informis
/
textfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
textfiles/bbs/FIDONET/FIDONEWS/fido0852.nws

1595 lines
73 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters

This file contains invisible Unicode characters that are indistinguishable to humans but may be processed differently by a computer. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

F I D O N E W S -- | Vol. 8 No. 52 (30 December 1991)
The newsletter of the |
FidoNet BBS community | Published by:
_ |
/ \ | "FidoNews" BBS
/|oo \ | (415)-863-2739
(_| /_) | FidoNet 1:1/1
_`@/_ \ _ | Internet:
| | \ \\ | fidonews@fidonews.fidonet.org
| (*) | \ )) |
|__U__| / \// | Editors:
_//|| _\ / | Tom Jennings
(_/(_|(____/ | Tim Pozar
(jm) |
----------------------------+---------------------------------------
Published weekly by and for the Members of the FidoNet international
amateur network. Copyright 1991, Fido Software. All rights reserved.
Duplication and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes
only. For use in other circumstances, please contact FidoNews.
Paper price: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5.00US
Electronic Price: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . free!
For more information about FidoNews refer to the end of this file.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of Contents
1. EDITORIAL ..................................................... 1
Editorial: Here we go again ................................... 1
2. ARTICLES ...................................................... 2
FidoNews! submission policy to change! ........................ 2
FidoNet program version list info ............................. 3
Wanted: Dovemail Beta Testers ................................. 4
Area Code Chart, revised, for the postal-abbrev. impaired ..... 9
Welfare Conference ............................................ 10
The Play-By-Mail Echo Part II ................................. 11
NEW PARENTS NETWORK AVAILABLE TO USA's PARENTS ................ 11
FidoNet <==> Packet Gateway ................................... 13
Brigadoon Village Network ..................................... 14
FidoNet Technical Specification Problem ....................... 15
3. RANTS AND FLAMES .............................................. 19
Something Rotten in The Skeptic Tank .......................... 19
Housebroken II ................................................ 21
A rebuttal to a rebuttal ...................................... 22
Meat Pies, Fosters Beer and Universal Mayhem .................. 22
4. LATEST VERSIONS ............................................... 24
Latest Greatest Software Versions ............................. 24
5. FIDONEWS INFORMATION .......................................... 30
FidoNews 8-52 Page 1 30 Dec 1991
======================================================================
EDITORIAL
======================================================================
Editorial: here we go again...
by Tom Jennings (1:1/1)
There are two things of note in this issue of FidoNews! First is the
revision to ARTSPEC.DOC, discussed this past summer. Portions of the
revised text appear as an article, and the complete proposed revised
file is also available.
Secondly, text once again appears in the RANTS AND FLAMES section. As
annoying as it is, it may serve as a test for the new RESOLVING
CONTROVERSIES section in FidoNews submission guidelines. If you are a
regular reader of FidoNews, consider the thread of the articles leading
to the ones in RANTs, and see how you think the new policy handles it.
Feedback please!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 8-52 Page 2 30 Dec 1991
======================================================================
ARTICLES
======================================================================
* ARTSPEC.DOC Changes soon...
As discussed (or monologued, for all the feedback I got) this past
summer, the FidoNews! article submission policy, ARTSPEC.DOC, is about
to be revised. It is substantially the same, with three major changes:
SUBJECT MATTER tightened up, RESOLVING CONTROVERSIES added, article
filenames simplified. The changed text is given below, with additions
marked with |'s, and deleted text marked with $'s.
The complete new proposed policy file is available from 1:1/1 as
NEWSPEC.DOC (filerequest or download) and will be delivered with all
filerequests for ARTSPEC.DOC.
All of these changes were mentioned in previous FidoNews', though I have
clarified some of the specific language. Please send specific
suggestions and complaints (constructive please) to me here at FidoNews.
I would like to release this sometime in January 1992.
--------------
SUBJECT MATTER:
| Articles must be in some way related to the FidoNet, its
| technology and its uses; other networks (such as uucp and the
| Internet); social, ethical or legal aspects of the above; and
| any other related matters. You are welcome to submit articles
| on other subjects, but their inclusion is at the discretion of
| the editor(s).
|
| Articles of a general commercial nature or "classified ads" for
| services, equipment new or used, don't belong in FidoNews;
| there are other avenues within FidoNet for commercial
| transactions.
| -----------------------
| RESOLVING CONTROVERSIES:
|
| Occasionally FidoNews is presented with a dillema: a
| "controversial" article generates a seemingly endless
| series of responses, commentary, rebuttals, etc, and threatens
| to overwhelm FidoNews. How to stop the stop the flood without
| violating the editorial policy? Here is the somewhat complex
| solution:
|
| If a particular article generates a cascade of responses, the
| editor does two things: (1) chooses one or few of them as
| representative; (2) passes them on to the original author, who
| is asked to write a response within 2 weeks. The resulting
| representative response(s), and the original authors response,
FidoNews 8-52 Page 3 30 Dec 1991
| are run in the next possible FidoNews -- ONCE ONLY.
| Interested parties can then pick up the torch and march with it
| off the long or short pier of their choice.
...
------------------
WRITING GUIDELINES:
...
| * All submissions must include the author(s) name and
| full contact information, so that the editor can
| verify authorship if necessary. The author may request
| that the article be run anonymously. The editor(s) and anyone
| who comes across the above information is charged to
| keep it completely confidential.
---------------------
SUBMITTING AN ARTICLE
...
| FILENAME.ART
| a 0 to 3 character file type, always "ART"
|
| The ".ART" file type is important, as it allows the flood of
| input to the FidoNews node to be sorted properly. (Exceptions
| will be granted if the sending system is not capable of meeting
| this requirement.)
$ File types are used to distinguish types of submissions, as
$ follows:
$
$ .ART An article, commentary, open letter, or general news
$ item.
$ .AD "For Sale", "Wanted" or other advertisement.
$ .NOT A notice for the back of the issue.
$
$ If your file doesn't have one of the above extensions, then it
$ will lay around taking up disk space until someone takes a look
$ at it and realizes what it is. Maybe.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNet program version list info
by David French (1:103/250)
(Version list compiler person)
FidoNews 8-52 Page 4 30 Dec 1991
> So David...how can I get the rest of the information? I.e.,
> numbers 2 & 3?
>
> 1) Software Name & Version 2) FileName.Ext
> 3) Support Node Address 4) Support BBS Phone Number
Until recently the file was being deleted at 13/13 due to an error in
communications. The problem has been fixed and the files should be
getting out weekly.
I added the FREQ info into this weeks FidoNews.Ver listing, so that should
help also. Have a good one!
--dave
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Decker 1:154/8
WANTED: DOVEMAIL BETA TESTERS
DoveMail is a program that lets you carry UseNet/Internet newsgroups
on Fidonet systems. As you may be aware, Fidonet has both official and
unofficial gateways into UseNet and the Internet, but you don't see
UseNet Newsgroups (their equivalent of echomail) carried on very many
Fidonet systems at present. I think part of the reason for this is
that we've been using the wrong approach in the past. Up until now,
all UseNet to Fidonet conversion software has attempted to convert the
individual messages in a newsgroup from the UseNet message format to
FidoNet echomail format.
