REPLY: 2:221/6.21 16bf15c2   
   MSGID: 2:333/808.7 5fa89ef6   
   CHRS: CP850 2   
   TZUTC: 0100   
   Hi Charles!   
      
   Answering a msg of <08 Nov 20>, from you to me:   
      
    AA>> those well supported systems with multiple lines.   
    AA>> Hence, users gravited towards systems where they   
    AA>> could get on right away..   
      
    CP> I remember with AOL, it would cycle through local   
    CP> numbers until it connected. The others I don't   
    CP> recall.   
      
   The others had little to no busy signal issues. Even IBM had its own BBS. That   
   was fun to connect to and get info about OS/2 updates and post messages in the   
   online community. From the latter, I learned about an OS/2 user group that   
   would meet every month in downtown Montreal in one of the IBM buildings. They   
   featured guest speakers (programmers, designers..), door prizes. I won an OS/2   
   Warp T-shirt one evening - that was cool.   
      
      
    CP> But as far as single line BBSes, I had several   
    CP> different systems in my terminal program. At least   
    CP> 20-30 local one's during the height of popularity.   
    CP> With autodial, the terminal program would simply   
    CP> go down the list until a system connected.   
      
   I had much the same. I just robo-dialed my usual BBSes.   
      
   But TODAY, that dial-n-wait process is obsolete.  I don't think the   
   prospective public knows that BBSes are accessible via Telnet (with their   
   exisiting internet service) and the waiting queue is practically non-existent.   
      
      
    CP> I primarily logged on transferred QWK or BW   
    CP> packets and logged off. A few systems, I would   
    CP> play a few door games. Primarily league games.   
      
   Same here. I wasn't too much into the games, but it was a nice diversion at   
   times.   
      
      
    AA>> To come back? Why would they do that, when they   
    AA>> get pretty graphics and colours (html) and   
    AA>> buttons to click on the screen? It's so much more   
    AA>> fun.   
      
    CP> True, you could see things that you couldn't on a   
    CP> BBS, but why is it either/or?   
      
    CP> For the most part, with a few exceptions, you   
    CP> still have far better quality discussions on Fido   
    CP> than elsewhere online.   
      
   The target audience is jappers like you and I.  I don't need the graphical   
   distractions that online web interfaces provide.   
      
      
    CP>>> Obviously I was wrong.   
    AA>> :)   
    CP>>> I tried newsgroups now and then. I didn't care   
    CP>>> for them. It seemed a cheap imitation of   
    CP>>> echomail.   
      
   On that, I concur.   
      
      
    CP> Fidonet had a Message area for nearly any topic   
    CP> you could imagine.   
      
   Over time, the majority of active echos reduced to areas geared for sysop/bbs   
   interests.   
      
      
    CP> Now systems either can send packets as soon as   
    CP> there is new mail or hourly, as they choose, so   
    CP> you can have back and forth in a conversation   
    CP> several times a day.   
      
   This is what today's Fidonet ought to leverage and promote for the user's   
   advantage.   
      
      
    AA>> Sysops do there best with listings.. But, for the   
    AA>> most part Fidonet (or any othernet for that   
    AA>> matter) remains obscure to the average user out   
    AA>> there.   
      
    CP> Exactly. How many of those things would someone   
    CP> not part of the BBS community even know exist?   
      
   Word needs to be seeded outside the Fidonet realm.   
      
      
    CP> Even with Facebook, I belong to a Group called   
    CP> FidoNet TREK Echo. It was supposedly set up to   
    CP> mimic it's namesake. There are about 175 members   
    CP> in the Group. Besides myself, I know 3 members   
    CP> that were for certain part of Fidonet in the past.   
      
   I hung out in the fido PHOTO group. Then, when internet came along, someone   
   built a Facebook group and everyone went there.  The FB solution was pretty   
   good considering that echo was primarily about each other's photos. FB made it   
   easy to share images. BUT... I noticed that the converstional content degraded   
   to zero. The FB group maybe had a brief description (or none at all) for an   
   initial photo, but the rest of the content was just the "thumbs-up" thing, or   
   one-liners like "great photo".   
      
   The group even experimented with scheduled audio chat events (think Zoom, but   
   for audio-only). That was rather cool, except for me still on dialup at the   
   time, it was a brutal experience. Group audio could get confusing.   
      
      
    CP> ... people share articles related to various Star   
    CP> Trek related shows, movies, events, actors.   
    CP> Occasionally, someone will post an opinion on an   
    CP> episode. But there is no discussion to speak of.   
      
    CP> It hardly reflects what the Echo it's named after   
    CP> was.   
      
   Same result as PHOTO echo.   
      
      
    CP> My point is that if you have something like that,   
    CP> wouldn't you want to promote where it came from?   
      
   That is a good point. A shout-out to a sister "disscussion" group on Fidonet   
   could appeal to some of the FB TREK users too, like you.   
      
      
    AA>>>> Twitter..   
    CP>>> I don't get the hashtags. I mean, I understand   
    CP>>> what the intent was, but I don't get it..   
    AA>> They are a way to categorize a message...   
      
