Subj : Another filearea question
To : Mvan Le
From : mark lewis
Date : Tue Jun 12 2007 02:47 pm
ml> MvanL> satisfied the requirement of whomever invented it.
ml> i never said that dorinfox.def should carry more
ml> details... i said that it doesn't carry the node number
ml> internally... you extrapolated that on to something else...
MvanL> The number in the dorinfo1.def dropfile file name was never
MvanL> meant to designate a node number -- not dorinfox.def, not
MvanL> dorinfo#.def, not "dorinfo dropfile" -- DORINFO1(ONE).DEF
MvanL> dropfile.
MvanL> Do you understand the distinction between "The" dorinfo1.def
MvanL> dropfile and "those" dorinfo(x|#).def dropfiles ?
do you understand the meaning of "POST THE SPECS OR A LINK TO THEM"?
ml> MvanL> If people deviate from the specification and adopt different
ml> MvanL> methods for using dorinfo1.def that's their perogative, which
ml> MvanL> doesn't change the fact that the number in the dorinfo1.def
ml> MvanL> dropfile was never meant to designate a node number.
ml> you've still not provided the proof of this... i'm more
ml> than willing to look at it once it is made available...
ml> i would hope that it is written by the original author
ml> of the dorinfox.def specification ;)
MvanL>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dropfile:
oh, cool... i'll go fix that right now...
hint: don't take wikipedia as gospel...
[trim]
MvanL> Which is totally conclusive evidence that the RA mob initiated a
MvanL> dorinfo(x|#).def propaganda against dorinfo1.def which the BBS
MvanL> community later acquiesced towards.
no, it is not conclusive of that... QBBS was also using dorinfox.def at that
time as were wildcat, pcboard, and many other mainstream bbs packages...
besides, there's no cite for that information or a link to the specs those
statements are drawn from...
MvanL> You therefore are a victim of misinformation.
in this instance, your mistake is in believing unproven and undocumented
writtings that you read on wikipedia ;)
)\/(ark
* Origin: (1:3634/12)