This simply doesn't work very well, for several reasons. UseNet
newsgroup messages carry slightly different types of information in
the message header, and this doesn't translate well into Fidonet
format. In addition, it is not uncommon to see very long messages in
some newsgroups, and these either have to be split, truncated, or
discarded at the gateway system. If the gateway software allows a
message that is too large to pass, it may be discarded by an echomail
processor downstream (or worse yet, some echomail processors will lock
up when they receive a too-long message). The problem is that there is
no real standard in Fidonet as to what constitutes a message that is
"too large"... in fact, the Fidonet standards call for unlimited
length messages. It's just that in the "real world", there is NO
echomail processor available that will handle an unlimited length
message (at least not to my knowledge).
(There's a reason that UseNet messages can be unlimited length while
Fidonet messages cannot. In UseNet message, ALL control information is
put at the TOP of the message. Thus, once you've read the message
header, you have all the information you need to process the message,
and from then on you can just copy the remainder of the message.
However, Fidonet messages contain control information at both the top
AND the bottom of the message, which means that you have to read the
entire message before you can process it. It's not IMPOSSIBLE to do
that, but it's very difficult from a programming standpoint and most
FidoNews 8-52 Page 5 30 Dec 1991
programmers don't feel it's worth the effort, particularly when no
OTHER existing echomail processors will handle an unlimited length
message).
Also, UseNet newsgroup messages may be posted to more than one
newsgroup. In Fidonet Echomail, if you post an identical message to
two echomail conferences, you actually create two copies of the
message, which increases the amount of time (and telephone toll
charges) needed to transmit the message. In UseNet, you can post a
message to several newsgroups but only one copy of the message is
transmitted. When such a message is converted to echomail at a gateway
system, one of two things happens... either it is only posted to one
echomail conference (corresponding to the first newsgroup listed in
the message header), and those reading other areas don't see the
message, or else multiple copies of the message are made (one for each
echomail area that the message is posted to at the gateway system).
Yet another problem is that UseNet messages are always assumed to be
addressed to "all". When the message are converted at the gateway
system, if the same person has entered more than one message, the
messages may appear to be so similar that some echomail processors may
erroneously discard some of them as duplicates. This is a very common
problem because many echomail processors will declare a message as a
dupe if the Date/Time, To, From, and Subject fields of a message are
all the same (and in some cases, even those entire fields may not be
checked... instead, a comparison may be made on only the first few
characters, particularly of the Subject field). If someone in UseNet
replies to two or more messages in the same subject thread, the From
and Subject fields will be the same, and most gateway software
addresses all messages to "All" so the To fields will be the same.
And, if the date is derived from the time at which the messages were
processed (at some point in UseNet or at the gateway system), rather
than the time they were actually entered, the date/time field may be
duplicated and one or more messages may be declared a dupe.
The solution to these problems is fairly obvious: DON'T convert
newsgroups to Echomail! Instead, transmit them within Fidonet in their
native RFC-822 (UseNet) format, and convert from that format DIRECTLY
to *.msg format if necessary. Up until now, there has not been any
software capable of doing this. But now, I am beta testing a program
called DoveMail which, along with some related programs, allows UseNet
format messages to be transmitted within Fidonet (and other Fidonet-
technology networks) without ever being shoehorned into echomail
format.
Now, please understand that I am talking about using a native UseNet
format for the packet that carries the messages only. I'm not talking
about using a UseNet mailer, or the UseNet/Internet communication
protocols. When you use DoveMail, if you're not a "gateway" system,
you use your usual mailer and send and receive mail in the normal
manner. More on that in a moment.
FidoNews 8-52 Page 6 30 Dec 1991
The main DoveMail program is somewhat similar to an echomail processor
like ConfMail or QMail, but works a little differently. With echomail,
incoming messages are normally imported to your message base and then
exported from there to any nodes you feed. With DoveMail, the main
DoveMail program doesn't touch your message bases at all. It simply
takes an incoming packet, looks at each message, decides which nodes
that message has to go to, and creates mail packets for those nodes
(again, these are in native UseNet format). If you are a "leaf" node
and don't feed any other nodes, then you could get by without even
using the main DoveMail program at all.
So how do you see the messages on your system? A pair of programs
called NewsToss and NewsScan accomplish that. What you do is to have
DoveMail toss a packet for YOUR system, or if you're a leaf node, you
just use the incoming newsgroup packets from your feed directly. In
either case, NewsToss will toss messages from the newsgroup packet
directly to your *.msg format message bases.
When you have locally-entered messages to export, NewsScan will create
an RFC-822 format message packet that can either be used as input for
DoveMail, or if you're a leaf node, sent directly to your feed. Note
that in either direction, the messages go directly from to or from
your message base, from or to the RFC-822 message format.
Some might wonder why all these functions are not integrated into one
program. The most practical reason is that NewsToss and NewsScan only
work with the *.msg format. Someone could write a program similar to
NewsToss and NewsScan that works with a Hudson message base, or a
Squish message base, and you could still use DoveMail to send
newsgroups to other nodes. Honestly, I prefer running several modules
separately (even with programs I didn't write) because if one isn't
working quite the way I want it to, I can replace just that one
program with something else. Also, from a programming standpoint, it's
easier to debug separate smaller programs than a single large program.
I also find that it's easier for users of the program to figure out
how the system actually works when separate programs handle separate
functions. I guess I'm just the sort of person that prefers to build
things up from individual modules than to have a whole complete system
in a box.
Now, you may wonder how these UseNet format packets get sent between
nodes in Fidonet. When DoveMail (or NewsScan) creates an RFC-822
format message packet (called a "batched newsgroup" packet in UseNet
terminology, because it contains a "batch" of newsgroup messages), it
places the packet in your outbound directory (the appropriate one if
you have multiple outbound directories) with the extension .UUT. This
packet is the functional equivalent of a Fidonet *.OUT file (except
that *.UUT's are in RFC-822 format while *.OUT's are FTS-0001). And
then DoveMail (or NewsScan) washes its hands of the matter, so to
speak.
FidoNews 8-52 Page 7 30 Dec 1991
It is hoped that future mail packers will come along, see that there
is a .UUT file in the directory, rename it to a file with the
extension *.pku (similar to a Fidonet *.pkt file, but again, it's RFC-
822 rather than FTS-0001), and then archive it into an outgoing mail
archive (which CAN have the same extensions as Fidonet uses, that is,
*.MO?, *.TU?, ..... *.SU?). An outgoing mail packet might quite
possibly contain both *.PKT's and *.PKU's, intermixed in the same mail
packet. Of course, you're only going to send such a packet to another
node that runs DoveMail and therefore knows enough to run an external
(to the echomail processor) unarchive shell such as GUS, POLYXARC, or
SPAZ if necessary.
Since no EXISTING mail packers know about this convention yet, the
DoveMail archive includes a program called DovePack that will serve
the purpose in the interim. It will look for .UUT packets in the
outbound area, and if it finds any it will rename them to *.PKT files,
and then TRY to add them to EXISTING mail archive files (files with a
*.mo? ... *.su? extension). If it doesn't find an EXISTING outbound
mail archive file for the destination node, it will create a new one.
It then looks for an EXISTING *.?lo attach list for the node in
question and tries to add the name of the outbound mail archive file
to the attach list, if it's not already there. If no *.?lo attach list
exists, DovePack will create a normal *.flo attach, which can be
renamed to another "flavor" by other software or by batch file
commands if necessary (or, for those systems that don't use *.?lo
files for file attaches, DovePack can also create a file attach
message in your netmail area). Obviously, this isn't an optimal
solution, but I'm hoping that other software authors that write mail
packers will support the *.UUT/*.PKU naming convention, since doing so
would probably add only a VERY few lines of code to such programs.
