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)