F I D O N E W S -- | Vol. 8 No. 52 (30 December 1991) The newsletter of the | FidoNet BBS community | Published by: _ | / \ | "FidoNews" BBS /|oo \ | (415)-863-2739 (_| /_) | FidoNet 1:1/1 _`@/_ \ _ | Internet: | | \ \\ | fidonews@fidonews.fidonet.org | (*) | \ )) | |__U__| / \// | Editors: _//|| _\ / | Tom Jennings (_/(_|(____/ | Tim Pozar (jm) | ----------------------------+--------------------------------------- Published weekly by and for the Members of the FidoNet international amateur network. Copyright 1991, Fido Software. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances, please contact FidoNews. Paper price: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5.00US Electronic Price: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . free! For more information about FidoNews refer to the end of this file. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Table of Contents 1. EDITORIAL ..................................................... 1 Editorial: Here we go again ................................... 1 2. ARTICLES ...................................................... 2 FidoNews! submission policy to change! ........................ 2 FidoNet program version list info ............................. 3 Wanted: Dovemail Beta Testers ................................. 4 Area Code Chart, revised, for the postal-abbrev. impaired ..... 9 Welfare Conference ............................................ 10 The Play-By-Mail Echo Part II ................................. 11 NEW PARENTS NETWORK AVAILABLE TO USA's PARENTS ................ 11 FidoNet <==> Packet Gateway ................................... 13 Brigadoon Village Network ..................................... 14 FidoNet Technical Specification Problem ....................... 15 3. RANTS AND FLAMES .............................................. 19 Something Rotten in The Skeptic Tank .......................... 19 Housebroken II ................................................ 21 A rebuttal to a rebuttal ...................................... 22 Meat Pies, Fosters Beer and Universal Mayhem .................. 22 4. LATEST VERSIONS ............................................... 24 Latest Greatest Software Versions ............................. 24 5. FIDONEWS INFORMATION .......................................... 30 FidoNews 8-52 Page 1 30 Dec 1991 ====================================================================== EDITORIAL ====================================================================== Editorial: here we go again... by Tom Jennings (1:1/1) There are two things of note in this issue of FidoNews! First is the revision to ARTSPEC.DOC, discussed this past summer. Portions of the revised text appear as an article, and the complete proposed revised file is also available. Secondly, text once again appears in the RANTS AND FLAMES section. As annoying as it is, it may serve as a test for the new RESOLVING CONTROVERSIES section in FidoNews submission guidelines. If you are a regular reader of FidoNews, consider the thread of the articles leading to the ones in RANTs, and see how you think the new policy handles it. Feedback please! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-52 Page 2 30 Dec 1991 ====================================================================== ARTICLES ====================================================================== * ARTSPEC.DOC Changes soon... As discussed (or monologued, for all the feedback I got) this past summer, the FidoNews! article submission policy, ARTSPEC.DOC, is about to be revised. It is substantially the same, with three major changes: SUBJECT MATTER tightened up, RESOLVING CONTROVERSIES added, article filenames simplified. The changed text is given below, with additions marked with |'s, and deleted text marked with $'s. The complete new proposed policy file is available from 1:1/1 as NEWSPEC.DOC (filerequest or download) and will be delivered with all filerequests for ARTSPEC.DOC. All of these changes were mentioned in previous FidoNews', though I have clarified some of the specific language. Please send specific suggestions and complaints (constructive please) to me here at FidoNews. I would like to release this sometime in January 1992. -------------- SUBJECT MATTER: | Articles must be in some way related to the FidoNet, its | technology and its uses; other networks (such as uucp and the | Internet); social, ethical or legal aspects of the above; and | any other related matters. You are welcome to submit articles | on other subjects, but their inclusion is at the discretion of | the editor(s). | | Articles of a general commercial nature or "classified ads" for | services, equipment new or used, don't belong in FidoNews; | there are other avenues within FidoNet for commercial | transactions. | ----------------------- | RESOLVING CONTROVERSIES: | | Occasionally FidoNews is presented with a dillema: a | "controversial" article generates a seemingly endless | series of responses, commentary, rebuttals, etc, and threatens | to overwhelm FidoNews. How to stop the stop the flood without | violating the editorial policy? Here is the somewhat complex | solution: | | If a particular article generates a cascade of responses, the | editor does two things: (1) chooses one or few of them as | representative; (2) passes them on to the original author, who | is asked to write a response within 2 weeks. The resulting | representative response(s), and the original authors response, FidoNews 8-52 Page 3 30 Dec 1991 | are run in the next possible FidoNews -- ONCE ONLY. | Interested parties can then pick up the torch and march with it | off the long or short pier of their choice. ... ------------------ WRITING GUIDELINES: ... | * All submissions must include the author(s) name and | full contact information, so that the editor can | verify authorship if necessary. The author may request | that the article be run anonymously. The editor(s) and anyone | who comes across the above information is charged to | keep it completely confidential. --------------------- SUBMITTING AN ARTICLE ... | FILENAME.ART | a 0 to 3 character file type, always "ART" | | The ".ART" file type is important, as it allows the flood of | input to the FidoNews node to be sorted properly. (Exceptions | will be granted if the sending system is not capable of meeting | this requirement.) $ File types are used to distinguish types of submissions, as $ follows: $ $ .ART An article, commentary, open letter, or general news $ item. $ .AD "For Sale", "Wanted" or other advertisement. $ .NOT A notice for the back of the issue. $ $ If your file doesn't have one of the above extensions, then it $ will lay around taking up disk space until someone takes a look $ at it and realizes what it is. Maybe. