It would appear to be so, but Wv intended to "reply" to a previous message (but did not actually do a R)eply on Telegram,..
Yeah, reply on the Telegram is easy to miss. And can look odd on the Fido side. :-\
On 12/15/2020 1:19 PM, between "Charles Pierson - August Abolins":
It would appear to be so, but Wv intended to "reply" to a previous message (but did not actually do a R)eply on Telegram,..
Yeah, reply on the Telegram is easy to miss. And can look odd on the Fid side. :-\
(And it would seem that I failed to do a proper R)eply in my earlier message message too! :( Anyway, THIS is the reply how I intended to do it.)
Fidonet *is* the odder side! (Pun intended) ;)
?
Testing emoji's?
Not testing, just using them, and forgetting they are not getting
carried through the "gate"...
Hello Wilfred!
** On Tuesday 15.12.20 - 21:33, Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Charles Pierson:
?
Testing emoji's?
Not testing, just using them, and forgetting they are not getting carried through the "gate"...
Maybe we can find another term for this grand experiment of Fido<->Telegram
Gate seems to hold negative connotations with some sysops. The
"tg BBS" is merely massaging the messages so that Telegram can understand them.
Maybe we can find another term for this grand experiment
of Fido<->Telegram
Actually, the Telegram Groups are the BBS. the Bot is a
mailer/tosser that converts from Telegram-speak to Fido-
speak.
Or at least that's how Stas has always explained it.
Not testing, just using them, and forgetting they are not getting
carried through the "gate"...
Maybe we can find another term for this grand experiment of Fido<->Telegram
Gate seems to hold negative connotations with some sysops. The
"tg BBS" is merely massaging the messages so that Telegram can
understand them.
Actually, the Telegram Groups are the BBS. the Bot is a
mailer/tosser that converts from Telegram-speak to Fido-
speak.
I see it that way too. The Telegram groups are merely a
mirror of the same echos on Stas' BBS. .: the Telegram
groups are as if participating on Stas' BBS albiet with a
different reader/app unlike anything else currently available
for fidonet users.
Perhaps... But I find 'gate' much clearer than 'tg BBS', to describe what's happening....
Hi August,
On 2020-12-15 23:45:00, you wrote to Charles Pierson:
Actually, the Telegram Groups are the BBS. the Bot is a
mailer/tosser that converts from Telegram-speak to Fido-
speak.
I see it that way too. The Telegram groups are merely a
mirror of the same echos on Stas' BBS. .: the Telegram
groups are as if participating on Stas' BBS albiet with a
different reader/app unlike anything else currently available
for fidonet users.
The same could be said about newsgroups on a bbs. But they call that "gating" too...
I see it that way too. The Telegram groups are merely a
mirror of the same echos on Stas' BBS. .: the Telegram
groups are as if participating on Stas' BBS albiet with a
different reader/app unlike anything else currently available
for fidonet users.
The same could be said about newsgroups on a bbs. But they call that
"gating" too...
The difference being that with the Telegram BBS, the users and their messages have a distinct node seperate from Stas's BBS.
You aren't creating an account on Stas's BBS. You are creating an account on Telegram. Stas's BBS acts as a Hub or Feed for the Telegram BBS.
The difference being that with the Telegram BBS, the users and their messages have a distinct node seperate from Stas's BBS.
You aren't creating an account on Stas's BBS. You are creating an acc on Telegram. Stas's BBS acts as a Hub or Feed for the Telegram BBS.
Newsgroup users would have an account at their ISP and/or newsgroup provider.
Hello Wilfred!
** On Tuesday 15.12.20 - 21:33, Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Charles Pierson:
?
Testing emoji's?
Not testing, just using them, and forgetting they are not getting carried through the "gate"...
Maybe we can find another term for this grand experiment of Fido<->Telegram
Gate seems to hold negative connotations with some sysops. The
"tg BBS" is merely massaging the messages so that Telegram can understand them.
--
../|ug
On 16 Dec 2020, Wilfred van Velzen said the following...
Hi August,
On 2020-12-15 23:45:00, you wrote to Charles Pierson:
Actually, the Telegram Groups are the BBS. the Bot is a
mailer/tosser that converts from Telegram-speak to Fido-
speak.
I see it that way too. The Telegram groups are merely a
mirror of the same echos on Stas' BBS. .: the Telegram
groups are as if participating on Stas' BBS albiet with a different reader/app unlike anything else currently available
for fidonet users.
The same could be said about newsgroups on a bbs. But they call that "gating" too...
The difference being that with the Telegram BBS, the users and their messages
have a distinct node seperate from Stas's BBS.
You aren't creating an account on Stas's BBS. You are creating an account on
Telegram. Stas's BBS acts as a Hub or Feed for the Telegram BBS.
The difference being that with the Telegram BBS, the users andtheir
messages have a distinct node seperate from Stas's BBS.acc
You aren't creating an account on Stas's BBS. You are creating an
on Telegram. Stas's BBS acts as a Hub or Feed for the TelegramBBS.
Newsgroup users would have an account at their ISP and/or newsgroup
provider.
I don't know if I've ever accessed Fido via newsgroups outside of
BBSes using JAMNNTP or similar.
But if it's through a regular Newsgroup provider, do those messages
have a distinct node or are they linked to an existing BBS in some
other manner?
But my point was actually more to Augusts remarks than yours. Telegram groups as they are as a whole is more like a BBS than a mirror.
I see it that way too. The Telegram groups are merely a mirror of the same echos on Stas' BBS. .: the Telegram groups are as if participating on Stas' BBS albiet with a different reader/app unlike anything else currently availabl for fidonet users.
