944 lines
45 KiB
Plaintext
944 lines
45 KiB
Plaintext
Volume 4, Number 48 28 December 1987
|
||
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|
||
| _ |
|
||
| / \ |
|
||
| /|oo \ |
|
||
| - FidoNews - (_| /_) |
|
||
| _`@/_ \ _ |
|
||
| International | | \ \\ |
|
||
| FidoNet Association | (*) | \ )) |
|
||
| Newsletter ______ |__U__| / \// |
|
||
| / FIDO \ _//|| _\ / |
|
||
| (________) (_/(_|(____/ |
|
||
| (jm) |
|
||
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|
||
Editor in Chief: Thom Henderson
|
||
Chief Procrastinator Emeritus: Tom Jennings
|
||
Contributing Editors: Dale Lovell, Al Arango
|
||
|
||
FidoNews is published weekly by the International FidoNet
|
||
Association as its official newsletter. You are encouraged to
|
||
submit articles for publication in FidoNews. Article submission
|
||
standards are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC, available from
|
||
node 1:1/1.
|
||
|
||
Copyright 1987 by the International FidoNet Association. All
|
||
rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted for
|
||
noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances,
|
||
please contact IFNA at (314) 576-4067.
|
||
|
||
The contents of the articles contained here are not our
|
||
responsibility, nor do we necessarily agree with them.
|
||
Everything here is subject to debate. We publish EVERYTHING
|
||
received.
|
||
|
||
|
||
SEASON'S GREETINGS
|
||
|
||
Table of Contents
|
||
|
||
1. EDITORIAL ................................................ 1
|
||
Swan Song ................................................ 1
|
||
2. ARTICLES ................................................. 2
|
||
Modem, Modem, whose got the Modem? ....................... 2
|
||
A Storm Is On The Horizon ................................ 7
|
||
The Other Side of MetroNet ............................... 11
|
||
3. NOTICES .................................................. 14
|
||
The Interrupt Stack ...................................... 14
|
||
Latest Software Versions ................................. 14
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 1 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
EDITORIAL
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
|
||
Swan Song
|
||
|
||
|
||
I've always been big on giving out free advice. Some would call
|
||
that a shortcoming, but at least I occasionally take my own
|
||
advice.
|
||
|
||
I remember in particular one company I used to work for. Every
|
||
week they had a staff meeting I was required to go to, and every
|
||
week the head of the company would encourage anyone who had any
|
||
criticisms to stand up and speak his peace. Never having learned
|
||
to be especially diplomatic (I was once told that I had the tact
|
||
and subtlety of a Sherman tank), I would take him at his word and
|
||
speak out.
|
||
|
||
This had several unfortunate side effects, one of which was that
|
||
disgruntled employees started standing around my desk complaining
|
||
about how awful things were. They would be surprised to discover
|
||
that I wasn't very sympathetic. I generally told them that, if
|
||
things were all that intolerable, then they should quit and go
|
||
somewhere else.
|
||
|
||
Then the day came where something happened that I found
|
||
intolerable. Within the hour my letter of resignation was on my
|
||
supervisor's desk and I was out the door. I've never had cause
|
||
to regret that.
|
||
|
||
What does all this have to do with FidoNet? Patience, I'm
|
||
getting to that.
|
||
|
||
Quite some time ago (more time than I care to think about,
|
||
actually) Ken Kaplan and Ben Baker roped me into helping them
|
||
figure out how to run this net. This was before we made it
|
||
democratic, so there wasn't a whole lot in the way of feedback.
|
||
We worked under the premise that if anyone was really unhappy
|
||
with what we were doing, they'd leave and form their own net.
|
||
|
||
So once again it's time for me to take my own advice. For a
|
||
number of reasons I'm unhappy about how things are going these
|
||
days, so I'm leaving to help form a new net. This will be my
|
||
last issue of FidoNews. Dale Lovell will be taking over as the
|
||
FidoNews publisher starting next week.
|
||
|
||
To all of you who have been supportive for lo these many moons,
|
||
you have my sincere and heartfelt thanks. To all the rest, no
|
||
hard feelings. Best of luck to all of you. By and large, it's
|
||
been fun.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 2 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
ARTICLES
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
|
||
Bob Morris, Co-Chair, FTSC High-Speed Modem Committee
|
||
16/0
|
||
|
||
After three months of testing, it is finally out, at least for a
|
||
couple of manufacturers we, the committee, have tested the name
|
||
brands with more to come.
|
||
|
||
If you had thought that we were going to recommend a modem, well,
|
||
you will have to make your own decision! As a committee we have
|
||
decided that we would undertake this task with you, the sysop and
|
||
user in mind. As such, we will not be making a decision as to
|
||
what should be or should not be a "Standard" for the FidoNet
|
||
community. What we have done is to evaluate these modems "Out of
|
||
the Box" so that we would do a equal comparison of what happens
|
||
when you get the boxes yourselves.