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNet program version list info by David French (1:103/250) (Version list compiler person) FidoNews 8-52 Page 4 30 Dec 1991 > So David...how can I get the rest of the information? I.e., > numbers 2 & 3? > > 1) Software Name & Version 2) FileName.Ext > 3) Support Node Address 4) Support BBS Phone Number Until recently the file was being deleted at 13/13 due to an error in communications. The problem has been fixed and the files should be getting out weekly. I added the FREQ info into this weeks FidoNews.Ver listing, so that should help also. Have a good one! --dave ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jack Decker 1:154/8 WANTED: DOVEMAIL BETA TESTERS DoveMail is a program that lets you carry UseNet/Internet newsgroups on Fidonet systems. As you may be aware, Fidonet has both official and unofficial gateways into UseNet and the Internet, but you don't see UseNet Newsgroups (their equivalent of echomail) carried on very many Fidonet systems at present. I think part of the reason for this is that we've been using the wrong approach in the past. Up until now, all UseNet to Fidonet conversion software has attempted to convert the individual messages in a newsgroup from the UseNet message format to FidoNet echomail format. This simply doesn't work very well, for several reasons. UseNet newsgroup messages carry slightly different types of information in the message header, and this doesn't translate well into Fidonet format. In addition, it is not uncommon to see very long messages in some newsgroups, and these either have to be split, truncated, or discarded at the gateway system. If the gateway software allows a message that is too large to pass, it may be discarded by an echomail processor downstream (or worse yet, some echomail processors will lock up when they receive a too-long message). The problem is that there is no real standard in Fidonet as to what constitutes a message that is "too large"... in fact, the Fidonet standards call for unlimited length messages. It's just that in the "real world", there is NO echomail processor available that will handle an unlimited length message (at least not to my knowledge). (There's a reason that UseNet messages can be unlimited length while Fidonet messages cannot. In UseNet message, ALL control information is put at the TOP of the message. Thus, once you've read the message header, you have all the information you need to process the message, and from then on you can just copy the remainder of the message. However, Fidonet messages contain control information at both the top AND the bottom of the message, which means that you have to read the entire message before you can process it. It's not IMPOSSIBLE to do that, but it's very difficult from a programming standpoint and most FidoNews 8-52 Page 5 30 Dec 1991 programmers don't feel it's worth the effort, particularly when no OTHER existing echomail processors will handle an unlimited length message). Also, UseNet newsgroup messages may be posted to more than one newsgroup. In Fidonet Echomail, if you post an identical message to two echomail conferences, you actually create two copies of the message, which increases the amount of time (and telephone toll charges) needed to transmit the message. In UseNet, you can post a message to several newsgroups but only one copy of the message is transmitted. When such a message is converted to echomail at a gateway system, one of two things happens... either it is only posted to one echomail conference (corresponding to the first newsgroup listed in the message header), and those reading other areas don't see the message, or else multiple copies of the message are made (one for each echomail area that the message is posted to at the gateway system). Yet another problem is that UseNet messages are always assumed to be addressed to "all". When the message are converted at the gateway system, if the same person has entered more than one message, the messages may appear to be so similar that some echomail processors may erroneously discard some of them as duplicates. This is a very common problem because many echomail processors will declare a message as a dupe if the Date/Time, To, From, and Subject fields of a message are all the same (and in some cases, even those entire fields may not be checked... instead, a comparison may be made on only the first few characters, particularly of the Subject field). If someone in UseNet replies to two or more messages in the same subject thread, the From and Subject fields will be the same, and most gateway software addresses all messages to "All" so the To fields will be the same. And, if the date is derived from the time at which the messages were processed (at some point in UseNet or at the gateway system), rather than the time they were actually entered, the date/time field may be duplicated and one or more messages may be declared a dupe. The solution to these problems is fairly obvious: DON'T convert newsgroups to Echomail! Instead, transmit them within Fidonet in their native RFC-822 (UseNet) format, and convert from that format DIRECTLY to *.msg format if necessary. Up until now, there has not been any software capable of doing this. But now, I am beta testing a program called DoveMail which, along with some related programs, allows UseNet format messages to be transmitted within Fidonet (and other Fidonet- technology networks) without ever being shoehorned into echomail format. Now, please understand that I am talking about using a native UseNet format for the packet that carries the messages only. I'm not talking about using a UseNet mailer, or the UseNet/Internet communication protocols. When you use DoveMail, if you're not a "gateway" system, you use your usual mailer and send and receive mail in the normal manner. More on that in a moment. FidoNews 8-52 Page 6 30 Dec 1991 The main DoveMail program is somewhat similar to an echomail processor like ConfMail or QMail, but works a little differently. With echomail, incoming messages are normally imported to your message base and then exported from there to any nodes you feed. With DoveMail, the main DoveMail program doesn't touch your message bases at all. It simply takes an incoming packet, looks at each message, decides which nodes that message has to go to, and creates mail packets for those nodes (again, these are in native UseNet format). If you are a "leaf" node and don't feed any other nodes, then you could get by without even using the main DoveMail program at all. So how do you see the messages on your system? A pair of programs called NewsToss and NewsScan accomplish that. What you do is to have DoveMail toss a packet for YOUR system, or if you're a leaf node, you just use the incoming newsgroup packets from your feed directly. In either case, NewsToss will toss messages from the newsgroup packet directly to your *.msg format message bases. When you have locally-entered messages to export, NewsScan will create an RFC-822 format message packet that can either be used as input for DoveMail, or if you're a leaf node, sent directly to your feed. Note that in either direction, the messages go directly from to or from your message base, from or to the RFC-822 message format. Some might wonder why all these functions are not integrated into one program. The most practical reason is that NewsToss and NewsScan only work with the *.msg format. Someone could write a program similar to NewsToss and NewsScan that works with a Hudson message base, or a Squish message base, and you could still use DoveMail to send newsgroups to other nodes. Honestly, I prefer running several modules separately (even with programs I didn't write) because if one isn't working quite the way I want it to, I can replace just that one program with something else. Also, from a programming standpoint, it's easier to debug separate smaller programs than a single large program. I also find that it's easier for users of the program to figure out how the system actually works when separate programs handle separate functions. I guess I'm just the sort of person that prefers to build things up from individual modules than to have a whole complete system in a box. Now, you may wonder how these UseNet format packets get sent between nodes in Fidonet. When DoveMail (or NewsScan) creates an RFC-822 format message packet (called a "batched newsgroup" packet in UseNet terminology, because it contains a "batch" of newsgroup messages), it places the packet in your outbound directory (the appropriate one if you have multiple outbound directories) with