🚀 go-pugleaf

From article <1992Aug28.2065.678@channel1>, by "brian miller" <brian.miller@channel1.com>:
> Gee, Willard, I thought we were talking about *BBS's*.  I
> guess both you and Larry should sit down and read a good BBS list.
> Neither of you has apparently had any contact with DOS BBS's in
> 3 or 4 years.  Try the USBBS list.  Count the number of multi-line
> BBS's, compare it to Nixpub, and get back to us.

	*chuckle*  Exactly what I've been trying (perhaps unsuccessfully)
to say :)

> It's always interesting how everyone views the world through their
> own little window.  Internet is just another somewhat larger window.
> RFC "standards" have about as much chance of prevailing as Fidonet
> ..msg format.
> 
> Novell (MHS/GME), Lotus (VIM) and Microsoft (MAPI) will determine
> the future of electronic mail standards.  Gateways and X.400 will
> glue it all together.
> 
	True.  While the "howses" and "whatis" of a BBS are determined
by the user, these "standards" of mail transferal are unfortunately going
to be forced down our throats like Windows, OS/2 and so many other "standards".
What do the above see when they look at computer networks and the ways
that they tranfer mail/files?  They see the way the internet does it 
, the way Fidonet does it, and I'm certain there are a few (albiet smaller)
networks which do it differently! 

	If we as BBS programmers, and interested operators/users from
all platforms can get together, say "This is how we are going to transfer
mail/graphic interfaces/etc", implement it, and truly make it a standard,
we shouldn't have to put up with MHS/GME, VIM, MAPI (unless of course,
we WANT to *grin*).  If the internet, fidonet, and all of the xxnets are
linked by the common thread of just message transferal, the corperate
giants that we dispise so much (yet spend so much on buying their stuff *grin*)
won't have much of a choice but to go along with it...
 
 TTYL
 Chris
 "Performing an excercise in futility"