On Tuesday February 09 2021 10:58, you wrote to me:
SM> As far as I understand, this cannot become mandatory for them. SM> However, I still see no reason to refuse such an opportunity.
Of course it can not be made mandatory. Even considering it, will get many feathers ruffled. That you see no reason to refuse an opportunity is not what will get others moving. You will have to convince the developers and their first reaction wil be: "Why should I spent time and energy on it?". So far you have not really provided any reason how this would be useful other than just stating your opinion.
MvdV>> 2) Golded's use is for e-mail gating.
SM> Yes. Initially, the idea of using @REPLYTO was for the convenience of SM> using the e-mail gate. However, practice has shown that it is also SM> very convenient inside Fido.
1) So you say...
2) e-mail gating was useful in the days when not every Fidonet participant had e-mail. In the POTS age I have used it myself. Now in the days of Fido over IP, almost every member of Fdionet has an internet connection and with an internet connection almost everyone has e-mail. E-mail gating over Fidonet is no longer needed.
MvdV>> It may be useful for that, but e-mail gating is not part of MvdV>> Fidonet.
SM> Ok.
So we can forget about e-mail gating in the context of PING robots supportinge @REPLYTO.
MvdV>> It does not convince me it is useful, let alone useful for Ping MvdV>> robots and certainly not that the usefulness outweighs Murphy MvdV>> art 42.
SM> By the way, using this kludge allows you to receive replies from the SM> robot to an e-mail through the gate. And this can also be useful for SM> some sysops.
I do not see how PING can be useful to users. Because that is what people sending e-mail through a gate to Fidonet are. From the Fidonet POV they are users on the system of the gate. PING is designed to test routing within Fidonet. Users have no knowledge of all that, nor do they have a need to know.
MvdV>>>> 3) Are you familiar with art. 42 of Muprpy's Law?
SM>>> Everything that cannot happen happens. ;)
MvdV>> No. that's art 41. ;-)
MvdV>> Murphy's law art 42: If it can be abused, it will be abused,
SM> However, we have not yet figured out if this could be abused. While SM> the answer is - it cannot.
Then art 4 kicks in. "Everything that cannot happen happens."
