TZUTC: -0600   
   MSGID: 2153.sync_sys@723:1/0 2b956ea3   
   REPLY: 56738.sync_sys@1:103/705 2b9633e6   
   PID: Synchronet 3.20a-Linux master/d9c5f963f Nov 03 202 GCC 14.2.1   
   TID: SBBSecho 3.21-Linux master/b8260ae62 Nov 08 2024 20:27 GCC 12.2.0   
   BBSID: PHARCYDE   
   CHRS: UTF-8 4   
   On Sat, Nov 09 2024 20:53:56 -0600, you wrote:   
      
   >   > Ok, so what you're saying is that ".fidonet" only triggers a gated FTN   
   >   > netmail message, but if you were to actually send an email/netmail to   
   >   > the original (FTN) message author of any network besides Fidonet, it   
   >   > would use the proper network even though it says ".fidonet"?   
      
   > Correct.   
      
   Ok, great!   
      
   >   > If so, understood and thanks for the clarification. Just wierd that it   
   >   > wouldn't say the actual network that the p.f.n.z corresponds to   
      
   > The ".fidonet" is not indicating a "network" but rather a "network type". It   
   has nothing to do with what FTN domain the address might be in.   
   Understood. It just looks wierd when you see f100.n1.z46.fidonet when    
   you know darn well it's not Fidonet. Maybe it's just me. :)   
      
   >   > while I'm no JS guru whatsoever, looking at the function in mailutil.js,   
   >   > it seems to set the variable "ftn" to fidonet before any actual domains   
   >   > are checked for.   
      
   > Feel free to hack at it, but most echomail messages doesn't actually have a   
   FTN domain in its message headers.   
      
   Agreed with you there, and was part of the reason I had asked about it.    
   Maybe I will mess with it, but not for the reasons I was originally    
   questioning. Instead, now that I understand better, maybe changing it to    
   "netmail" or "mailto" or something that hints it's a workable mailing    
   address, but doesn't actually say a specific network name where it    
   wouldn't look right in all other cases besides Fidonet, or have someone    
   question it, like a couple of us just did.   
      
   However, I don't know what the best option would be as a replacement. I    
   just don't think "fidonet" is the answer in this case.   
      
   Thanks for the info!   
      
   Regards,   
   Nick   
      
   ... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.   
   ---   
    ￭ Synchronet ￭ _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin)   
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)   
   SEEN-BY: 90/1 103/705 105/81 106/201 124/5016 128/187 153/757 7715   
   SEEN-BY: 154/10 30 203/0 218/700 221/0 226/30 227/114 229/110 114   
   SEEN-BY: 229/206 317 400 426 428 470 550 700 705 240/1120 5832 266/512   
   SEEN-BY: 280/464 5003 5006 282/1038 291/111 292/8125 301/1 320/219   
   SEEN-BY: 322/757 341/66 234 342/200 396/45 423/120 460/58 256 1124   
   SEEN-BY: 467/888 633/280 712/848 770/1 5020/400 8912 5054/30 5075/35   
   PATH: 103/705 280/464 460/58 229/426