Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!PENNDRLS.UPENN.EDU!GTHEALL
From: GTHEALL@PENNDRLS.UPENN.EDU (George A. Theall)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.dec.micro
Subject: RE: RAINBOW USERS UNITE!!    Conf: (74) fRAINBOW
Message-ID: <8910131137.AA03398@remote.dccs.upenn.edu>
Date: 13 Oct 89 12:36:00 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 24

Comments: Rainbow Echomail from BILL MAYHEW    Read: YES

Please understand that neither CIS NOR the DECPC Forum thereon has
requested this capability.  I am very aware of the concerns you have
enumerated and I think they are significant.
For the record, CIS _does_ stand to lose money by a two-sided gateway.
While you're right that someone would be paying to download the messages
there and get them posted here, that's just _one_ someone reading those
messages, not "n" someones.  Further, if all that content were available
on Fidonet, there could very well be significant attrition of CIS customers
away from CIS.  These are, in my opinion, some of the reasons{
why CIS would frown on (and in fact clearly proscribes, under its
operating rules and regulations) any fully two-sided gateway of that type.
Given their business, I don't particularly blame them.
As for volume comparisons... I estimate based on what I see here that
gatewaying between DECPC and the Rainbow Echo would _rougly_ double the
volume.  (Uh, make that "roughly")  In other words, they're about equal.
Overall, CIS has 500,000+ users; I doubt Fido/Opus comes very close to
that, but I also don't think it's particularly relevant :-}...
-Bill

--- ConfMail V4.00
* Origin: Still Servicing the Rainbow - Maybee Forever (1:101/1)
--- Via PCBGate v2.0a5