installed on your machine. However, there are some web forums (using
vBulletin or whatever) that I don't really mind, since there isn't much Ni>> alternative (also, usually they don't seem terribly slow either). But
Yeah, I'm currently off all web forums. :/
you've also said that latency tends to be bigger where you are since
many online forums etc. are far away. So that makes sense too.
That's one issue, the other is every forum is an island - no networking, and that means more things I have to remember to check. Not exactly compatible with my brain. :/
"every forum is an island" ...well said.
But Synchronet's adoption of using a webby interface for FTN echos and labeling it as "Forum" in the menu, can change that perception and blur the boundaries.
On 06-21-20 09:16, Ogg wrote to dove-net.general <=-
"every forum is an island" ...well said.
But Synchronet's adoption of using a webby interface for FTN echos and labeling it as "Forum" in the menu, can change that perception and blur the boundaries.
On 06-21-20 11:29, Nightfox wrote to Ogg <=-
Yes, and I've also heard web forums being called "bulletin boards" a couple times. Particularly, the web forum software phpBB stands for
"PHP bulletin board". Conceptually, they serve the same purpose - They provide a place for people to discuss things through public messages
(and also send private messages to other users).
As has been said before though, there's no networking with web forums.
It would be interesting if they supported some kind of networking..
You could possibly then be able to browse & post on one forum's message areas from multiple web sites. Or perhaps combine message areas from multiple forums into one listing.
Yes, and I've also heard web forums being called "bulletin boards" a
couple times. Particularly, the web forum software phpBB stands for
"PHP bulletin board". Conceptually, they serve the same purpose -
They provide a place for people to discuss things through public
messages (and also send private messages to other users).
In a limited sense, given the lack of networking.
networking.. You could possibly then be able to browse & post on one
forum's message areas from multiple web sites. Or perhaps combine
message areas from multiple forums into one listing.
That would be interesting, and then perhaps if it was its own protocol, it could be gated to FTN, or BBSs might even evolve to support whatever the web forums came up with. :) However, such a development seems highly unlikely. Web forum developers tend to be rather web centric and somewhat insular. Some don't like the idea of interfacing to other media (e.g. SMF won't integrate mailing lists, etc), others are more open to that idea (e.g. FUDForum, which has mailing list and NNTP integration available).
On 06-21-20 11:29, Nightfox wrote to Ogg <=-
As has been said before though, there's no networking with web forums. It would be interesting if they supported some kind of networking..
You could possibly then be able to browse & post on one forum's message areas from multiple web sites. Or perhaps combine message areas from multiple forums into one listing.
That would be interesting, and then perhaps if it was its own protocol, it could be gated to FTN, or BBSs might even evolve to support whatever the web forums came up with. :) However, such a development seems highly unlikely. Web forum developers tend to be rather web centric and somewhat insular. Some
don't like the idea of interfacing to other media (e.g. SMF won't integrate mailing lists, etc), others are more open to that idea (e.g. FUDForum, which has mailing list and NNTP integration available).
On 06-21-20 23:23, Nightfox wrote to Vk3jed <=-
In a literal sense, a bulletin board is just a board where bulletins
and other news can be attached to, for communal places. So in a way, I think "bulletin board" can make sense for a web forum. I think we tend
to think of a bulletin board as the small online computer service we're familiar with, with networked message areas, etc., but I think the term "bulletin board" was adopted from earlier usages.
Yep, I haven't seen many web forums that can easily integrate with
other forums or services. Perhaps only through 3rd-party plugins.
That reminds me, there was a plugin for vBulletin that would let it
sync with an NNTP news server. That's one way you could network
multiple web forum sites together - Have a news server somewhere and
have multiple vBulletin forum sites set up with the same forum areas syncing with the news server. And if multiple Synchronet sysops set up vBulletin that way with their BBS, then we'd effectively have Dove-Net available from multiple vBulletin forum interfaces online.
That could have interesting implications, because web forums sometimes have additional features like allowing users to upload photos and
display photos inline with their messages, etc..
Conceptually, they serve the same purpose - They provide a place
for people to discuss things through public messages (and also
send private messages to other users).