the extension .UUT. This packet is the functional equivalent of a Fidonet *.OUT file (except that *.UUT's are in RFC-822 format while *.OUT's are FTS-0001). And then DoveMail (or NewsScan) washes its hands of the matter, so to speak. FidoNews 8-52 Page 7 30 Dec 1991 It is hoped that future mail packers will come along, see that there is a .UUT file in the directory, rename it to a file with the extension *.pku (similar to a Fidonet *.pkt file, but again, it's RFC- 822 rather than FTS-0001), and then archive it into an outgoing mail archive (which CAN have the same extensions as Fidonet uses, that is, *.MO?, *.TU?, ..... *.SU?). An outgoing mail packet might quite possibly contain both *.PKT's and *.PKU's, intermixed in the same mail packet. Of course, you're only going to send such a packet to another node that runs DoveMail and therefore knows enough to run an external (to the echomail processor) unarchive shell such as GUS, POLYXARC, or SPAZ if necessary. Since no EXISTING mail packers know about this convention yet, the DoveMail archive includes a program called DovePack that will serve the purpose in the interim. It will look for .UUT packets in the outbound area, and if it finds any it will rename them to *.PKT files, and then TRY to add them to EXISTING mail archive files (files with a *.mo? ... *.su? extension). If it doesn't find an EXISTING outbound mail archive file for the destination node, it will create a new one. It then looks for an EXISTING *.?lo attach list for the node in question and tries to add the name of the outbound mail archive file to the attach list, if it's not already there. If no *.?lo attach list exists, DovePack will create a normal *.flo attach, which can be renamed to another "flavor" by other software or by batch file commands if necessary (or, for those systems that don't use *.?lo files for file attaches, DovePack can also create a file attach message in your netmail area). Obviously, this isn't an optimal solution, but I'm hoping that other software authors that write mail packers will support the *.UUT/*.PKU naming convention, since doing so would probably add only a VERY few lines of code to such programs. Note that the above standard (if you can call it a "standard" at this point) does not really provide for sending UNCOMPRESSED batched newsgroups... while it would certainly be possible to send an uncompressed *.UUT file, there's no naming convention to make it any "flavor" other than normal... that is, you can't make the uncompressed file Crash or Hold. I honestly don't know of any situation where it would be desirable to send uncompressed files AND to mark them as crash or hold. Remember that once the files have been compressed into a mail archive, then the archive can be put on Crash or Hold. The thing to keep in mind is that while the DovePack program will do the necessary task of preparing a batched newsgroup file for transmission, it certainly does not do it in an elegant manner. I'm really hoping that the authors of other programs, that now look for *.OUT files in the outbound directory and process them, will modify their programs slightly to also look for *.UUT files and if found, rename such files to *.PKU and add them to the appropriate mail archives. Now a word about DoveMail's copyright. Most of the software I write I give away free, but I wanted to place just a few restrictions on the use of DoveMail. Now, before you go away, let me quickly say that MOST users will never have to pay a dime for DoveMail. But there are a few people that will have to pay, and fewer still that are barred from using it. Without reprinting the whole license agreement, I will just FidoNews 8-52 Page 8 30 Dec 1991 say that the people who will have to pay are those who themselves make money off of the sale of computer software. It burns me to see that, while on one hand there is some absolutely fabulous software offered free for all (and the authors of that software are to be congratulated and thanked profusely), there are other people who write (relatively) trivial programs and then try to charge a few bucks for them... it would never occur to them to give something back to this hobby. I figure that those people can pay me if they want to use DoveMail. DoveMail is what I call "Golden RuleWare." The Golden Rule is "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." In this application, it means the following: If you do not sell computer software or receive money from the sale of computer software, if you do not charge money to others in exchange for providing them with newsgroup feeds, and if you do not use geography as a basis for determining to whom you will provide newsgroup feeds, then you will be granted a license to use DoveMail for free, with my compliments (subject to the restrictions mentioned in the documentation file). Otherwise, you may be required to pay for the use of DoveMail, or in some cases you may not be permitted to use DoveMail. Please don't assume that you will have to pay until you read the documentation. Honestly, I'm not trying to make money on this software as much as I'm trying to express, in a tangible way, my displeasure with those who cannot give anything back to the hobby and with "control freaks." One stipulation that I make is that you may not use DoveMail in any newsgroup distribution scheme that refuses newsgroup feeds to other sysops based solely on where they are geographically located. In other words, you are not required to feed newsgroups you receive to any other system, but if you do, you may not refuse a newsgroup feed to a node solely because they are not in your net or region. Many readers of this publication are aware of my long-standing contempt for the geographic restrictions in Fidonet (and those who enforce them), and since UseNet doesn't have any such nonsense in there rules, I see no need whatsoever to try and place geographic restrictions on newsgroup feeds brought into Fidonet. Newsgroups are NOT echomail and therefore the "Echomail Coordinators" have no right to determine how they may be distributed. The above is a VERY abridged and edited version of what's in the DoveMail documentation on this subject. If you hate "control freaks" and/or software authors that demand a payment for the use of their relatively trivial software, you might want to pick up a copy of DoveMail just to read the "legal stuff" section of DoveMail.Doc... I'm sure you'll agree that it's unique, if nothing else! And if you like it and want to use it with software you write, please by all means feel free to do so! Anyway, by now you're probably either saying "I want to see this program!" or "who cares?" If you're in the former group, you can pick up a copy of the latest version by file requesting DOVE*.* from 1:154/600 (BUT SEE BELOW FOR HOURS OF OPERATION). You should get back a file with a name something like DOVE1207.ZIP (the current version as I write this). 1:154/600 is a mail-only board in Milwaukee but it is a PART-TIME board and is only up for requests AFTER MIDNIGHT CENTRAL STANDARD TIME. If you can't make the call after midnight, you might FidoNews 8-52 Page 9 30 Dec 1991 look for the file on 1:154/40 and/or 1:154/100 and/or 1:228/24 but I have no idea how long it takes the sysops of those BBS's to get a new version online, so you may get a newer version by waiting until after Midnight central time and polling 1:154/600. There's one thing that DoveMail cannot do, and that's to find newsgroup feeds for you. Check with your local UseNet guru, or with the nearest node that flies the "UUCP" flag in the nodelist, or just ask around. Finally, I can't emphasize too strongly that this is still BETA-TEST software. While I think I have most of the early major bugs out, if you use the program YOU are a beta-tester! So if you only want iron- clad tested and guaranteed software, this isn't it yet. But hey, where's the fun in our hobby if you don't try something new occasionally? And support is available, either via netmail or the UFGATE conference (which seems to have expanded to cover anything and everything relative to Fidonet <--> Internet gateways), so give it a try. