🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.bbs.misc
Article #219

Re: Searchlight (Bidirectional Flame)

#219
From: Doc
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:54
57 lines
3344 bytes
fnord@panix.com (Cliff Heller) writes:

>>2) Many people hate Searchlight.

>one person hates Searchlight.

Get a life, fnord.  If you think Im the only one you are ignorant indeed.

>The Message Threading on Searchlight is superior to any product on the
>market. When a message comes up, there is an indicator of the number of
>replies to it.  You can read these replies without losing your place.  You
>can jump up the thread, or across the thread very easily.

Message threading on SL is totally confusing.  I have yet to figure out
the difference between "Top" and "Original" message, or "Next" and
"Sequential".  Im sure fnord will now diligently explain the differences
to me, and tell me how simple it really is (to him) but the fact remains 
that it is confusing to new users. Hell its confusing to old users!  
And there is no online help which explains it satisfactorily, or even 
in the manual.  SL once again leaves you in the dark.

>The decision was made not to incorporate such information because

>1) it rapidly fills up disk space   and

How nice to know that Frank made that choice for you, instead of
leaving it up to you.  Frankie knows best?  I dont think so.....

>2) it is contrary to the author's philosophy of BBSing.  That is Frank
>didn't really go for "The Sysop as big brother"

Yes, and along with that philosophy, SL doesnt even let the sysop see
the users' passwords.  A sorry "feature" indeed.  That says "well we
dont trust you and we think that you might share your users' passwords
with other sysops so you arent allowed to see."  
So when a user forgets his password and asks you what it is, you look
like an idiot having to tell him "I dont know, I can only reset it
for you."

>From what I gathered from our sole major vocal opponent of Searchlight in
>private e-mail transactions, the problem is that after the first major
>upgrade, they cost $25.  (This naturally excludes maintenence releases)

Dont even think that I am alone in this fnord, Im just the only SL sysop
who doesnt like it AND who happens to read this group AND has the motivation 
to speak up about it.  The fact is that the =majority= of SL sysops I know
would not buy it again.  The fact that they dont have internet access or
dont read this group or just dont care to get involved in this debate doesnt
mean theyre not out there.

By the way, the upgrades cost $30, not $25.  If you want a diskette mailed
to you, you can add another 6 bucks on top of that.  For that $6 you get
a 720K diskette that has been hole-punched and formatted to 1.44M, and a
floppy mailer with $.65 postage on it.  

You wanted facts, those are facts.  Opinion is still the same, Searchlight 
sucks!
Technical Details
Message-ID: <Bs41qE.1Hy@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!olivea!hal.com!decwrl!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!jvmg9796
References: <1992Jul25.172208.9598@panix.com> <BryuL1.5A2@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <1992Jul26.043116.9215@ncsu.edu> <1992Jul26.195127.24773@klic.rain.com> <1992Jul28.011055.16431@panix.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!olivea!hal.com!decwrl!sdd.hp.com!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!news.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!jvmg9796
From: jvmg9796@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Doc)
Newsgroups: comp.bbs.misc
Subject: Re: Searchlight (Bidirectional Flame)
Message-ID: <Bs41qE.1Hy@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 28 Jul 92 17:54:13 GMT
References: <1992Jul25.172208.9598@panix.com> <BryuL1.5A2@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> <1992Jul26.043116.9215@ncsu.edu> <1992Jul26.195127.24773@klic.rain.com> <1992Jul28.011055.16431@panix.com>
Sender: usenet@news.cso.uiuc.edu (Net Noise owner)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 57