Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [BPQ32] Something to Kick Around

Expand Messages
  • Charles Brabham
    Howdy, Neil! I am curious about the same thing. It seems to me that it should be possible, but it s a new idea ( to me, at least ) and it may be that nobody
    Message 1 of 7 , Jun 25, 2011
      Howdy, Neil!
       
      I am curious about the same thing. It seems to me that it should be possible, but it's a new idea ( to me, at least ) and it may be that nobody has tried it yet.
       
      Maybe a couple of hams who are set up to experiment with that will give it a shot, and let us know how it goes.
       
      73 DE Charles, N5PVL
       
       
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2011 11:15 AM
      Subject: Re: [BPQ32] Something to Kick Around

       

      Hey Charles ....

      I was always kinda curious about this one. I have wanted to limit (I.E.
      disconnect) forwarding any @WW stuff to any of my partners, because of
      size, but also because of content and not being able to examine every
      single one. Now with BPQ, it seems like it might be a good idea to let
      them (@WW messages) go via the web only. Is there a way to set that up
      so if a forwarding partner wants them, he could ask for them via the
      web, leaving the radio channels alone?

      This might be a real neophyte question, but I'm a card-carrying neophyte!

      73 de Neil
      K9CTB

      On 6/25/2011 12:07 PM, Charles Brabham wrote:
      > Looking over this, I saw an error that I would like to correct.
      >
      > Here's the error:
      >
      > "( 1 ) Do not forward or offer access to @WW messaging over amateur radio frequencies at all, ever. "
      >
      > - which should read:
      >
      > ( 1 ) Do not forward @WW messaging over amateur radio frequencies at all, ever. ( Access is OK of course, just no FWD. )
      >
      > I realized the mistake when thinking of the expansion and advance of the internet forwarding group if this suggestion is adopted. There will be a lot more BBS stations adding internet access or using some other arraingement in order to have the @WW stuff, and with no particular restriction on message size, the @WW messaging can go in the direction that many internet forwarders have expressed an interest in for years.
      >
      > My original thought was that since the @WW message are likely to grow quite a bit in size, we would be better off to have the access to them be internet-only, as well.
      >
      > Since then I have realized that the problem will tend to be either self-limiting or self-correcting, and so there is no reason to guild the lilly by having a rule to that effect.
      >
      >
      > 73 DE Charles, N5PVL
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Charles Brabham
      > To: BPQ32@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Friday, June 24, 2011 12:07 PM
      > Subject: [BPQ32] Something to Kick Around
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > In another reflector where @WW forwarding was being discussed, I came up with an idea that I thought I'd run up the flag-pole here, to see if anyone salutes.
      >
      > Problem:
      >
      > Point to Point messaging systems work well for their intended purpose. - Point to point messaging.
      >
      > You can set up the software to allow wide area bulletin distributions, for point to many-points distribution as in ALL@TX which would go to all recipients in Texas for example, but it has to be understood that point-to-point networks like the packet network are literally not designed to handle that kind of traffic. As the area that you distribute one-to-many messages to grows, the unwonted strain upon the PtP network grows as well.
      >
      > This may be why we don't see many internet messages addressed to go into every eMail inbox on the planet.
      >
      > We can get away with doing this kind of thing if the distribution is limited in size/population as in ALL@CA and ALL@USA if the traffic level is light, but ALL@WW is a clear case of grabbing the tool by the wrong end.
      >
      > Another problem with @WW distribution is noted by internet forwarders, who would like to see larger message sizes, and who have even discussed @WW distribution of private messages, or eliminating most forwarding distributions and just have @WW.
      >
      > These desires are met with howls of outrage by RF forwarders of course.
      >
      > -----------------------------------
      > Suggestion:
      >
      > ( 1 ) Do not forward or offer access to @WW messaging over amateur radio frequencies at all, ever.
      >
      > This way, @WW messages are only available on BBS stations that have internet capability for forwarding and access of @WW messages.
      >
      > Bulletin size @WW can go up then, and experiments like the personal messaging @WW distro can be tried without complaint or hinderence from those knuckle-dragging types who insist upon using radio.
      >
      > Allow me to be the first one to suggest that a third W be added to @WW - even though it is a silly idea and would breed confusion. If this suggestion goes over, bright boys everywhere will independently think that one up, over and over again for years to come... - Laugh now, if you can, while it's new and fresh!
      >
      > ( 2 ) Do not forward other distros like @TX, @EU, @USA etc.over non-ham links at all, ever. ( Access is OK of course, just no FWD. )
      >
      > This way, the RadioNet guys will have a job that fits the tool at hand and the incentive to grow the network will be there, so they can once again start doing a good job and feeling good about it.
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > There you go - and I didn't get nearly as long-winded as I generally do. There's something to be thankful for, whether you like the suggestion or not.
      >
      > Is it possible to set up the BBS software for dual-use this way, I wonder?
      >
      > 73 DE Charles, N5PVL
      >
      > "If you are going to do something with amateur radio, then use amateur radio. - If you are going to do something with the internet, then use the internet."
      >
      >
      >
      >

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.