|
||
|
||
As of this writing, we have looked at and tested the Telebit
|
||
Trailblazer, the Microcom AX9624c, the Hayes V-Series 9600 and
|
||
the US Robotics HST with MNP 5. We have also started to look at
|
||
the Ven-Tel Pathfinder 18K modem, which is compatible with the
|
||
Trailblazer and is the only other modem on the market that is
|
||
compatible with any of the other brands at high speed.
|
||
|
||
The testing on the Hayes, Robotics and Ven-Tel is basically
|
||
unfinished at this time, but we thought that it was time to at
|
||
least report on what we have found to date. The prices for the
|
||
modems vary from the HST at $495.00 to $672.50 for the
|
||
Trailblazer modem. Additionally, we have not yet tested the
|
||
Trailblazer Plus within the Fido Compatible software available,
|
||
nor were we able to bring into our testing a copy of Fido V 12,
|
||
but we will assume that it is compatible with the current
|
||
software versions in use today.
|
||
|
||
Many of the manufacturers have been more than willing to assist
|
||
us in this endeavor and have contacted us to insure that the
|
||
products we had were operating properly. We must state at this
|
||
time that the V.29 "Standard" which exists today is not a true
|
||
data communications standard but one which exists for FAX
|
||
machines and the transmission of data for those pieces of
|
||
equipment. The high speed modem standard will probably be based
|
||
upon the V.32 standard under which we can probably expect that
|
||
all of the manufacturers will have equipment which talks to one
|
||
another at high speed. All modems tested talked to other brands
|
||
at at least 2400 BPS. Data transmission to locations outside of
|
||
the Continental United States were tested and the modem which
|
||
communicated the best via high speed using a registered data jack
|
||
and a "Data Line" was the Trailblazer, which obtained 815 CPS to
|
||
Australia. However, this modem is fairly well distributed
|
||
overseas and has been accepted, as the V.29 standard, in a number
|
||
of countries outside of the United States.
|
||
|
||
It is important to note that owners of systems which are based
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 3 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
upon the 8088 which run on an original clock speed of 4.77 MHz
|
||
should be aware that a problem does exist when attempting to
|
||
utilize these modems above 9600 bps. According to most of the
|
||
documentation available at the time, the data bus cannot handle
|
||
sustained speeds of 9600 or greater. This would limit the speed
|
||
of the modem, but XT and XT Clone owners can expect between 3600
|
||
and 9600 BPS, AT owners can expect between 7200 and 13000 when
|
||
using systems equipped with the 16450 UART and machine speeds of
|
||
at least 6 MHz when dealing with archived data as is found in
|
||
Echomail and file transfers of Archived data.
|
||
|
||
There is a new term which is CPS, which is the character
|
||
throughput with these new modems. CPS, simply stated, is the
|
||
character count expressed as actual characters (10bits = 1
|
||
Character). Therefore if throughput is expressed as 1320 CPS,
|
||
then the actual throughput (in old and familiar terms) is 13200
|
||
BPS.
|
||
|
||
The following is a report dealing with the Microcom AX9624c and
|
||
the Telebit Trailblazer. Both of these modems operated on both
|
||
the AT&T PC6300 Plus and an ARC Turbo AT Clone, both of these
|
||
machines worked in different environments, the AT&T utilized
|
||
SEADog 4.1 as the communications program and operates at 6MHz
|
||
utilizing the 8250 UART. The ARC Turbo AT utilized OPUS 1.03a as
|
||
both the BBS program as well as the mailer, this AT uses the
|
||
16450 UART and an 8MHz clock.
|
||
|
||
The Microcom was equipped with the current version of the
|
||
Firmware (ROM Version 1.6) and the Telebit was equipped with
|
||
their current version (Rom Version 3.00).
|
||
|
||
The Microcom utilizes MNP Class 6 as a form of error correction,
|
||
but the Microcom's implementation appears to be less tolerant of
|
||
noisy Central Offices, weather changes and long distance
|
||
connections. If utilized within a one hundred (100) mile radius
|
||
the modem appears to communicate reliably with another Microcom
|
||
of the same type. Technical support is available for the
|
||
product, but this support is somewhat onesided, when called about
|
||
a problem, they do not appear to have the desire to call back
|
||
with a solution if one is found. On two occasions I have had to
|
||
make calls to obtain the answer to a question which was given to
|
||
them. They have stated that the modem works best when "No
|
||
Protocol" is used to transmit the data. This would require Opus,
|
||
Seadog, BinkleyTerm and presumably Fido Version 12 to provide for
|
||
this modem and develop some sort of protocol when talking to
|
||
another Microcom. Users of this modem will notice that the modem
|
||
must be sent the dialing string twice in order for it to actually
|
||
dial the number. It also appears to be slower to respond to
|
||
commands issued from the keyboard (Opus' "K" command for
|
||
example).
