True, and some of them don't read or grasp exactly what I'm saying or showing when I cut and paste things, there are a few like you, Dumas and Nightfox that look at the situation and use constructive logic instead of judgmentalusm. I thank you for that.
everyone keeps jumping to a false conclusion about log checking, I've
checked the logs all along, nothing showed up.
People *LOVE* jumping to conclusions about stuff.. human nature I
presume..
Yet you seem to be doing the same right here.
now we were all wrong.
Yep. I was just trying to point out that if his BBS itself was working fine, REP packets were being sent to VERT (which we found out were not being allowed into the network), and QWK packets were not being processed, there was no need to 'rollback' his upgrade.
Obviously, his logs probably didn't tell him anything useful either, though. But at least the issue was taken care of, and a bug was fixed in the process.
Now that we know they wouldn't have helped at all, but then again, neither would rolling back or downgrading his entire BBS software (again, as I thought he mentioned already doing so once).
Regards,
Go back and read some of the comments, some truley tried to help, other's were just there blathering.
When people are trying to look for solutions, if all some do is just criticise that's not helpful.
Go back and read some of the comments, some truley tried to help,
other's were just there blathering.
When people are trying to look for solutions, if all some do is just criticise that's not helpful.
People *LOVE* jumping to conclusions about stuff.. human nature I
presume..
Yet you seem to be doing the same right here.
as far as I know, the last time I checked.. I am a person..
Thanks for letting me know.
Backing up is something most sysops do not do.
as far as I know, the last time I checked.. I am a person..
Thanks for letting me know.
Very nice of you to cut out the rest of the message that explained everything in detail.
On Sat, 18 May 2024 11:47:30 -0400, you wrote:
everyone keeps jumping to a false conclusion about log checking, I've
checked the logs all along, nothing showed up.
People *LOVE* jumping to conclusions about stuff.. human nature I
presume..
Yet you seem to be doing the same right here.
Nobody was jumping to any conclusions. Everyone involved were giving ideas and trying to help figure out the problem. If that is jumping to conclusions, maybe we should just tell everyone that asks a question to RTFM or GTFO and see how that goesf?
Backing up is something most sysops do not do.
I'd be worried without a backup.. I wouldn't want to lose everything after putting all the work into it that I have.
What i always do is check the logs and visually observe what is going on. Then in this case i would do it manually and observe.
Then i would put on a backup to where it was working, and then see if there's a change.
if nothing else works, i would contact the feed.
In this case his feed was cut. not sure if DM emailed him about the issue. Usually I contact people on dovenet when they have spammers but i've
been real busy with working long hours.
Shit happens. having good backups are a great asset. I still have an irc bot that stops responding and I have no idea why and i restore with a backup and it works. Nothing makes sense about why it stops running
some scripts.
we can play the blame game all you want.
but i bet you aren't looking into why your feed was cut and seeing how
to stop it from happening again, right? I bet that didn't cross your
mind once.
Backing up is something most sysops do not do.
I'd be worried without a backup.. I wouldn't want to lose everything
after putting all the work into it that I have.
Very nice of you to cut out the rest of the message that explained
everything in detail.
Just doing what everyone else does on dovenet.. gettin my point across
is all that matter right??
Thanks again, nice to know I am human, sorry for not quoting the message
in its entireity, here you go.
Nobody was jumping to any conclusions. Everyone involved were
giving ideas and trying to help figure out the problem. If that
is jumping to conclusions, maybe we should just tell everyone
that asks a question to RTFM or GTFO and see how that goes?
Did "I" say anyone was jumping to conclusions?
All I said was that was human nature, and there you go jumping to conclusions saying that I am jumping to conclusions.. lol if you wouldYour WHOLE reply was this:
have actually quoted my WHOLE reply, I did state that it looked like everyone was being pretty helpful
everyone keeps jumping to a false conclusion about log checking, I've checked the logs all along, nothing showed up.
and there was nowhere that I could see where he posted his log files..
but you needed to prove a point, so.... um.. see how that goes??? lol...