    CP> I know what hashtags are and their purpose. I   
    CP> don't get the need for them.   
      
   It is a way to attempt to build a community of likeminded people on a   
   particular topic.  Case in point: #metoo  And look how that sky-rocketed into   
   media fame.   
      
      
    AA>> The ZDnet article mentioned The Well. The   
    AA>> internet presence for The Well looks amazing and   
    AA>> well organized. It's basically the same thing as   
    AA>> Fidonet, but webbased forums. Not sure if there   
    AA>> is an offline option for messages. Its philosophy   
    AA>> of real names, etc... reads very much like the   
    AA>> Fidonet BBSses of old.   
      
    CP> The Well is a commercial BBS, more or less.   
      
   Was it always commercial? One of the history articles in WIRED didn't quite   
   cover that aspect. But it did primarily focus on an LA community.  No mention   
   of anything like echomail connecting people worldwide.   
      
      
    CP> I wasn't clear enough, I guess.   
      
    CP> History is important. FidoNet showed what a bunch   
    CP> of regular people are capable of. Linking   
    CP> thousands or more people together worldwide   
    CP> talking about things. Not governments, not   
    CP> corporations, not Universities. People. On their   
    CP> own time, out of their own pockets.   
      
   I sense a fine Fidonet article in the making!   
      
      
    CP> Different computer systems, it didn't matter.   
    CP> Different OSes, no problem. We have this program   
    CP> in DOS, let's make it available for people that   
    CP> use OS2 or Linux. Or vice versa.   
      
    CP> You have a C=64? No problem, join in the fun.   
      
    CP> If I'm not mistaken, every model of home computer   
    CP> there was could participate.   
      
   Yes.. there was excitement to accomodate the caller/user.   
      
      
    CP> Apathy fits a lot of it. But there is more than   
    CP> that.   
      
    CP> How many BBS related programs are there that have   
    CP> versions for multiple operating systems? What if   
    CP> those programmers thought, "I only use X OS. I   
    CP> don't need to port it to Y."? Or release the code   
    CP> so someone else can.   
      
    CP> That's exactly what this is here. Android is   
    CP> simply a different OS.   
      
    CP> But there are negative reactions to the idea.   
      
   Age? I think the sysops/progammers of yesteryear are tired, satisfied to just   
   dwell in nostalgia.   
      
      
    CP> It's the negativity.   
      
    CP> "The screen is too small"   
    CP> "The Keyboard is too small"   
    CP> "It's too hard to read on it"   
      
   Those are user's/sysop's comments. What is lacking is a programmer/visionary.   
      
      
    CP> Ok, in your particular situation, any or all of   
    CP> these comments might be true. But that doesn't   
    CP> make it universally true. Millions of people use   
    CP> tablets and smartphones on a daily basis.   
      
      
   Except for the tried and true genuine BBS interface experience, there is no   
   real reason NOT to embrace supporting echomail on a smartphone/tablet. Some of   
   the NNTP apps are pretty good. They just need cooperating sysops to provide   
   the server-side for that - which there is.  JamNNTP goes a step further and   
   tries to mimic the FROM:/TO: in the typical nntp field so that you can see   
   both names in a conversation.   
      
      
    CP> My more current discussion in Asian Link. His idea   
    CP> works. It's more programmer heavy than I'm looking   
    CP> for. But it's there, and if it works for people,   
    CP> I'm in full support.   
      
   Which discussion is that?  I think I missed it. Short-lived? Was it just a   
   comment or two?   
      
      
    CP> The general public aren't big programmers. But   
    CP> they can install an app. They can type an address.   
    CP> They can fill out a form. So the typical BBS   
    CP> related software, a decent Telnet that supports   
    CP> ANSI graphics and BBS transfers for Mail Packets,   
    CP> seem a very good thing to me.   
      
   That is all good. Keep expressing it. If you could draw in someone who can   
   explore your ideas futher, it could get traction.   
      
      
    CP> As far as the BBS on Android idea? It's definitely   
    CP> not for everyone. But it's something that I see   
    CP> potential for.   
      
   I'm reminded of the BBS-on-a-Stick project.   
      
      
    AA>> Yes, Hotdoged seems to be a fine adaptation for   
    AA>> Android devices. But is that the one where the   
    AA>> code is not available?   
      
    CP> The Fido provider portion of HotdogEd is based on   
    CP> jNode. I'm not sure about the other portions.   
      
   I see lots of tutorials and info on jNode.  Sounds good.   
      
   ___/|ug   
      
   --- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20180707   
    * Origin:  ----> (2:333/808.7)   
   SEEN-BY: 105/81 129/305 153/757 221/0 6 360 229/426 664 700 240/1120   
   SEEN-BY: 282/1038 301/1 322/757 331/313 333/0 808 335/364 370 460/58   
   SEEN-BY: 4500/1   
   PATH: 333/808 335/364 221/6 153/757 229/664 426