From: gopher-bounce@complete.org Date: Mon Aug 4 23:24:19 2008 Subject: [gopher] Re: Fate of the Protocol (was Re: Gopherness) On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 4:54 PM, Jay Nemrow <jnemrow@quix.us> wrote: > Actually, I have to disagree with the fate of the RFC. If those who > want to change the protocol insist on using port 70 and "obsolete" the > RFC through creating a replacement, Gopher will essentially disappear > as an established service. Not true. I will simply remove all links to any server using a different protocol. While using port 70 to serve a different protocol is rude and violates widely observed RFC decorum, it would only take a minute or two to remove links to innovative servers; using this list to discuss innovations is even worse because it clogs up my inbox. If anyone insists on discussing this here and refuses to create a new list, please let me know now so I can add you to my spam filter. Thread start (DIR) [gopher] Fate of the Protocol (was Re: Gopherness) Thread start (DIR) [gopher] Fate of the Protocol (was Re: Gopherness) (DIR) Followup: [gopher] Re: Fate of the Protocol (was Re: Gopherness) (DIR) Followup: [gopher] Re: Fate of the Protocol (was Re: Gopherness) (DIR) Followup: [gopher] Re: Fate of the Protocol (was Re: Gopherness) (DIR) Followup: [gopher] Re: Fate of the Protocol (was Re: Gopherness)