|
||
|
||
The Trailblazer works directly out of the box, just like the
|
||
Microcom, but requires a different type of setup string, in that
|
||
Telebit utilizes internal switches instead of the more
|
||
recognizable commands. The Trailblazer appears to talk well in
|
||
almost every situation, yet to be tested is the super long
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 4 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
distance communication to a super noisy central office
|
||
environment. The physical size of this modem is larger than the
|
||
Microcom but also provided is a fan for cooling and an on/off
|
||
switch. The options, once written into the memory of the machine
|
||
remain there until changed by the Sysop. This modem works in
|
||
both the Opus and SEAdog environments and it is assumed to also
|
||
work in the Fido Version 12 environment. Technical support was
|
||
not used during the first 120 days of the test but additional
|
||
data will be attached to the next report if it is utilized.
|
||
|
||
Modem set-up for the Telebit Trailblazer and the Ven-Tel
|
||
Pathfinder 18K are as follows:
|
||
|
||
E1 F1 M0 Q0 P V1 X1
|
||
S0=1 S1=0 S2=43 S3=13 S4=10 S5=8 S6=2 S7=60 S8=2 S9=6 S10=7
|
||
S11=70 S12=50
|
||
S45=0 S47=4 S48=0 S49=0
|
||
S50=0 S51=5 S52=1 S53=1 S54=3 S55=0 S56=17 S57=19 S58=2 S59=0
|
||
S60=0 S61=13 S62=3 S63=1 S64=0 S65=0 S66=1 S67=0 S68=2
|
||
S90=0 S91=0 S92=0 S95=0
|
||
S100=0 S101=0 S102=0 S104=0
|
||
S110=255 S111=255 S112=1
|
||
S121=0
|
||
|
||
Note: Pathfinder settings differ a bit. Set S09=3, S53=4 and
|
||
S64=1 when using Binkley Term.
|
||
|
||
SEAdog Init Strings (4.1) Modem (Type Not used)
|
||
|
||
MODEM COM1
|
||
Modem Lock 19200 OR 9600 FOR XT'S
|
||
Modem Init AT E1 V1 X1 S0=1 S7=50
|
||
Modem Reset AT S0=0
|
||
|
||
OPUS 1.03a
|
||
|
||
Modem Init ~|AT E1 V1 X1 S0=1 S7=55|
|
||
|
||
config.sys entry
|
||
|
||
DEVICE=X00.SYS E B,0,19200 FOR AT CLASS MACHINES
|
||
-or-
|
||
DEVICE=X00.SYS E B,0,9600 FOR XT CLASS MACHINES
|
||
|
||
|
||
The Microcom AX9624c has external switches which must be set
|
||
before the modem is placed on line. The rear switch bank
|
||
contains 8 switches, all switches must be up except for switches
|
||
3 and 7. On the front panel, switches 1, 6, 7, 9 and 10 are up
|
||
with the others (2, 3, 4, 5 and 8) are down. Additionally, the
|
||
A/S switch must be released and in an out position.
|
||
|
||
The Init strings for the Microcom is as follows:
|
||
|
||
SEAdog 4.1
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 5 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
MODEM H24
|
||
MODEM COM1
|
||
MODEM BAUD 19200 OR 9600 FOR XT SYSTEMS
|
||
MODEM SETUP AT H0 M0 E0 X4 V1 Q0 S0=1 S7=55 \V1 \Q0 \X0 \N3 %C1 \J0
|
||
MODEM RESET ATZ
|
||
|
||
Opus 1.03a
|
||
|
||
Modem Init AT H0 M0 E0 X4 V1 Q0 S0=1 S7=55 \V1 \Q0 \X0 \N3 %C1 \J0
|
||
|
||
|
||
Config.sys Entry
|
||
|
||
DEVICE=X00.SYS E B,0,19200 FOR AT'S
|
||
-or-
|
||
DEVICE=X00.SYS E B,0,9600 FOR XT'S
|
||
|
||
The Hayes V-Series 9600 Modem was then tested by the committee
|
||
and was found to be able to communicate with another Hayes V-
|
||
Series 9600 in either an Opus to Opus or an Opus to Seadog or
|
||
Seadog to Seadog envirnoment. Throughput on this modem, using
|
||
standard Echomail packets did not exceed 628 CPS, but when used
|
||
in a standalone environment, file transfers did approach 800 CPS
|
||
when using ZModem protocol for file up/downloads. The set up
|
||
used on this modem is the same one as found in the OPUS.CTL file.
|
||
|
||
It is important to note that although this modem gave the lowest
|
||
average transfer rates, the representatives from Hayes are
|
||
continuing to work with the committee to evaluate the setting
|
||
utilized and attempt to isolate the problem. There will be
|
||
furthur testing on this modem, providing that Hayes will allow us
|
||
to have access to the modem in the future. Until that time, we
|
||
will simply state that the modem does work in all of the current
|
||
environments in use today.
|
||
|
||
The committee also obtained two of the new US Robotics HST modems
|
||
equipped with the MNP 5 programming. To date our testing has
|
||
shown that when tranferring data from one of these new modems to
|
||
a "Old Style" HST, the new modems do not appear to be downwardly
|
||
compatible with the older modems. These modems when talking to
|
||
another MNP5 modem become very sensitive when using either XModem
|
||
or similiar protocols. As the tests are not completed at this
|
||
time for these new modems the report on this modem will be
|
||
forwarded at the time that the tests are completed.
