CA>>> We've discussed the lack of conformity to 'fido standards'
CA>>> many many times and it just isn't going to happen in my
CA>>> lifetime if ever.

ml>> actually, it's been done and quite some time ago... point
ml>> systems are offline users that transport FTN mail in FTN
ml>> format and (generally) use FTN compliant mail handlers and
ml>> readers -=B-)

ml>> zone 2 has pointlist managers to handle all the point
ml>> system entries they have... i haven't gotten a pointlist
ml>> (like a fidonet nodelist) in quite some time but i
ml>> understand that there are several thousands of points
ml>> listed...

 CA> All roads lead to Rome eh?

i reckon >

 CA> I would not trade my freedom to upload/download FIDO messages
 CA> to/from any or all BBS that I chose to use.

you can't take a QWK from one BBS and upload replies to it on another
BBS... they have to match...

 CA> Being a 'point' is
 CA> comparable to voluntary servitude IMO. I guess the notion of
 CA> serfdom and empire building causes sysops to push the 'point'
 CA> thing as often as possible but the glitter is not there for
 CA> me.
 CA> ;-)

you can be a point on as many BBS' as have the capability to set you up and
are willing to do so... the messages and replies are also matched just like
QWKs...

there are other features, though, to being a point... automated file feeds
and freqing files being one... netmail being another... not having to log
in and go for the QWK stuff or have scripts to do it all for you is
another... the mailers talk and know who each other is and then they send
and receive the mail which, BTW, is already packaged up and waiting for you
to come get... the whole scenerio is much faster than QWK could ever dream
of being...

)\/(ark