Text 420, 54 rader
Skriven 2012-07-13 00:19:32 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
    Kommentar till text 377 av Nicholas Boel (10382.fidonews)
Ärende: .fidonet
================
 > Arent you projecting here a little bit??

 > This isnt the first time SBBS been scrutinized, its been under scrutiny
 > well before you came onto the scene..

 NB> SBBS can't be singled out.

no one said it was the only one... what was said was that it is the one
currently selected as it has been over the years... seems that nothing has
changed in that respect, either... maybe...

 NB> I'm sure every software has been scrutinzed by someone at one 
 NB> point or another. At least taking it to the developers (instead of 
 NB> arguing about it here, where they don't read) would be a better 
 NB> step in the right direction. Wouldn't it?

and what do you do when that taking it to the developers has been done and it
has been shuffed off as a non-problem plus the ever-ready eyerolls?

 > It used to be that everytime we saw echo regurgitations we could say
 > "Someone is setting up a synchronet BBS".

 NB> There's a lot of people that setup SBBS that have no idea what
 NB> they're doing. All-in-one BBS softwares (ie: SBBS, Wins/Wildcat,
 NB> BBBS, etc) have that effect on some people.

these things wouldn't happen if folks would learn their software first before
spewing it out to the rest of the network ;)

 NB> This is the first issue brought up with me, and I relayed it
 NB> straight to the devs via IRC. I got one response to ask for a spec
 NB> reference. All I could give them was FTS-0009, as what was given to
 NB> me. Haven't heard anything since, but for some reason I don't think
 NB> it's the end of ME getting blamed for it. 

i was going to say that i've been looking for your post(s) in the synchronet
support areas and haven't seen it yet... IRC... ok... hummm...

 NB> For the 4th time now, I'm working on another software anyways, as
 NB> my use for Synchronet's extra features has fizzled since I do
 NB> everything separately now. So if the die-hards could just get over
 NB> it (once again, since apparantly it's happened before), it will all
 NB> be over shortly. Until the next SBBS user comes around, at least.

dude, look... you are not specifically "the target" but you did toss some
arrows from your system at others... you have to expect that your system's
interactions with the rest of the network would come under scrutiny... i mean
geez... you put down others who have been doing this for years and their
software but their ancient 20 year old software can do what your newer
supposedly better software can do... it doesn't make sense, ya know? ;)

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)