Note that the above standard (if you can call it a "standard" at this
point) does not really provide for sending UNCOMPRESSED batched
newsgroups... while it would certainly be possible to send an
uncompressed *.UUT file, there's no naming convention to make it any
"flavor" other than normal... that is, you can't make the uncompressed
file Crash or Hold. I honestly don't know of any situation where it
would be desirable to send uncompressed files AND to mark them as
crash or hold. Remember that once the files have been compressed into
a mail archive, then the archive can be put on Crash or Hold.
The thing to keep in mind is that while the DovePack program will do
the necessary task of preparing a batched newsgroup file for
transmission, it certainly does not do it in an elegant manner. I'm
really hoping that the authors of other programs, that now look for
*.OUT files in the outbound directory and process them, will modify
their programs slightly to also look for *.UUT files and if found,
rename such files to *.PKU and add them to the appropriate mail
archives.
Now a word about DoveMail's copyright. Most of the software I write I
give away free, but I wanted to place just a few restrictions on the
use of DoveMail. Now, before you go away, let me quickly say that MOST
users will never have to pay a dime for DoveMail. But there are a few
people that will have to pay, and fewer still that are barred from
using it. Without reprinting the whole license agreement, I will just
FidoNews 8-52 Page 8 30 Dec 1991
say that the people who will have to pay are those who themselves make
money off of the sale of computer software. It burns me to see that,
while on one hand there is some absolutely fabulous software offered
free for all (and the authors of that software are to be congratulated
and thanked profusely), there are other people who write (relatively)
trivial programs and then try to charge a few bucks for them... it
would never occur to them to give something back to this hobby. I
figure that those people can pay me if they want to use DoveMail.
DoveMail is what I call "Golden RuleWare." The Golden Rule is "Do unto
others as you would have others do unto you." In this application, it
means the following: If you do not sell computer software or receive
money from the sale of computer software, if you do not charge money
to others in exchange for providing them with newsgroup feeds, and if
you do not use geography as a basis for determining to whom you will
provide newsgroup feeds, then you will be granted a license to use
DoveMail for free, with my compliments (subject to the restrictions
mentioned in the documentation file). Otherwise, you may be required
to pay for the use of DoveMail, or in some cases you may not be
permitted to use DoveMail. Please don't assume that you will have to
pay until you read the documentation. Honestly, I'm not trying to make
money on this software as much as I'm trying to express, in a tangible
way, my displeasure with those who cannot give anything back to the
hobby and with "control freaks."
One stipulation that I make is that you may not use DoveMail in any
newsgroup distribution scheme that refuses newsgroup feeds to other
sysops based solely on where they are geographically located. In other
words, you are not required to feed newsgroups you receive to any
other system, but if you do, you may not refuse a newsgroup feed to a
node solely because they are not in your net or region. Many readers
of this publication are aware of my long-standing contempt for the
geographic restrictions in Fidonet (and those who enforce them), and
since UseNet doesn't have any such nonsense in there rules, I see no
need whatsoever to try and place geographic restrictions on newsgroup
feeds brought into Fidonet. Newsgroups are NOT echomail and therefore
the "Echomail Coordinators" have no right to determine how they may be
distributed.
The above is a VERY abridged and edited version of what's in the
DoveMail documentation on this subject. If you hate "control freaks"
and/or software authors that demand a payment for the use of their
relatively trivial software, you might want to pick up a copy of
DoveMail just to read the "legal stuff" section of DoveMail.Doc... I'm
sure you'll agree that it's unique, if nothing else! And if you like
it and want to use it with software you write, please by all means
feel free to do so!
Anyway, by now you're probably either saying "I want to see this
program!" or "who cares?" If you're in the former group, you can pick
up a copy of the latest version by file requesting DOVE*.* from
1:154/600 (BUT SEE BELOW FOR HOURS OF OPERATION). You should get back
a file with a name something like DOVE1207.ZIP (the current version as
I write this). 1:154/600 is a mail-only board in Milwaukee but it is a
PART-TIME board and is only up for requests AFTER MIDNIGHT CENTRAL
STANDARD TIME. If you can't make the call after midnight, you might
FidoNews 8-52 Page 9 30 Dec 1991
look for the file on 1:154/40 and/or 1:154/100 and/or 1:228/24 but I
have no idea how long it takes the sysops of those BBS's to get a new
version online, so you may get a newer version by waiting until after
Midnight central time and polling 1:154/600.
There's one thing that DoveMail cannot do, and that's to find
newsgroup feeds for you. Check with your local UseNet guru, or with
the nearest node that flies the "UUCP" flag in the nodelist, or just
ask around.
Finally, I can't emphasize too strongly that this is still BETA-TEST
software. While I think I have most of the early major bugs out, if
you use the program YOU are a beta-tester! So if you only want iron-
clad tested and guaranteed software, this isn't it yet. But hey,
where's the fun in our hobby if you don't try something new
occasionally? And support is available, either via netmail or the
UFGATE conference (which seems to have expanded to cover anything and
everything relative to Fidonet <--> Internet gateways), so give it a
try.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Area Code Chart, revised - for the postal-abbreviation impaired
Charlie Baden 1:207/117.1
201 N.J. 301 Md. 401 R.I. 501 Ark. 601 Miss 701 NDak 801 Utah 901 Tenn
202 D.C. 302 Dela 402 Neb. 502 Ky. 602 Ariz 702 Nev. 802 Vt. 902#Nov.S
203 Conn. 303 Colo 403#Alta 503 Ore. 603 N.H. 703 Va. 803 S.C. 903 Tex.
204#Mani 304 W.Va 404 Ga. 504 La. 604#B.C. 704 N.C. 804 Va. 904 Fla.
205 Ala. 305 Fla. 405 Okla 505 N.M. 605 SDak 705#Ont. 805 Cal.
206 Wash. 306#Sask 406 Mont 506#N.B. 606 Ky. 806 Tex. 906 Mich
207 Maine 307 Wyo. 407 Fla. 507 Minn 607 N.Y. 707 Cal. 807#Ont. 907Alask
208 Idaho 308 Neb. 408 Cal. 508 Mass 608 Wisc 708 Ill. 808 Hi. 908 N.J.
209 Cal. 309 Ill. 409 Tex. 509 Wash 609 N.J. 709#Newf 809 P.R.(909 Cal)
310*Cal. 410*Md. 510*Cal.
212 N.Y. 312 Ill. 412 Penn 512 Tex. 612 Minn 712 Iowa 812 Ind. 912 Ga.
213 Cal. 313 Mich 413 Mass 513 Ohio 613#Ont. 713 Tex. 813 Fla. 913 Kans
214 Texas 314 Mo. 414 Wisc 514#Queb 614 Ohio 714 Cal. 814 Penn 914 N.Y.
215 Penn. 315 N.Y. 415 Cal. 515 Iowa 615 Tenn 715 Wisc 815 Ill. 915 Tex.
216 Ohio 316 Kans 416#Ont. 516 N.Y. 616 Mich 716 N.Y. 816 Mo. 916 Cal.
217 Ill. 317 Ind. 417 Mo. 517 Mich 617 Mass 717 Penn 817 Tex.
218 Minn. 318 La. 418#Queb 518 N.Y. 618 Ill. 718 N.Y. 818 Cal. 918 Okla
219 Ind. 319 Iowa 419 Ohio 519#Ont. 619 Cal. 719 Colo 819#Queb 919 N.C.
* 310, 410, 510 are new for 1991.
