[telnet] Re: the future and popularity of the BBS
- From: "Justin Ekis" <jekis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <telnet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 01:37:21 -0700
Hello.
You make some good points, but there are just a few I'd like to reply to.
First, about all the systems having the same interface. That's a problem,
but that falls on the sysops and not synchronet. It's still so easy to make
your system stand out.
With all the work some sysops do on their boards you'd think there wouldn't
be a problem downloading a custom menu set and changing the default command
shell in scfg. Synchronet comes with six other shells besides the default
synchronet classic and dozens more are available from the ftp site, but
nobody will change the default shell. For example logging into my board will
bring you to a menu which looks like the old PCBoard system.
So even if you're not in the mood or don't know how to customize your own
menu files there's no excuse for not doing something.
How it stands now if it weren't for the title bar which displays the address
you're connected to you can't tell most apart and it's a shame.
Ok, that rant's over.
Most good systems don't ask for address info any longer, just email address
and city/state. A few still ask all the questions but not many.
I don't quite understand this statement.
Synchronet and Wildcat! are killing
> themselves. Why should I bother to login to a BBS when I can just use
> anonymous ftp?
If all you're looking for is file downloads then I see what you mean, but
BBSs as you know have so much more than just downloads.
Besides, the servers are just alternate ways of accessing parts of the
system.
For example you get your own email address you can use for anything that's
legal. If you just want to read a few messages you just log in with you're
news reader and soon web browser and read that way. I think all the extra
servers will help bring in new users because now you can access it however
you want. It's great for the community.
On time limits. Only an hour? Where? Before I started a board, I used lots
of them so I could play my favorite game. Almost all I saw gave three to six
hours or more.
Sure you could set a local system and play games on it with no time limits,
but honestly what fun is that? BBS doors are designed to be played against
others.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Baechler" <baechler@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <telnet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 11:30 PM
Subject: [telnet] Re: the future and popularity of the BBS
>
> Hello. First, about email via telnet. It is very unsecure. That is why
> there are warnings on the major web sites about not sending your credit
> card via email. Everything is sent in cleartext in most cases, but with
> some ISPs you can use SSL. One example is myrealbox.com. If you leave
> Eudora's default setting alone, it automatically uses SSL for
> download. That is fine but it is very, very slow. It takes about five
> minutes for a short message to download.
>
> Second, I have not read the interview but I have read similar things from
> others before. We might as well face reality though. BBSs are basically
> dead. Out of the entire Internet and millions of people who use it, there
> are about 500 BBSs in all, and in most cases one is just like another.
The
> majority run Synchronet. I know a bit about it because I have used
> it. Any BBS I telnet to is basically the same because of the
> interface. In the old days, there was no dominating software. Just in my
> calling area there was Telegard, Renegade, Wildcat!, Maximus,
RemoteAccess,
> PCBoard, and others. There was one Synchronet system for awhile but it
did
> not last long.
>
> With that said, I agree with you that the biggest thing which could help
is
> informing others of the existance of BBSs and what they are like. In that
> regard we have the same problem as Fidonet, which is why it is basically
> dead also. People like and want the small community atmosphere. I like
to
> know my local sysop. Often the only reason why I would call a BBS is to
> chat with the sysop and nothing else. I passed many pleasant hours that
> way. That is just not practical nowadays, and somewhat impossible for big
> boards running 250 nodes. Also, it is against the nature of the
> Internet. For example, I felt nothing wrong about giving out my name and
> address to local sysops because I implicitly trusted them. Who in their
> right mind would want to give this to a total stranger half a world
> away? Not to mention that anyone between here and there could use packet
> sniffers and discover that information. No thanks. I still trust most of
> them, but there are a lot out there who just want to make a buck (for
> international readers, make easy money) with no concern for privacy.
>
> Finally, we have two other problems. Synchronet and Wildcat! are killing
> themselves. Why should I bother to login to a BBS when I can just use
> anonymous ftp? It is already built in to Synchronet anyway. Besides,
with
> most telnet clients they do not support zmodem transfers. For that
matter,
> why should I subject myself to an hour time limit when I can go to the
web,
> download what I want (and a lot faster), play games, and set up my own
> local system? I can now, for the first time ever, set up any DOS or
> Windows door with no concerns about if it will talk in local mode or
> not. I just fire up my telnet client, telnet to my local system, login as
> sysop and I have no time or credit limits. If I want to play for six
hours
> a day, why not? Meanwhile I have to give some stranger my contact
> information for only an hour per day. Also, even in the BBS community
spam
> is a problem. I signed up for a BBS and gave my email address. I got
> their newsletter which I did not want. I consider that spam since I
> selected the "no" option.
>
> In one way, the Internet can duplicate the community spirit. Even though
> Fidonet is just barely limping along, email lists are thriving and there
> are lots of free servers hosting them. Of course a list depends on its'
> moderator or lack thereof. I moderate this list just as I would a Fidonet
> echo. I was never an echo moderator but I always wanted to be one. I let
> subscribers freely post and only take action if necessary. I could set
the
> list to make me manually approve all posts or not allow posts at all.
With
> usenet, everything is a big free-for-all with no rules at all. It is
> impossible to moderate and flame wars are common. The best thing Fidonet
> could do is switch entirely to a mailing list based system and forget
> trying to move traffic via traditional dial-up lines. They could still
> have zone gates which would bundle the mailing lists into packets for
> overseas distribution but that would be it. In other words, many people
in
> Europe and Asia do still use Fidonet. For them, it would be up to their
> local nets or regions to pull from central zonegates via dial-up, ftp,
> telnet or something else and to pass those packets along a chain, similar
> to how it is done now. However, instead of echos where only Fidonet
system
> can join, there would be mailing lists with the same human moderators as
we
> would expect from Fido and anyone could join. They could put spam filters
> in place as well. However, this would never happen since the entire
> structure of Fidonet would have to be changed. To a point this is
> happening, echos are gated to mailing lists. What I mean is that echos
> would disappear entirely and everything would be Internet-based. Netmail
> could still be done as always, with each net responsible for their own
> Internet gateway if they want one or paying connect charges otherwise.
>
> Just for a laugh, read the 1985 Fidonews newsletters. You can read all
> about 300 and 1200 BPS modems and how to get them to work with Fido. In
> those days, the modems would ring back the caller. In other words, I
would
> call your BBS and hang up. Your modem would have to call me back and my
> modem would answer the call. Ah well.
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe from the telnet list, send a blank message to
telnet-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the subject. Make sure
this is sent from your actual subscribed email address. To contact the list
owner, write to telnet-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx This list's home page is at
<http://members.cox.net/~baechler/>.
---
To unsubscribe from the telnet list, send a blank message to
telnet-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "unsubscribe" in the subject. Make sure this
is sent from your actual subscribed email address. To contact the list owner,
write to telnet-admin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx This list's home page is at
<http://members.cox.net/~baechler/>.
Other related posts:
