Subj : Movies
To   : Wilfred van Velzen
From : August Abolins
Date : Sat Sep 04 2021 20:11:00

Hello Wilfred!

** On Saturday 04.09.21 - 10:45, you wrote to me:

 WvV>>> That. And the fact that areas can happily exist without being
 WvV>>> elisted...

 AA>> But the elist method makes the process self-serve for a
 AA>> creator/moderator

 WvV> What does this mean?

The initial comms to the bot can be performed at any time, and  
some results would come back within an hour or so.  If it were  
just a "user" requesting to create an echo for a topic of their  
interest they would first have to convince their sysop to go  
through the trouble to create it and spread the word. Whereas,  
the elist-bot method [1] "creates" the echo, [2] establishes a  
pretty standardised message with a description, and [3] gets a  
spot in a .NA file that is distributed to boards everywhere.


 AA>> *and* the existence of an echo is automatically published
 AA>> in its respective .NA file that some bbses refer to see
 AA>> "available" echos.

 WvV> The elist and the NAB (list) are not the same thing. The
 WvV> set of areas in both probably overlap, but are not the
 WvV> same.

Why be burdened over that distinction?  The whole point is to  
announce that an echo exists and anyone, NAB or not, can pick  
it up if they want.


 WvV> And being in either list doesn't automatically mean an
 WvV> area is available at your link. You still have to check
 WvV> the %LIST response.

Noted. At some point people interested in participating in an  
echo need to consult with their sysop, or a sysop has to  
perform the %LIST and request to add it anyway.  But the  
initial elist-bot process is something anyone could do to get  
something started at their convenience.

Why was the elist-bot system even built in the first place if  
it wasn't intended to provide a more organized way to create  
and announce the existence of echos?


--
  ../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.50
 * Origin: Mobile? Join CHAT here: https://tinyurl.com/y5k7tsla (1:153/757.21)

.