(909 won't be in use until 1992.)
# Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova
Scotia, Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan are Canadian provinces.
I have found it convenient to have this little chart accessible, either
via a pop-up window or just as a printed table, to see just what state a
phone number is located in. I welcome your comments, corrections,
suggestions and additions. And yes, I know that the Northwest
Territories and Yukon use area codes from adjoining provinces, and
Prince Edward Island uses Nova Scotia's area code; and the various
FidoNews 8-52 Page 10 30 Dec 1991
Caribbean islands that are in our phone system all use the same area
code (809), listed as P.R. above. This is just to give you an idea of
where they are! My original chart just used the 2-letter postal
abbrevations (LA for Louisiana, AR for Arkansas, etc.) because I assumed
everybody had them memorized like I do... NE=Nebraska, AK=Alaska,
AL=Alabama, and so on... This expanded version should explain some of
the questions I received after I sent in the last version.
Really, it's just a silly little chart that I found interesting. I could
also post the phone number prefixes in 213, 301, 415, that were split in
Fall '91 to create area codes 310, 410, 510... plus the 714 prefixes
that are going to create 909 in late *1992*. Gee, I could set myself up
as the self-appointed Fidonews telnum expert... <grin>
You can reach me on the NEWSCHAT echo, or netmail to 1:207/117.1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
by Mike Adams (1:19/10)
Welfare Conference Begins
Whenever the word "welfare" enters a discussion, people automatically
start thinking of multi-generational families who've been living off of
the system forever and appear to have every desire to continue doing so.
They think of welfare fraud, and they become angry when confronted with
examples of able-bodied individuals who manage to live quite well
without working.
Welfare had its beginnings many years ago, and it originated in many
states as an effort to assist widows, orphans, the aged and the infirm.
Today, it is an institution which seems to touch well over a third of
the population of this country. The existance of welfare is hotly
debated because of the abusers within the system, because of an
over-grown bureacracy, and because of the large chunk of the economic
pie it represents. Despite its negative attributes, there are many
aspects to the welfare programs which exist in this country which prove
to be beneficial to those who recieve assistance from them. Efforts are
being made to move the economically deprived towards self-sufficiency.
Work is being done to improve self-esteem, which often is the culprit
when it comes to analyzing why people end up on "welfare."
After nearly fourteen years with the Oklahoma Department of Human
Services, I've gathered a certain amount of knowledge in the area of
administering the social service programs that my state provides, and
I've seen how mis-information and half-told stories often malign
programs which provide positive benefits to thousands of people. I've
also been involved in dealing both directly and indirectly with welfare
fraud and its detection.
If you're interested in picking up the WELFARE conference, I'm starting,
you will have to pick it up directly from my system. I envision
discussions from others in the field of social services as well as from
those who have an interest in understanding how the welfare system works
(or doesn't work).
FidoNews 8-52 Page 11 30 Dec 1991
Until such time as the conference is more widely spread, as through the
Backbone, send netmail to me at 1:19/10, and we'll work things out. I
have a feeling that this could turn into a very interesting, if not
controversial, discussion area.
Mike Adams, Welfare Moderator
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The PBM Echo, Again.
by Dean Gilbert
1:353/700.0
Well, the PBM echo has had a reasonable amount of response,
but it seems that I wasn't as clear about the subject matter
as I should have been.
The Play-By-Mail echo is a chat echo about commercial
Play-By-Mail games such as Spiral Arm, Feudal Lords,
Hyborean War, etc. These games are played over Snail
mail primarily although some companies allow you to submit
turns over commercial networks like CompuServe.
The PBM Echo is NOT a forum or a method to play such
games over FidoNet. There are several echoes/networks
that support this (the AD&D echo and VervanNet come to mind).
Although it might be a good idea to start something like this
up, it's not a current priority of mine.
If you would like more information, or would like to begin
polling for this echo, please contact me at 1:353/700.0
The Echotag is PBM, and I can be polled anytime between
8pm and 12noon daily. I default to archiving with Lharc, so
if you don't use that archiver to de-arc mail, please tell me
in your message.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
By Ken Salois 1:300/21@FidoNet
New Parents Network ... A Vital Parenting Information Network
The word Parent fits a broad definition in todays society no matter
where you are in the world. Although we hold the title "New Parents
Network", we serve all likes of parents, relatives and interested
parties. We have no limits or specifications to base on interests for
parenting.
New Parents Network is currently available to the United States as a
zone 79 based network. We plan to open up to the world as soon as our
network grows to a greater size within the U.S.
FidoNews 8-52 Page 12 30 Dec 1991
The New Parents Network opened up to the the U.S. as a National
Network in October of 1991. At this point we have NPNet State
Coordinators in nine states and we are continuing to grow.
We are currently in need of 9600 Baud HUBS to serve our parenting
network through your residing State. States that are currently linked
to NPNet are: Arizona, California, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Missouri,
Tennessee and Louisiana. We would like to have all states join our
parenting network.
NPNet is designed to co-exist on an existing BBS system and takes up
little space. We currently offer National Bulletin text files that
range from national parenting organizations that provide services to
parents, to safety recall information on items such as faulty child
restraints. All systems that are currently NPNets have sent their
praises as to the volume and information contained in the NPNet
National Bulletins files area. This information has been collected
since 1988 and contains excellent information for all likes of
interested parents, guardians, child care providers, friends and
relatives. Bulletin specifics include: recently recalled toys
and car seats, support groups that exist to help parents, safety
information, immunization schedules, government agencies that
help parents, etc.
If you are interested in joining our network please reference the
following information:
=====================================================================
Zone Coordinator Fidonet Info file to
Network Name Zone or Contact Address FREQ
======================== ================ ========== ============
New Parents Network 79 Ken Salois 1:300/21 NP_NET.ZIP
Filename Size Date Title
==================== ======== =====================================
NP_NET.ZIP 30237 12-10-91 New Parents Network Information File
We currently offer seven national message forums that are broad in
scope and offer great parenting interaction.
1) NPN SysOp Support
2) NPN Bulletin Information
3) NPN Public Discussion Forum
4) NPN Father's Forum
5) NPN Mother's Forum
6) NPN Alternative Parenting
7) NPN Safety Forum
New Parents Network started as a National BBS in Tucson Arizona and is
available 24 hours a day. The BBS allows immediate access to all
first time callers following a new user questionnaire. If you'd like
to call the New Parents Network BBS for further information, call:
FidoNews 8-52 Page 13 30 Dec 1991
1-602-326-9345
24 hours a day
1200 - 9600 Baud 8,N,1
System IBM MS-DOS
Software - RemoteAccess 1.10+ - FrontDoor 2.02 NC
SysOp / Founder and Executive Director - Karen Storek Lange
Voice 1-602-327-1451
New Parents Network is trade marked and trade named. All facets of
the New Parents Network are protected by copyright (c) 1991. New
Parents Network is a Social & Service Information Provider and is a
Non-Profit Organization.
