Very cool, but these are normally limited to weekly frequency postings ...
Very cool, but these are normally limited to weekly frequency postings ...
LOL, hey, twice a day on a pretty dead echo really drives the
message home though doesn't it.. ;)
Very cool, but these are normally limited to weekly frequency postings ...
it wouldn't be so bad if they were also conformant to the FTN specs... they d not have a valid origin line and i've written him netmail and echomail about with no response or change :(
On 13 May 07 08:02:23, mark lewis got back to Michael J. Ryan
Re: *Square One BBS
it wouldn't be so bad if they were also conformant to the FTN specs... they do not have a valid origin line and i've written him netmail and echomail about it with no response or change :(
it wouldn't be so bad if they were also conformant to the FTN
specs... they do not have a valid origin line and i've written him
netmail and echomail about with no response or change :(
Sorry, Mark, I thought I had gotten it corrected. I'll try again.
8-(
___ Virtual Advanced Ver 2 for DOS
*Origin: *Square One BBS...the place to begin FidoNet 1:123/22
it wouldn't be so bad if they were also conformant to the FTN specs... they do not have a valid origin line and i've written him netmail and echomail about it with no response or change :(
You may have to go one step up the line...
___ OMX/Blue Wave/DOS v2.30
- Origin: Soundly on the Fault Line (1:138/666.0)
Very cool, but these are normally limited to weekly frequency postings ... >>LOL, hey, twice a day on a pretty dead echo really drives the
message home though doesn't it.. ;)
it wouldn't be so bad if they were also conformant to the FTN specs... they do
not have a valid origin line and i've written him netmail and echomail about it
with no response or change :(
Very cool, but these are normally limited to weekly frequency
postings ...
LOL, hey, twice a day on a pretty dead echo really drives the
message home though doesn't it.. ;)
it wouldn't be so bad if they were also conformant to the FTN
specs... they do not have a valid origin line and i've written him
netmail and echomail about it with no response or change :(
Actually, they annoy the hell out of me.. I was being a smarta**.
Actually, they annoy the hell out of me.. I was being a smarta**.
i hear ya... almost as much as postings in fidonet that are a reply to someone
in specific (like yours to me) coming in addressed To: ALL... undoubtedly because of some sort of newsgroup-style access that doesn't employ the additional features and capabilities to link properly in fidonet... i wouldn't
even have read your reply if i hadn't recognized it (after reading it twice!)
as a reply specifically to me and my message... that's an annoyance, too O:)
Actually, they annoy the hell out of me.. I was being a smarta**.
i hear ya... almost as much as postings in fidonet that are a reply
to someone in specific (like yours to me) coming in addressed To:
ALL... undoubtedly because of some sort of newsgroup-style access
that doesn't employ the additional features and capabilities to link properly in fidonet... i wouldn't even have read your reply if i
hadn't recognized it (after reading it twice!) as a reply
specifically to me and my message... that's an annoyance, too O:)
I was pretty sure the reply functionality was working in
synchronet's nntp... it seems to be running fine on my board to
0net ..
I don't carry fido, and am posting on another bbs.
mark lewis wrote:
Actually, they annoy the hell out of me.. I was being a smarta**.
i hear ya... almost as much as postings in fidonet that are a reply to som in specific (like yours to me) coming in addressed To: ALL... undoubtedly because of some sort of newsgroup-style access that doesn't employ the additional features and capabilities to link properly in fidonet... i woul even have read your reply if i hadn't recognized it (after reading it twic as a reply specifically to me and my message... that's an annoyance, too O
I was pretty sure the reply functionality was working in synchronet's nntp.. it seems to be running fine on my board to 0net .. I don't carry fido, and a posting on another bbs.
--- Virtual Advanced Ver 2 for DOS
*Origin: *Square One BBS...the place to begin (1:123/22)
I don't carry fido, and am posting on another bbs.
yes, i believe that you are writting from the synchronet bbs author's site.
I was pretty sure the reply functionality was working in synchronet's nntp.. >> it seems to be running fine on my board to 0net .. I don't carry fido, and a >> posting on another bbs.
Your mesage was posted to "All". :-(
There's nothing in the header fields here to indicate that there was a "apparently-to" or "x-comment-to" header field in the posted article. The reply-id look-up doesn't appear to be working now. I'll have to look into that.
--- Virtual Advanced Ver 2 for DOS
*Origin: *Square One BBS...the place to begin (1:123/22)
Bill you still have one minor problem with your origin line, look
at mine you'll notice a space before the *, so your should look
like this: *Origin: *Square One BBS...the place to begin
(1:123/22)
Rob Swindell wrote:
I was pretty sure the reply functionality was working in
synchronet's nntp.. it seems to be running fine on my board to 0net
.. I don't carry fido, and a posting on another bbs.
Your mesage was posted to "All". :-(
There's nothing in the header fields here to indicate that there was a "apparently-to" or "x-comment-to" header field in the posted article. The reply-id look-up doesn't appear to be working now. I'll have to look
into that.
Nod.. I know it was working, and am pretty sure it's working on
0net on my board... not sure wtf on this end..
| Sysop: | digital man |
|---|---|
| Location: | Riverside County, California |
| Users: | 1,048 |
| Nodes: | 15 (1 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 42:20:04 |
| Calls: | 236,049 |
| Calls today: | 8 |
| Files: | 60,363 |
| D/L today: |
12,128 files (2,212M bytes) |
| Messages: | 289,496 |
| Posted today: | 6 |