[Xitami] Is this exploitable? Switch to bulletin board-mode?

[Brian {Hamilton Kelly}]

In message <001e01c1af4c$bd957af0$972de00c@personal>
   "Many Lists" writes:

> How about a list option of digest mode? It works in other places.  I
> filter my e-mail in outlook into folders and use a separate e-mail just
> for lists rather than use my personal e-mail so when I check my mail
> remotely through a web interface I am not flooded with stuff I don't
> need to reply to.

Good idea.

> My opinion. I hate web based forums.  I was on one for awhile at Winamp
> trying to get a streaming audio server online, but sometimes you like to
> have more information rather than when you just post.  In the e-mail if
> you don't like the 
> Thread you just delete the whole thread.

Hmm, I've never used a mailer that has the capability of deleting traffic
on a "thread" that has not yet arrived.  How do you ensure that mail is
threaded anyway, given that the use of In-Reply-To is only sketchily
followed by some MUAs, and that others use References instead, which is
something that actually belongs to Usenet?  (RFC-2822, which is still
only a "proposed standard", mentions References for the first time; it
was not part of THE standard RFC-822.  Moreover, the latter never
mandated the use of I-R-T, and even the new one only places both at the
level of a SHOULD, and not a MUST.)

Perhaps the amount of traffic on this list could justify a proper Usenet
newsgroup.  Perhaps a case could be made for restructuring the
comp.infosystems.www.servers.* hierarchy, which (foolishly, IMHO)
contains the groups:
    comp.infosystems.www.servers.mac
    comp.infosystems.www.servers.misc
    comp.infosystems.www.servers.ms-windows
    comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix

Obviously no one envisaged the concept of a cross-platform server; all
the same comp.infosystems.www.servers.xitami might not be beyond the
realms of possibility.

Would anyone care to try raising an RFD?

(OTOH, Imatix could run an NNTP server on their systems, that handles
only a xitami newsgroup, or hierarchy of them.  I'm generally against the
concept of special-to-one-server-only newsgroups, since I consider that
the advantage of a newsgroup is that one reads it from the most local
server, wherever one happens to be.  But Borland use one, as do Serenity
Systems (for the ecomstation.* hierarchy).)

-- 
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}                                          bhk@dsl.co.uk
    "We have gone from a world of concentrated knowledge and wisdom to one of
    distributed ignorance.  And we know and understand less while being incr-
    easingly capable."              Prof. Peter Cochrane, formerly of BT Labs