Profit is not a dirty word, my friend... ;)

Michel has to stay in business so he can continue to provide the service. I don't think he's at all out of line to structure the WSs as he has; in fact I applaud him.

He'd be cutting his own throat -- and ours -- if he were to open up WS access to messages. It's not a good business plan.

Yes, it's certainly possible to use GETs to build a message database, but one would spend more time building that than it costs for PUTM -- and the code would require constant vigilance and maintenance for whenever the DOM changed.



>Jeff,
>
> I understand, and fair enough it someone could build their own local database of the messages, and search etc. But, I could do the same thing w/ HTTP Get requests as well.
>
>It would be more difficult, but the same function could be accomplished using web requests. I mean if it is a premier members site only then that is fine, but to have the illusion of free members who add to the community then the web services should have that functionality. IMHO.
>
>I writing an application, just so I can contribute more, and utilize my time better. It is totally Michel's choice whether to open it up, but if he wants to encourage more activity then why not open up the webservices.
>
>I don't want a local database, I just want to be able to see if they are new messages which are interesting and which I would be able to reply to. Because I just can't leave a browser open to UT all day.
>
>Morgan
>
>
>>Hi Morgan
>>
>>I'm pretty sure WS message access isn't allowed because if it were, anyone >could build their own local database and bypass the message search >restriction currently in place for non-PUTM.
>>
>>If that's not the entire reason, it's surely at least part of it. (And, >IMO, he's justified in doing it this way.)
>>
>>Jeff