Just a sample of the Echomail archive
[ << oldest | < older | list | newer > | newest >> ]
|  Message 32805  |
|  Mike Powell to ACCESSION  |
|  SlyEdit  |
|  29 Nov 25 17:47:13  |
 TZUTC: -0500 MSGID: 14816.dove-sync_sys@723:320/1 2d90e7d1 REPLY: 723:1/1 692797af PID: Synchronet 3.21a-Linux master/123f2d28a Jul 12 2025 GCC 12.2.0 TID: SBBSecho 3.32-Linux master/ec8f7009f Nov 15 2025 GCC 12.2.0 BBSID: CAPCITY2 CHRS: CP437 2 FORMAT: flowed > While I think vi(m) is a great editor for programming, I think nano is /much/ > better suited for this hobby specifically, as far as writing and replying to > text messages goes. Then again, I prefer nano over vi(m) any time, so that's > probably a pretty biased opinion. ;) I have monkeyed around with vi(m) a time or two and, as a result, I am also very biased towards nano. ;) * SLMR 2.1a * Do unto others BEFORE they do unto YOU. --- þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705) SEEN-BY: 10/0 1 13/0 102/401 103/1 13 17 705 105/81 106/201 124/5016 SEEN-BY: 128/187 129/14 153/7715 154/110 214/22 218/0 1 215 601 700 SEEN-BY: 218/840 860 880 226/30 227/114 229/110 112 206 317 400 426 SEEN-BY: 229/428 470 700 705 266/512 280/464 291/111 301/1 320/219 SEEN-BY: 322/757 342/200 396/45 460/58 633/280 712/848 902/26 5075/35 PATH: 103/705 218/700 229/426 |
[ << oldest | < older | list | newer > | newest >> ]