Three dozen BBSes: Some observations. reddit / bbs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Paco_Smithereens · 2015-10-28 22:47 So in the past few days, curious about how things were, I've connected to three dozen separate systems. What follows is just my opinion. In the past, people have expressed hostility to it; that's fine. But when I started this, I thought, you know, I have a hankering to put up a system of my own. Not now. Much of the following does not apply to people running old BBS packages in emulation or on old systems; just assume if any of the problems I mention here can't be fixed in light of that, I'm explicitly excepting old platforms in my criticisms. Those of you running weird old software, like Heatwave - heatwavebbs.com - are doing God's work. Heatwave, by the way, running on a Myarc Geneve...in TI-99/4a mode. That's downright esoteric. * It *seems like* there are barely more users than there are systems. Even callers (telnetters) to systems tend to be other sysops lending mutual support. This is also the case on the smattering of echoes/message bases I looked at. This is understandable given the historical nature of so many of these boards, but it raises the question: unless I'm bringing up a board on a novel platform (a retro one), what point is there in bringing up another Synchronet when there are plenty of fully functional (and huge amounts of completely unmodified, stock systems) ones out there? I can read messages on any number of them. I am curious - I don't know the answer - whether or not the lack of a user base drags on modern sysops at all, or whether they don't care and just enjoy running a system for historical reasons. Perhaps some of you can answer that. How much does bringing in new users (more specifically: new activity) weigh on your decision to keep your board running year after year? * As to Mystic, an other currently maintained and interesting platform, I just do not have the talent or patience to sit there and set up all of that ANSI. Some of the ones out there are utter feasts for the eyes, and while there's always room for my art, I'm not the one to do that: really, you don't want to see my ANSI and I actually have TheDraw ready to go at any given time. I particularly want to call attention to one of the Mystics I connected to: fluph.zapto.org which is downright beautiful. * That said, one of the problems I run into on several systems is form-before-function problems. One board in question did not contain the message number I was reading, nor even a From: field, so it was impossible to know where I was at in the read process or who was posting at all. Other systems have such elaborate headers and footers that there are maybe 15 lines left for actual message text, making them a pain to read. Such systems make me long for Citadel's economy. There is possibly no BBS software platform more shat upon by (modern) reviewers than Citadel, but a properly run Citadel (where anyone could create rooms) was possibly the most similar thing to reddit in the BBS age. Short, tight headers, hotkeys, and a Floor/Room system allowed for speedy navigation. * Synchronet still only asks for a city and state for location by default -- there is no room for country. This is surprising if only because of how much Synchronet has been updated to accommodate the modern Internet, one major feature of which is being global. Would like to see that field updated. This is a stupid, silly nitpick, I know, but when you call out to a bunch of systems in a row, these little things stick out. Now as someone who ran a BBS before the Internet dominated the online experience, I have certain expectations and certain things I am used to. There are, on the other hand, a whole bunch of old habits which are simply going to turn off newcomers: * There is no standard nomenclature for message board hierarchies, where you have message boards, echoes, bases, and groups. I can't even keep track of what's what from board to board. Most boards - not all, but most - have boards separated by **Network** (though they rarely call that level "Network"), and then...echoes or bases or whatever...within them. Joining and selecting message areas can be confusing unless you're used to one software platform, and even then, only in an unmodified state. I was used to this at one point, but if I'm confused, new users are going to be as well. Another problem is similar to one I experience on my banking site. "Previous" and "Next" or "Newer" and "Older" navigation concepts work better than the all-too-common "Last" verbiage which, to me, says, "take me to the last message -- the last one in the message base" (this is a problem, mainly, on MBSE systems). * The sheer amount of information SysOps demand to get an account borders on ludicrous. No other forum or internet service I am aware of requires the extensive information new user applications on modern BBSes require: Real names, phone numbers, addresses. The question is not whether or not SysOps have a right to request this on their own systems (obviously they do): the question is, rather, whether the benefits of having this information on file outweighs the hostility