|
||
|
||
It is important to note that in almost all cases, when dealing
|
||
with a modem which utilizes MNP Protocol 4, 5 or 6 that there
|
||
appears to occur a condition in which the modem to modem link
|
||
becomes questionable to the modems themselves and causes major
|
||
problems when using protocols which utilize error corrction
|
||
routines, such as XModem, since it appears that the two error
|
||
checking routines clash with one another. This clash appears to
|
||
cause a loss in data transfer rates from 35-60% of the rated
|
||
speed of the interface (UART).
|
||
|
||
The committee is also evaluating the Ven-Tel Pathfinder 18K modem
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 6 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
for use within our environment. The Pathfinder also uses PEP,
|
||
Packetized Ensemble Protocol like the Trailblazer, and it's major
|
||
positive attractions are the smaller size and the setup which
|
||
duplicates the Trailblazer.
|
||
|
||
In discussions with the Regional Manager from Microcom, there
|
||
appears to be some inconsistancies when dealing with protocols
|
||
which within themselves provide for error checking. This is
|
||
evidenced by the lower transfer rates using Xmodem type protocols
|
||
and the higher transfer rates under YModem or IModem. This
|
||
particular company has stated that they are planning on offering
|
||
a PROM change which will allow high speed without MNP 4, 5 or 6.
|
||
|
||
From all of the conversations that we have seen, both in EchoMail
|
||
areas as well as in Private NetMail, there has been a lot of
|
||
discussion concerning which modem if any should be selected as a
|
||
standard for high speed data transmission. It doubtful that any
|
||
of the manufacturers, except for Telebit, have the capacity
|
||
available to them within the existing modems to duplicate the
|
||
protocols of any of the other brands currently in the
|
||
marketplace. It is felt that at the current V.29 standard there
|
||
will exist no one standard, therefore the battle for marketshare
|
||
will be made by price alone and not by the technology itself.
|
||
The V.32 standard, however, will force each of the manufacturers
|
||
to adopt one standard for High Speed data communications and will
|
||
force the standard as it will be an International Standard for
|
||
all manufacturers and not open to interpretation by each of the
|
||
modem manufacturers. Until that happens, it is doubtful that any
|
||
one manufacturer will be able to capture more than a percentage
|
||
of the market.
|
||
|
||
Anyone wishing to forward their comments may do so to me at 16/0
|
||
or 16/2.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 7 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
This is a copy of an open echo mail message I received on
|
||
12/14/87. My reply to this message is also here. I think everyone
|
||
should read both of these and send comments as soon as possible.
|
||
This could have a drastic effect on our Net, and we need input
|
||
(good or bad) from EVERY Sysop in the Net as soon as possible.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Date: 12-12-87 19:13
|
||
From: David Hart
|
||
To: William Bertholff
|
||
Subj: AN OPEN MESSAGE
|
||
|
||
|
||
I feel obligated to comment on today's Sysop meeting which, in my
|
||
opinion, was nothing less than a fiasco.
|
||
|
||
On or about November 13, you asked us by netmail if we would be
|
||
interested in attending a Sysop meeting to explore forming a
|
||
Sysop Association. One month was adequate notice but the meeting
|
||
was not confirmed until about one week ago. At that time, you
|
||
sent the original respondents the files for the meeting including
|
||
an agenda, "proposed" articles of the Association and a statement
|
||
of ethics.
|
||
|
||
Though the entire Net 107 could be effected by these actions, you
|
||
chose to supply this material only to those individuals who
|
||
indicated an interest in attending. You have subsequently stated
|
||
that the files were posted at the IGATE (who would know and so
|
||
what?).
|
||
|
||
A few days ago, you and I spoke by telephone. Rather than discuss
|
||
any of the issues at hand we discussed the format of the meeting.
|
||
I thought that we both agreed that the format would be a forum to
|
||
openly discuss our views. I expressed my fears that the meeting
|
||
would become either autocratic or technocratic. You assured me
|
||
this would not be the case.
|
||
|
||
I arrived, as schedule at 12:00 noon.
|
||
|
||
You arrived, without apology, at 1:00 PM.
|
||
|
||
From the outset, you made it very clear that this was your
|
||
meeting. You stifled discussion. You yelled and screamed (like a
|
||
child) at cross talk.
|
||
|
||
Nevertheless you made no attempt to follow an agenda or do
|
||
anything in a democratic or in a professional manner.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Now I run a prosperous company. I have been the COO of a
|
||
$40,000,000 organization and I won't be subjected to your temper
|
||
tantrums.
|
||
|
||
During the first hour, in your absence, I spoke with the attorney
|
||
who you had hired (without anybody's consent). I was informed
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 8 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
that you had encumbered (without authorization) the association-
|
||
to-be to the tune of $2,500 which the lawyer had agreed to
|
||
discount to $700. I also learned that you instructed counsel
|
||
(without prior consent of anyone else) to form a FOR PROFIT
|
||
corporation.