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Area Code Chart, revised - for the postal-abbreviation impaired Charlie Baden 1:207/117.1 201 N.J. 301 Md. 401 R.I. 501 Ark. 601 Miss 701 NDak 801 Utah 901 Tenn 202 D.C. 302 Dela 402 Neb. 502 Ky. 602 Ariz 702 Nev. 802 Vt. 902#Nov.S 203 Conn. 303 Colo 403#Alta 503 Ore. 603 N.H. 703 Va. 803 S.C. 903 Tex. 204#Mani 304 W.Va 404 Ga. 504 La. 604#B.C. 704 N.C. 804 Va. 904 Fla. 205 Ala. 305 Fla. 405 Okla 505 N.M. 605 SDak 705#Ont. 805 Cal. 206 Wash. 306#Sask 406 Mont 506#N.B. 606 Ky. 806 Tex. 906 Mich 207 Maine 307 Wyo. 407 Fla. 507 Minn 607 N.Y. 707 Cal. 807#Ont. 907Alask 208 Idaho 308 Neb. 408 Cal. 508 Mass 608 Wisc 708 Ill. 808 Hi. 908 N.J. 209 Cal. 309 Ill. 409 Tex. 509 Wash 609 N.J. 709#Newf 809 P.R.(909 Cal) 310*Cal. 410*Md. 510*Cal. 212 N.Y. 312 Ill. 412 Penn 512 Tex. 612 Minn 712 Iowa 812 Ind. 912 Ga. 213 Cal. 313 Mich 413 Mass 513 Ohio 613#Ont. 713 Tex. 813 Fla. 913 Kans 214 Texas 314 Mo. 414 Wisc 514#Queb 614 Ohio 714 Cal. 814 Penn 914 N.Y. 215 Penn. 315 N.Y. 415 Cal. 515 Iowa 615 Tenn 715 Wisc 815 Ill. 915 Tex. 216 Ohio 316 Kans 416#Ont. 516 N.Y. 616 Mich 716 N.Y. 816 Mo. 916 Cal. 217 Ill. 317 Ind. 417 Mo. 517 Mich 617 Mass 717 Penn 817 Tex. 218 Minn. 318 La. 418#Queb 518 N.Y. 618 Ill. 718 N.Y. 818 Cal. 918 Okla 219 Ind. 319 Iowa 419 Ohio 519#Ont. 619 Cal. 719 Colo 819#Queb 919 N.C. * 310, 410, 510 are new for 1991. (909 won't be in use until 1992.) # Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan are Canadian provinces. I have found it convenient to have this little chart accessible, either via a pop-up window or just as a printed table, to see just what state a phone number is located in. I welcome your comments, corrections, suggestions and additions. And yes, I know that the Northwest Territories and Yukon use area codes from adjoining provinces, and Prince Edward Island uses Nova Scotia's area code; and the various FidoNews 8-52 Page 10 30 Dec 1991 Caribbean islands that are in our phone system all use the same area code (809), listed as P.R. above. This is just to give you an idea of where they are! My original chart just used the 2-letter postal abbrevations (LA for Louisiana, AR for Arkansas, etc.) because I assumed everybody had them memorized like I do... NE=Nebraska, AK=Alaska, AL=Alabama, and so on... This expanded version should explain some of the questions I received after I sent in the last version. Really, it's just a silly little chart that I found interesting. I could also post the phone number prefixes in 213, 301, 415, that were split in Fall '91 to create area codes 310, 410, 510... plus the 714 prefixes that are going to create 909 in late *1992*. Gee, I could set myself up as the self-appointed Fidonews telnum expert... You can reach me on the NEWSCHAT echo, or netmail to 1:207/117.1. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- by Mike Adams (1:19/10) Welfare Conference Begins Whenever the word "welfare" enters a discussion, people automatically start thinking of multi-generational families who've been living off of the system forever and appear to have every desire to continue doing so. They think of welfare fraud, and they become angry when confronted with examples of able-bodied individuals who manage to live quite well without working. Welfare had its beginnings many years ago, and it originated in many states as an effort to assist widows, orphans, the aged and the infirm. Today, it is an institution which seems to touch well over a third of the population of this country. The existance of welfare is hotly debated because of the abusers within the system, because of an over-grown bureacracy, and because of the large chunk of the economic pie it represents. Despite its negative attributes, there are many aspects to the welfare programs which exist in this country which prove to be beneficial to those who recieve assistance from them. Efforts are being made to move the economically deprived towards self-sufficiency. Work is being done to improve self-esteem, which often is the culprit when it comes to analyzing why people end up on "welfare." After nearly fourteen years with the Oklahoma Department of Human Services, I've gathered a certain amount of knowledge in the area of administering the social service programs that my state provides, and I've seen how mis-information and half-told stories often malign programs which provide positive benefits to thousands of people. I've also been involved in dealing both directly and indirectly with welfare fraud and its detection. If you're interested in picking up the WELFARE conference, I'm starting, you will have to pick it up directly from my system. I envision discussions from others in the field of social services as well as from those who have an interest in understanding how the welfare system works (or doesn't work). FidoNews 8-52 Page 11 30 Dec 1991 Until such time as the conference is more widely spread, as through the Backbone, send netmail to me at 1:19/10, and we'll work things out. I have a feeling that this could turn into a very interesting, if not controversial, discussion area. Mike Adams, Welfare Moderator ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The PBM Echo, Again. by Dean Gilbert 1:353/700.0 Well, the PBM echo has had a reasonable amount of response, but it seems that I wasn't as clear about the subject matter as I should have been. The Play-By-Mail echo is a chat echo about commercial Play-By-Mail games such as Spiral Arm, Feudal Lords, Hyborean War, etc. These games are played over Snail mail primarily although some companies allow you to submit turns over commercial networks like CompuServe. The PBM Echo is NOT a forum or a method to play such games over FidoNet. There are several echoes/networks that support this (the AD&D echo and VervanNet come to mind). Although it might be a good idea to start something like this up, it's not a current priority of mine. If you would like more information, or would like to begin polling for this echo, please contact me at 1:353/700.0 The Echotag is PBM, and I can be polled anytime between 8pm and 12noon daily. I default to archiving with Lharc, so if you don't use that archiver to de-arc mail, please tell me in your message. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- By Ken Salois 1:300/21@FidoNet New Parents Network ... A Vital Parenting Information Network The word Parent fits a broad definition in todays society no matter where you are in the world. Although we hold the title "New Parents Network", we serve all likes of parents, relatives and interested parties. We have no limits or specifications to base on interests for parenting. New Parents Network is currently available to the United States as a zone 79 based network. We plan to open up to the world as soon as our network grows to a greater size within the U.S. FidoNews 8-52 Page 12 30 Dec 1991 The New Parents Network opened up to the the U.S. as a National Network in October of 1991. At this point we have NPNet State Coordinators in nine states and we are continuing to grow. We are currently in need of 9600 Baud HUBS to serve our parenting network through your residing State. States that are currently linked to NPNet are: Arizona, California, Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, Missouri, Tennessee and Louisiana. We would like to have all states join our parenting network. NPNet is designed to co-exist on an existing BBS system and takes up little space. We currently offer National Bulletin text files that range from national parenting organizations that provide services to parents, to safety recall information on items such as faulty child restraints. All systems that are currently NPNets have sent their praises as to the volume and information contained in the NPNet National Bulletins files area. This information has been collected since 1988 and contains excellent information for all likes of interested parents, guardians, child care providers, friends and relatives. Bulletin specifics include: recently recalled toys and car seats, support groups that exist to help parents, safety information, immunization schedules, government agencies that help parents, etc. If you are interested in joining our network please reference the following information: ===================================================================== Zone Coordinator Fidonet Info file to Network Name Zone or Contact Address FREQ ======================== ================ ========== ============ New Parents Network 79 Ken Salois 1:300/21 NP_NET.ZIP Filename Size Date Title ==================== ======== ===================================== NP_NET.ZIP 30237 12-10-91 New Parents Network Information File We currently offer seven national message forums that are broad in scope and offer great parenting interaction. 1) NPN SysOp Support 2) NPN Bulletin Information 3) NPN Public Discussion Forum 4) NPN Father's Forum 5) NPN Mother's Forum 6) NPN Alternative Parenting 7) NPN Safety Forum New Parents Network started as a National BBS in Tucson Arizona and is available 24 hours a day. The BBS allows immediate access to all first time callers following a new user questionnaire. If you'd like to call the New Parents Network BBS for further information, call: FidoNews 8-52 Page 13 30 Dec 1991 1-602-326-9345 24 hours a day 1200 - 9600 Baud 8,N,1 System IBM MS-DOS Software - RemoteAccess 1.10+ - FrontDoor 2.02 NC SysOp / Founder and Executive Director - Karen Storek Lange Voice 1-602-327-1451 New Parents Network is trade marked and trade named. All facets of the New Parents Network are protected by copyright (c) 1991. New Parents Network is a Social & Service Information Provider and is a Non-Profit Organization. Ken Salois New Parents National Network Coordinator 1:300/21@FidoNet 79:300/21@NPNet --- END ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Fredric L. Rice The Skeptic Tank, 1:102/901.0 The HAM Radio Packet message environment now interfaces to the Fido Network through this system by virtue of the Echo Mail Conference: SC_HAMPK. Moderated by Tony Lane (1:102/833.0), this conference is exported into the HAM world to WB6YMH.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA.FIDONET. If you have access to a Packet system, you can send mail into the Southern California area by addressing all messages to: KC6EFH@WB6YMH.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA.FIDONET If the first line of your message begins with a FidoNet mailing address, your message will be forwarded to the FidoNet system so long as its address is in the Southern California area or an area which a partcipating FidoNet system currently interfaces directly to. If your message does not contain a FidoNet address, it will be placed into the SC_HAMPK Echo Mail Conference. Once technical aspects have been through a peer review board, Usenet may be included in SC_HAMPK. If anyone is interested in details, contact either myself or Tony Lane. If you would like to review the gateway software, an initial release, which is not technically solid yet, is available for File Requests from my system as FIDO-HAM.LZH. As usually is the case, my source code is included so that it may be expanded upon and corrected. This is the work of several software engineers and hardware demi- gods and uses resources which the F.C.C. regulates with a passion. Because of these facts, certain subjects will be sensored out-right so that the radio licenses of the HAM operators are secured. [Note: It was known that the, well, 'unenlightened?', would argue against takeing reasonable cautions about what the F.C.C. would consider to be FidoNews 8-52 Page 14 30 Dec 1991 pronographic in a previous FidoNews. HAMs will not take such an idiotic attitude. Packet security is doubly tight about such issues as each individuals station is _licensed_. The second version of Fido-Ham employs word searches and will mark messages on hold for review in some cases.] Fredric Rice. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Brigadoon Village Network Why why why did you say that Why why why did you walk over there Why why why did the girl in the shadows beckon me Why why why am I here Because you said: promise me you won't fade away Fade away Fade away.... Oh run run run... let it run itself out Let the light in Let the light come in and shine on the floor Let it lift itself to your hair Let the insanity bring you joy Joy Joy... Yes, oh yes I told you I promised you I would not turn away And I won't No I won't I won't... If I seem sad If I seem too badly off It will end now End now Yes now I will be dancing with the light I am the light And I cannot leave Cannot leave Cannot leave... --------------------------------------- For info on Brigadoon. FREQ: BRIGADOON Modem supported: USR HST DS V32bis V42bis FidoNews 8-52 Page 15 30 Dec 1991 From: 1:325/101.0 @FidoNet If you would like to try it first, then FREQ the magic name TRYBRIG which will get you NODELIST.TXT. (You don't need to FREQ this if you FREQ BRIGADOON) as always you can always call: 1-802-453-3316 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- An apparent FidoNet Technical Specification incompatability problem by Brice Fleckenstein 1:231/190 From: FTS-0001 Version: 015 Date: 30-Aug-90 2. Levels of Compliance This documents represents the most basic FidoNet implementation. A future document will define well tested extensions which are optional but provide sufficient additional function that implementors should seriously consider them. SEAdog(tm), from System Enhancement Associates, is an excellent example of such an extended FidoNet implementation. (Notice there is NOTHING here that specifies that a future standard INHERENTLY overrides FTS-0001, but rather adds OPTIONAL EXTENSIONS to FTS-0001. Therefore, FTS-0001 definitions of the information in a message packet remain in effect for ALL messages. - B.F.) From FTS-0001: Message Text A 'hard' carriage return, 0DH, marks the end of a paragraph, and must be preserved. If the first character of a physical line (e.g. the first character of the message text, or the character immediately after a hard carriage return (ignoring any linefeeds)) is a ^A (, 01H), then that line is not displayed as it contains control information. The convention for such control lines is: FidoNews 8-52 Page 16 30 Dec 1991 o They begin with ^A o They end at the end of the physical line (i.e. ignore soft s). o They begin with a keyword followed by a colon. o The keywords are uniquely assigned to applications. o They keyword/colon pair is followed by application specific data. (Notice the definition of an information line here - this definition fits a "SEEN-BY" line EXACTLY, just like it fits a PATH line or a TOPT line or a INTL line. - B.F.) From: FTS-0004 EchoMail Specification This document is directly derived from the documentation of The Conference Mail System By Bob Hartman With Bob Hartman's kind