We currently run 5 sites all with the same forums (rocksolid.* hierarchy) in three networks (clearnet, i2p and tor), running
rslight sites, one FudForum, one modified vichan and one custom site written as bash scripts. I'm using domain names I alrea
owned, so they say 'bbs' in them. That's from when I was running the Synchronet web interface, which is where this all start
www.rocksolidbbs.com
Retro Guy
Re: Re: every forum is an island
By: Retro Guy to Vk3jed on Mon Jun 22 2020 09:19 am
We currently run 5 sites all with the same forums (rocksolid.* hierarchy) in three networks (clearnet, i2p and tor), running
rslight sites, one FudForum, one modified vichan and one custom site written as bash scripts. I'm using domain names I alrea
owned, so they say 'bbs' in them. That's from when I was running the Synchronet web interface, which is where this all start
www.rocksolidbbs.com
Retro Guy
What is your i2p address?
On 06-22-20 09:19, Retro Guy wrote to Vk3jed <=-
This is currently the target of the forum software I'm posting with
right now (and developing). The "backend" is not a database, but a nntp spool. It uses nntp, and includes a simple nntp server, all written in php. The idea actually came from good forums coming and going in the
The software I'm using right now, Rocksolid Light (rslight), can talk
nntp to other servers, other installs of rslight, or just standalone.
This site I'm using right now is connected to Synchronet as the
backend. rslight also knows to send correct 'To:' header when connected
to Synchronet, just toggle the config option '$synchronet'. At some
point I'd really like to support QWK, but still ironing out what I have already. But I hope in the future to do so.
We currently run 5 sites all with the same forums (rocksolid.*
hierarchy) in three networks (clearnet, i2p and tor), running 2 rslight sites, one FudForum, one modified vichan and one custom site written as bash scripts. I'm using domain names I already owned, so they say 'bbs'
in them. That's from when I was running the Synchronet web interface, which is where this all started. www.rocksolidbbs.com
On 06-22-20 10:12, Rampage wrote to Vk3jed <=-
remember, too, that BBSes did not start out being networked... that
came later when some BBS devs figured out they could sent messages to other BBSes late at night when it was cheaper via automated means
instead of doing long distance dialing and manually typing live in
sysop chat to the other dev operator... thus FTN was born... i'm not
sure when other forms of BBS networking came around, though... WWIV native, QWK, etc... they were probably all in a tight race if there was
a ""race"" taking place...
[...] instead of doing long distance dialing and manually typing
live in sysop chat to the other dev operator... thus FTN was born...
i'm not sure when other forms of BBS networking came around,
though... WWIV native, QWK, etc... they were probably all in a tight
race if there was a ""race"" taking place...
On 06-22-20 09:19, Retro Guy wrote to Vk3jed <=-
This is currently the target of the forum software I'm posting with right now (and developing). The "backend" is not a database, but a nntp spool. It uses nntp, and includes a simple nntp server, all written in php. The idea actually came from good forums coming and going in the
That actually sounds pretty cool. That's something I'd consider running on this system as an alternative web interface. Would even be better if it could
talk to Sunchronet's userbase, or a number of other selected userbases.
On 06-23-20 10:31, Rampage wrote to Vk3jed <=-
yep... no need to link different forums in that case... at best, only
one server/forum/database setup is needed... at worst, multiple servers synced to the same database and probably spread over the globe...
well... it is understandable... 24x7 connectivity is a goal and one
that is fast approaching... just like the internet came along and
overtook the dialup networking that was the big thing once upon a
time...
On 06-24-20 04:06, Retro Guy wrote to Vk3jed <=-
That was my initial plan, but it would have been difficult at that
time. Now that I include my own nntp (nnrp) server, I should be able to work that into it.
I'd still like to
support "messages to me" and such when connected to Synchronet, but
right now it is not supported. Only adding "To: " and authenticating
with the sender user/pass. As of now, Synchronet just sees it as a nntp client, so no real interaction with Synchronet's userbase data, but the goal of interconnected web forums seems to be going well.
Vk3jed wrote to Retro Guy <=-
On 06-22-20 09:19, Retro Guy wrote to Vk3jed <=-
This is currently the target of the forum software I'm posting with
right now (and developing). The "backend" is not a database, but a nntp spool. It uses nntp, and includes a simple nntp server, all written in php. The idea actually came from good forums coming and going in the
That actually sounds pretty cool. That's something I'd consider
running on this system as an alternative web interface. Would even be better if it could talk to Sunchronet's userbase, or a number of other selected userbases.
