| |
VK2TV > PAKET 24.03.09 05:12l 83 Lines 3321 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : F50266VK2TV
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: Another Nail >VK2TV
Path: IZ3LSV<IK2XDE<DB0RES<DK0WUE<7M3TJZ<F6CDD<F6BVP<VK2TV
Sent: 090324/0304Z @:VK2TV.#MNC.NSW.AUS.OC #:55723 [Kempsey, QF68JX] $:F50266VK
From: VK2TV@VK2TV.#MNC.NSW.AUS.OC
To : PAKET@WW
> From : G7SRI
> To : PAKET@WW
> Type/status : B$
> Date/time : 24-Mar 05:29
> BID (MID) : 1F1570G7SRI
> Message # : 317854
> Title : Re: Another Nail >VK2TV
>
> Path: !GB7LDI!CX2SA!7M3TJZ!ON0AR!F4BWT!ON0BEL!SV1CMG!VE2GPQ!ZL2BAU!GB7MAX!
> !GB7SYP!GB7NND!
>
> From: G7SRI@GB7NND.#23.GBR.EU
> To : PAKET@WW
>
> [T:1253. D:23/03/09 #:1570 N:Geoff B:GB7NND {IO93JG, Clowne}]
>
> Sorry. NO header allowed on this message.....
>
> First of all, Thanks for responding to my mail Ray,
>
> I appreciate the point you made regarding the internet, and I realise that
> without Internet the packet network would be in an almost total state of
> collapse by now. I'm glad that such is not the case and I can still enjoy
> the mode.
>
> A few days ago I noticed a station had logged onto my local bbs by going
> through my digipeater, which is exactly why I have it enabled, so that
> people can use it. The operator had been away from packet for a long time
> and had decided to get back on, only to find that from where he lives, my
> station is the only packet signals he can 'see'. I hope I see more
> activity from him even though it will be a slow connection for him having
> to digipeat.
>
> Please don't think I am against packet using the internet, but I would
> rather see a healthy RF network as we had back a few years when the only
> Australian BBS not to ban BOFARS was your good self.
>
> Thanks again for the responce.
>
>
Hi Geoff,
I've long held the philosophy that if systems exist there is something for
potential users to use. Without those systems they have no choice.
The bbs system here is also a multi-port node that caters for ax25, Rose
and Netrom routing. The system will even respond to TCP/IP over radio. For
most of the time most of the facilities don't get used but they are here,
just in case.
I have one bbs user who does a bit of portable operating, camping with his
wife. He logs in here on 40m from wherever he may be and checks some mail.
It's things like that, that make it all worthwhile. He's also on aprs so
when he's out and about I'll take a screen dump of his track and send it
to him.
BOFARS, eh? What about CUDLIP and WIERDO? Don't be surprised to see them
again because I've just given Glen access here.
I suppose that many of those titles encountered the wrath of sysops in an
era before internet forwarding took hold, back when HF forwarding was
supreme, and large or meaningless traffic was seen as a burden on the
system. I don't see any need these days to place such limitations on
traffic. Anyone who sends anything to packet is at very least another user
of a dwindling facility.
It would be very easy to blame an inadequate infrastructure for the demise
of packet, and I've certainly done that, but the reality is that even in
areas where a high speed, broadband backbones existed, packet activity is
minimal. I think the bottom line is that packet wasn't what many users
expected it to be. They tried it and moved on to something else. The
advent of affordable, get it anywhere, internet didn't help.
I still believe that packet is an invaluable tool for the amateur service
but not many share that point of view, sadly.
Cheers ... Ray vk2tv
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
