Subj : only check/reply to messages every 2 months or so? To : Charles Pierson From : August Abolins Date : Fri Jan 01 2021 15:01:00 Hello Charles! ** On Friday 01.01.21 - 18:19, Charles Pierson wrote to August Abolins: CP> ..I'm currently carrying around 200 message areas I believe, CP> and unfortunately, this phone doesn't let applications run CP> off of the SD card, so it limits my available space. Offloading to an SD card would be sweet. On my Blackberry, I can establish which storage device any app uses. It's in the overall Settings section of the phone. I don't really need the extra storage that an SD card offers, but decided to configure the camera to stash the pics onto the SD card. The document and music apps can be adjusted too. AA>> CS> BTW, saw some silly dust ups about the telegram bit.. CP> I think a big part of the dust up was a lack of CP> communication. wh8ch is somewhat humourous considering this CP> is a communucation medium. LOL. :) CP> But there has always been complaints about changes to how CP> and where Fidonet traffic is. I'm ok with that. Some initial complaints take the form of concern which are a form of inquiry. But to kick up a dust storm with no suggestion that there are options for educational discussion is sad. CP> "Privacy" concerns just seem to loom larger these days than CP> in the past. There is no provision in Fido technology for privacy. Everything is in the clear. The nature of echomail is open and public discussion. The privacy in netmail is under the discretion of the sysop of the system it passes through - whether it be via email using Juno, a VPS hosted BBS somewhere or whatever. But it may be true that a few more people are tuned to privacy concerns about any communications medium these days. I'd say to those persons if you expect privacy and "control" of your messages, then don't participate in Fidonet. :( But I like the idea of the option of encrypted packets, and systems carrying the "ENC" flag. That, at least is a good indication that things don't necessarily have to remain blatantly in-the-clear if FTN systems are willing to cooperate. AA>> The experiment lost WIFI, X-FILES, NZ_FIDONET, WHAT'S_HOT! AA>> & RETAIL_HORROR ..all good candidates for the independent AA>> chat style of messaging. CP> Again, I still say it was a communication problem. I CP> remember Carol mentioning at least that the link was coming. CP> That's more than those echos you mention above did. True. I got the moderator approvals, but the moderators did not say "wait until we make an announcement". A day or two later, I forwarded the info to Stas, and then a day or two later, Stas worked on getting feeds. The total time for all that took about a week for the 1st echo go live. I think it was nearly 2 weeks before one of the later echos went live. If a moderator was concerned about communication there was plenty of time to achieve that in their own echo. ;) But none of the mods spoke up or raised concerns at the time. CP> Like I was trying to say before during that hooplah, going CP> forward, even after getting moderators permission, take a CP> little time explaining how it works in the echo before going CP> live. But then, do you expect that every time a sysop changes to host their BBS on a new VPS and other "obviously commericial" servers? ;) The Telegram concept simply blew some people's minds when they made assumptions. Misconceptions followed. CP> Yes, there are going to be some users and even sysops CP> opposed to the idea, but they are free to no longer CP> participate in the echo if it bothers them that much. Absolutely. Freedom is wonderful. I am enjoying the Fidonews postings from 30 year ago to comp.org.fidonet. Man.. users and sysops really seemed to care about the progress of the hobby back then. In one of the latest issues was a concern to be expected to carry a specific echo and even the carry the Fidonews newsletter itself. -- ../|ug --- OpenXP 5.0.48 * Origin: Mobile? ASIAN_LINK https://preview.tinyurl.com/y6rwskq (2:221/1.58) .