Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 00:20:22 -0400
To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>
From: "Mike B." <omni at omniphile.com>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Minutes
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at WSFA.org>

At 09:26 PM 5/11/05 -0400, Keith F. Lynch wrote:

>I went directly from work to the meeting, and didn't check my email.

There's a phrase I bet you are happy to be able to use again!  ;-)

>necessary (e.g. directions to the meeting).  (The telnet application
>turns every <CR> I type into a <CR><LF>, which makes it difficult to
>do much.  Does anyone know how to fix it?  Thanks.)

What application is it?  Some let you play with the line terminators, and
some don't.  There may even be something in the option negotiations that
can set it up automatically if that's enabled and supported.  There's
nothing in the protocol that insists on that terminator behavior that I'm
aware of.  Also, remember that there are two parts to a telnet connection:
the client and the server.  Even if the client insists on sending CRLF for
CR, the server can sometimes be requested/configured to turn CRLF back into
CR.  How you do that, or even if, depends on the software in use.  I don't
claim to know the details of every implementation out there, but I know a
couple, and wrote one once, and maybe someone else here has used what you
are using?

Have you considered IMAP or POP to access mail remotely?  IMAP might work
better from work, as it leaves the mail in your mailbox on your other
machine rather than relocating it as POP does.  For security it may be
possible to run it through an SSH "port forwarding" link, but I haven't
looked into that yet.  It would require SSH support at both ends, but would
encrypt the data stream between them.

>White House.)  This was, and still is, their top headline, implying
>that nothing more important happened anywhere in the world today.

You mean like another 60 or so dead people in Iraq from more terrorist
bombings?

>The previous night, at home, I had transcribed and proofread the WSFA
>meeting minutes.  The latter half was difficult because someone -- I'm
>sure you can guess who -- had gotten ahold of some bubble wrap and was
>popping it close to my tape recorder.

I was there, so I don't have to guess.  I suggest a different tape recorder
location in future, at least if a sensor scan detects more bubble wrap in
the area.  ;-)

>pleasant to use.  (I'm plagued with "floaters," and when I look at a
>light background, I see lots of blurry blobs darting around randomly,

You too?  I wish they could treat those, but there are other eye problems I
want them to work on first...

-- Mike B.
--
It takes a long time to understand nothing.