to privacy it represents. Look: My *co-workers* who I know *in real life* don't even have a lot of this info. Yet, sysops want me to give it to you, who I don't know, over what is in many cases an unencrypted telnet session. If anyone said to me, "Hey I was trying out a BBS but they asked me for my address and phone number and birthdate," I'd tell them not to, explicitly, as I would if any other system on the Internet asked for all that. Some SysOps apparently feel like they have a right to all of the information required for outright identity theft to let you into "their electronic living room." (Several login messages used exactly this metaphor.) It's *another internet server run by a faceless person*, like any web server or forum. Fair to say those are the requirements up front, but I'd advise pretty much everyone against handing that information over to BBSes -- as well as reddit, facebook, Google, and pretty much every other system on the Internet which insists it needs to know all sorts of stuff about you. In more than one case, I used the customary alias (like we all use here on reddit and most places on the Internet), only to be told midway through the new user application process that my real name was required. That's fucking annoying, plain and simple. If you're *really* going to do this, please state it up front. Like on the title screen before I can even type "New" so I can give your system a miss. * Boards which are going to require an entire dossier on new users should put this *up front, immediately*, so as not to waste my time and theirs. Boards which have these forms as legacy remnants of the past should explicitly say, "I don't need this; feel free to make stuff up." Some boards do this: I salute you if you do. * Some boards make a pretty big deal about supporting SSH and web interfaces and being wicked-modern in every sense yet *limit people to eight character passwords.* I have to go through the annoyance of re- configuring my random password generator in my wallet to accommodate this ancient limit. We may not have much choice with old software -- I get that. Modern software needs to get rid of this limit entirely. I have a hard time believing some schmuck has enough time on his hands to try to brute force a BBS password, but larger passwords on modern hardware can be had *for free.* I'd really like to see currently- maintained systems fix this limitation. * Provide guidance for code page selections. Most oldsters know what this means but it is going to be confusing to anyone new. The "do you see color" and "do you see a line here" dialogs are still the best means to this end. Again, I get that retroBBS software has conventions we're stuck with but anything new should help in this selection. * Entire networks, or massive swaths of them, seem dead or mostly dead. While this ordinarily wouldn't or shouldn't matter, it still breaks up common subject areas (think "HAM RADIO") into multiple networks unnecessarily. There may be really good reasons to duplicate subject areas from network to network (an example might be a political debate echo, where one network is all pissy about profanity, and another isn't.) Still, I can't help but feel a lot of the duplication of subject areas could stand some consolidation. I feel the same way about reddit, incidentally. By all means, "fork" a community if you need to, but only do this if there's a good reason to. Otherwise it just leads to atomization, less activity, and more effort for people interested in these topics. Echo lists should ideally show how many messages are in the echo before I waste my time [J]oining them. There are a whole lot of echoes on various networks with zero messages, and they just make navigating through echo lists a pain. * There is the phenomenon of unmodded Synchronets dominating what is left of the BBS scene (and for good reason -- it's a good package). I can understand the desire to run your own board as a hobby, but if you want any kind of differentiation, at least pretty-up Synchronet's tired default menus, messages, and so on. I can read DOVEnet anywhere. If I'm going to use your board, there has to be something - anything - to differentiate it from others (ideally message and file content, but I'll take a nice look and feel). Also there are a bunch of legacy functions in BBS software which don't seem to serve much point anymore, and while for experienced users they can be easily ignored, they "dirty up" already-intimidating menus for newcomers. An example is the ubiquitous "time bank," which had obvious uses in the days of one-line BBSes, but had dubious use on modern, multi-line systems which barely get any traffic anyway. If you don't have doors (for example), it'd make things cleaner if you would get rid of the door option from your menus. Or the criminally under-utilized g-file section. Ditto file bases, and so on. A new user seeing all of these things is just going to get confused. Stuff you use should be there; stuff you don't should be removed. * Several echoes/bases/whatever, and even one or two whole networks I could name, seem outright hostile to...just about everyone. I don't know how to fix this but I