|
||
|
||
From a tax and organizational standpoint this would be
|
||
preposterous but in true Bertholff style, ya' just did it! This
|
||
meant that my buy in would include assumption of YOUR structure
|
||
and YOUR legal fees.
|
||
|
||
Frankly, a better first step would have been to form the
|
||
association and then to have the association retain counsel and
|
||
draft by-laws in accordance with the wishes of the membership as
|
||
contrasted to the wishes of William.
|
||
|
||
During the "meeting" you presented and allowed some other people
|
||
to present their views for what the association could and should
|
||
be.
|
||
|
||
We differed in that YOU were suggesting that the association, by
|
||
natural process over time become net 107 (or visa versa). I
|
||
agreed and suggested that the association become the legal entity
|
||
formed by Net 107. I felt that your approach was deceptive to the
|
||
Net but you didn't want to hear it and wouldn't allow discussion.
|
||
We both know that, though this was not a net 107 meeting you were
|
||
attempting to form a legal entity that would control the net. You
|
||
admitted as much. Unfortunately, your way of doing things is
|
||
through self-egrandizing subterfuge.
|
||
|
||
You then asked that we agree to accept the by-laws which were
|
||
never discussed. You further suggested that we agree to meet
|
||
again in late February to elect officers.
|
||
|
||
I suggested that we form a steering committee to author a "Call
|
||
for Comment" of net 107 of the by-laws as you had drafted them
|
||
and that the steering committee draft revised by-laws based on
|
||
the input of the entire net.
|
||
|
||
These would then be presented for ratification in the February
|
||
meeting. No time would be lost but some of your power might be.
|
||
Others suggested that this might not be practical and that the
|
||
by-laws could "always be changed".
|
||
|
||
However I think some people lost sight of the fact that this
|
||
change would have to then be by 2/3 majority rather than a simple
|
||
majority. Therefor, it is possible that a minority could
|
||
effectively control the organization.
|
||
|
||
You then had the unmitigated gall to present the situation as
|
||
your way or no way. NO DISCUSSION, NO IDEAS, NO DISAGREEMENT;
|
||
King Bertholff. I tried to get my point across diplomatically and
|
||
inoffensively but you can't handle anyone disagreeing with you.
|
||
|
||
At this point, you slammed a fist down on the table, had an
|
||
enormous temper tantrum and stormed out of the room. You behaved
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 9 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
like a 3 year old child who couldn't get his way. You asked those
|
||
who disagreed with your approach to leave and I did (strange form
|
||
of democracy).
|
||
|
||
I came prepared to join (check in wallet). I left with nothing.
|
||
|
||
I call for your immediate resignation as Network Host. If that
|
||
does not occur I will ask those who feel as I do to form a "more
|
||
perfect" network in this area!
|
||
|
||
David Cary Hart
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
* Origin: Cary Hart Assoc CareerPath BBS:212-696-9777
|
||
(Opus 1:107/117)
|
||
|
||
|
||
Here is my reply to the above message.
|
||
|
||
Date: 12-14-87 10:33
|
||
From: Gene Coppola
|
||
To: David Hart
|
||
Subj: Re: AN OPEN MESSAGE
|
||
|
||
This is a reply to the echo mail about the meeting held Saturday.
|
||
|
||
I was at first in favor of this new association. Now I am not so
|
||
sure! Here are some of my concerns.
|
||
|
||
The first question I have is a simple one. I am a host/hub for a
|
||
private network (33 systems - Pace University) and have been
|
||
refused the use of certain software granted to other hubs/hosts
|
||
in the normal network. If 107 incorporates and becomes a FOR
|
||
PROFIT corporation will they lose the right to use some of IFNA's
|
||
software as well? If so, then this could be a problem.
|
||
|
||
The second question I have is regarding taxes. Stockholders in a
|
||
FOR PROFIT corp. must pay taxes on earnings, if I understand the
|
||
IRS laws on this matter? Also, who pays the corporation taxes,
|
||
etc; required by state law?
|
||
|
||
Third, what state will this corporation be started in?
|
||
|
||
Fourth, what protection if any will it grant a sysop from
|
||
liability resulting from, incorrect phone numbers, messages
|
||
containing information not normally public (unknown to sysop) and
|
||
other protections? And, does not IFNA provide these same
|
||
protections as well?
|
||
|
||
Fifth, as a FOR PROFIT corporation, does it not go against the
|
||
very reasons behind the initial formation of Fidonet?
|
||
|
||
Sixth, if a node currently in Net107 refuses to join the
|
||
corporation does he lose the right to use his hub, and the
|
||
resulting OGATE?