So why did my reply get you so hot in the britches anyway?
nothing but a simple observation on human nature, as you can see is very true.. did'nt call out anyone or anything.. yet human nature---
kk4qbn wrote to Accession <=-
Re: qwk packets
By: Accession to kk4qbn on Sat May 18 2024 15:53:28
as far as I know, the last time I checked.. I am a person..
Thanks for letting me know.
Very nice of you to cut out the rest of the message that explained everything in detail.
Just doing what everyone else does on dovenet.. gettin my point
across is all that matter right??
Honestly, I haven't had to restore anything from backup in well over 10 years. You really have to mess something up in order to go that route. That's how good Synchronet is.
Thanks again, nice to know I am human, sorry for not quoting the message
in its entireity, here you go.
Woah woah there buddy. Whatever you were trying to portray was split up in multiple messages. NOT the one I was replying to.
Nobody was jumping to any conclusions. Everyone involved were giving
ideas and trying to help figure out the problem. If that is jumping to
conclusions, maybe we should just tell everyone that asks a question to
RTFM or GTFO and see how that goes?
Did "I" say anyone was jumping to conclusions?
Yes. Yes you did.
Just doing what everyone else does on dovenet.. gettin my point across is
all that matter right??
"Everyone else"? I think not.
kk4qbn wrote to Gamgee <=-
Just doing what everyone else does on dovenet.. gettin my point across is
all that matter right??
"Everyone else"? I think not.
No suprise getting a reply from you. It was written to bait you
and of course it did.
Jump on in the boat fish, yall are just strengthening my claims
about you.
kk4qbn wrote to Accession <=-
Nobody was jumping to any conclusions. Everyone involved were giving
ideas and trying to help figure out the problem. If that is jumping to
conclusions, maybe we should just tell everyone that asks a question to
RTFM or GTFO and see how that goes?
Did "I" say anyone was jumping to conclusions?
Yes. Yes you did.
No. No I did'nt.. "ITS HUMAN NATURE TO JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS" that
is what I said. If for some reason that hit home with you as an
insult than you must have a gulty consience.
This is so stupid.. I'm done with this thread. It's not hard to
fish here. just pop the boat in the lake and fish jump in the
boat..
Re: qwk packets
By: Denn to Accession on Sat May 18 2024 08:14 am
Go back and read some of the comments, some truley tried to help, other's were just there blathering.
When people are trying to look for solutions, if all some do is just criticise that's not helpful.
we can play the blame game all you want.Wrong.
but i bet you aren't looking into why your feed was cut and seeing how to stop it from happening again, right? I bet that didn't cross your mind once.
Just doing what everyone else does on dovenet.. gettin my point across
is all that matter right??
"Everyone else"? I think not.
No suprise getting a reply from you. It was written to bait you and of
course it did.
Hahaha, once again you snip out some of the relevant context, to suit your (trolling) agenda. Very petty, but thanks for publicly *admitting* to being a troll. We won't have to argue about that any more.
but i bet you aren't looking into why your feed was cut and seeing how to stop it from happening again, right? I bet that didn't cross your mind once.Wrong.
Anyway, as far as I'm concerned this thread is over, problem was solved.
Honestly, I haven't had to restore anything from backup in well over 10 years. You really have to mess something up in order to go that route. That's how good Synchronet is.
Anyway, as far as I'm concerned this thread is over, problem was solved.
so what was it, when did it happen and how did you solve the problem?
Honestly, I haven't had to restore anything from backup in well over 10
years. You really have to mess something up in order to go that route.
That's how good Synchronet is.
Synchronet is good, but there are other things that could go wrong.
Your storage device could die, for various reasons. It would be good to have a backup just in case anything does happen..
so what was it, when did it happen and how did you solve the problem?
It looked like Digital Man had the posting restriction enabled for Denn's account, which prevented his account from posting messages on Dove-Net (though there was a bug that still allowed polls to be posted, and it looks like Digital Man fixed that).
Digital Man posted about that, and I thought you had seen it, because you replied to that message..