do question why I'd wade into a discussion on any of these, where full grown adults are still calling each other "faggots." Then there are hostile Fidonet echoes (see other posts in this subreddit) where I'm simply not going to participate under my real name for fear of being swatted or harrassed. Maybe the answer is we need *yet another* BBS network with better moderation policies. Speaking of which -- this seems excessive given the number of users and the amount of subject duplication this entails. I'm probably missing a few: * Agoranet * Cryptonet * DoRENET * ILink * Fidonet * DOVENet * MicroNet * SportNet * VQNET * Usenet * LinuxNet * Sysops TechNet * Pascal-net * AdventureNet * JustaXnet * ZyXEL-Net * VirNet * Amiganet * SurvNet * FamilyNet * GamesNet * RMNet * GatorNet I scrubbed my snarky notes I had next to *some* of these, which are just...just awful. I am curious to hear what networks people like to use, and which people think have some life in them. And, perhaps most importantly: which are used by at least moderately civilized human beings. Also please let me know what I've missed. **What I like:** No one in 2015 is going to make running a board a full-time hobby. I get that. But I do like boards that update their system bulletins at least once per month. Some systems even have bulletins saying, "No updates in a long time so just checking in." I like to see this, because a board which is left to rot is just one I'm not going to call back to -- there's no incentive. A hard drive is going to die and the Sysop is just likely not going to bother rebuilding things. I like boards that are cleaned up to an extent that I know whether or not message bases are *actually working*. With some boards, I honestly can't tell. I see dozens of boards with zero messages and I can't tell if these are broken or just inactive. I question whether or not any board/echo which hasn't seen a message in years really belongs in the default listing (maybe put them in another area: "Dormant Echoes"?) I can see a good counterargument to this - keeping all of Fidonet in one place, for example - but what will new users make of it? I like all boards running on retro-platforms, without exception, whatever other deficiencies they have. I like boards that don't want to know my religion and blood type when I'm applying to be a new user. I have seen enough bulletins about troublemakers (what kind of CHUD creates problems for sysops in 2015...seriously...) to understand why Sysops require all of that, but it seems draconian. If indeed sysops don't care much about new users (meaning, people who have never used BBSes before and won't give all that info over because they wouldn't to anyone else on the Internet), it's fair enough. But I also like to know that up front. If your BBS is something like "SUPER UBER CHRISTIAN FAMILY NO CUSSIN BIBLICAL CARTOONS AND BIBLE VERSES BBS" I can suss that out pretty simply up front, but other boards....I'd prefer it if they'd put it before the login prompt. Sorry if this comes across as a bunch of bitching; I mean this constructively. No one needs to cater to me, but at least some of what I write here cannot be helping the BBS community at large, if it wants more users (and I have to believe at least some of you do). *I bitch because I **care**. Lil bit. Anyway.* ---------------------------------------------------------------------- RealDeuce · 2015-10-28 23:46 A lot of these observations have been true for all of BBS history... it's just that now BBSs aren't the only game in town, so they don't attract the users who can't get anything better. From your rant, it sounds like you value the following things in a BBS: 1) Retro computing. 2) Active, moderated message bases. 3) ANSI (or ASCII) art. And that's it... everything else is simply waste of space in your eyes. Only #3 is really something that BBSs have ever done better than almost everything else in the space, and the scene abandoned the BBS decades ago. I think most if not all SysOps know that to get more users, they need to put more effort into their board... but most SysOps are simply not so interested in that that they are willing to put that effort in over a long enough period of time. It's the same as most blogs being not worth reading and most podcasts not being worth listening to. One thing that could provide some value is somewhere to get a list of "BBSs that don't suck" from... gather data from a door that, the fifth (or whatever, not the first) time a user logs into a BBS, begs for a rating and review which is then submitted to an online resource which lets you find BBSs you're interested in... just like app stores. For the retro BBSs, a very short URL that the user can go to to submit a review would be needed. If that thing existed, in about a year or two, you may end up with a useful list. Right now, every BBS list I've encountered is either too inclusive (ie: the [Synchronet BBS List](http://www.synchro.net/sbbslist.html)) or too exclusive (ie: the [Elite BBS list](http://bbslist.bbses.info/))... and none of them include feedback from actual users. But, almost everyone in BBSing now only cares a little bit... which isn't enough to put up a list, write the doors, and keep with it for years. If you care enough to do it, I would care enough to help. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ebookit · 2015-10-29 02:49 Most BBS systems are designed from a 16 bit MS-DOS system that uses MODEMS for users to connect to the BBS. They have been hacked to use Telnet instead. There was a lot of work to port the 16 bit DOS code to 32 bit systems, but the flaws in the BBSes were not fixed. SYSOPS asked for a lot of information like real name, address, phone number, so they could voice validate you and call you on the phone if there was a problem. I remember some BBSes even asked you to photocopy your driver's license and postal mail it in to prove you are 18 years old or older to get access to adult content. I remember the Dark Avenger virus that stole BBS user databases and passwords and store it into GIF files so hackers stole the identity of SYSOPS and Users. They never modernized a BBS and its networks, it is still basically 16 bit technology from the 1980s before the Internet took off. Fidonet was always real name only, for some reason my real name was not allowed to be used on Fidonet because they thought it was a handle. I had to enter a different name in order to use Fidonet. I remember people trolling each other using real names and the like. I ran a Telnet based Sychnonet and tried to add in the software to get on Fidonet and never could get it to work on Linux. Person helping me wanted Root access to my Linux box to make it work, and that wasn't going to happen. I gave up couldn't get people to use my BBS, couldn't get on Fidonet, a lot of BBS Doors like Tradewars can't get reg code anymore and most people have to use a crack for them. Tradewars was rewritten for 32 bits using Delphi as TWGS Tradewars Game Server and they dropped the BBS DOS version a long time ago and no longer sell codes for it. There was a BBS Documentary, but my Facebook group had criticized it for focusing on people more than the technology and didn't even try to get into the dark side of BBSing with the trolls, porn, pirated files, hacking and other stuff. They got more into the legal battle over Zip which had almost nothing to do with BBSing other than it was used as an archive format, and many were used like LHA, Zoo, GZip, PAK, ARC, based on what BBS you logged into each one had a different preferred archive format. Yes everyone did copy everyone else's algorithm for the archive formats because they gave the source code out for free or a donation. They did the same with BBS software you paid for a donation, got a reg code and the source code and other BBS programmers stole from each other. But people who maintain the BBS systems are not interested in modernizing them for the Internet age. They only focus on getting it working on 32 bits, and then fixing any bug that comes up later on. Most of them are volunteers and it is hard to get into their groups and companies to help out and make feature requests and changes. The Internet Forum replaced the BBS, all it requires is email validation and it has evolved to sites like Reddit where it is superior technology to BBS technology. SYSOPS are basically Gods of their BBSes, they often have strict rules and they don't tell you on the login screen and you won't find out what the rules are until you break one of them. I remember one BBS the SYSOP got mad at me for uploading Windows programs for archive, antivirus, and the like. He was DOS or OS/2 only and hated Windows. I didn't really have anything else for upload credit as they already had the DOS and OS/2 versions of those programs, and I had to find GIF files and Text files from other BBSes and upload them for upload credit. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- L1th0 · 2015-10-29 02:58 Looks like you spent some time researching the current status of BBS's. I agree with quite a bit of what you said. I think alot of development problems which you speak of "like time-bank" and "message base setup" are due to most people who run current boards are pulling on the past instead of looking forward and providing direction to make BBS's relevant in today's world. I believe BBS's should start looking to CMS (Content Management System) packages, like Wordpress, and adding these features to make them relevant again. This would be a "web based BBS" of course. A BBS, IMO is a system which hosts games (flash, java, etc) has an internal network/email tosser which connects to other systems to share info, and is customizeable where someone with little computer knowledge can set it up in a matter of minutes in their own home. To answer the question: What point is there in bringing up another Synchronet when there are plenty of fully functional (and huge amounts of completely unmodified, stock systems) ones out there? The answer to this is: 1. You can set up a SynchroNet system in minutes 2. It takes less than 10Mb of space 3. Don't need MySQL database installed for website 4. Supports web CSS 5. Has Built-in e-mail tosser 6. You can network/share messages with other sites and view the threads on the web 7. Supports html/irc/ftp/rlogin/ssh/RSS And probably