consent, copying for the purpose of technological research and advancement is allowed. (Which leaves the question of the editor of this document in considerable doubt - B.F.) The Conference Mail System is designed to operate in conjunction with a FidoNet compatible mail server. (Thus specifying that FTS-0001 DOES effect this document - B.F.) CONFERENCE MAIL MESSAGE CONTROL INFORMATION There are five pieces of control information associated with a Conference Mail message. Some are optional, some are not. 4. Seen-by Lines There can be many seen-by lines at the end of Conference Mail messages, and they are the real "meat" of the control information. They are used to determine the systems to receive the exported messages. The format of the line is: SEEN-BY: 132/101 113 136/601 1014/1 FidoNews 8-52 Page 17 30 Dec 1991 The net/node numbers correspond to the net/node numbers of the systems having already received the message. In this way a message is never sent to a system twice. In a conference with many participants the number of seen-by lines can be very large. This line is added if it is not already a part of the message, or added to if it already exists, each time a message is exported to other systems. This is a REQUIRED field, and Conference Mail will not function correctly if this field is not put in place by other Echomail compatible programs. (Note the definition of a SEEN-BY line as a control information line - an EXACT corespondance to the terminology used in FTS-0001. Also note the less-then-rigid definitions used throughout this document - sorry, Bob, you're a good programmer but a poor technical documentation writer. - B.F.) Refering to the original ConfMail docs that FTS-0004 was BASED on, I find the following option listed: -K Use the International FidoNet Association (IFNA) endorsed "kludge" of hiding the AREA and SEEN-BY lines behind a Control-A character. This option should not be used by systems which must communicate with older echomail compatable systems. (Note that this is SPECIFICALLY mentioned as being a bad idea when talking to OLD EchoMail systems - the implication is that NEW and/or CURRENT EchoMail systems SHOULD HANDLE A "hidden" SEEN-BY and/or AREA line properly. -B.F.) End of document referances. It would appear to me that there is a DEFINITE conflict in the current set of FidoNet specifications here, and that the AUTHOR of FTS-0004 INTENDED that "hidden SEEN-BYs" should become the NORM in FidoNet, per their status as a "control information" line per FTS-0001's definition of such. It also appears to me that Bob Hartman is the current "final authority" on the subject, and FTSC should get a WRITTEN clarification from him A.S.A.P. (preferably in the form of a FTS-0004 re-written SPEFICICALLY AS A SPECIFICATION rather than "cut and pasted" from the ConfMail documentation). FidoNews 8-52 Page 18 30 Dec 1991 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-52 Page 19 30 Dec 1991 ====================================================================== RANTS AND FLAMES ====================================================================== _(*#$_(*@#(* (*^$+)#(%&+| #$)%(&*#_$ @_#( @$ ^@#+)(#&%$*+)$%&*+$*%&#@(@#_|)*%|)#%&)#*%&+(@#&*_+(@#*^&@### *&#_($*&#$_(*#&$_(#*$&$ _(#$*#$+)#($&*+#)$ &#+$*&# ()*&#$_(&^#$_(#*$_#($^&#_$(^&#_$(&^#$_(&#^ damn right _(#^&$_(#^& $*&#$_+(* #)$&(%($%+)($%*+$)%($* it's ugly _#&%^# & #($_*#$_ FidoNet (*$&%_@#_(*&@#_(@*#&_ @#_(*&@#_(* )*&#$ Flames *^$+)#(% (not for the timid) @_#( (*#$_(*^@#+) and #_|)*% &+(@#&*_+(@#*^&@### (#$*&#_($*&#$_(*#&$_(#* Rants *&+#$*&#+$*&# )*&#$_(a regular feature)^&#_$(&^#$_ $^&#$_(#^ (*^#$_*#^&$)*#&$^%)#*$&^_#($*^&#_($ Section #&%^_ _(*#&$_(#* #($*& #$* _(*&@#_(@*# *&@#_(*& )&*+_)*&+)*&+))&*(*& (*&_(*&_(*& ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jack Decker 1:154/8 SOMETHING ROTTEN IN THE SKEPTIC TANK I'd like to take a moment to protest the inclusion of a defamatory statement in Fidonews 8-49. The statement occurred the the article "The Skeptic Tank" by Fredric L. Rice, in which he encourages sysops to be more aware of the types of files they have available on their systems. I have no problem with anything that was said in the article EXCEPT for this one statement: "And then there is another method of attack that we should guard against. So many christians, out of a love for their jesus, would have us remove the pronographic materials from our systems upon pain of lawsuit if their holy and untried children were ever to be caught panting over a GIF file displayed on their screens." First of all, there is an obvious intent to show disrespect to Christians by the lack of capitalization of the term "Christian" and the name of "Jesus". Even secular books and articles capitalize those properly. I notice that Mr. Rice managed to capitalize his own name properly at the top and bottom of the article, so it's not as though he's unaware of the rules for capitalization of proper names. FidoNews 8-52 Page 20 30 Dec 1991 And second, the paragraph implies that it is only Christians who are concerned about the influence of pornography, especially upon children. The fallacy of that thinking should be obvious, but in any case, it's an unsubstantiated slur against a particular religious group. It reminds me of an article that appeared in the local newspaper which accused Christians of removing copies of an atheistic magazine (the magazine actually has the word "Atheist" in the title) from the local public library, despite the fact that no one had ever been caught or charged with the removal of the magazines. Apparently the writer of the article had forgotten (or ignored) the fact that one of the basic tenets of the Christian religion is the commandment, "Thou shalt not steal." I suggested that it could just as easily have been a case of someone wanting to read the magazine, but not be observed reading it in the library (this IS a small town). There are numerous groups and individuals, some religious (not necessarily Christian, however), some involved in law enforcement, and others that for whatever reason feel that pornography is harmful to our society. I'm not for a moment denying that many Christians feel this way, but to suggest that it is ONLY Christians that are opposed to pornography is to mis-state the facts. When coupled with the deliberate lack of capitalization noted above, I feel that the above quoted paragraph was written in such as way as to be deliberately offensive to Christians, and to manipulate others into feeling resentment toward members of the Christian faith. I'm surprised that the editor allowed it to be printed verbatim, without at least correcting the capitalization. (Seriously, Tom, are you not aware that there has been a lot of Christian bashing in Fidonews in the last few months? Would you allow the bashing of other groups in this manner? If not, then why the discriminatory treatment?) That said, I will agree that there are many state and federal laws that prohibit or restrict the distribution of pornography in various ways. Whether you agree with them or not, the laws currently exist, and if you are a sysop you violate those laws at your own peril. If you believe that there should be fewer restrictions on the distribution of pornography, you certaily have the right to lobby your lawmakers to that effect. However, I hope you'll appreciate the fact that those who may disagree with you, regardless of religion (or lack thereof) also have the right to make their voices heard, and to insist that existing laws be enforced. You might also consider that some of the folks who are against pornography are not against it simply because of blind religious faith, or because they want to spoil your fun, but because they are aware of the influence of pornography in various sex crimes, including but not limited to the torture and murder of children. FidoNews 8-52 Page 21 30 Dec 1991 How would you feel if you knew that someone downloaded a .GIF file from your BBS and printed it out on a high-quality printer, and then it was found at the scene of a rape or child molestation? Just something to think about. And if THAT doesn't bother you, you might want to give some thought to the fact that many .GIF's are scanned in from copyrighted publications, so if you carry .GIF's on your BBS, chances are that at least a few of them violate someone's copyright. And, in some cases it may be much easier for a prosecutor to prove copyright infringement than to get a court to agree that certain images are pornographic. Parting comment: Why is it that the folks who are generally so quick to defend "freedom of speech" as an absolute right, are often among the first to try and deny that right to those who disagree with them? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Housebroken II Billy Cash III - Programmer's Connection BBS - 1:226/70.0 A short reply to Daniel Tobias' article about a previous piece I published in FidoNews. He states that "... there is a ... category of material which can pose legal trouble for a sysop. This is libelous text, material that defames a person. Somebody who writes material of this nature, and a sysop who allows his system to be used in the dissemination of such things, could be the subject of a lawsuit in today's litigious climate." Later he comments that "Unfortunately, a possible example of such conduct has been provided to the FidoNews audience in the form of Billy Cash's (1:226/70.0) response to Rice." Well, Mr. Tobias, if this is true, and I am "guilty" of libel, then so is every sysop in the world receiving this newsletter. Including Mr. Tobias. It must be taken into account, however, whether or not libel was actually committed. In the original article, Mr. Rice mentioned that he had "adult" materials on his bulletin board. If this is the case, and he reveals this to the entire planet, then how can my restatement of the fact be libel? I will reiterate what I have been saying all along. People who hide objectionable material and get caught can't complain. It is this type of sysop that causes big headlines -- not the SaudiNet sysop, or the veterans' echo sysop. FidoNews 8-52 Page 22 30 Dec 1991 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Cleaning out the dog house.." - part III By Scott Neville - The Fourth Dimension BBS - 3:635/553 In responce to Billy Cash, I think he has a rather pompous view of amatuer bulletin board systems. You say that nobody will be moving heaven amd earth to remove you for a long time. How can you say that? You dont know that some official people might not come barging into your house and seize all of your computer gear, be they from the government or telephone company. You really have no idea what will happen, and Im sure that it happens to. Good sysops dont need to worry about this? Who are you trying to kid? You can do whatever you like, but unless you sit watching your BBS 24 hours a day, you cannot guarentee that there wont be commercial programs uploaded to your system, no matter how "good" you think you are. Furthermore, you blame Fred Rice for any bad name given to the BBS community? Thats absurd. The only statement he has made on the matter has been constructive to try and stop the illegal going-ons that can happen in the electronic media and you blame him. I have nothing to hide myself and Im sure Mr Rice doesnt either, but if you are found with a copy of a commercial program on your system, you (not the user who uploaded it) are in direct breach of the copyright laws. I think thats something worth taking notice of, rather than criticising. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- BY Scott Neville P.O. Box 1077 Ph : 61-3-560-9292 Glen Waverley 3:635/553 (Fido) Victoria 11:9000/0 (ClariNet) Australia 3150 Meat Pies, Fosters Beer and Universal Mayhem. After Fred Rice wrote his article entitled "Death throws with much twitching" (very creative Fred), reguarding the laying to rest of the Universal Mayhem online game, many of the Australian sysops turned to me, being the one who distributes the game in Australia. It was taken many years ago and distributed by the network I started (ClariNet) and is still being continued with today. So what is Universal Mayhem? It is quite possibly the most complicated online game ever written, but also the most addictive and competative if the players take the time to learn how to play it well. You assume the role of a space trader, caught in the constant race for power over your opponants. The ultimate goal is to assemble the parts of the slaver death weapon that was dismantled many moons ago. To this day I dont believe that anyone has ever managed this feat on any system in the world. The supporting echo conference (MAYHEM) is being distributed, along with export ships for the remote player function of the game to anyone who asks and calls in FidoNews 8-52 Page 23 30 Dec 1991 for them. Although Fred has decided that he will not continue writing the game, ClariNet (and people of other nets) are welcome to the echo and the latest version that is available to me. In the future I hope to see more players and updates. I hope to organise some updates to the program to keep it coming up with more surprises. Mayhem is not dead. It is just beginning. To anyone who wants more information on ClariNet or to connect to the mayhem echo or take remote ships, call/message/write to the above address. There may be a local ClariNet BBS taking them. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-52 Page 24 30 Dec 1991 ====================================================================== LATEST VERSIONS ====================================================================== Latest Greatest SoftWare Versions Last Update: 12/25/91 - Season's Greetings!!!! /df/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- MS-DOS Systems -------------- BBS Software NodeList Utilities Compression Name Version Name Version Utilities -------------------- -------------------- Name Version Aurora 1.32b EditNL 4.00 -------------------- DMG 2.93 FDND 1.10 ARC 7.12 DreamBBS 1.05 MakeNL 2.31 ARJ 2.20 Fido/FidoNet 12.21 Parselst 1.33 LHA 2.13 Genesis Deluxe 3.2 Prune 1.40 PAK 2.51 GSBBS 3.02 SysNL 3.14 PKPak 3.61 Kitten 1.01 XlatList 2.90 PKZip 1.10 Lynx 1.30 XlaxNode/Diff 2.53 Maximus-CBCS 2.00 Merlin 1.39n Opus 1.73a* Other Utilities(A-M) Other Utilities(N-Z) Oracomm 5.M.6P@ Name Version Name Version Oracomm Plus 6.E@ -------------------- -------------------- PCBoard 14.5a 2DAPoint 1.50* Netsex 2.00b Phoenix 1.07* ARCAsim 2.31 OFFLINE 1.32@ ProBoard 1.20* ARCmail 2.07 Oliver 1.0a QuickBBS 2.75 Areafix 1.20 PKInsert 7.00 RBBS 17.3b ConfMail 4.00 PolyXarc 2.1a RemoteAccess 1.10 Crossnet 1.5 QM 1.00a SimplexBBS 1.05 DOMAIN 1.42 QSort 4.04 SLBBS 2.15C* DEMM 1.06 RAD Plus 2.11@ Socrates 1.11 DGMM 1.06 Raid 1.00 SuperBBS 1.12* DOMAIN 1.42 RBBSMail 18.0@ SuperComm 0.99@ EEngine 0.32 ScanToss 1.28 TAG 2.5g EMM 2.11* ScMail 1.00@ TBBS 2.1 EZPoint 2.1 ScEdit 1.12@ TComm/TCommNet 3.4 4Dog/4DMatrix 1.18 Sirius 1.0x Telegard 2.5 FGroup 1.00 SLMail 2.15C TPBoard 6.1 FNPGate 2.70 SquishMail 1.00 TriTel 2.0* GateWorks 3.06e StarLink 1.01 WildCat! 