The same could be said about newsgroups on a bbs. But they call t "gating" too...
The difference being that with the Telegram BBS, the users and theirmessages
have a distinct node seperate from Stas's BBS.
You aren't creating an account on Stas's BBS. You are creating an accon
Telegram. Stas's BBS acts as a Hub or Feed for the Telegram BBS.
Which would make Telegram the "client" that we are accessing Stas' feed from.
Hi Charles,
On 2020-12-16 13:33:50, you wrote to me:
The difference being that with the Telegram BBS, the users andtheir
messages have a distinct node seperate from Stas's BBS.acc
You aren't creating an account on Stas's BBS. You are creating
on Telegram. Stas's BBS acts as a Hub or Feed for the TelegramBBS.
Newsgroup users would have an account at their ISP and/or newsgroup
provider.
I don't know if I've ever accessed Fido via newsgroups outside of BBSes using JAMNNTP or similar.
Then you would also need to login to your account on the BBS.
But if it's through a regular Newsgroup provider, do those messages have a distinct node or are they linked to an existing BBS in some other manner?
I was thinking about the regular newsgroups, that are sometimes gated to and from fidonet. (The CBM area is one example)
But my point was actually more to Augusts remarks than yours. Telegra groups as they are as a whole is more like a BBS than a mirror.
I still think that naming it gating covers it better than calling it a telgram BBS. ;)
I don't know if I've ever accessed Fido via newsgroups outsideof
BBSes using JAMNNTP or similar.
Then you would also need to login to your account on the BBS.
Yes you would. And your messages reflect the Origin node off the BBS, correct?
But if it's through a regular Newsgroup provider, do thosemessages
have a distinct node or are they linked to an existing BBS insome
other manner?
I was thinking about the regular newsgroups, that are sometimes gated
to and from fidonet. (The CBM area is one example)
So do those messages reflect a unique Node or the node of the system
they transfer through?
But my point was actually more to Augusts remarks than yours.Telegra
groups as they are as a whole is more like a BBS than a mirror.
I still think that naming it gating covers it better than calling it a
telgram BBS. ;)
It's possible. I don't know anymore.
It's a method of communicating with Fidonet message areas. I'll leave it at
that.
The difference being that with the Telegram BBS, the users and their messages have a distinct node seperate from Stas's BBS.
You aren't creating an account on Stas's BBS. You are creating an account on Telegram. Stas's BBS acts as a Hub or Feed for the Telegram BBS.
Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Charles Pierson <=-
But my point was actually more to Augusts remarks than yours. Telegram groups as they are as a whole is more like a BBS than a mirror.
I still think that naming it gating covers it better than calling it a telgram BBS. ;)
Can I send a netmail via FTN to a Telegram user? That might be a good
litmus test of whether gating is the appropriate term or not, but I'm
not sure if it's worth coming up with a new term if gating mostly
fits.
Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Charles Pierson <=-
But my point was actually more to Augusts remarks than yours. Telegram groups as they are as a whole is more like a BBS than a mirror.
I still think that naming it gating covers it better than calling it a
telgram BBS. ;)
Can I send a netmail via FTN to a Telegram user? That might be a good litmus test of whether gating is the appropriate term or not, but I'm
not sure if it's worth coming up with a new term if gating mostly
fits.
... Are there sections? Consider transitions
I tend to at least look at it like a new "client" rather
than a gate.
Too late to change folks perception that have already
made up their minds about it unfortunately.
I still think that naming it gating covers it better
than calling it a telgram BBS. ;)
You aren't creating an account on Stas's BBS. You are
creating an account on Telegram. Stas's BBS acts as a
Hub or Feed for the Telegram BBS.
In fact, it is very convenient to use the resources of
Telegram servers for this. ;)The BBS itself, in fact,
works only as a tosser, although user lists are
maintained and, in a case, I can disconnect any Telegram
user from Fido.
Can I send a netmail via FTN to a Telegram user? That
might be a good litmus test of whether gating is the
appropriate term or not,
..but I'm not sure if it's worth
coming up with a new term if gating mostly fits.
If/when Stas decides to release his bot to the public, there is the potential for more of these systems to come into being.
We can just refuse to use the term gate when refering to it.
Re: Re: through the "???"
By: Charles Pierson to Richard Miles on Wed Dec 16 2020 02:30 pm
If/when Stas decides to release his bot to the public, there is the potential for more of these systems to come into being.
Because nothing ever went awry by releasing bots into the public. Skynet?
:)
We can just refuse to use the term gate when refering to it.
Call it an etag. That'll mess with them.
I still think that naming it gating covers it better
than calling it a telgram BBS. ;)
Then you can say that converting JAM/Squish/MSG bases is
"gating" to FTN.
In this case, the messages on Telegram servers is in Telegram
format. The public API allows Stas to build a tosser/scanner
that understands that format. That's not much different than
a sysop using whatever tosser/scanner that can work with Jam/
Squish/MSG.
Meanwhile, we use the Telegram app as a client that is not
much different than using an nntp, telnet, or ssh client.
Call it an etag. That'll mess with them.
I am not getting your meaning with the etag term.
Call it an etag. That'll mess with them.
I am not getting your meaning with the etag term.
Gate backwards, I believe. ;-)
Sysop: | digital man |
---|---|
Location: | Riverside County, California |
Users: | 1,049 |
Nodes: | 15 (0 / 15) |
Uptime: | 104:38:09 |
Calls: | 235,759 |
Calls today: | 9 |
Files: | 60,336 |
D/L today: |
248 files (647M bytes) |
Messages: | 20,616,130,654 |
Posted today: | 3 |