TID: Mystic BBS 1.12 A48   
   MSGID: 1:129/215 0d85d94b   
   REPLY: 2:280/464.47 61e5a1da   
   TZUTC: -0500   
    Ol> This is not what FTS-1026 recommends. It also doesn't work with every   
    Ol> legacy mailer. What you don't understand is that FSP-1011 specified the   
    Ol> wrong escape method.   
      
   FTS-1026 recommends it to be a per-connection configurable option as I have   
   shown here, which is implemented in Mystic.  It is not an option in BINKD and   
   if it were, this would not be a problem for Paul.  Those are the facts.   
      
    Ol> This option was meant for mailers that uses the incorrect escape   
    Ol> sequence \## (like Mystic does).   
      
   Again, you're literally quoting a message that says Mystic can operate in   
   either way, which is the FTS recommendation.  Grow up and stop being so   
   disingenious all of the time.   
      
    Ol> So you expect that binkd implement a feature that is not implemented in a   
      
   No, as I have said in messages prior: I don't care if BINKD implements it as   
   an option or not.  But the only way for Paul's problem to be solved is for   
   BINKD to implement the FTS recommendation on how to handle escaping.  I cannot   
   help him.   
      
   Stop trying twist everything to create confusion, and just let it go.   
      
    Ol> I would also recommend upgrading from the Mystic mailer to some FTS   
    Ol> compliant mailer and to one that supports the faster binkp/1.1 protocol.   
      
   As with every single thing you've said in this message, none of this is true.   
      
   The difference between BINKP 1.0/NR and BINKP 1.1 has nothing to do with   
   performance.  It simply sends an extra round of EOB for handling file requests   
   differently.   
      
   You're saying the \## was a typo and not used anywhere, which is absolutely   
   false.  The FTS documentation on the subject specifically says mailers DO use   
   that escaping.  In fact, older mailers either did no escaping at all or only   
   use \##.   
      
   There are no FTS compliance issues with Mystic's echomail, and it probably   
   transmits more FTN-style mail than any other software.  If there was an actual   
   problem then speak up.  And Paul has worked with me enough to know if there   
   was a problem I would fix it for him quickly, and he wouldn't have to go   
   through this drama-filled daycare to get help.   
      
   It doesn't matter how many more years you go on trying to harass me and spew a   
   bunch of misinformation about me or Mystic, reality will never agree with you.   
      
   I am sure everyone here is more than tired of this, so just move on.   
      
   --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 2022/01/14 (Windows/64)   
    * Origin: Sector 7 * Mystic WHQ (1:129/215)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/123 14/0 15/0 90/1 103/705 105/81 106/201 114/705 709 120/340   
   SEEN-BY: 120/616 123/10 120 131 124/5016 129/215 305 153/250 757 7715   
   SEEN-BY: 154/10 30 40 50 700 203/0 218/840 220/70 80 90 221/0 6 226/17   
   SEEN-BY: 226/18 30 227/114 201 229/110 200 307 310 317 424 426 550   
   SEEN-BY: 229/664 700 240/5832 249/206 250/5 8 266/512 267/800 280/464   
   SEEN-BY: 280/5003 5555 282/1038 292/854 8125 298/25 301/1 305/3 310/31   
   SEEN-BY: 317/3 320/219 322/757 341/234 342/200 396/45 423/120 460/58   
   SEEN-BY: 633/280 712/848 770/1 100 340 772/210 220 230 2320/105 2452/250   
   SEEN-BY: 3634/12   
   PATH: 129/215 154/10 280/464 770/1 317/3 229/426