Ken Salois
New Parents National Network Coordinator
1:300/21@FidoNet
79:300/21@NPNet
---
END
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fredric L. Rice
The Skeptic Tank, 1:102/901.0
The HAM Radio Packet message environment now interfaces to the Fido
Network through this system by virtue of the Echo Mail Conference:
SC_HAMPK. Moderated by Tony Lane (1:102/833.0), this conference is
exported into the HAM world to WB6YMH.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA.FIDONET.
If you have access to a Packet system, you can send mail into the
Southern California area by addressing all messages to:
KC6EFH@WB6YMH.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA.FIDONET
If the first line of your message begins with a FidoNet mailing
address, your message will be forwarded to the FidoNet system so long as
its address is in the Southern California area or an area which a
partcipating FidoNet system currently interfaces directly to. If your
message does not contain a FidoNet address, it will be placed into the
SC_HAMPK Echo Mail Conference. Once technical aspects have been through
a peer review board, Usenet may be included in SC_HAMPK.
If anyone is interested in details, contact either myself or Tony
Lane. If you would like to review the gateway software, an initial
release, which is not technically solid yet, is available for File
Requests from my system as FIDO-HAM.LZH. As usually is the case, my
source code is included so that it may be expanded upon and corrected.
This is the work of several software engineers and hardware demi-
gods and uses resources which the F.C.C. regulates with a passion.
Because of these facts, certain subjects will be sensored out-right so
that the radio licenses of the HAM operators are secured. [Note: It was
known that the, well, 'unenlightened?', would argue against takeing
reasonable cautions about what the F.C.C. would consider to be
FidoNews 8-52 Page 14 30 Dec 1991
pronographic in a previous FidoNews. HAMs will not take such an idiotic
attitude. Packet security is doubly tight about such issues as each
individuals station is _licensed_. The second version of Fido-Ham
employs word searches and will mark messages on hold for review in some
cases.]
Fredric Rice.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Brigadoon Village Network
Why why why did you say that
Why why why did you walk over there
Why why why did the girl in the shadows beckon me
Why why why am I here
Because you said: promise me you won't fade away
Fade away
Fade away....
Oh run run run... let it run itself out
Let the light in
Let the light come in and shine on the floor
Let it lift itself to your hair
Let the insanity bring you joy
Joy
Joy...
Yes, oh yes I told you
I promised you I would not turn away
And I won't
No I won't
I won't...
If I seem sad
If I seem too badly off
It will end now
End now
Yes now I will be dancing with the light
I am the light
And I cannot leave
Cannot leave
Cannot leave...
---------------------------------------
For info on Brigadoon.
FREQ: BRIGADOON
Modem supported: USR HST DS
V32bis V42bis
FidoNews 8-52 Page 15 30 Dec 1991
From: 1:325/101.0 @FidoNet
If you would like to try it first, then FREQ the magic name
TRYBRIG which will get you NODELIST.TXT. (You don't need to
FREQ this if you FREQ BRIGADOON)
as always you can always call: 1-802-453-3316
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An apparent FidoNet Technical Specification incompatability problem
by
Brice Fleckenstein
1:231/190
From: FTS-0001
Version: 015
Date: 30-Aug-90
2. Levels of Compliance
This documents represents the most basic FidoNet implementation. A
future document will define well tested extensions which are optional
but provide sufficient additional function that implementors should
seriously consider them. SEAdog(tm), from System Enhancement
Associates, is an excellent example of such an extended FidoNet
implementation.
(Notice there is NOTHING here that specifies that a future standard
INHERENTLY overrides FTS-0001, but rather adds OPTIONAL EXTENSIONS to
FTS-0001. Therefore, FTS-0001 definitions of the information in a
message packet remain in effect for ALL messages. - B.F.)
From FTS-0001:
Message Text
A 'hard' carriage return, 0DH, marks the end of a paragraph, and must
be preserved.
If the first character of a physical line (e.g. the first character of
the message text, or the character immediately after a hard carriage
return (ignoring any linefeeds)) is a ^A (<control-A>, 01H), then that
line is not displayed as it contains control information. The
convention for such control lines is:
FidoNews 8-52 Page 16 30 Dec 1991
o They begin with ^A
o They end at the end of the physical line (i.e. ignore soft <cr>s).
o They begin with a keyword followed by a colon.
o The keywords are uniquely assigned to applications.
o They keyword/colon pair is followed by application specific data.
(Notice the definition of an information line here - this definition
fits a "SEEN-BY" line EXACTLY, just like it fits a PATH line or a TOPT
line or a INTL line. - B.F.)
From: FTS-0004 EchoMail Specification
This document is directly derived from the documentation of
The Conference Mail System
By
Bob Hartman
With Bob Hartman's kind consent, copying for the purpose of technological
research and advancement is allowed.
(Which leaves the question of the editor of this document in
considerable doubt - B.F.)
The Conference Mail System is designed to operate in conjunction
with a FidoNet compatible mail server.
(Thus specifying that FTS-0001 DOES effect this document - B.F.)
CONFERENCE MAIL MESSAGE CONTROL INFORMATION
There are five pieces of control information associated with a
Conference Mail message. Some are optional, some are not.
4. Seen-by Lines
There can be many seen-by lines at the end of Conference
Mail messages, and they are the real "meat" of the control
information. They are used to determine the systems to
receive the exported messages. The format of the line is:
SEEN-BY: 132/101 113 136/601 1014/1
FidoNews 8-52 Page 17 30 Dec 1991
The net/node numbers correspond to the net/node numbers of
the systems having already received the message. In this way
a message is never sent to a system twice. In a conference
with many participants the number of seen-by lines can be
very large. This line is added if it is not already a part
of the message, or added to if it already exists, each time
a message is exported to other systems. This is a REQUIRED
field, and Conference Mail will not function correctly if
this field is not put in place by other Echomail compatible
programs.
(Note the definition of a SEEN-BY line as a control information line -
an EXACT corespondance to the terminology used in FTS-0001.
Also note the less-then-rigid definitions used throughout this document
- sorry, Bob, you're a good programmer but a poor technical
documentation writer. - B.F.)
Refering to the original ConfMail docs that FTS-0004 was BASED on, I
find the following option listed:
-K
Use the International FidoNet Association (IFNA) endorsed
"kludge" of hiding the AREA and SEEN-BY lines behind a
Control-A character. This option should not be used by
systems which must communicate with older echomail
compatable systems.
(Note that this is SPECIFICALLY mentioned as being a bad idea when
talking to OLD EchoMail systems - the implication is that NEW and/or
CURRENT EchoMail systems SHOULD HANDLE A "hidden" SEEN-BY and/or AREA
line properly. -B.F.)
End of document referances.
It would appear to me that there is a DEFINITE conflict in the current
set of FidoNet specifications here, and that the AUTHOR of FTS-0004
INTENDED that "hidden SEEN-BYs" should become the NORM in FidoNet, per
their status as a "control information" line per FTS-0001's definition
of such.
It also appears to me that Bob Hartman is the current "final authority"
on the subject, and FTSC should get a WRITTEN clarification from him
A.S.A.P. (preferably in the form of a FTS-0004 re-written SPEFICICALLY
AS A SPECIFICATION rather than "cut and pasted" from the ConfMail
documentation).