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 10 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
Seventh, by forming this corporation, will the resulting Net
|
||
still be included in the official "IFNA NODELIST"? Perhaps not,
|
||
we will have to see how IFNA will rule on this A comment from
|
||
IFNA would be nice if IFNA cares to make one on what effect it
|
||
would have.
|
||
|
||
Eighth, what costs would be involved both to the sysops who join,
|
||
and the sysops who don't join? Will the IGATE start charging to
|
||
handle incoming mail? Will the OGATE start charging to handle
|
||
outgoing mail? Will OTHER Nets charge to handle mail from 107
|
||
systems?
|
||
|
||
And last, since Net 107 is NOW IN EXISTENCE, I feel that any move
|
||
like this to organize should be made, by FIRST applying to the
|
||
Regional Coordinator for a NEW Net Number Assignment for the
|
||
corporation. I am sure there will be some people who WILL NOT
|
||
desire to join, so why inconvenience them? If people feel a need
|
||
to form a new corporation then they should break away and obtain
|
||
a new Net number for their group! There are plenty of people in
|
||
Net107 who can take over the various duties, if it comes to this!
|
||
|
||
I think this is a SERIOUS issue, that needs to be fully discussed
|
||
BEFORE anyone votes on this matter. Comments pro and con are
|
||
welcome from anyone interested!
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
That ends my reply. I am not saying that anything in the above
|
||
reply will come true. These are just questions I feel I need
|
||
answers to BEFORE I vote on this matter.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 11 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
Sak, 107/529
|
||
|
||
The Other Side of MetroNet
|
||
|
||
Apparently, the meeting of December 12th didn't satisfy everyone.
|
||
A message has been going around the net intended to explain the
|
||
events of that meeting in such a way as to color William
|
||
Bertholff as Hitler. Seeing as I also attended this meeting, I
|
||
thought another point of view might balance the net's perception
|
||
a bit better.
|
||
|
||
About a month or so prior to the meeting, Bill posted a net wide
|
||
invitation to all sysops. As a courtesy, I responded saying that
|
||
I doubted that I could manage to make it into NYC. Bill called me
|
||
voice and helped arrange a ride for me. Later, the meeting's
|
||
location was changed to New Brunswick and my commuting problem
|
||
vanished. Nonetheless, it should be noted that when I showed even
|
||
the slightest bit of interest, Bill responded, and responded in a
|
||
manner intended to solve those problems that stood between me and
|
||
my attendance.
|
||
|
||
At some point during the next few weeks, I received a call from
|
||
Bill notifying me that several files would be sent to my system.
|
||
He explained further that these files were the definitive
|
||
documents of a proposed BBS related organization and should be,
|
||
therefore, read carefully.
|
||
|
||
In other words, he was calling a meeting to show his peers the
|
||
work he had done and asking them to accept or reject it.
|
||
|
||
Granted, those that didn't respond to that invitation, may not
|
||
have had the background I did, but, considering the amount of
|
||
work such a task entails, I can surely understand making those
|
||
who showed interest the target of the work. Egos, being what
|
||
they are, and practicality, being what it is, often collide in
|
||
bruised self-interest. Most understand and make room for this
|
||
relationship; some don't and, in so doing, belittle all but
|
||
superhuman efforts.
|
||
|
||
The meeting was to start at 12 noon. Bill wasn't there at that
|
||
time so the lawyer retained by Bill opened the meeting. He
|
||
explained that:
|
||
|
||
1) he in no way represented any incumbrance to anyone in the
|
||
room,
|
||
|
||
2) only in the event the organization was accepted by the group
|
||
did he expect any payment at all,
|
||
|
||
3) he was willing to discount his fee for the sake of the
|
||
organization creation,
|
||
|
||
4) such and organization was necessary for numerous reasons (of
|
||
which he gave very good examples), and
|
||
|
||
5) related his background in law to verify his credentials.
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 12 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
Of the Sysops present (maybe 25 at the time, although the number
|
||
grew to over 40), two Sysops assumed a confrontational posture
|
||
asserting that Bill had no right to retain a lawyer for them, nor
|
||
did the lawyer have any right to incumber them. The lawyer simply
|
||
restated that no one was incumbered and that Bill alone had
|
||
retained him. Nonetheless, these two pressed the same questions
|
||
again and again. In fact, discussion was reduced to a three way
|
||
conversation to the exclusion of the rest of us.
|
||
|
||
At about 1pm Bill arrived. The anonymous message's author
|
||
maintains that he did so without apology. This is untrue. He
|
||
apologized about missing his train, and immediately got down to
|
||
business.
|
||
|
||
He began by asking everyone present to make some noncontroversial
|
||
changes to the articles and ethics standards. These changes were
|
||
culled over the preceding week from conversations with several
|
||
sysops. Largely these changes were inconsequential to the sense
|
||
of the document, save the change from 3 board members to 5. Next,
|
||
he explained the "big picture" (i. e., the why's and wherefore's
|
||
of such and organization). Then he opened the meeting to
|
||
questions from the floor.
|
||
|
||
During the question period, one of the two sysops that had
|
||
previously taken the lawyer to task, demanded that he be allowed
|
||
to make a statement. Bill reminded him that he was taking
|
||
questions at present, that there would be a time for comments
|
||
later. The sysop persisted, making asking question very difficult
|
||
in deed. Nonetheless, quite a few were asked, and Bill answered
|
||
them all candidly. Once the questions stopped, and after another
|
||
sysop announced that he supported the proposed organization (over
|
||
Bill's objections that he too was out of order, I might add), a
|
||
ten minute break was announced so that sysops could talk among
|
||
themselves. The break lasted 20 minutes and everyone exchanged
|
||
opinions.