The software I'm using right now, Rocksolid Light (rslight), can talk
nntp to other servers, other installs of rslight, or just standalone.
This site I'm using right now is connected to Synchronet as the
backend. rslight also knows to send correct 'To:' header when connected
to Synchronet, just toggle the config option '$synchronet'. At some
point I'd really like to support QWK, but still ironing out what I have already. But I hope in the future to do so.
Now this is a forum I could get behind. :)
We currently run 5 sites all with the same forums (rocksolid.*
hierarchy) in three networks (clearnet, i2p and tor), running 2 rslight sites, one FudForum, one modified vichan and one custom site written as bash scripts. I'm using domain names I already owned, so they say 'bbs'
in them. That's from when I was running the Synchronet web interface, which is where this all started. www.rocksolidbbs.com
I'll look it up.
The D Language Forum is set up like this too, a web front end with NNTP access.
They use D to power the forum and it works nice and fast.
On 06-24-20 21:07, Dennisk wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The D Language Forum is set up like this too, a web front end with NNTP access.
They use D to power the forum and it works nice and fast.
On 06-24-20 21:07, Dennisk wrote to Vk3jed <=-
The D Language Forum is set up like this too, a web front end with NNTP access.
They use D to power the forum and it works nice and fast.
Seems to be a good way to create a fast, responsive forum. I was impressed with the speed of Rocksolid. Sounds like the D Language Forum is similar.
On 06-24-20 04:06, Retro Guy wrote to Vk3jed <=-
That was my initial plan, but it would have been difficult at that
time. Now that I include my own nntp (nnrp) server, I should be able to work that into it.
Yeah, using the host system's userbase is more work, though should be doable in
theory with Synchronet, because it's well documented.
Bust looking through rocksolifbbs.com. Performance is actually quite snappy, a
refreshing change from many other web forums. Navigation is not quite me though, it's "go into a thread and back out", whereas I prefer being able to continue in a more linear fashion, going from thread to (next) thread with a single (ideally keyboard command) event. But I am inpressed. The display of a
thread is great, showing the entire thread view, first as a tree, then all of the posts.
Nightfox wrote to Dennisk <=-
Re: Re: every forum is an isl
By: Dennisk to Vk3jed on Wed Jun 24 2020 09:07 pm
The D Language Forum is set up like this too, a web front end with NNTP access.
They use D to power the forum and it works nice and fast.
I haven't actually seen D used for very much. As a compiled language,
I'm not sure if D would be a first choice to power a forum? It seems
to me that back-end web-based stuff is usually done with PHP, JSP, ASP.NET, Python, Ruby, etc..
Nightfox
So, enjoy DOVE-Net on your phone here https://www.rocksolidbbs.com/dovenet/
Retro Guy
yep... no need to link different forums in that case... at best, only
one server/forum/database setup is needed... at worst, multiple
servers synced to the same database and probably spread over the
globe...
Yes, I'd agree that's where they're thinking, but it is still a bit blinkered, and relies on a large number of assumptions, like:
Everyone _wants_ to be connected to the server for all operations in
real time. (I often don't for performance reasons)
Everyone is happy with a collection of independent sites and checking
each one separatetly. (Not compatible with my brain - I'd class this as
an accessibility issue in my case).
Everyone wants to use a web interface for all functions - A web
interface has its place, but not for everything for me.
And the reasons I like BBSs as we know them include offline mail and the ability to bring multiple nets into the one place using FTN, QWK, NNTP,
etc.
well... it is understandable... 24x7 connectivity is a goal and one
that is fast approaching... just like the internet came along and
overtook the dialup networking that was the big thing once upon a
time...
Understandable, yes, but it shouldn't be to the exclusion of everything
else, which seems to be the approach most forum software takes. :/
Everyone is happy with a collection of independent sites and checking
each one separatetly. (Not compatible with my brain - I'd class this as
an accessibility issue in my case).
