[gopher] Re: Item Type Suggestions

[Jay Nemrow <jnemrow@xxxxxxx>]

Hey, Topeka is not far away!  I am in a tiny berg called Tucumcari, New 
Mexico on I-40.  Although I don't do beer, if I am ever in Topeka, I 
would be glad to come by and watch you drink one!

Yes, I agree that much has been lost in the flood that is the 
World-Wide-Web.  The most disheartening thing is that so much wonderful 
historical content gets lost forever as expensive servers get repurposed 
to meet the needs of brainless mass-appeal.  I know there is the Wayback 
Machine, but that started after many cool things, often brought over 
from older gopher servers, were already gone.

I like the old ways better.  I even read books still, in printed form! 
 Thank goodness Project Gutenburg hasn't succumbed (yet) to using ajax 
or flash to present its texts - I can still put its texts on a gopher 
server and people can access it usefully without some bloated "reader". 
 I have to pull together that gopher-Gutenburg bridge I always wanted... 
 It will be a 0 data type you would be reading, incidently!

Matthew Holevinski wrote:

>Hello Everyone,
>
>I have joined the ?=BFMailing List=BF? a few days ago, and have been
>reading a few threads by everyone. Let me just say I think I have
>found my niche, not that it was ever lost to me, I used gopher back
>when it was popular, and unfortunately should have pushed to keep it
>mainstream. I wanted to be a Computer Programmer back then, I was very
>analytical and my thought process was very incremental in the way I
>thought things through. But life dictated I take other paths, but
>instead of bore everyone about me I would like to say this, I miss
>gopher.
>
>I believe there was a posting on slashdot a few years back that took
>the words right out of my mouth.
>
>http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3D9002&cid=3D605938
>
>I especially liked this part:
>
>"So after wading through various gopher servers from various
>universities that I've never heard of, I found myself reading about
>multithreaded routing protocols, papers on linguistics, and other
>various research topics.
>
>Then it dawned on me. Hey! This is what the internet used to be like!
>Some sysadmin saying "email me if you want to upload something here".
>Research papers that I don't understand. Wierd stuff that I would
>never expect to find anywhere else. "
>
>and
>
>"I know for some people, they simply aren't interested, they don't
>have time to just explore and read random things, but those of us who
>remember when you could go five clicks on the web and be reading more
>about archaeology than you ever wanted to know, well, here it is
>again.
>
>I recommend these gopher pages to any kid who has curiousity about
>what one might find on the internet. Brings back the old days of
>"whoa, there is a lot to learn in this world" feelings. "
>
>I know I truly remember that, reading research papers, and rfc's, and
>medical journals, and whitepapers on nuclear physics, or new designs
>for modular lunar modules, you could find stuff like that back then.
>I'm not going to sit here and piss and whine about the glitter and the
>glam, and web 2.0 and my hatred for all things "new tech" and
>arbitrarily retarded to it's very core and fundamentally worthless in
>it's own right. I am beginning to feel as though I have found the
>others that feel the very same way as me.
>
>I miss the long hours reading online, collaborating on projects, and
>giving my 2 cents to those who actually gave a damn.
> ' no, i will not sign your self indulgent guestbook, no I will not
>visit your self-serving myspace page, no I will not goto pepsi.com and
>type in your dumb-ass code, no i'm not interested in your
>self-important web 2.0 site ' My life has meaning and my time has
>value, I look to latter days when efficiency is mainstream, I don't
>want to watch 29 minutes of commercials for a 30 minute program on
>something that has been dumbed down to a 3rd graders reading level, I
>don't want to buy the swiffer-jet, nor am I interested.
>
>But Gopher, I've seen a few users gopher sites lately, i've devoured
>them, I've read everyone's pointless ramblings, and images of their
>server serving up the gopher pages, and loved every minute of it,
>because it wasn't cut and paste glitter graphics on their myspace
>pages. It was something these people put an effort into and actually
>cared about. It didn't matter if it was a gopher link to my local
>weather report, or a picture of their pet dog. I never emailed anyone,
>but gauruntee'd i bet if I did I would of gotten a response.
>
>p.s. and it wouldn't of been from india....
>
>Sorry to stick my snout where it doesn't belong everyone, but I just
>had to vent my frustrations with the way things are and they way they
>will be to someone, and I think maybe this is the group that might
>actually care.
>