|
||
|
||
The meeting reconvened, and the floor was opened for discussion.
|
||
The sysop that demanded to make a statement during the question
|
||
period, now demanded to ask questions. Once again this sysop
|
||
asserted that Bill had no right to do any of the things he had
|
||
done; that Bill had some how stolen everyone's rights. I think at
|
||
this point everyone was pretty fed up with the same questions,
|
||
the same accusations, the same "if-you-make-your-idea-MY-idea-
|
||
I'll-be-quiet", but order was the privilege of the chair. Bill
|
||
did attempt to call order any number of times, but this sysop
|
||
persisted in trying to assert his out-of-order questions.
|
||
Finally, Bill slammed his fist to the table and demanded order.
|
||
With that, a very small contingent of sysops walked out.
|
||
|
||
Thus the letter of complaint came to be.
|
||
|
||
In it the writer lays claim to superior business judgement by
|
||
stating that he runs his own organization and once was the CEO of
|
||
a $40,000,000 firm. I wish I could tell you how many times I
|
||
heard that at the meeting. I also run my own company and have
|
||
done so for more than 10 years; I think I can make business
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 13 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
decisions too, and most of mine have paid off just fine. I would
|
||
like to tell the writer of that message here and now that his
|
||
resume doesn't mean that "no one else can think". Besides, the
|
||
moderate successes that it reports seem to indicate a downhill
|
||
trend.
|
||
|
||
The letter also states that incorporating in NYC is the wrong
|
||
thing to do. I have my own opinion on this, but I do remember
|
||
this post-CEO of a $40,000,000 company proclaiming to the meeting
|
||
that he could offer NYC office space should the company be
|
||
incorporated there. It's interesting that now, once the post-CEO
|
||
of a $40,000,000 company walked out of the meeting, this has
|
||
become a bad idea altogether and proof of bad decision making.
|
||
|
||
Furthermore, the letter states that it is terrible that the
|
||
lawyer and Bill incumbered the organization-to-be. I sure would
|
||
like to know what the author expected. It seems to me, we
|
||
received the cheapest legal advice any of us are likely to get.
|
||
It also seems to me, the lawyer bent over backwards to be as
|
||
accommodating fee-wise as is humanly possible. If anything, I'd
|
||
say that Bill cut a mean deal, and that we should all be grateful
|
||
for it.
|
||
|
||
The author maintains that a FOR-PROFIT organization is
|
||
ridiculous, that it should be NONPROFIT organization. I'll really
|
||
have to check my facts here, but I believe there are far more
|
||
governmental regulations and red tape attached to nonprofit
|
||
organizations than there are to for-profit organizations.
|
||
Furthermore, the tax liability issue is easily managed by virtue
|
||
of the organization's ability to manage its profits. Once again,
|
||
it seems to me, the choice was a wise one.
|
||
|
||
The letter also mentioned that by buying into the organization,
|
||
one would also be buying into Bill's legal fees and
|
||
organizational structures. I never bought into anything that
|
||
didn't have overhead as a cost consideration. CEO's of
|
||
$40,000,000 companies usually deal with this concept daily. Be
|
||
that as it may, buying into the structure still remains. As far
|
||
as I can remember, I must have seen 100 different structures for
|
||
as many organizations. Most of them seem to work as long as the
|
||
people involved want them to. It's pretty obvious to me, overhead
|
||
and organizational structure aren't really the objections here;
|
||
rather they are skinned egos and self-importance.
|
||
|
||
All in all, I have to say I'm glad Bill took the bull by the
|
||
horns. For too long the net has been talking about the weather
|
||
but doing nothing about it. Now, that one of our members has
|
||
taken the initiative to do something about it, some seem to feel
|
||
cheated rather than gratified. Perhaps this is a natural feeling.
|
||
Bill's action has underscored the notion that other people have
|
||
good ideas too . . . with or without CEO approval.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 14 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
NOTICES
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
|
||
The Interrupt Stack
|
||
|
||
|
||
1 Jan 1988
|
||
Genesis of the Intergalactic Sysop Alliance, and publication
|
||
of the first AlterNet node list.
|
||
|
||
9 Jan 1988
|
||
The next net 104 FidoNet Sysop Meeting. Contact Oscar Barlow
|
||
at 104/0 for information.
|
||
|
||
26 Jan 1988
|
||
Australia Day. Australia celebrates 200 years of colonization.
|
||
|
||
25 Aug 1988
|
||
(pending BoD approval) Start of the Fifth International
|
||
FidoNet Conference, to be held at the Drawbridge Inn in
|
||
Cincinnatti, OH. Contact Tim Sullivan at 108/62 for more
|
||
information. This is FidoNet's big annual get-together, and
|
||
is your chance to meet all the people you've been talking with
|
||
all this time. We're hoping to see you there!
|
||
|
||
24 Aug 1989
|
||
Voyager 2 passes Neptune.
