textfiles/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/HISTORY/presnell.txt

61 lines
2.4 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

2021-04-15 11:31:59 -07:00
Original Message Date: 25 Jan 92 23:47:02
From: Marshall Presnell on 1:133/114
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: your funny story...
^AMSGID: 1:133/114.0 29826776
tj> Marshall --
tj> Someone gave me a copy or your amusing FidoNet history. Alas, it
tj> contains some rather serious errors.
Hiya TJ - long time since we've talked!
The message you quoted was meant to be a humourous portrayal of the <20>
problems (which were brought up locally - you had to have been there) of <20>
routing outbound netmail (as well as other things) - it was never meant to <20>
be 'purely' factual - in fact, it was intended to be apocryphal in the <20>
extreme.
As a member since a way back I do recall most of what happened in <20>
actuality, as of course, you do. There was no 'elevation' to godhood <20>
<grin> - nor were some of the fictitiously events which I documented meant <20>
to be taken literally. My apologies if this is what happened - it appears <20>
that everything not explicitly claimed as fiction is taken as a 'FidoNet <20>
fact' <sly grin>.
It was my hope in writing the 'history' to expouse the original intent of <20>
FidoNet - not provide an actual case history of the phenomena. If some <20>
people have taken it wrong, well.... <sigh>..... I hope they take this <20>
stuff less seriously and actually stop and ENJOY the the damn hobby <20>
instead of making it into a madhouse of political intrigue and <20>
backstabbing.
In any case, I appreciate your comments and maybe (just maybe) I'll write <20>
the amusing 'correct' history of FidoNet - if you'd care to help me along <20>
the rough spots.
Sincerely,
Marshall Presnell
Original Message Date: 27 Jan 92 00:13:28
From: tom jennings on 1:125/111
To: Marshall Presnell on 1:133/114
Subj: re: your funny story...
^AINTL 1:133/114 1:125/111
Well actually, seeing how most people BELIEVE that the regions are
"under" nets, and you DID say you tried to write "my intentions"<
thats exactly why I requested the change... because it DOES state that
I deasigned it that way, and I actually think it is a terrible
concept, this heirarchy, and I am flatly and absolutely opposed to the
idea. I hate this *C crap so much you can't believe. The structure,
not necessarily any individuals. (And it peeves me that sysops put up
wit hthe bullying...)
So I'll ask once again if you could produce an update... its actually
a serious subject, as it supports many peopels mistaken beliefs, which
I'm sure isnt intentional ...