some items I forgot about. Try to find a comparable software out there which can offer these features. Also, it's not about how many users one has, it's about having a secure portal in your home where "you" have direct control over your data. Further, you can remotely reach back and have access to your data securely at your house. Also, you can set it up as "your portal" putting links of what you like to visit daily. An example is, I can say just go to my portal here to learn more about a CMS BBS philosophy :-): http://asirta.com/about.ssjs Maybe one day a new fire will be lit and and serious investment will be made to redefine the BBS where it has more value in today's internet. I still think BBS's have value and have the potential of being popular again with a little foresight, teamwork, and programming skills. Just my thoughts, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- nolageek · 2015-10-29 17:14 I want to address more of his other points, but I don't have the time at the moment (stupid work!) but I think he has some valid critiques, but like you said - they're mostly nothing new. Most of the users that are finding their way to the scene now are either ex sysops or users who called boards in the past. That nostalgia hits them and they want to run one - either again or for the first time. When I first called boards in the early 90s it was a *lot* of work and resources to run a board (know-how, time, phone lines, etc...) there's nowhere near that much of a barrier anymore. So, when you call a few boards and wonder how hard it is ti run one now, you find it's not that hard to set up. It's customization that gets people - so... lots of stock boards sit around. Plus, many of the boards with amazeball graphics (fluph, black flag, etc..) are affiliated with ACiD, Blocktronics, and other art groups They have people with 20 years of experience making screens for them. The average user just isn't going to be able to sit down and crank out eyepopping ANSI screens. (Lord knows I've tried!) I too would like to see some changes to information that boards collect to include facebook, twitter, non-binary gender, etc.. Maybe a way to include this in message footers if they like, etc.. But a lot of this can be changed if you're willing to dig in code. :) Edit: I forgot a bunch of stuff. :( ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [deleted] · 2015-10-31 18:13 [removed] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [deleted] · 2015-10-31 18:19 [deleted] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- mro_1337 · 2015-10-31 18:25 i agree with deuce's post. regarding bbslist.bbses.info (my site) i set up a series of guidelines for bbs submissions but i think i removed them. i also had people vote on bbses but people got sick of participating. my guidelines are : [1] good art [2] something unique [3] a sysop who cares if they are missing #1 or #2 but not both, i put them on the list. it really is just what i find when i am calling up bbses. i always forward people to the synchronet bbs list or telnetbbsguide if they have done nothing with their system and just want to be on lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- mro_1337 · 2015-10-31 18:27 you can buy a code for tradewars for bbs. john pritchette doesnt turn down $$$ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- mro_1337 · 2015-11-01 00:30 bbses should have their own identity; they shouldnt just be another wordpress plugin. should bbses be easy to setup? i dont think so. you get what you put in. if you put in next to nothing, you have a shitty product. also pushing the retro thing never helps. any of your complaints and suggestions are best addressed to the systems and authors of bbs softwares you ran into. a lot of these changes are easy to implement. reddit is not really a place to create change for bbses. For instance with synchronet, the sysop picks what the system asks the users. for me i have location. you can put your website, or your city, state or your country. and people do. not a problem. Regarding activity we had a REAL bad year. summer is the time when there is a big increase or decrease in activity. this year it was a decrease. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [deleted] · 2015-11-11 00:02 [deleted] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- nolageek · 2015-11-11 00:02 Keep it civilized. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- mro_1337 · 2015-11-14 17:35 you missed the joke ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [deleted] · 2015-11-14 18:28 [deleted] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- BstMnFail · 2016-01-06 03:55 I see the request for personal information as a valid for its time. The way I think about it, my ISP knows all about me - my address, phone number, real name, etc. A BBS, back then, was acting almost like a simple ISP - connecting you to a system of games, files, users, messages, chat boards, etc. just like AOL did, and Comcast sort-of- does. Now with Telnet access to BBSes in distant parts of the world, this kind of personal information isn't necessary (and should definitely be removed if the software allows it)...