2.55 GMail 2.05 TagMail 2.41 WWIV 4.20 GMD 3.10 TCOMMail 2.2 XBBS 1.77 GMM 1.21 Telemail 1.27 GoldEd 2.31p TGroup 1.13 GROUP 2.23 TIRES 3.11@ Network Mailers GUS 1.40 TMail 1.21 Name Version Harvey's Robot 4.10@ TosScan 1.00 -------------------- HeadEdit 1.18 UFGATE 1.03 BinkleyTerm 2.50 HLIST 1.09@ VPurge 4.09e D'Bridge 1.30 IMAIL 1.20 WildMail 2.00 Dreamer 1.06 InterPCB 1.31 XRS 4.99 Dutchie 2.90c Lola 1.01d XST 2.3e FidoNews 8-52 Page 25 30 Dec 1991 FrontDoor 2.02 Mosaic 1.00b@ ZmailH 1.25 InterMail 2.01 MSG 4.2 ZSX 2.40 Milqtoast 1.00 MSGED 2.06 PreNM 1.48 MsgLnk 1.0c SEAdog 4.60 MsgMstr 2.03a SEAmail 1.01 MsgNum 4.16d TIMS 1.0(mod8) MSGTOSS 1.3 OS/2 Systems ------------ BBS Software Other Utilities(A-M Other Utilities(N-Z) Name Version Name Version Name Version -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- Kitten 1.01 ARC 7.12 oMMM 1.52 Maximus-CBCS 2.00 ARC2 6.01 Omail 3.1 SimplexBBS 1.04.02+ ConfMail 4.00 Parselst 1.33 EchoStat 6.0 PKZip 1.02 EZPoint 2.1 PMSnoop 1.30 Network Mailers FGroup 1.00 PolyXOS2 2.1a Name Version GROUP 2.23 QSort 2.1 -------------------- LH2 2.11 Raid 1.0 BinkleyTerm 2.50 MSG 4.2 Remapper 1.2 BinkleyTerm(S) 2.50 MsgEd 2.06c SquishMail 1.00 BinkleyTerm/2-MT MsgLink 1.0c Tick 2.0 1.40.02 MsgNum 4.16d VPurge 4.09e SEAmail 1.01 Xenix/Unix 386 -------------- BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- BinkleyTerm 2.32b ARC 5.21 C-LHARC 1.00 MsgEd 2.06 |Contact: Jon Hogan-uran 3:711/909, | MSGLINK 1.01 |Willy Paine 1:343/15 or Eddy van Loo| oMMM 1.42 |2:285/406 | Omail 1.00 ParseLst 1.32 Unzip 3.10 VPurge 4.08 Zoo 2.01 QNX --- FidoNews 8-52 Page 26 30 Dec 1991 BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- QTach2 1.09 QMM 0.50s Kermit 2.03 QCP 1.02 NodeList Utilities Archive Utilities QSave 3.6 Name Version Name Version QTTSysop 1.07.1 -------------------- -------------------- SeaLink 1.05 QNode 2.09 Arc 6.02 XModem 1.00 LH 1.00.2 YModem 1.01 Unzip 2.01 ZModem 0.02f Zoo 2.01 Apple II -------- BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- DDBBS + 8.0* Fruity Dog 2.0 deARC2e 2.1 GBBS Pro 2.1 ProSel 8.70* ShrinkIt 3.30* |Contact: Dennis McClain-Furmanski 1:275/42| ShrinkIt GS 1.04 Apple CP/M ---------- BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- Daisy 2j Daisy Mailer 0.38 Filer 2-D MsgUtil 2.5 Nodecomp 0.37 PackUser 4 UNARC.Com 1.20 Macintosh --------- BBS Software Network Mailers Other Software Name Version Name Version Name Version -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- FBBS 0.91 Copernicus 1.0 ArcMac 1.3 Hermes 1.6.1 Tabby 2.2 AreaFix 1.6 Mansion 7.15 Compact Pro 1.30 Precision Sys. 0.95b EventMeister 1.0 Red Ryder Host 2.1 Export 3.21 Telefinder Host Import 3.2 FidoNews 8-52 Page 27 30 Dec 1991 2.12T10 LHARC 0.41 MacArd 0.04 Mantissa 3.21 Point System Mehitable 2.0 Software OriginatorII 2.0 Name Version PreStamp 3.2 -------------------- StuffIt Classic 1.6 Copernicus 1.00 SunDial 3.2 CounterPoint 1.09 TExport 1.92 MacWoof 1.1 TimeStamp 1.6 TImport 1.92 Tset 1.3 TSort 1.0 UNZIP 1.02c Zenith 1.5 Zip Extract 0.10 Amiga ----- BBS Software Network Mailers Other Software Name Version Name Version Name Version -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- 4D-BBS 1.65@ BinkleyTerm 1.00 Areafix 1.48 DLG Pro. 0.96b TrapDoor 1.80 AReceipt 1.5 Falcon CBCS 1.00 WelMat 0.44 ChameleonEdit 0.11 Paragon 2.082+ ConfMail 1.12 TransAmiga 1.07 ElectricHerald 1.66 XenoLink 1.0 Compression FileMgr 2.08 Utilities GCChost 3.6b Name Version Login 0.18 NodeList Utilities -------------------- MessageFilter 1.52 Name Version AmigArc 0.23 Message View 1.12 -------------------- booz 1.01 oMMM 1.50 ParseLst 1.66 LHARC 1.30 PolyXAmy 2.02 Skyparse 2.30 LZ 1.92 RMB 1.30 TrapList 1.40 PKAX 1.00 Roof 46.15 UnZip 4.1 RoboWriter 1.02 Zippy (Unzip) 1.25 Rsh 4.07a Zoo 2.01 Tick 0.75 TrapToss 1.20 |Contact: Maximilian Hantsch 2:310/6| Yuck! 2.02 Atari ST/TT ----------- BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- FIDOdoor/ST 2.5.1 BinkleyTerm 2.40n9 ApplyList 1.00@ FiFo 2.1v The Box 1.20 Burep 1.1 LED ST 1.00 ComScan 1.04 MSGED 1.99 ConfMail 4.10 QuickBBS/ST 1.04 NodeList Utilities Echoscan 1.10 FidoNews 8-52 Page 28 30 Dec 1991 Name Version FDrenum 2.5.2 -------------------- FastPack 1.20 Compression ParseList 1.30 Import 1.14 Utilities EchoFix 1.20 oMMM 1.40 Name Version sTICK/Hatch 5.50 Pack 1.00 -------------------- Trenum 0.10 ARC 6.02 LHARC 2.01e PackConvert STZIP UnJARST 2.00 WhatArc 2.02 Archimedes ---------- BBS Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- ARCbbs 1.44 BinkleyTerm 2.03 ARC 1.03 BatchPacker 1.00 ParseLst 1.30 !Spark 2.00d Unzip 2.1TH Tandy Color Computer 3 (OS-9 Level II) -------------------------------------- BBS Software Compression Utility Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version -------------------- -------------------- -------------------- RiBBS 2.02 OS9ARC (Arc) 1.0 Ascan 1.2 OS9ARC (Dearc) 1.0 AutoFRL 2.0 DEARC CKARC 1.1 UNZIP 3.10 EchoCheck 1.01 FReq 2.5a LookNode 2.00 ParseLST RList 1.03 RTick 2.00 UnSeen 1.1 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Key: + - Netmail Capable (Doesn't Require Additional Mailer Software) * - Recently Updated Version @ - New Addition -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- FidoNews 8-52 Page 29 30 Dec 1991 The Complete List is Available For FReq as VERSIONS from 1:103/250 Utility Authors: Please help keep this list up to date by reporting all new versions to 1:103/250 in this format: 1) Software Name & Version 2) FileName.Ext 3) Support Node Address 4) Support BBS Phone Number Note: It is not our intent to list all utilities here, only those which verge on necessity. If you want it updated in the next FidoNews, get it to me by Thursday evening. --David French, 1:103/250 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 8-52 Page 30 30 Dec 1991 ====================================================================== FIDONEWS INFORMATION ====================================================================== ------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION ---------------- Editors: Tom Jennings, Tim Pozar Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell, Vince Periello Special thanks to Ken Kaplan, 1:100/22, aka Fido #22 "FidoNews" BBS FidoNet 1:1/1 Internet fidonews@fidonews.fidonet.org BBS (415)-863-2739 (9600 HST/V32) (Postal Service mailing address) FidoNews Box 77731 San Francisco CA 94107 USA Published weekly by and for the Members of the FidoNet international amateur electronic mail system. It is a compilation of individual articles contributed by their authors or their authorized agents. The contribution of articles to this compilation does not diminish the rights of the authors. Opinions expressed in these articles are those of the authors and not necessarily those of FidoNews. FidoNews is copyright 1991 Fido Software. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances, please contact FidoNews (we're easy). OBTAINING COPIES: FidoNews in electronic form may be obtained from the FidoNews BBS via manual download or Wazoo FileRequest, or from various sites in the FidoNet and via uucp. PRINTED COPIES mailed may be obtained from Fido Software for $5.00US each PostPaid First Class within North America, or $7.00US elsewhere, mailed Air Mail. (US funds drawn upon a US bank only.) Periodic subscriptions are not available at this time; if enough people request it I will implement it. SUBMISSIONS: You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in FidoNews. Article submission requirements are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC, available from the FidoNews BBS, or Wazoo filerequestable from 1:1/1 as file "ARTSPEC.DOC". FidoNews 8-52 Page 31 30 Dec 1991 "Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered trademarks of Tom Jennings of Fido Software, Box 77731, San Francisco CA 94107, USA and are used with permission. -- END ----------------------------------------------------------------------