(Message inbox:93) Return-Path: peugh@wam.umd.edu Received: from mail.fwi.uva.nl by gene.fwi.uva.nl with SMTP (5.65c(FWI)/3.0) id AA00687; Tue Feb 16 13:24:37 1993 Received: by mail.fwi.uva.nl from wor-srv.wam.umd.edu with SMTP (5.65c(FWI)/3.0) id AA07915; Wed, 17 Feb 1993 00:25:49 +0100 Received: from next15pg2.wam.umd.edu by wor-srv.wam.umd.edu with SMTP id AA17325 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Tue, 16 Feb 1993 18:24:52 -0500 Received: by next15pg2.wam.umd.edu id AA00913 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4); Tue, 16 Feb 1993 18:24:37 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1993 18:24:37 -0500 From: Lindsy McDonnal Message-Id: <199302162324.AA00913@next15pg2.wam.umd.edu> Received: by NeXT Mailer (1.63.RR) To: cschaffe@piranha.rutgers.edu (Michael Timmons) Subject: Re: ... Cc: stolk@fwi.uva.nl, dove@well.sf.ca.us, edan@netcom.com, fontenot@comet.rice.edu, graham@cs.montana.edu, groenewo@fwi.uva.nl, hjtoi@jyu.fi, jw@ddsdx2.jhuapl.edu, lyn@matt.ksu.ksu.edu, peugh@wam.umd.edu, pulkka@cs.washington.edu, vexar@watserv.ucr.edu One MAJOR change that I would like to see in the PROTOCOL is that I would like to see all of the @ commands, like the @TMS command, HAVE to begin on a new line. Whenever a user types something in, it wont show up on a new line. this will solve the problem that I mentioned WAY up there about people sending unwanted graphics, and PROTOCOL commands to another user. I feel so strongly about this, because of certain users that I have met in the past who love to create trouble! +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ That idea is all fine and dandy, except with drawback. If all the @Commands start with a \n then an extra line is expended. And those Scheppers who want to have rooms with many objects, are forced to have their descriptions look something like this My Room-- Blah-Blah-.... End-Blahs > With newlines for every object that is present in the room. This, if you ask me, would get quite annoying. And there is simply no way to get around this. Lindsy McDonnal