Text 3198, 59 rader
Skriven 2008-04-21 08:41:00 av andrew clarke (3:633/267.0)
   Kommentar till text 3145 av Frank Reid (1569.fidoftscpubl)
Ärende: Proper nodelist format for Internet-only nodes?
=======================================================
On Wed 2008-04-16 19:29, Frank Reid (1:109/567) wrote to Nick Andre:

 FR> My statements were intended to be pro-Fidonet, as I think that's where
 FR> we're losing ground today.  More on topic, I also think it's an area
 FR> where FTSC can have a direct role in providing rudder by tapping current
 FR> and even outside talent pools to embrace new transports and technologies
 FR> and forge new ways forward.

I suspect a lot of people within FidoNet enjoy the relative exclusivity of the
network and would prefer it stay that way.  The sorts of people who make a fuss
when their favourite echo is gated to the Internet and their name is
subsequently indexed by Google.

In any case I think your suggestion is really beyond the scope of the FTSC.  If
you want to attract software developers by way of a FidoNet technology advocacy
group then you'll probably need to start one yourself.

 FR> Yes, Fidonet(tm) itself may be a product, but that product needs 
 FR> the means to reach a new base of users.  DB is one such transport, 
 FR> of course.  SBBS is another.

 FR> The Facebook, MySpace and blogger crowds are tough to get and keep
 FR> interested.  They're looking for a "SETUP.EXE" that prompts with a few
 FR> questions and rewards them with a capability in return.  Synchronet
 FR> comes as close as I've seen in succeeding in that, but there may be
 FR> other actively supported Windows packages out there of which I'm not
 FR> aware.  Again, I'm not a shill for Synchronet.  I run it here on a
 FR> secondary system, and I like it.  That's about all.

Arguably the folks MySpace and Facebook with such short attention spans
probably don't belong on FidoNet.

Aside from the social networking aspect of MySpace, I don't really understand
the value of it.  It could break tomorrow and only bored teenage gossips, and
perhaps some musicians would really care.

With Facebook there is at least some value in being able to use their internal
messaging system from (some?) mobile phones.  If I can locate some NNTP
newsreading software for my Nokia phone (I haven't looked yet) then I should be
able to send messages to FidoNet with little trouble.  Echomail, anyway.  While
echomail usually isn't instant, it can be, especially if sender and receiver
are using the same node, or nodes that talk to each other whenever there is new
mail.

But - if I can already do that through Facebook, why would I bother using
something else (FidoNet) that none of my friends use?  This isn't limited to
FidoNet, but also applies to small web sites trying to compete with the large
established sites.  For example I think a lot of people would prefer not to use
eBay, but "everyone else does", so they stick with it.  There is "lock-in" like
this everywhere on the web, and it can only be overcome with a lot of
cooperation between the established sites, and some compromises that may mean
loss of income for some players - in other words, it's very difficult.

Facebook's other main feature are the games, which don't appeal to me, but I
know are popular with some of my friends. Scrabulous, for example.  Do you want
to play Scrabulous over FidoNet?  :-)

--- timEd/FreeBSD 1.11.b2
 * Origin: Blizzard of Ozz, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (3:633/267)