>We have a common bond, and it's gopher, and although i'm completely
>green all over again to this old protocol, I expect I'll get up to
>speed very fast.
>
>Matthew Holevinski
>Topeka, KS
>eylusion@xxxxxxxxx
>785-276-1194 (work phone number)
>Ya I typed that in plain text what?
>ohh and if your ever in my neck of the woods I'll buy you a beer :-) how's =
>that
>
>On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 1:44 PM, JumpJet Mailbox <jumpjetinfo@xxxxxxxxx> wr=
>ote:
>  
>
>>Life would be far better if the average person had more pride of workmans=
>>    
>>
>hip!
>  
>
>>We are not talking about a major programming effort here.  Making a good =
>>    
>>
>Gopher program is far less complicated than (I would estimate) about 80% of=
> the programming currently being done by both amatures and professionals.  =
>The creator of the Acorn Gopher Client for example, claimed that he built t=
>he Acorn Client in less than 4 hours.
>  
>
>>Today, there is almost NO excuse why a single person could not build a ne=
>>    
>>
>ar flawless piece of Gopher Software in about a week or two.  The real issu=
>e here in NOT "can it be programmed quickly and relatively bug-free", but r=
>ather "what FEATURES are to be incorporated".
>  
>
>>We are not in a market competition that requires rapid software release t=
>>    
>>
>o stay ahead of the competitors, nor are profits hinging on the rapid reale=
>ase of software.  We are instead striving to get more uses interested in th=
>e Gopher Protocol.  The critera for that goal is software with "Features Pe=
>ople Want", and "Relatively bug-free performance".  These goals dictate doi=
>ng the job "Right The First Time" (NOT quick and dirty programming).
>  
>
>>We are only likely to have a potential new Gopher Protocol user examine t=
>>    
>>
>he protocol and software ONCE.  If he doesn't see what he needs (or he sees=
> slapped-together-software), it is unlikely that he will ever examine the p=
>rotocol again.
>  
>
>>--- On Mon, 7/14/08, Jay Nemrow <jnemrow@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>From: Jay Nemrow <jnemrow@xxxxxxx>
>>Subject: [gopher] Re: Item Type Suggestions
>>To: gopher@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Date: Monday, July 14, 2008, 3:22 PM
>>
>>All productive programming is Quick and Dirty.  Funny that you use
>>that Phrase, as QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) was the basis
>>of MSDOS that stomped out competition quite effectively, simply
>>because it came to market first (at a good price-point), though it was
>>technically inferior in many ways.  If you ponder too much, consider
>>all the angles, you will be non-competitive and never get out a
>>product before the market is already saturated or has blown past you.
>>
>>You can never do it right the first time.  It only gets closer to
>>"right" as you read your market and make changes to meet needs
>>(sometimes requiring a complete recoding of things you never
>>considered that were important).  Even though Gopher is not a
>>commercial product (sure sounds like some people are thinking along
>>these lines though - "We have GOT to do this right"), it might be a
>>desire that it meets the needs of a group of gopher-wranglers.  New
>>versions make that happen, as opposed to some mystical, perfect
>>"first-effort" implementation.
>>
>>sounds like you had a lot of work incident to y2k.  If the originial
>>programmers had "gotten it right" initially, your job might not have
>>existed.  Perhaps we should be glad for unperfect things that require
>>our effort in order to get "better" or to "fix" things.
>>
>>Jay
>>
>>On 7/12/08, JumpJet Mailbox <jumpjetinfo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Thanks to the dilligent effort of countless untold computer specialists
>>>      
>>>
>>(including myself) over a period of several years, our efforts were indee=
>>    
>>
>d
>  
>
>>successful (but a royal pain none the less).
>>    
>>
>>> Fixing Gopher issues I'm afraid, won't generate quite the
>>>      
>>>
>>response from the community, so we have GOT to do it right the first time=
>>    
>>
>... NO
>  
>
>>"quick-and-dirty" programming!
>>    
>>
>>>--- On Thu, 7/10/08, Avery M. <averym@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Avery M. <averym@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>>Subject: [gopher] Re: Item Type Suggestions
>>> To: gopher@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>Date: Thursday, July 10, 2008, 4:44 PM
>>>
>>>
>>> You mean the non-bug?
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 4:34 PM, JumpJet Mailbox
>>>      
>>>
>><jumpjetinfo@xxxxxxxxx>
>>    
>>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Expediency is what always gets us into trouble.  Does anyone
>>>      
>>>
>>remember the
>>    
>>
>>> Y2K bug?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>