Text 1889, 58 rader
Skriven 2007-09-11 01:53:56 av Richard Webb (1:116/901.0)
   Kommentar till text 1888 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
Ärende: fidonet ham radio file echoes
=====================================
Roy Witt wrote in a message to Richard Webb:

 >> HE was running wildcat at first, but was a poor man.  HE couldn't
 >> afford registration of frontDOor and Wildmail, yet he got a lot of
 >> users participating.

RW> I couldn't get Frontdoor to work with Wildcat. And, Frontdoor was
RW> free to non-commercial users in those days.

Yah I believe you're right, but wildmail was the kicker.  WE had wildmail
interfacing just fine with fd but he bumped up against the cripple unless he
registered for some reason.

 >> I encouraged him to get into fido so that he'd take all the gamers
 >> from my board <g>.

RW> That was my board, all games. Plenty of users to play the games,
RW> very few were interested in Fidonet.

I had the hams, had a packet radio door, the os/2 users, the serious
programmers.  I got another lady to get into fido to take all the genealogy
users but one.  HE liked the search feature better in Maximus. I was the
serious technorat board.  I think I carried about 100 plus echoes between all
the programming echoes and the ham and electronics echoes. I also carried all
the musicians' and audio geeks' echoes as well.
I think at the height I also supported about 20 + points.

RW> I don't have much time to work on it. Gotta remember to give AT&T a
RW> call to have their techs come out and fix the screw-up.

 >> Was just about to drop you a crashmail the other night as I saw you
 >> had a pots listed in the nodelist.  Glad I held off on that <g>. AS
 >> you've gathered from other communication we have a coordinator and
 >> I'll assist him where I can.

RW> Your mailer shouldn't have a problem with a non-answering line.
RW> Although it would probably go on and on until it runs up against
RW> your set limit. 

true enough, but no reason to let it sit there with a mail packet it can't
deliver <g>.

 >> I also note that with the death of the ham fdn went the echo ham_req
 >> where ham fdn files used to be announced. Have you any problem with
 >> those announcements being made here?

RW> Not at all. The more traffic, the longer lived the echo will be. 

Cool, I'll let Mark know.  I hatched a file into hamfiles the other day which
you should be seeing in hamnews soon. IT's official, it's in the latest
filegate.zxx file so the ham fdn is again alive.

73 de nf5b

Regards,
           Richard
--- timEd 1.10.y2k+
 * Origin: Radio REscue net operations BBS       (1:116/901)