I wouldn't say that "Everyone is happy". It's more because there are no other alternatives to experience. :(
Most forums serve as info/techhelp sites. You look for some info, find it, and you're done. If you have a question, you post it, check back in a few days, follow the convo for a little while, and then you're done. They are not necessarily like echomail destinations that you "follow" on a continuing basis.
On 06-25-20 08:29, Retro Guy wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Looks like they've done a nice job on the dlang forum. I didn't realize
it worked as a nntp client. The one thing I did here in addition to
that is that it is also a nntp server. This allows other installations
of rslight to communicate directly with eachother (which was the goal). rslight also does not create a 'database', but creates it's own spool which, for articles, is a direct match of an INN tradspool. This allows rslight to read articles directly from disk, without bothering the
(local) nntp server to ask. The local server creates overview files
that rslight can use to find articles, etc., and also so it can operate
as a server. I regularly read and post using knode and thunderbird
through the rslight nntp server.
Also, the dlang forum is responsive and looks pretty good on a phone.
This is another thing I've tried to accomplish, and so far it's working well on rslight also. Of course it can always be improved.
So, enjoy DOVE-Net on your phone here https://www.rocksolidbbs.com/dovenet/
On 06-25-20 08:42, Retro Guy wrote to Vk3jed <=-
I do create accounts from the new accounts on the site in a script
which calls /sbbs/exec/makeuser, but that's just the easy part. It'll
take some time and work to track what messages a user has already read, etc.
Yes, it's really designed as a standard forum that happens to use nntp,
so it doesn't have the nice personalized features of a bbs. I need to
dig back into sbbs code and see what I'm up against to start linking
some of these features. If I can add them in a way that a common forum user would understand, that's how I'd like to do it (since almost all users of these sites have probably never used a bbs before)
We just got past the hurdle of no longer requiring a separate nntp
server for sync since it's now built in. We just applied this code to vichan and now have it working as a (client only) nntp forum (chan). A little time to address bugs as they come up and then I can start
getting back to adding features.
And, thanks for your comments, it is helpful.
On 06-26-20 00:27, Ogg wrote to All <=-
Everyone _wants_ to be connected to the server for all operations in
real time. (I often don't for performance reasons)
Me neither! If there was an offline option for reading and writing
with forum-based sites, I'd love that. I don't particularly care to
have to have my radio on a laptop or the mobile hotspot operating, for example, that continues to consume precious battery power while there
is no signifacant internet activity.
Everyone is happy with a collection of independent sites and checking
each one separatetly. (Not compatible with my brain - I'd class this as
an accessibility issue in my case).
I wouldn't say that "Everyone is happy". It's more because there are
no other alternatives to experience. :(
Most forums serve as info/techhelp sites. You look for some info, find it, and you're done. If you have a question, you post it, check back in
a few days, follow the convo for a little while, and then you're done. They are not necessarily like echomail destinations that you "follow"
on a continuing basis.
The always-connected forum style is not a good fit for echomail.
Everyone wants to use a web interface for all functions - A web
interface has its place, but not for everything for me.
The rockbbs webby solution and one of sychro's adaptive solution for mobile are pretty good. But and "offline" option would be better! :)
And the reasons I like BBSs as we know them include offline mail and the ability to bring multiple nets into the one place using FTN, QWK, NNTP,
etc.
"to bring mutiple nets into one place".. I concur!
When ICQ came around, that was pretty cool. But then, some people discovered AIM, others GoogleTalk, YahooMessenger - first. Running the different clients separately got old pretty fast. However, Pidgin was
like a breath of fresh air - as it combined all those chats into one environment.
It's nice to bring the different FTN, QWK, NNTP based nets into one
place.
Sadly, an "offline" concept is not optioned as a possibility for the modern internet user. Even most Apps operate on the assumption that a connection is always present.
On 06-26-20 00:06, MRO wrote to Ogg <=-
there's some forums that send you emails when people reply. also years
ago when i was looking for an alternative to vbulletin, atleast one allowed you to network with another site's forums. i cant remember the name. it was a long time ago.
---
Everyone is happy with a collection of independent sites and checking
each one separatetly. (Not compatible with my brain - I'd class this as
an accessibility issue in my case).
