On 08/09/17, Jeff Smith pondered and said...

Hello Dream Master,

I realize and am aware of that. But I would imagine that many systems >> either do not support or the operator chooses to not support those code >> in echo mail. As a result there are those that are likely to pass over >> such messages rather that taking the time to decipher what is actually >> be stated in the message.

not being a dick please know this before i type this.

And I did not think you were.

Pat on the back to both you of you. Respectful exchange. Kudos.

i been around using this sig a while. hence my cobwebs lol i don't see anything about using these in the message base rules and if your not the moderator then please leave that to whom ever that is

My intent was not to act or appear to act in any position of authority
in the matter. I was simply expressing an observation. It is also not my intent to single out you or your sig. Actually my thought on the matter
is more directed toward messages as a whole that are comprised primarily of codes. Those types of messages I pay little attention to.

or simply take it up with avon instead of making a long thread about it replying in a public forum and not netmail. the sig is the last part of message.

I was simply expressing my public opinion to a publically posted message.

Looking back at the thread it seems DM is posting echomail body content and with a sig, both using colour pipe codes.... and in the case of Jeff's
software tools it looks wonky in the echomail reader he is using.

I'm not aware of which BBS software does not play nice with colour pipe codes but this is the first time I have seen the subject come up in fsxNet. So to date the messages that have been posted with colour pipe codes (in any
fsxNet echoarea) *don't appear* to be causing any major levels of concern to participants.

I do know that Mystic plays nice with colour pipe codes as I have just done a test in FSX_GEN to confirm things and could read the results of my tests, and
I also could read the posts by DM here without issue.

Given we're having this chat in a Mystic Support issue I think it's
reasonable to expect colour pipe codes may be used here by some. I also think the use of colour pipe codes in people's signatures is a personal choice and folks can decide for themselves what they want to do (or not) in that space
:)

So in sum, use of colour pipe codes is fine by me in fsxNet echomail posts. If a larger group voice a concern in the future then we can re-assess if we want to have a flag in the subject line (like the ANSI one we use). But for now it's clear Jeff is happy to choose to read (or not) messages with colour pipe codes... and DM ... you just keep doing what you're doing :)

Thanks all.

Best, Paul

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A34 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | telnet://agency.bbs.geek.nz (21:1/101)

Hello Avon,

My intent was not to act or appear to act in any position of authority
in the matter. I was simply expressing an observation. It is also not my
intent to single out you or your sig. Actually my thought on the matter
is more directed toward messages as a whole that are comprised primarily
of codes. Those types of messages I pay little attention to.

Let me expand to state that I personally have never been a fan of ansi in messages. That is my personal choice and is not meant to suggest that I am trying to impose that choice on to others.

or simply take it up with avon instead of making a long thread about it
replying in a public forum and not netmail. the sig is the last part of
message.

I was simply expressing my public opinion to a publically posted message.

Looking back at the thread it seems DM is posting echomail body content and with a sig, both using colour pipe codes.... and in the case of Jeff's software tools it looks wonky in the echomail reader he is using.

Currently I am using BBBS's web interface as well as Synchronet's web interface
to post/reply echomail. Currently they do not process ansi codes effectively. I use Golded on the Mystic machine for the same purpose with the same result.

I understand that the codes might look as intended if I were telneting into the
BBS's directly. I wasn't meaning to suggest that ansi codes should not be used or should not be permitted. Just an observation of how they appear on some systems that try to read them.


Jeff

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-3
* Origin: FsxNet: The Ouija Board - bbs.ouijabrd.net (21:1/128)

On 08/10/17, Avon said the following...

Looking back at the thread it seems DM is posting echomail body content and with a sig, both using colour pipe codes.... and in the case of
Jeff's software tools it looks wonky in the echomail reader he is using.

no pipe color codes mpl code . you said wonky. willy wonky and the chocolate factory lol unless there is an [Xx / [Yx code in there but i'm not seeing it?

posts. If a larger group voice a concern in the future then we can re-assess if we want to have a flag in the subject line (like the ANSI
one we use). But for now it's clear Jeff is happy to choose to read (or

but if you have a sig it wont show [ANSI]. any think with the /U command will post ansi if it's toggles in the config. the only other toggle is allow ansi
in each individual base. you will see the sig but not in colors. =)

|08 .|05ú|13ù|15Dr|07e|08am Ma|07st|15er|13ù|05ú|08.
|08 øù|05ú|13ùø |13øù|05ú|08ùø
|11 DoRE|03!|11ACiDiC|03!|11Demonic |08[|15dreamland|09.|15darktech|09.|15org|08]

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A34 (Windows/64)
* Origin: |08--[|15!|07dreamland BBS dreamland.darktech.org (21:1/163)

On Wednesday, August 9th Avon muttered...

Given we're having this chat in a Mystic Support issue I think it's reasonable to expect colour pipe codes may be used here by some.

Sorry to jump in yalls conversation, but ENiG supports pipe codes -- and through they are not yet supported in the FSE, they will be soon. I for one welcome them :)





--- ENiGMA 1/2 v0.0.7-alpha (linux; x64; 6.10.3)
* Origin: Xibalba -+- xibalba.l33t.codes:44510 (21:1/121)

On 08/10/17, NuSkooler said the following...

Sorry to jump in yalls conversation, but ENiG supports pipe codes -- and through they are not yet supported in the FSE, they will be soon. I for one welcome them :)

I installed it last night because I'm looking for another software to configure, hehehe. Very nice, easy install and it works really well too. I
look forward to digging in more.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A31 (Raspberry Pi)
* Origin: Alcoholiday / Est. 1995 / alco.bbs.io (21:1/113)

On 08/10/17, NuSkooler pondered and said...

Sorry to jump in yalls conversation, but ENiG supports pipe codes -- and through they are not yet supported in the FSE, they will be soon. I for one welcome them :)

You're most welcome to dive on in :)

Glad to hear ENiG will support them... you're coding some super cool stuff there Nu and I'm glad you're so active in the dev space :)

Best, Paul

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A34 (Windows/32)
* Origin: Agency BBS | telnet://agency.bbs.geek.nz (21:1/101)

So in sum, use of colour pipe codes is fine by me in fsxNet echomail posts. If a larger group voice a concern in the future then we can re-assess if we want to have a flag in the subject line (like the ANSI
one we use). But for now it's clear Jeff is happy to choose to read (or not) messages with colour pipe codes... and DM ... you just keep doing what you're doing :)

Sweet, I personally love my pipe codes (as evidenced by my signature as well heh). It's been awhile since I've seen a BBS that didn't do pipe
codes... I think PCBoard/MajorBBS come to mind first (with PCB doing the @ codes instead). Maybe there's an option to filter them at the local sysop's discretion for softwares that don't play nicely? That's what I would
suggest as it would allow other sysops with pipe friendly codes to keep on rocking them. Maybe something in the mail tosser. Or it could be an easy filter with sed, maybe something like |\d{2}?

|01ú |14d|12a|04rkwi|12n|14g
|01ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
|08 +o |14S|12k|04yNET Syste|12m|14s |01ú

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A34 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: ACiD Underworld // Victor Ludorum (21:1/188)

On Thursday, August 10th Zero Reader was heard saying...

I installed it last night because I'm looking for another software to configure, hehehe. Very nice, easy install and it works really well too. I look forward to digging in more.

Great! If you have questions/issues don't hesitate to ask or feel free to join us on #enigma-bbs / freenode!


--- ENiGMA 1/2 v0.0.7-alpha (linux; x64; 6.10.3)
* Origin: Xibalba -+- xibalba.l33t.codes:44510 (21:1/121)