johnd@tsdiag.ccur.com (John Decatur KA2QHD) (04/07/90)
In article <j1iaf117h@tmsoft.uucp>, mshiels@tmsoft.uucp (Michael A. Shiels) writes: > > canremote.uucp as you all probably know (or will real soon) is a 80+ > BBS system running under PCBoard. Usenet is gatewayed in and out via > don't read the online documentation or bulletins giving them > posting anything they want because in the BBS world no one seems to > care if it's relevant or not. Great, just what we need, another gateway... Remember the net before un*x ran on pc's.... Oh well.... progress... Rgds all, johnd -- Quote: "DA DA DIT DIT DIT , DIT DIT DIT DA DA" PACKET: KA2QHD@NN2Z US MAIL: John Decatur - CONCURRENT COMPUTER CORP.(Ex MASSCOMP,Interdata) FAX: 201-870-5960 2 Crescent Pl. Oceanport NJ 07757 PH 201-870-4093 UUCP: rutgers!petsd!tsdiag!ka2qhd!johnd or johnd@tsdiag.ccur.com KA2QHD
geoffw@xenitec.on.ca (Geoffrey Welsh) (04/07/90)
In article <j1oslebhi@tmsoft.uucp> mshiels@tmsoft.UUCP (Michael A. Shiels) writes: >In the BBS world private/public mail are stored in the same "conferences". Speak for yourself; the PCBoard network is the only one I know of whoich has no support for separate netmail. Fido even has a mechanism whereby private replies in a conference are sent via netmail - basically the same as hitting "r" in stead of "f" under rn. I have always viewed this as a major impediment to proper gateway operation between PCBoard systems like CanConfMail/NorthAmeriNet and Usenet. >Any other ideas? Yeah - don't let people near a conference (Usenet or otherwise) until you *know* they've read an explanation of what the mechanisms and costs are. It won't solve the problem completely (i.e. there will still be misunderstandings), but it will cut down a lot on the stupid postings by ignorant users (and leave only the ignorant postings by stupid users? <grin>) Geoff UUCP: watmath!xenitec!zswamp!root | 602-66 Mooregate Crescent Internet: root@zswamp.fidonet.org | Kitchener, Ontario FidoNet: SYSOP, 1:221/171 | N2M 5E6 CANADA Data: (519) 742-8939 | (519) 741-9553 My comments do not represent and should not obligate anyone but myself.
dave@compnect.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe) (04/09/90)
In article <j1iaf117h@tmsoft.uucp>, mshiels@tmsoft.uucp (Michael A. Shiels) writes: > > canremote.uucp as you all probably know (or will real soon) is a 80+ > BBS system running under PCBoard. Usenet is gatewayed in and out via > some custom software. The problem we are running into is that people > don't read the online documentation or bulletins giving them > instructions on how to use Usenet etc. They just go ahead and post > inappropriate messages to Usenet conferences. They are used to just > posting anything they want because in the BBS world no one seems to > care if it's relevant or not. > > But this has changed. They now have to specifically add something > to the message to get it to post to usenet as well as locally. > Hopefully this will alleviate everyones worries. ....but don't count on it. Why don't you restrict access to your Usenet interface to those who have READ your instruction files. As proof they have, include a key phrase they must use when requesting Usenet access as the last line of your instruction file. If they then proceed to dump kitty litter into Usenet, yank their access. That's the way I do it here and it works for me. At the very least, you'll be adding an additional buffer between the general public and Usenet. Call it a jerk trap if you will :-) (<------- LOOK! A Smilie!) *>> Dave <<* [------: Dave Ratcliffe :---------:---: UUCP: uunet!wa3wbu!compnect!dave :----] : : The Data Factory BBS : : empty : Data: (717)657-4997 - (717)657-4992 : [.................................:...........................................]