I wouldn't say that "Everyone is happy". It's more because there are
no other alternatives to experience. :(
Well, not many people are pushing for change. :(
..Actually help forums often piss me off, because they get cached in
search results, and when you go to read the post, it's not where the
search engine thought it was. :/
And in the ham radio world, support groups also tend to be discussion
groups, and again, the forum is a poor fit. Many are still in mailing
lists, but the pro forum crowd keep arguing to get things moved to
forums. :/
A BBS with a forum would go a long way towards making
something suitable for more people.
Everyone wants to use a web interface for all functions - A web
interface has its place, but not for everything for me.
The rockbbs webby solution and one of sychro's adaptive solution for
mobile are pretty good. But and "offline" option would be better! :)
Well, if it's backed by Synchronet, offline mail is available! :)
When ICQ came around, that was pretty cool. But then, some people
discovered AIM, others GoogleTalk, YahooMessenger - first. Running
the different clients separately got old pretty fast. However, Pidgin
was like a breath of fresh air - as it combined all those chats into
one environment.
Yes, Pidgin was a godsend, and to thing I'm no longer on those networks. :/
Sadly, an "offline" concept is not optioned as a possibility for the
modern internet user. Even most Apps operate on the assumption that a Og>> connection is always present.
And even that is a fallacious assumption. All you have to so is drive a short distance from here - umm, 10-15 minutes will do it, and your
always on Internet suddenly isn't on. :)
Syncho's new webby thing (that you call ecwebv4 in another message) looks
yet - so, I don't know how the replying/quoting behaves to the user. It
Well, if it's backed by Synchronet, offline mail is available! :)
But the Synchro webby thing doesn't have a download-for-offline option. I
On 06-30-20 21:25, Ogg wrote to Vk3jed <=-
Well, not many people are pushing for change. :(
All it takes is a working model or demonstation to start. The key is inspiring a like-minded coder who recognizes the advantages and can
create it.
..Actually help forums often piss me off, because they get cached in
search results, and when you go to read the post, it's not where the
search engine thought it was. :/
But you shouldn't experience that with the forum's local search.
I wouldn't trust google-search. google still pulls up old info about
my business! And then, it you follow through with the link, the full
info page may or may not be there!
And in the ham radio world, support groups also tend to be discussion groups, and again, the forum is a poor fit. Many are still in mailing lists, but the pro forum crowd keep arguing to get things moved to
forums. :/
Maybe it is because the HAM guys are used to working "live", not
offline. ??? Maybe the solution is to introduce the concept and
benefit of time- shifting - akin to when recording OTA TV to VHS or
with a HDD recorder so that you could watch whenever you wanted gained favour.
Now, having an internet service or connection "means" that a constant active connection is required to do anything. The masses have been inculcated to assume that you can't participate in forums/echomail
unless they are currently connected. The masses with unlimited
internet are not concerned with understanding any benefit of "offline" usage. Here, education could be an answer - what does that look like?
A BBS with a forum would go a long way towards making
something suitable for more people.
Syncho's new webby thing (that you call ecwebv4 in another message)
looks intriguing. I haven't tried it as a registered user on a
supporting bbs, yet - so, I don't know how the replying/quoting behaves
to the user. It has the Next/Back/First/Last controls to navigate
through threads or topics.
But the Synchro webby thing doesn't have a download-for-offline option.
I guess we would need an "app" that can manage the messages locally on
a device.
When ICQ came around, that was pretty cool. But then, some people
discovered AIM, others GoogleTalk, YahooMessenger - first. Running
the different clients separately got old pretty fast. However, Pidgin
was like a breath of fresh air - as it combined all those chats into
one environment.
Yes, Pidgin was a godsend, and to thing I'm no longer on those networks. :/
The real-time chat was cool to have like a personal walkie-talkie while
I was working on the computer doing something else not too important.
But at other times entering into a conversation wasn't always
convenient and I'd regret being "On Line" in the chat view.
I liked Pidgin's tie-in to the local WinAmp and displaying "Currently listening too.." as part of my presence. It cool to check out other people's choice of tunes.
Ah... but the "apps" *do* operate on the constantly-connected
assumption. It is *you* who is using that app outside its expectations!
LOL
| Sysop: | MCMLXXIX |
|---|---|
| Location: | Prospect, CT |
| Users: | 325 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 124:58:25 |
| Calls: | 506 |
| Messages: | 219665 |