FidoNews 8-52 Page 18 30 Dec 1991
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 8-52 Page 19 30 Dec 1991
======================================================================
RANTS AND FLAMES
======================================================================
_(*#$_(*@#(* (*^$+)#(%&+| #$)%(&*#_$ @_#( @$
^@#+)(#&%$*+)$%&*+$*%&#@(@#_|)*%|)#%&)#*%&+(@#&*_+(@#*^&@###
*&#_($*&#$_(*#&$_(#*$&$ _(#$*#$+)#($&*+#)$ &#+$*&#
()*&#$_(&^#$_(#*$_#($^&#_$(^&#_$(&^#$_(&#^ damn right _(#^&$_(#^&
$*&#$_+(* #)$&(%($%+)($%*+$)%($* it's ugly _#&%^# &
#($_*#$_ FidoNet (*$&%_@#_(*&@#_(@*#&_ @#_(*&@#_(*
)*&#$ Flames *^$+)#(% (not for the timid) @_#(
(*#$_(*^@#+) and #_|)*% &+(@#&*_+(@#*^&@###
(#$*&#_($*&#$_(*#&$_(#* Rants *&+#$*&#+$*&#
)*&#$_(a regular feature)^&#_$(&^#$_ $^&#$_(#^
(*^#$_*#^&$)*#&$^%)#*$&^_#($*^&#_($ Section #&%^_
_(*#&$_(#* #($*& #$* _(*&@#_(@*# *&@#_(*&
)&*+_)*&+)*&+))&*(*&
(*&_(*&_(*&
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Decker
1:154/8
SOMETHING ROTTEN IN THE SKEPTIC TANK
I'd like to take a moment to protest the inclusion of a
defamatory statement in Fidonews 8-49. The statement occurred
the the article "The Skeptic Tank" by Fredric L. Rice, in which
he encourages sysops to be more aware of the types of files
they have available on their systems. I have no problem with
anything that was said in the article EXCEPT for this one
statement:
"And then there is another method of attack that we should
guard against. So many christians, out of a love for their
jesus, would have us remove the pronographic materials from our
systems upon pain of lawsuit if their holy and untried children
were ever to be caught panting over a GIF file displayed on
their screens."
First of all, there is an obvious intent to show disrespect to
Christians by the lack of capitalization of the term
"Christian" and the name of "Jesus". Even secular books and
articles capitalize those properly. I notice that Mr. Rice
managed to capitalize his own name properly at the top and
bottom of the article, so it's not as though he's unaware of
the rules for capitalization of proper names.
FidoNews 8-52 Page 20 30 Dec 1991
And second, the paragraph implies that it is only Christians
who are concerned about the influence of pornography,
especially upon children. The fallacy of that thinking should
be obvious, but in any case, it's an unsubstantiated slur
against a particular religious group. It reminds me of an
article that appeared in the local newspaper which accused
Christians of removing copies of an atheistic magazine (the
magazine actually has the word "Atheist" in the title) from the
local public library, despite the fact that no one had ever
been caught or charged with the removal of the magazines.
Apparently the writer of the article had forgotten (or ignored)
the fact that one of the basic tenets of the Christian religion
is the commandment, "Thou shalt not steal." I suggested that
it could just as easily have been a case of someone wanting to
read the magazine, but not be observed reading it in the
library (this IS a small town).
There are numerous groups and individuals, some religious (not
necessarily Christian, however), some involved in law
enforcement, and others that for whatever reason feel that
pornography is harmful to our society. I'm not for a moment
denying that many Christians feel this way, but to suggest that
it is ONLY Christians that are opposed to pornography is to
mis-state the facts. When coupled with the deliberate lack of
capitalization noted above, I feel that the above quoted
paragraph was written in such as way as to be deliberately
offensive to Christians, and to manipulate others into feeling
resentment toward members of the Christian faith. I'm
surprised that the editor allowed it to be printed verbatim,
without at least correcting the capitalization.
(Seriously, Tom, are you not aware that there has been a lot of
Christian bashing in Fidonews in the last few months? Would
you allow the bashing of other groups in this manner? If not,
then why the discriminatory treatment?)
That said, I will agree that there are many state and federal
laws that prohibit or restrict the distribution of pornography
in various ways. Whether you agree with them or not, the laws
currently exist, and if you are a sysop you violate those laws
at your own peril. If you believe that there should be fewer
restrictions on the distribution of pornography, you certaily
have the right to lobby your lawmakers to that effect.
However, I hope you'll appreciate the fact that those who may
disagree with you, regardless of religion (or lack thereof)
also have the right to make their voices heard, and to insist
that existing laws be enforced. You might also consider that
some of the folks who are against pornography are not against
it simply because of blind religious faith, or because they
want to spoil your fun, but because they are aware of the
influence of pornography in various sex crimes, including but
not limited to the torture and murder of children.
FidoNews 8-52 Page 21 30 Dec 1991
How would you feel if you knew that someone downloaded a .GIF
file from your BBS and printed it out on a high-quality
printer, and then it was found at the scene of a rape or child
molestation? Just something to think about. And if THAT
doesn't bother you, you might want to give some thought to the
fact that many .GIF's are scanned in from copyrighted
publications, so if you carry .GIF's on your BBS, chances are
that at least a few of them violate someone's copyright. And,
in some cases it may be much easier for a prosecutor to prove
copyright infringement than to get a court to agree that
certain images are pornographic.
Parting comment: Why is it that the folks who are generally so
quick to defend "freedom of speech" as an absolute right, are
often among the first to try and deny that right to those who
disagree with them?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Housebroken II
Billy Cash III - Programmer's Connection BBS - 1:226/70.0
A short reply to Daniel Tobias' article about a previous piece I
published in FidoNews. He states that
"... there is a ... category of material which can
pose legal trouble for a sysop. This is libelous text,
material that defames a person. Somebody who writes material
of this nature, and a sysop who allows his system to be used
in the dissemination of such things, could be the subject of
a lawsuit in today's litigious climate."
Later he comments that
"Unfortunately, a possible example of such conduct has
been provided to the FidoNews audience in the form of Billy
Cash's (1:226/70.0) response to Rice."
Well, Mr. Tobias, if this is true, and I am "guilty" of libel, then
so is every sysop in the world receiving this newsletter. Including
Mr. Tobias.
It must be taken into account, however, whether or not libel was
actually committed. In the original article, Mr. Rice mentioned that
he had "adult" materials on his bulletin board. If this is the case,
and he reveals this to the entire planet, then how can my restatement
of the fact be libel?
I will reiterate what I have been saying all along. People who hide
objectionable material and get caught can't complain. It is this
type of sysop that causes big headlines -- not the SaudiNet sysop, or
the veterans' echo sysop.
FidoNews 8-52 Page 22 30 Dec 1991
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Cleaning out the dog house.." - part III
By Scott Neville - The Fourth Dimension BBS - 3:635/553
In responce to Billy Cash, I think he has a rather pompous view of
amatuer bulletin board systems.
You say that nobody will be moving heaven amd earth to remove you for a
long time. How can you say that? You dont know that some official
people might not come barging into your house and seize all of your
computer gear, be they from the government or telephone company. You
really have no idea what will happen, and Im sure that it happens to.
Good sysops dont need to worry about this? Who are you trying to kid?
You can do whatever you like, but unless you sit watching your BBS 24
hours a day, you cannot guarentee that there wont be commercial
programs uploaded to your system, no matter how "good" you think you
are. Furthermore, you blame Fred Rice for any bad name given to the BBS
community? Thats absurd. The only statement he has made on the matter
has been constructive to try and stop the illegal going-ons that can
happen in the electronic media and you blame him.
