|
|
| Author |
Message |
jimj
|
|
.yesmesg (more control)
| 
Jan 4 19:59 UTC 1997 |
This is an idea that has been introduced before I believe but was
rejected. I think people may reconsider. I think grex should support a
.yesmesg command which would allow you to control who can write and tel
you. If the file .yesmesg doesn't exist in the users home directory
then anyone can write/tel them,for those of you who wouldn't wanna
limit anyone, much like the .forward file only works if it exists.
Comments?
|
| 67 responses total. |
valerie
|
|
response 1 of 67:
|
Jan 4 20:09 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
ryan1
|
|
response 2 of 67:
|
Jan 4 20:13 UTC 1997 |
Cool! I can't wait until there is a working version. <grumble....
hotchatters... grumble...>
|
kerouac
|
|
response 3 of 67:
|
Jan 4 21:48 UTC 1997 |
I still dont like this idea. What we will end up
with will be a community of people who are
inaccessible to outsiders, who cannot be
communicated with unless they are on an exclusive
.yesmsg list.
Grex is about interaction. It cant be a community
when people wall themselves in and become
inaccessible to all but their "approved" list of
friends.
This lends itself to the creation of cliques and
does not IMO foster a true community. In the real
world you cant filter your mail, except for junk
mail. You cant tell the post office NOT to deliver
mail from people who you dont like, or only from
people you like.
Community is taking the good with the bad, and I
think this will detract from Grex's development
into what everyone wants it to be.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 4 of 67:
|
Jan 4 23:07 UTC 1997 |
And .yesmesg will *not* prevent anyone from sending mail to anyone else.
However, I can obtain an unlisted telephone number. I'm not sure these
counter examples are particularly relevant - but neither was your's about
postal mail.
|
ryan1
|
|
response 5 of 67:
|
Jan 4 23:08 UTC 1997 |
Not again............
A person own's their TTY, therefore, they may chose who can write to
them.
|
jimj
|
|
response 6 of 67:
|
Jan 5 02:45 UTC 1997 |
hmm, hey ker, for 1 thing, the internet is now part of the "real world",
next, why should people be able to decide who they don't want to message them?
its just like the :ignore command (which i am sure you opposed but i didn't
follow df's then which is besides the point) if a person wants to be able to
recieve messages from everyone then they don't need to make a .yesmesg (or
whatever the name of it is supposed to be) file. I didn't wanna say it, but
ryan commented on the "hotchatters", which can be quite annoying at times,
and at the moment the only way to stop them is !mesg n which makesit so even
your friends can't mesg you, at least this way you'll have control over who
can mesg you and who can't.
|
jenna
|
|
response 7 of 67:
|
Jan 5 03:07 UTC 1997 |
We always have to have one huge argue ment don't we?;}
I remember this one.
|
janc
|
|
response 8 of 67:
|
Jan 5 05:14 UTC 1997 |
I used to be strongly opposed to selective control of message permissions.
I think that as Grex grows larger, they become more necessary. I haven't had
time to work on write for a while. Likely, if someone else doesn't do it
first, this will be one of the things I do when next I get around to working
on "write". However, currently "backtalk" is a much higher priority, and this
is not a very simple modification (doing it right is not as simple as you'd
think), so I can't promise it anytime soon. I think John had indicated that
he too was going to be too busy for a while.
|
steve
|
|
response 9 of 67:
|
Jan 5 06:04 UTC 1997 |
Sadly, I agree with Jan that it is probably time for this to be
implemented on Grex. I still don't expect to use it, however.
|
mdw
|
|
response 10 of 67:
|
Jan 5 07:45 UTC 1997 |
An option we may want to consider in the longrun is to support something
like zephyr.
|
ryan1
|
|
response 11 of 67:
|
Jan 5 16:30 UTC 1997 |
zephyr? Never heard of that before.... Anybody with more details?
|
popcorn
|
|
response 12 of 67:
|
Jan 5 16:51 UTC 1997 |
It's something like tel's, but you can send them to someone on a different
computer. They use it at MIT.
|
ryan1
|
|
response 13 of 67:
|
Jan 5 17:03 UTC 1997 |
so
...
Talk is to Write as
Zephyr is to Tel
??
|
steve
|
|
response 14 of 67:
|
Jan 5 18:00 UTC 1997 |
Zephyrgrams are more configurable than other things. They're pretty
neat, considered. We need to get other things working before that,
however.
|
robh
|
|
response 15 of 67:
|
Jan 5 18:05 UTC 1997 |
That does sound good, though. My main concern would be to
find a way for each user to disallow them, as we currently
do through "mesg". Think a tel bomb is bad? Imagine a
Zephyr bomb...
|
kerouac
|
|
response 16 of 67:
|
Jan 5 20:12 UTC 1997 |
thats odd...when this was being argued last year, STeve led the argument
opposed to it. I'm curious what happened in the last year to change his
mind?
|
steve
|
|
response 17 of 67:
|
Jan 6 00:53 UTC 1997 |
The fact that more and more people have occaisonal to constant
problems with unwanted tels/writes/talks.
This problem is occuring everywhere. If I hadn't heard others
on machines all over the net complain about this, I wouldn't think
that Grex was so unusual as to warrent special tools.
Unforunately, as more of the general populace of the US gets
access to the net, social problems on the net have risen. Would
that it were not so...
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 18 of 67:
|
Jan 6 05:45 UTC 1997 |
Yes, yes, a way to allow my friends to interrupt a Grex session, but not the
hotchatters! I'd appreciate it, and I suspect most people with feminine
sounding login ids would too!
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 19 of 67:
|
Jan 6 05:54 UTC 1997 |
does anyone know why Grex didn't wordwrap that correctly?
|
mdw
|
|
response 20 of 67:
|
Jan 6 10:11 UTC 1997 |
Zephyr is *very* configurable. You can tell it what kinds of messages
you want to receive, and what you want done in response to such
messages. Messages can include other automated events, such as the
arrival of mail, as well as messages from people. Zephyr works
particularly well in a distributed environment.
|
remmers
|
|
response 21 of 67:
|
Jan 6 14:45 UTC 1997 |
Re #19: Did you enter #18 through Backtalk, perchance?
Yes, I did volunteer to do this a few months ago. At this point
I've read through Jan's source code, formed a design plan for
modifying it to implement the .yeswrite/.nowrite concept, and
corresponded with Jan a bit on my ideas. Basically (to get slightly
technical), my plan is to modify the structure of the records in
the /etc/wrttmp file so that information is recorded for each
logged-in tty or pty about whether the user wants their .yeswrite
or .nowrite file to be consulted when a write/chat/tel request is
received, and to add options to the 'mesg' command to allow a user
to turn this feature on and off. (So that 'mesg n' would still mean
"nobody can write me", but 'mesg .n' would mean "nobody can write
me except for people in my .yeswrite file.")
But I haven't gotten to actually implementing the changes yet;
other matters have had higher priority. I expect that things may
ease up later this month and I may be able to get back to it. Wish
I could guarantee that, but I can't, so I won't be offended if Jan
gets hot to do it himself in the next few weeks.
There's the issue of integrating talk/ntalk/ytalk into the
.yeswrite/.nowrite scheme, since those programs don't use the
/etc/wrttmp file. Not sure the best way to tackle that at this
point, or if I really want to. This and other technical issues
belong in the garage conference rather than coop, I suppose.
I see that people are bringing up the same arguments for and
against this idea that were hashed over at great length before. I
won't get into that except to say that if I didn't think this was a
reasonable idea, I wouldn't have volunteered to do it.
|
cmcgee
|
|
response 22 of 67:
|
Jan 7 04:19 UTC 1997 |
Remmers: re #19, no backtalk, no telnet, just plain old local dialin.
|
janc
|
|
response 23 of 67:
|
Jan 7 04:42 UTC 1997 |
Word wrapping in Picospan is actually done by a separate program called
"gate". Your .cfonce file does seem to set up gate correctly, but if somehow
these settings got messed up, you might get a text-input mode that looks just
like the usual, but doesn't word-wrap automatically.
|
valerie
|
|
response 24 of 67:
|
Jan 7 05:55 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|