Accession wrote to Nightfox <=-
While it might be a waste, this is exactly why I went with a RAID 1
setup. I had 8TB to play with, and definitely figured I wouldn't need
half of that. :)
yeah but denn doesn't know exactly why and how to prevent it from happening again. maybe a spammer was on his web or something
While it might be a waste, this is exactly why I went with a RAID 1
setup. I had 8TB to play with, and definitely figured I wouldn't need
half of that. :)
My desktop for years was an old Dell Precision Workstation that came
with a PERC raid controller. Doubling my drives and running RAID 1 paid off handsomely over ~10 years, I think I had 2 drive failures that required just a shutdown and drive swap.
Getting a 10 year-old PERC controller running in Windows 10, now that
was a challenge...
Maybe something on those same lines now?
Re: qwk packets
By: MRO to Nightfox on Sun May 19 2024 08:58 pm
yeah but denn doesn't know exactly why and how to prevent it from happening again. maybe a spammer was on his web or something
I don't recall the reason why. I usually (and likely did) send a netmail to the sysop of the offending system at the time. <shrug>
I don't recall the reason why. I usually (and likely did) send a
netmail
to the sysop of the offending system at the time. <shrug>
Nope, the only email I got from you was logging into vert to reset my message pointers.
The other messages were from 2019 and 2020.
Re: qwk packets
By: Denn to Digital Man on Mon May 20 2024 04:58 pm
Maybe something on those same lines now?
Not that I've seen.
Re: qwk packets
By: Digital Man to MRO on Mon May 20 2024 03:17 pm
Re: qwk packets
By: MRO to Nightfox on Sun May 19 2024 08:58 pm
yeah but denn doesn't know exactly why and how to prevent it from happening again. maybe a spammer was on his web or something
I don't recall the reason why. I usually (and likely did) send a netmail to the sysop of the offending system at the time. <shrug>
Nope, the only email I got from you was logging into vert to reset my message pointers.
The other messages were from 2019 and 2020.
Perhaps the netmail was in one of those *.qwk.*.bad files that you deleted. In the future, I'll be sure to post a message publicly in DOVE-Net Sysops before removing a node's posting privileges. Then there'll be a more readily discoverable record of the reasoning.
Re: qwk packets
By: Digital Man to Denn on Tue May 21 2024 10:57 am
Perhaps the netmail was in one of those *.qwk.*.bad files that you deleted. In the future, I'll be sure to post a message publicly in DOVE-Net Sysops before removing a node's posting privileges. Then there'll be a more readily discoverable record of the reasoning.
usually you do that, but not always.
Perhaps the netmail was in one of those *.qwk.*.bad files that you deleted. In the future, I'll be sure to post a message publicly in DOVE-Net Sysops before removing a node's posting privileges. Then there'll be a more readily
Good thing he backs up. he can go back and look at those files and see what happened.
for that matter, i sometimes wonder about how the larger bbs filebases should be left to someone.. if they're not already mirrored to archive.org i guess. every time i see a message with the general sentiment "log onto my bbs to get xxx" i cringe.. all those files might as well be dead and gone already.
if i want to be a closed-source dickhead til the last moment and ensure my code is released after i'm dead, has anyone talked to a lawyer about how that would work?
for that matter, i sometimes wonder about how the larger bbs filebases should be left to someone.. if they're not already mirrored to archive.org i guess. every time i see a message with the general sentiment "log onto my bbs to get xxx" i cringe.. all those files might as well be dead and gone already.
Re: Re: qwk packets
By: fusion to MRO on Wed May 22 2024 12:19 am
if i want to be a closed-source dickhead til the last moment and ensure my code is released after i'm dead, has anyone talked to a lawyer about how that would work?
There are dead-man switch sevices that can send emails when someone doesn't "check-in" after a while (presumed dead), which could send a decryption key to a public encrypted archive that contains the source/secrets. There's also "software escrow" services, but they're going to be a more expensive/elaborate solution.
Nothing's forever. Even archive.org could go down some day. Our best defense is replication, so if every BBS had "all the files", that'd be the best insurance that those files wouldn't go "dead and gone".
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 762 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 105:45:53 |
| Calls: | 12,295 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 186,558 |
| Messages: | 2,254,873 |