I have nothing to hide myself and Im sure Mr Rice doesnt either, but if
you are found with a copy of a commercial program on your system, you
(not the user who uploaded it) are in direct breach of the copyright
laws. I think thats something worth taking notice of, rather than
criticising.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BY Scott Neville P.O. Box 1077
Ph : 61-3-560-9292 Glen Waverley
3:635/553 (Fido) Victoria
11:9000/0 (ClariNet) Australia 3150
Meat Pies, Fosters Beer and Universal Mayhem.
After Fred Rice wrote his article entitled "Death throws with much
twitching" (very creative Fred), reguarding the laying to rest of the
Universal Mayhem online game, many of the Australian sysops turned to
me, being the one who distributes the game in Australia. It was taken
many years ago and distributed by the network I started (ClariNet) and
is still being continued with today. So what is Universal Mayhem? It is
quite possibly the most complicated online game ever written, but also
the most addictive and competative if the players take the time to
learn how to play it well. You assume the role of a space trader,
caught in the constant race for power over your opponants. The ultimate
goal is to assemble the parts of the slaver death weapon that was
dismantled many moons ago. To this day I dont believe that anyone has
ever managed this feat on any system in the world. The supporting echo
conference (MAYHEM) is being distributed, along with export ships for
the remote player function of the game to anyone who asks and calls in
FidoNews 8-52 Page 23 30 Dec 1991
for them. Although Fred has decided that he will not continue writing
the game, ClariNet (and people of other nets) are welcome to the echo
and the latest version that is available to me. In the future I hope to
see more players and updates. I hope to organise some updates to the
program to keep it coming up with more surprises.
Mayhem is not dead. It is just beginning.
To anyone who wants more information on ClariNet or to connect to the
mayhem echo or take remote ships, call/message/write to the above
address. There may be a local ClariNet BBS taking them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 8-52 Page 24 30 Dec 1991
======================================================================
LATEST VERSIONS
======================================================================
Latest Greatest SoftWare Versions
Last Update: 12/25/91 - Season's Greetings!!!! /df/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MS-DOS Systems
--------------
BBS Software NodeList Utilities Compression
Name Version Name Version Utilities
-------------------- -------------------- Name Version
Aurora 1.32b EditNL 4.00 --------------------
DMG 2.93 FDND 1.10 ARC 7.12
DreamBBS 1.05 MakeNL 2.31 ARJ 2.20
Fido/FidoNet 12.21 Parselst 1.33 LHA 2.13
Genesis Deluxe 3.2 Prune 1.40 PAK 2.51
GSBBS 3.02 SysNL 3.14 PKPak 3.61
Kitten 1.01 XlatList 2.90 PKZip 1.10
Lynx 1.30 XlaxNode/Diff 2.53
Maximus-CBCS 2.00
Merlin 1.39n
Opus 1.73a* Other Utilities(A-M) Other Utilities(N-Z)
Oracomm 5.M.6P@ Name Version Name Version
Oracomm Plus 6.E@ -------------------- --------------------
PCBoard 14.5a 2DAPoint 1.50* Netsex 2.00b
Phoenix 1.07* ARCAsim 2.31 OFFLINE 1.32@
ProBoard 1.20* ARCmail 2.07 Oliver 1.0a
QuickBBS 2.75 Areafix 1.20 PKInsert 7.00
RBBS 17.3b ConfMail 4.00 PolyXarc 2.1a
RemoteAccess 1.10 Crossnet 1.5 QM 1.00a
SimplexBBS 1.05 DOMAIN 1.42 QSort 4.04
SLBBS 2.15C* DEMM 1.06 RAD Plus 2.11@
Socrates 1.11 DGMM 1.06 Raid 1.00
SuperBBS 1.12* DOMAIN 1.42 RBBSMail 18.0@
SuperComm 0.99@ EEngine 0.32 ScanToss 1.28
TAG 2.5g EMM 2.11* ScMail 1.00@
TBBS 2.1 EZPoint 2.1 ScEdit 1.12@
TComm/TCommNet 3.4 4Dog/4DMatrix 1.18 Sirius 1.0x
Telegard 2.5 FGroup 1.00 SLMail 2.15C
TPBoard 6.1 FNPGate 2.70 SquishMail 1.00
TriTel 2.0* GateWorks 3.06e StarLink 1.01
WildCat! 2.55 GMail 2.05 TagMail 2.41
WWIV 4.20 GMD 3.10 TCOMMail 2.2
XBBS 1.77 GMM 1.21 Telemail 1.27
GoldEd 2.31p TGroup 1.13
GROUP 2.23 TIRES 3.11@
Network Mailers GUS 1.40 TMail 1.21
Name Version Harvey's Robot 4.10@ TosScan 1.00
-------------------- HeadEdit 1.18 UFGATE 1.03
BinkleyTerm 2.50 HLIST 1.09@ VPurge 4.09e
D'Bridge 1.30 IMAIL 1.20 WildMail 2.00
Dreamer 1.06 InterPCB 1.31 XRS 4.99
Dutchie 2.90c Lola 1.01d XST 2.3e
FidoNews 8-52 Page 25 30 Dec 1991
FrontDoor 2.02 Mosaic 1.00b@ ZmailH 1.25
InterMail 2.01 MSG 4.2 ZSX 2.40
Milqtoast 1.00 MSGED 2.06
PreNM 1.48 MsgLnk 1.0c
SEAdog 4.60 MsgMstr 2.03a
SEAmail 1.01 MsgNum 4.16d
TIMS 1.0(mod8) MSGTOSS 1.3
OS/2 Systems
------------
BBS Software Other Utilities(A-M Other Utilities(N-Z)
Name Version Name Version Name Version
-------------------- -------------------- --------------------
Kitten 1.01 ARC 7.12 oMMM 1.52
Maximus-CBCS 2.00 ARC2 6.01 Omail 3.1
SimplexBBS 1.04.02+ ConfMail 4.00 Parselst 1.33
EchoStat 6.0 PKZip 1.02
EZPoint 2.1 PMSnoop 1.30
Network Mailers FGroup 1.00 PolyXOS2 2.1a
Name Version GROUP 2.23 QSort 2.1
-------------------- LH2 2.11 Raid 1.0
BinkleyTerm 2.50 MSG 4.2 Remapper 1.2
BinkleyTerm(S) 2.50 MsgEd 2.06c SquishMail 1.00
BinkleyTerm/2-MT MsgLink 1.0c Tick 2.0
1.40.02 MsgNum 4.16d VPurge 4.09e
SEAmail 1.01
Xenix/Unix 386
--------------
BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities
Name Version Name Version Name Version
-------------------- -------------------- --------------------
BinkleyTerm 2.32b ARC 5.21
C-LHARC 1.00
MsgEd 2.06
|Contact: Jon Hogan-uran 3:711/909, | MSGLINK 1.01
|Willy Paine 1:343/15 or Eddy van Loo| oMMM 1.42
|2:285/406 | Omail 1.00
ParseLst 1.32
Unzip 3.10
VPurge 4.08
Zoo 2.01
QNX
---
FidoNews 8-52 Page 26 30 Dec 1991
BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities
Name Version Name Version Name Version
-------------------- -------------------- --------------------
QTach2 1.09 QMM 0.50s Kermit 2.03
QCP 1.02
NodeList Utilities Archive Utilities QSave 3.6
Name Version Name Version QTTSysop 1.07.1
-------------------- -------------------- SeaLink 1.05
QNode 2.09 Arc 6.02 XModem 1.00
LH 1.00.2 YModem 1.01
Unzip 2.01 ZModem 0.02f
Zoo 2.01
Apple II
--------
BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities
Name Version Name Version Name Version
-------------------- -------------------- --------------------
DDBBS + 8.0* Fruity Dog 2.0 deARC2e 2.1
GBBS Pro 2.1 ProSel 8.70*
