Subj : Re: Housekeeping
To   : fusion
From : Commodore Clifford
Date : Tue Apr 25 2023 09:02 pm

On 24 Apr 23  16:13:29 fusion wrote...

FF> On 24 Apr 2023, poindexter FORTRAN said the following...   
FF>  pF> I'm all for security, but back-hauling security onto open
FF>  pF> protocols like bink and telnet seem pointless unless you're
FF>  pF> going to deprecate the insecure protocols. 
FF> 
FF> this stuff is just for fun. if you start giving the boot to people
FF> who can't (or won't) run the secure stuff, that's not fun.
FF> 
FF> *shrug*
FF> 
FF> --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A47 2021/12/25 (Windows/32)  * Origin: cold
FF> fusion - cfbbs.net - grand rapids, mi (21:1/616) 

To which Commodore Clifford replies...

The real problem is that there are a lot of actual retro hardware BBS's
that can't necessarily re-write their mailers (the juice isn't worth the
squeeze as some would say) and I think that is also a part of the
activity problem.

Many of the "retro" BBS's that I call are way more active than some of
the networks I receive....  As in individual BBS's getting more "local"
messages a day than I get from the net combined.

But these systems are too "retro" for some of these nets.  I'm only here
because I finally decided to break down and do a BinkD mailer on a linux
box.

These users could be a benefit if they could connect with their old
mailers... but even finding a successful telnet feed is nearly impossible
anymore.

And some nets don't even support that much.  I tried joining "RetroNet"
of all nets some 10 or so years ago.  My system was "too retro for
RetroNet". (No loss really, but the irony is amusing).

--- RATSoft/FIDO v09.14.95 [JetMail 1.01]
 * Origin: STar Fleet HQ BBS - bbs.sfhqbbs.org:5983 (21:3/171)

.