Why not produce an invite link to the FidoNet group that you created andadminister? ;)
Why not produce an invite link to the FidoNet group that you created andadminister? ;)
And what prevents us from creating an echo conference of the same name inFido and linking them? ;)
Why not produce an invite link to the FidoNet group that you created
and administer? ;)
And what prevents us from creating an echo conference of the same name in Fido and linking them? ;)
2:280/464 5fb80258created
Hi Brother,
On 2020-11-20 20:45:16, you wrote to August Abolins:
Why not produce an invite link to the FidoNet group that you
name inand administer? ;)
And what prevents us from creating an echo conference of the same
an Telegram exclusive group. We have enough areas that are already gated.Fido and linking them? ;)
The name of the group is rather pretentious: "FidoNet"
I didn't have gating in mind when I created it. I think it should remain
A new echomail area TELEGRAM. Or TELEGRAM.FIDONET would be a good ideathough, I think. Or can a gated area have different names on the Telegram and Fidonet side? Than it can be TELEGRAM on the fidonet side and FidoNet on the Telegram side. ;-)
Bye, Wilfred.
And what prevents us from creating an echo conference of the same
name in Fido and linking them? ;)
Moderator approval? <g,d,r>
A new echomail area TELEGRAM. Or TELEGRAM.FIDONET would
be a good idea though, I think. Or can a gated area have
different names on the Telegram and Fidonet side? Than it
can be TELEGRAM on the fidonet side and FidoNet on the
Telegram side. ;-)
The name of the group is rather pretentious: "FidoNet"
I didn't have gating in mind when I created it. I think it should
remain an Telegram exclusive group. We have enough areas that are
already gated.
A new echomail area TELEGRAM. Or TELEGRAM.FIDONET would be a good idea though, I think.
Or can a gated area have different names on the Telegram
and Fidonet side?
Than it can be TELEGRAM on the fidonet side and FidoNet
on the Telegram side. ;-)
Telegram produces an ID # for every group. Stas' bot uses the ID #.
The name can change on the TgM side at any time and and the activity
is unaffected. That is my understanding of it.
You may like to adjust some permissions. I think I just changed the
name of it for everyone! Sorry, I thought that it would only rename
for me. Or does it?
Meanwhile a new fido echo for the TgM/Fido topic might be good.
A new echomail area TELEGRAM. Or TELEGRAM.FIDONET would
be a good idea though, I think. Or can a gated area have
different names on the Telegram and Fidonet side? Than it
can be TELEGRAM on the fidonet side and FidoNet on the
Telegram side. ;-)
Telegram produces an ID # for every group. Stas' bot uses the ID #. The name can change on the TgM side at any time and and the activity is unaffected. That is my understanding of it.
itA new echomail area TELEGRAM. Or TELEGRAM.FIDONET would be a good
idea though, I think.
Ok. Let's do it!
Or can a gated area have different names on the Telegram
and Fidonet side?
Yes. The name of the group now may be completely different from ECHOTAG. Such groups even already exist.
Than it can be TELEGRAM on the fidonet side and FidoNet
on the Telegram side. ;-)
Yes. It can be that way.
I really liked both of your ideas. We can create a FIDONET.TELEGRAM group associated with TELEGRAM.FIDONET echo and/or link the FidoNet group with the TELEGRAM echo. It is very important that they are international and
is desirable to have one of these groups open, public.
2:460/5858 5fb805ab
Hi, August!
20 ноя 20 20:53, August Abolins -> Brother Rabbit:
And what prevents us from creating an echo conference of the same BR>> name in Fido and linking them? ;)
Moderator approval? <g,d,r>
Well, so, here we are trying to agree. ;)
Have nice nights.
Stas Mishchenkov.
Not to confuse people to much I think the names should be the same on both sides. So how about TELEGRAM.FIDONET, unless someone has a
better idea?
Not to confuse people to much I think the names should be the same
on both sides. So how about TELEGRAM.FIDONET, unless someone has a
better idea?
May be it will be better tu use FIDONET.TELEGRAM tag?
Hi, Wilfred!
20 ноя 20 20:53, Wilfred van Velzen -> Stas Mishchenkov:
Not to confuse people to much I think the names should be the same on
both sides. So how about TELEGRAM.FIDONET, unless someone has a
better idea?
May be it will be better tu use FIDONET.TELEGRAM tag?
May be it will be better tu use FIDONET.TELEGRAM tag?
Personnally, I think the following fits the "idea" of the
concept of accessing Fidonet using the Telegram app:
FIDONET_X_TELEGRAM
..where the X represents "-by-" and suggests a two-way
exchange as well.
Before that, I was partial to a mirror approach:
TENODIF.MARGELET
Another was a mashup:
TIDONET.FELEGRAM
FIGHTONET.HELLEGRAM was another one that popped in my head.
Perhaps you could drop the node address since it is already present in
the official "--From: " line at the top.
Or.. is this a first step in a plan to use the msgid for constructing
a replyid when a TgM user does an actual R)eply from this app?
May be it will be better tu use FIDONET.TELEGRAM tag?
Does it matter, either way? ;)
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 379 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 54:11:01 |
| Calls: | 8,066 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 13,055 |
| Messages: | 5,841,545 |