ShrinkIt 3.30*
|Contact: Dennis McClain-Furmanski 1:275/42| ShrinkIt GS 1.04
Apple CP/M
----------
BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities
Name Version Name Version Name Version
-------------------- -------------------- --------------------
Daisy 2j Daisy Mailer 0.38 Filer 2-D
MsgUtil 2.5
Nodecomp 0.37
PackUser 4
UNARC.Com 1.20
Macintosh
---------
BBS Software Network Mailers Other Software
Name Version Name Version Name Version
-------------------- -------------------- --------------------
FBBS 0.91 Copernicus 1.0 ArcMac 1.3
Hermes 1.6.1 Tabby 2.2 AreaFix 1.6
Mansion 7.15 Compact Pro 1.30
Precision Sys. 0.95b EventMeister 1.0
Red Ryder Host 2.1 Export 3.21
Telefinder Host Import 3.2
FidoNews 8-52 Page 27 30 Dec 1991
2.12T10 LHARC 0.41
MacArd 0.04
Mantissa 3.21
Point System Mehitable 2.0
Software OriginatorII 2.0
Name Version PreStamp 3.2
-------------------- StuffIt Classic 1.6
Copernicus 1.00 SunDial 3.2
CounterPoint 1.09 TExport 1.92
MacWoof 1.1 TimeStamp 1.6
TImport 1.92
Tset 1.3
TSort 1.0
UNZIP 1.02c
Zenith 1.5
Zip Extract 0.10
Amiga
-----
BBS Software Network Mailers Other Software
Name Version Name Version Name Version
-------------------- -------------------- --------------------
4D-BBS 1.65@ BinkleyTerm 1.00 Areafix 1.48
DLG Pro. 0.96b TrapDoor 1.80 AReceipt 1.5
Falcon CBCS 1.00 WelMat 0.44 ChameleonEdit 0.11
Paragon 2.082+ ConfMail 1.12
TransAmiga 1.07 ElectricHerald 1.66
XenoLink 1.0 Compression FileMgr 2.08
Utilities GCChost 3.6b
Name Version Login 0.18
NodeList Utilities -------------------- MessageFilter 1.52
Name Version AmigArc 0.23 Message View 1.12
-------------------- booz 1.01 oMMM 1.50
ParseLst 1.66 LHARC 1.30 PolyXAmy 2.02
Skyparse 2.30 LZ 1.92 RMB 1.30
TrapList 1.40 PKAX 1.00 Roof 46.15
UnZip 4.1 RoboWriter 1.02
Zippy (Unzip) 1.25 Rsh 4.07a
Zoo 2.01 Tick 0.75
TrapToss 1.20
|Contact: Maximilian Hantsch 2:310/6| Yuck! 2.02
Atari ST/TT
-----------
BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities
Name Version Name Version Name Version
-------------------- -------------------- --------------------
FIDOdoor/ST 2.5.1 BinkleyTerm 2.40n9 ApplyList 1.00@
FiFo 2.1v The Box 1.20 Burep 1.1
LED ST 1.00 ComScan 1.04
MSGED 1.99 ConfMail 4.10
QuickBBS/ST 1.04 NodeList Utilities Echoscan 1.10
FidoNews 8-52 Page 28 30 Dec 1991
Name Version FDrenum 2.5.2
-------------------- FastPack 1.20
Compression ParseList 1.30 Import 1.14
Utilities EchoFix 1.20 oMMM 1.40
Name Version sTICK/Hatch 5.50 Pack 1.00
-------------------- Trenum 0.10
ARC 6.02
LHARC 2.01e
PackConvert
STZIP
UnJARST 2.00
WhatArc 2.02
Archimedes
----------
BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities
Name Version Name Version Name Version
-------------------- -------------------- --------------------
ARCbbs 1.44 BinkleyTerm 2.03 ARC 1.03
BatchPacker 1.00
ParseLst 1.30
!Spark 2.00d
Unzip 2.1TH
Tandy Color Computer 3 (OS-9 Level II)
--------------------------------------
BBS Software Compression Utility Other Utilities
Name Version Name Version Name Version
-------------------- -------------------- --------------------
RiBBS 2.02 OS9ARC (Arc) 1.0 Ascan 1.2
OS9ARC (Dearc) 1.0 AutoFRL 2.0
DEARC CKARC 1.1
UNZIP 3.10 EchoCheck 1.01
FReq 2.5a
LookNode 2.00
ParseLST
RList 1.03
RTick 2.00
UnSeen 1.1
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Key: + - Netmail Capable (Doesn't Require Additional Mailer Software)
* - Recently Updated Version
@ - New Addition
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
FidoNews 8-52 Page 29 30 Dec 1991
The Complete List is Available For FReq as VERSIONS from 1:103/250
Utility Authors: Please help keep this list up to date by reporting
all new versions to 1:103/250 in this format:
1) Software Name & Version 2) FileName.Ext
3) Support Node Address 4) Support BBS Phone Number
Note: It is not our intent to list all utilities here, only those
which verge on necessity. If you want it updated in the next
FidoNews, get it to me by Thursday evening.
--David French, 1:103/250
----------------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 8-52 Page 30 30 Dec 1991
======================================================================
FIDONEWS INFORMATION
======================================================================
------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION ----------------
Editors: Tom Jennings, Tim Pozar
Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell, Vince Periello
Special thanks to Ken Kaplan, 1:100/22, aka Fido #22
"FidoNews" BBS
FidoNet 1:1/1
Internet fidonews@fidonews.fidonet.org
BBS (415)-863-2739 (9600 HST/V32)
(Postal Service mailing address)
FidoNews
Box 77731
San Francisco
CA 94107 USA
Published weekly by and for the Members of the FidoNet international
amateur electronic mail system. It is a compilation of individual
articles contributed by their authors or their authorized agents. The
contribution of articles to this compilation does not diminish the
rights of the authors. Opinions expressed in these articles are those
of the authors and not necessarily those of FidoNews.
FidoNews is copyright 1991 Fido Software. All rights reserved.
Duplication and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes
only. For use in other circumstances, please contact FidoNews (we're
easy).
OBTAINING COPIES: FidoNews in electronic form may be obtained from
the FidoNews BBS via manual download or Wazoo FileRequest, or from
various sites in the FidoNet and via uucp. PRINTED COPIES mailed
may be obtained from Fido Software for $5.00US each PostPaid First
Class within North America, or $7.00US elsewhere, mailed Air Mail.
(US funds drawn upon a US bank only.)
Periodic subscriptions are not available at this time; if enough
people request it I will implement it.
SUBMISSIONS: You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in
FidoNews. Article submission requirements are contained in the file
ARTSPEC.DOC, available from the FidoNews BBS, or Wazoo filerequestable
from 1:1/1 as file "ARTSPEC.DOC".
FidoNews 8-52 Page 31 30 Dec 1991
"Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered
trademarks of Tom Jennings of Fido Software, Box 77731, San Francisco
CA 94107, USA and are used with permission.
-- END
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink