Subj : Another filearea question To : Mvan Le From : mark lewis Date : Tue Jun 12 2007 02:47 pm ml> MvanL> satisfied the requirement of whomever invented it. ml> i never said that dorinfox.def should carry more ml> details... i said that it doesn't carry the node number ml> internally... you extrapolated that on to something else... MvanL> The number in the dorinfo1.def dropfile file name was never MvanL> meant to designate a node number -- not dorinfox.def, not MvanL> dorinfo#.def, not "dorinfo dropfile" -- DORINFO1(ONE).DEF MvanL> dropfile. MvanL> Do you understand the distinction between "The" dorinfo1.def MvanL> dropfile and "those" dorinfo(x|#).def dropfiles ? do you understand the meaning of "POST THE SPECS OR A LINK TO THEM"? ml> MvanL> If people deviate from the specification and adopt different ml> MvanL> methods for using dorinfo1.def that's their perogative, which ml> MvanL> doesn't change the fact that the number in the dorinfo1.def ml> MvanL> dropfile was never meant to designate a node number. ml> you've still not provided the proof of this... i'm more ml> than willing to look at it once it is made available... ml> i would hope that it is written by the original author ml> of the dorinfox.def specification ;) MvanL> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dropfile: oh, cool... i'll go fix that right now... hint: don't take wikipedia as gospel... [trim] MvanL> Which is totally conclusive evidence that the RA mob initiated a MvanL> dorinfo(x|#).def propaganda against dorinfo1.def which the BBS MvanL> community later acquiesced towards. no, it is not conclusive of that... QBBS was also using dorinfox.def at that time as were wildcat, pcboard, and many other mainstream bbs packages... besides, there's no cite for that information or a link to the specs those statements are drawn from... MvanL> You therefore are a victim of misinformation. in this instance, your mistake is in believing unproven and undocumented writtings that you read on wikipedia ;) )\/(ark * Origin: (1:3634/12) .