MSGID: 2:221/1.58@fidonet 09155d9e
REPLY: 1075.fido_points@1:135/115 28df3bf3
PID: OpenXP/5.0.57 (Win32)
CHRS: ASCII 1
TZUTC: -0400
Hello Dan!

** On Friday 02.06.23 - 08:50, you wrote to Alan Beck:

 AB>> Being a point is great, you just poll your bossnode and the mail
 AB>> comes in, easy peasy.

 DC> Yes, I understand that.  But it's also easy to grab a QWK packet from
 DC> (my) BBS and read/reply that way.  So... point has no advantage there.

Pointing can be faster.  With OXP, the command to poll are  
three keystrokes:  N A 


 DC> I like using QWK, and the whole point of my questions is
 DC> to find out if operating as a Point would be any better.
 DC> So far I've not seen any indication of that.

You just gotta give OXP a try to see what's different and/or  
better.

For me, it's the database-like storage of messages following a  
poll.  Unlike QWK were you have to keep track of each  
particular file and/or read/reply to all the messages in a  
single QWK at a time, the database result allows archiving  
messages all in one place and makes it easy to find any  
particular message.

OXP allows marking individual messages for "later reply" or  
tagging them to HOLD so they don't get deleted on a purge.

-- 
  ../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.57
 * Origin: The ONLY point that matters! --> . <-- (2:221/1.58)
SEEN-BY: 1/123 10/0 1 15/0 90/1 102/401 103/1 705 105/81 106/201 123/131
SEEN-BY: 124/5016 129/305 153/757 7715 154/10 203/0 214/22 218/0 1
SEEN-BY: 218/215 700 720 840 850 860 880 221/1 6 360 226/30 227/114
SEEN-BY: 229/110 112 113 206 307 317 400 426 428 470 664 700 240/1120
SEEN-BY: 240/5832 266/512 280/464 5003 282/1038 291/111 292/854 8125
SEEN-BY: 301/1 310/31 317/3 320/219 322/757 341/66 234 342/200 396/45
SEEN-BY: 423/81 120 460/58 633/280 712/848 770/1
PATH: 221/1 280/464 103/705 218/700 229/426