up man.

I have to be honest, the rest of your response is so unhinged even compared to your usual unhinged responses.  It seriously makes me worried for you, like you're under the influence of some serious drugs or something.  I hope you're alright.  Just move on dude!  FidoNet and this perceived notion that I am some sort of villian isn't worth your mental sanity...

 Ol> That is not the point. Why would anyone who is using a standard compliant
 Ol> mailer care, that Mystic can be configured to send incorrect escape
 Ol> codes? (or has to be explicitly configured for sending the correct
 Ol> escape code)

I covered this in every response to you, but you don't seem to care.  So instead I'll tell a story because I know he was reading this thread:

The best lesson I got when I started implementing FidoNet into Mystic was from Marc Lewis.  He is a great source of FTN knowledge and was a great guy to have around during those times.  We started strong and ended up bickering about a lot of things... Two specific examples come to mind:

The first is that Marc warned me about BINKP.  He said that the FTS was in proposal before most popular software at the time went out of development (this was before recent MBSE updates, before Synchronet ever had a mailer, and obviously before Mystic which came before all of those).

He specifically spoke in context of IREX which was at the time the most popular mailer.  He was spot on and it was what ended up teaching me that I implement what works across all software, not what someone thinks might work (even if that someone is the "FTS").

The second is that he gave me a good rundown of Bink 5D, and it made a lot of sense.  And I read the documentation, which also seemed to agree with what he told me.  When it was done, after all that effort, nothing worked.  If I swapped out Mystic's tosser for FastEcho, it would fail...

We bickered a lot about this stuff.  At some level I was annoyed I spent all this time implementing and Marc was confident he knew how it was supposed to work.  As it turns out we were both right, but in reality things weren't as they should have been, and documentation didn't match how software actually worked.

To this day, Mystic might be the only software I've seen working across the board (net/echo) with same-zone different-domain networks in 5D. It came at the cost of Marc and bickering and maybe ruining our own collaboration, but at least the software works. :(

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/01/14 (Windows/64)