|
||
|
||
|
||
If you have something which you would like to see on this
|
||
calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1:1/1.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Latest Software Versions
|
||
|
||
BBS Systems Node List Other
|
||
& Mailers Version Utilities Version Utilities Version
|
||
|
||
Dutchie 2.80* EditNL 3.3 ARC 5.21
|
||
Fido 12e* MakeNL 1.10 ARCmail 1.1
|
||
Opus 1.03a Prune 1.40 ConfMail 3.3*
|
||
SEAdog 4.10 XlatList 2.85* EchoMail 1.31
|
||
TBBS 2.0M MGM 1.1
|
||
|
||
* Recently changed
|
||
|
||
Utility authors: Please help keep this list up to date by
|
||
reporting new versions to 1:1/1. It is not our intent to list
|
||
all utilities here, only those which verge on necessity.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 15 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
__
|
||
The World's First / \
|
||
BBS Network /|oo \
|
||
* FidoNet * (_| /_)
|
||
_`@/_ \ _
|
||
| | \ \\
|
||
| (*) | \ ))
|
||
______ |__U__| / \//
|
||
/ Fido \ _//|| _\ /
|
||
(________) (_/(_|(____/ (tm)
|
||
|
||
Membership for the International FidoNet Association
|
||
|
||
Membership in IFNA is open to any individual or organization that
|
||
pays a specified annual membership fee. IFNA serves the
|
||
international FidoNet-compatible electronic mail community to
|
||
increase worldwide communications.
|
||
|
||
Member Name _______________________________ Date _______________
|
||
Address _________________________________________________________
|
||
City ____________________________________________________________
|
||
State ________________________________ Zip _____________________
|
||
Country _________________________________________________________
|
||
Home Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________
|
||
Work Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________
|
||
Zone:Net/Node Number ____________________________________________
|
||
BBS Name ________________________________________________________
|
||
BBS Phone Number ________________________________________________
|
||
Baud Rates Supported ____________________________________________
|
||
Board Restrictions ______________________________________________
|
||
Your Special Interests __________________________________________
|
||
_________________________________________________________________
|
||
_________________________________________________________________
|
||
In what areas would you be willing to help in FidoNet? __________
|
||
_________________________________________________________________
|
||
_________________________________________________________________
|
||
Send this membership form and a check or money order for $25 in
|
||
US Funds to:
|
||
International FidoNet Association
|
||
c/o Leonard Mednick, MBA, CPA
|
||
700 Bishop Street, #1014
|
||
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813-4112
|
||
USA
|
||
|
||
Thank you for your membership! Your participation will help to
|
||
insure the future of FidoNet.
|
||
|
||
Please NOTE that IFNA is a general not-for-profit organization
|
||
and Articles of Association and By-Laws were adopted by the
|
||
membership in January 1987. The first elected Board of Directors
|
||
was filled in August 1987. The IFNA Echomail Conference has been
|
||
established on FidoNet to assist the Board. We welcome your
|
||
input to this Conference.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 4-48 Page 16 28 Dec 1987
|
||
|
||
|
||
INTERNATIONAL FIDONET ASSOCIATION
|
||
ORDER FORM
|
||
|
||
Publications
|
||
|
||
The IFNA publications can be obtained by downloading from Fido
|
||
1:1/10 or other FidoNet compatible systems, or by purchasing
|
||
them directly from IFNA. We ask that all our IFNA Committee
|
||
Chairmen provide us with the latest versions of each
|
||
publication, but we can make no written guarantees.
|
||
|
||
Hardcopy prices as of October 1, 1986
|
||
|
||
IFNA Fido BBS listing $15.00 _____
|
||
IFNA Administrative Policy DOCs $10.00 _____
|
||
IFNA FidoNet Standards Committee DOCs $10.00 _____
|
||
|
||
SUBTOTAL _____
|
||
|
||
IFNA Member ONLY Special Offers
|
||
|
||
System Enhancement Associates SEAdog $60.00 _____
|
||
SEAdog price as of March 1, 1987
|
||
ONLY 1 copy SEAdog per IFNA Member
|
||
|
||
Fido Software's Fido/FidoNet $100.00 _____
|
||
Fido/FidoNet price as of November 1, 1987
|
||
ONLY 1 copy Fido/FidoNet per IFNA Member
|
||
|
||
International orders include $10.00 for
|
||
surface shipping or $20.00 for air shipping _____
|
||
|
||
SUBTOTAL _____
|
||
|
||
HI. Residents add 4.0 % Sales tax _____
|
||
|
||
TOTAL _____
|
||
|
||
SEND CHECK OR MONEY ORDER IN US FUNDS:
|
||
International FidoNet Association
|
||
c/o Leonard Mednick, MBA, CPA
|
||
700 Bishop Street, #1014
|
||
Honolulu, HI. 96813-4112
|
||
USA
|
||
|
||
Name________________________________
|
||
Zone:Net/Node____:____/____
|
||
Company_____________________________
|
||
Address_____________________________
|
||
City____________________ State____________ Zip_____
|
||
Voice Phone_________________________
|
||
|
||
Signature___________________________
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
|