TZUTC: -0500   
   MSGID: 1079.fido_points@1:135/115 28e13276   
   REPLY: 2:221/1.58@fidonet 09155d9e   
   PID: Synchronet 3.20a-Linux master/e54bed451 May  6 2023 GCC 11.2.0   
   TID: SBBSecho 3.20-Linux master/e54bed451 May  6 2023 GCC 11.2.0   
   BBSID: PALANTIR   
   CHRS: ASCII 1   
   -=> August Abolins wrote to Dan Clough <=-   
      
    AB>> Being a point is great, you just poll your bossnode and the mail   
    AB>> comes in, easy peasy.   
      
    DC> Yes, I understand that.  But it's also easy to grab a QWK packet from   
    DC> (my) BBS and read/reply that way.  So... point has no advantage there.   
      
    AA> Pointing can be faster.  With OXP, the command to poll are   
    AA> three keystrokes:  N A    
      
   Well, that's not a huge concern of mine.  Doesn't take me much more than    
   that to login to the BBS and grab a QWK packet.   
      
    DC> I like using QWK, and the whole point of my questions is   
    DC> to find out if operating as a Point would be any better.   
    DC> So far I've not seen any indication of that.   
      
    AA> You just gotta give OXP a try to see what's different and/or   
    AA> better.   
      
   So, I did give it a look a couple days ago.  I didn't get very far.  I    
   have to say, I cannot easily recall a piece of software that is less    
   intuitive on how to use it, than this.  Especially the opening dialog    
   when you start it for the first time, I mean.... WTF?  Really strange    
   stuff there.  Could I learn it with some time/study/reading?  Sure.  But    
   there isn't anything that makes that worth my while, at this point.   
      
    AA> For me, it's the database-like storage of messages following a   
    AA> poll.  Unlike QWK were you have to keep track of each   
    AA> particular file and/or read/reply to all the messages in a   
    AA> single QWK at a time, the database result allows archiving   
    AA> messages all in one place and makes it easy to find any   
    AA> particular message.   
      
   Yes, understood, but if you run a BBS, you already have all that.  I can    
   see this being a decent option for a non-Sysop though.   
      
    AA> OXP allows marking individual messages for "later reply" or   
    AA> tagging them to HOLD so they don't get deleted on a purge.   
      
   That doesn't fit how I'm used to doing things.  It may suit others very    
   well, I'm sure, but for me....  can't find any reason to switch to this    
   from BBS/QWK.  A big part of that is the learning curve on how to use    
   it; I just don't have the time or desire for that, at least right now.   
      
   Thanks for the response to my question(s), though, it's appreciated.   
      
      
      
      
   ... System halted - Press all keys at once to continue.   
   === MultiMail/Linux v0.52   
   --- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux   
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)   
   SEEN-BY: 1/120 123 10/0 1 15/0 18/0 50/109 90/1 92/1 102/401 103/1   
   SEEN-BY: 103/705 105/81 106/201 116/116 123/0 25 131 170 180 200 755   
   SEEN-BY: 123/3001 129/305 135/0 115 205 300 388 390 395 153/757 7715   
   SEEN-BY: 214/22 218/0 1 215 700 720 840 850 860 880 221/1 6 222/2   
   SEEN-BY: 226/30 227/114 229/110 112 113 206 307 317 400 426 428 470   
   SEEN-BY: 229/664 700 240/1120 250/1 261/1466 266/512 275/1000 280/464   
   SEEN-BY: 282/1038 291/111 292/854 299/6 301/1 113 317/3 320/219 322/757   
   SEEN-BY: 341/66 342/200 396/45 460/58 467/888 633/280 712/848 1321   
   SEEN-BY: 2320/105 3634/0 12 27 56 57 5001/100 5005/49 5020/715 846   
   SEEN-BY: 5020/1042 4441 5030/49 5061/133 5064/56 5075/128 5083/444   
   SEEN-BY: 5090/958   
   PATH: 135/115 3634/12 5020/1042 301/1 218/700 229/426