• Re: Local vs Network message boards

    From poindexter FORTRAN@21:4/122 to Utopian Galt on Sun May 12 06:59:00 2024
    Utopian Galt wrote to Mary4 <=-

    I also wished I still had my old icq number

    86103423 here. Last time I was on looks to be 2020.



    ... Only a part, not the whole
    --- MultiMail/Win v0.52
    * Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)
  • From Arelor@21:2/138 to niter3 on Mon May 13 12:21:36 2024
    Re: Local vs Network message boards
    By: niter3 to mary4 on Sat May 11 2024 02:38 pm

    i still use IRC! :D

    You find there is much activity ?

    IRC still has its bunch of users.

    I2P's official i2p network is quite active around the time Americans connect. Then there are a number of active channels in Canternet.

    I find the best IRC networks are the ones operated by a small group of people for friends and family.
    --
    gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken
    --- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (21:2/138)
  • From poindexter FORTRAN@21:4/122 to Arelor on Tue May 14 07:51:00 2024
    Arelor wrote to niter3 <=-

    I find the best IRC networks are the ones operated by a small group of people for friends and family. --

    Not IRC, but I still have a Jabber server at my web host. They
    discontinued support for new servers, but grandfathered in the existing
    ones. I always wanted to set up a F&F server, back in the
    Trillian/Pidgin/IM days.



    ... Overtly resist change
    --- MultiMail/Win v0.52
    * Origin: realitycheckBBS.org -- information is power. (21:4/122)
  • From Digital Man@21:1/183 to Accession on Fri May 24 18:52:10 2024
    Re: Local vs Network message boards
    By: Accession to Blue White on Sun May 05 2024 08:36 am

    Hello Blue,

    On Sun, 5 May 2024 13:07:18 -0500, you wrote:

    This post got me thinking, though, so I fired up MM on a QWK packet.
    It truncates the subjects to ~24 on replies also. I wonder if that is a *QWK* standard and all QWK readers do it when processing QWK packages?

    That's definitely possible. I haven't kept up with (or even looked at) QWK standards. But even taking a look at Synchronet's wiki about QWK it does seem to show the length of 25 bytes (with the last byte reserved for an ascii 32 character = 24 bytes). So good call on that, as that would explain it.

    Original/standard QWK message subjects can be a full 25 characters. The last byte is not reserved for a space (ASCII 32).

    QWKE (QWK extended) extends the subject length to > 25 characters (no max length specified).
    --
    digital man (rob)

    Breaking Bad quote #43:
    Congratulations! You're now officially the cute one of the group.
    Norco, CA WX: 64.1°F, 69.0% humidity, 11 mph WNW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (21:1/183)
  • From Digital Man@21:1/183 to AKAcastor on Fri May 24 18:55:29 2024
    Re: Local vs Network message boards
    By: AKAcastor to Blue White on Sun May 05 2024 11:05 am

    This post got me thinking, though, so I fired up MM on a QWK packet.
    It truncates the subjects to ~24 on replies also. I wonder if that is a *QWK* standard and all QWK readers do it when processing QWK packages?

    You are correct - 24 characters is the limit for subject lines in QWK packets.

    The specs are a 25-byte ASCII string for the subject line - the last character must be NULL, so 24 printable characters. http://wiki.synchro.net/ref:qwk

    I assume the above site is considered a reputable source. ;)

    It is. :-) But you're misreading it: there's no subject string termination needed (space or NULL), so the full 25 characters can be used in a standard/original QWK message. QWKE extends the subject lengths beyond 25 chars.

    I don't know the history behind it, whether the limit was arbitrarily chosen for QWK packets or if it was a pre-existing limit enforced by some BBS software.

    PCBoard limit, maybe. QWK was originally for PCBoard, iirc.
    --
    digital man (rob)

    This Is Spinal Tap quote #26:
    David St. Hubbins: They were still booing him when we came on stage.
    Norco, CA WX: 63.0°F, 70.0% humidity, 9 mph WSW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.20-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (21:1/183)
  • From AKAcastor@21:1/162 to Digital Man on Fri May 24 19:13:46 2024
    The specs are a 25-byte ASCII string for the subject line - the last character must be NULL, so 24 printable characters. http://wiki.synchro.net/ref:qwk

    I assume the above site is considered a reputable source. ;)

    It is. :-) But you're misreading it: there's no subject
    string termination needed (space or NULL), so the full
    25 characters can be used in a standard/original QWK
    message. QWKE extends the subject lengths beyond 25
    chars.

    Thanks for the clarification!


    Chris/akacastor


    --- Maximus 3.01
    * Origin: Another Millennium - Canada - another.tel (21:1/162)