1981 lines
95 KiB
Plaintext
1981 lines
95 KiB
Plaintext
Volume 6, Number 27 3 July 1989
|
||
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|
||
| _ |
|
||
| / \ |
|
||
| /|oo \ |
|
||
| - FidoNews - (_| /_) |
|
||
| _`@/_ \ _ |
|
||
| International | | \ \\ |
|
||
| FidoNet Association | (*) | \ )) |
|
||
| Newsletter ______ |__U__| / \// |
|
||
| / FIDO \ _//|| _\ / |
|
||
| (________) (_/(_|(____/ |
|
||
| (jm) |
|
||
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
|
||
Editor in Chief: Vince Perriello
|
||
Editors Emeritii: Dale Lovell
|
||
Thom Henderson
|
||
Chief Procrastinator Emeritus: Tom Jennings
|
||
|
||
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. 1:1/1 is a Continuous Mail system, available for
|
||
network mail 24 hours a day.
|
||
|
||
Copyright 1989 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. IFNA may also be contacted
|
||
at PO Box 41143, St. Louis, MO 63141.
|
||
|
||
Fido and FidoNet are registered trademarks of Tom Jennings of
|
||
Fido Software, 164 Shipley Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94107 and
|
||
are used with permission.
|
||
|
||
We don't necessarily agree with the contents of every article
|
||
published here. Most of these materials are unsolicited. No
|
||
article will be rejected which is properly attributed and legally
|
||
acceptable. We will publish every responsible submission
|
||
received.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Table of Contents
|
||
1. EDITORIAL ................................................ 1
|
||
2. ARTICLES ................................................. 3
|
||
Computer Literacy ........................................ 3
|
||
FidoCon '89 Update ....................................... 6
|
||
A network constitution? .................................. 8
|
||
Thoughts on the Nodelist (Revisited) ..................... 11
|
||
Multiple Nets in a Single Geographic Area ................ 18
|
||
More of My Opinions if Anyone Cares ...................... 21
|
||
SDNet/Works! UPDATE ...................................... 25
|
||
And we thought the mud-slinging presidential campaign w .. 28
|
||
A Short Story, With a Moral .............................. 29
|
||
And more!
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 1 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
EDITORIAL
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
|
||
This is getting ridiculous.
|
||
|
||
Frankly, at this point I could care less who the good guys and
|
||
bad guys are. My suspicion is that both sides are at fault. But
|
||
this apparent attempt to bury FidoNews in POLICY squabbles has
|
||
gone far enough.
|
||
|
||
To date I have printed nearly everything that has been sent on
|
||
the topic(s) in question, because of our open policy. The only
|
||
items I haven't printed were sent to the Publications committee
|
||
for review in one case, and exceeding the MAKENEWS limit in
|
||
another. (The long article will be published after PubComm looks
|
||
at it)
|
||
|
||
The result: some very HEAVY FidoNews editions.
|
||
|
||
Has anyone benefitted from this? Answer: No.
|
||
|
||
Is this serving the public interest? Answer: No.
|
||
|
||
So what can be done about this? Change the Editorial Policy? I
|
||
think not. I've spent some time thinking about it and I don't
|
||
believe that any policy can be drafted that will properly curb
|
||
abuse of the FidoNews forum without causing severe damage to the
|
||
usefulness of FidoNews to the community at large. And I'm not so
|
||
certain that devising long-winded policy documents accomplishes
|
||
much more in this network than usurping the normal role of
|
||
everyone's manners and good judgement, and putting all that into
|
||
the hands of others (however well-intentioned they might be).
|
||
|
||
So we're down to ASKING. PLEASE, DON'T SEND US SO MUCH MATERIAL
|
||
ABOUT POLICY SQUABBLES. If you feel strongly about publishing
|
||
something about some local issue, try to keep it down to one or
|
||
two concise articles. The current ratio of anywhere from 4 to 6
|
||
articles or more per dispute is just too much. If there really
|
||
are issues that we can all see, one well-written article should
|
||
be able to make them apparent. All you accomplish by sending in
|
||
20K of text a week is getting everyone pissed off at YOU.
|
||
|
||
I still intend to print what I receive as long as it passes
|
||
scrutiny for possible legal problems by me or the Pubs committee
|
||
(this isn't new, this is the policy we have been operating under)
|
||
but I would like some cooperation from certain combatants in
|
||
America's Heartland and elsewhere to help keep FidoNews on track.
|
||
|
||
There are important political issues facing the network. We need
|
||
a forum that enjoys wide readership in order to discuss them.
|
||
Spending too much time in a local Wisconsin dispute will drive
|
||
the Louisiana or Luxembourg reader away. I'm not taking sides
|
||
here. I'm just telling it like it is. PLEASE give this some
|
||
consideration.
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 2 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
As always, thanks for shopping K-Mart, er, reading FidoNews ...
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 3 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
ARTICLES
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
|
||
Claude F. Witherspoon
|
||
Fido 1:288/525
|
||
Home of KidsNews
|
||
|
||
Computer Literacy to be Top National Priority
|
||
|
||
Its that time of year again. Computer Learning Month will be upon
|
||
us before we know it. With that in mind, we at KidsNews would
|
||
like to share the following information in hopes to make this
|
||
year even better than last year:
|
||
|
||
COMPUTER LITERACY TO BE TOP NATIONAL PRIORITY FOR NEW
|
||
INDUSTRY-SUPPORTED FOUNDATION
|
||
|
||
PALO ALTO, Calif. (Feb. 13, 1989) -- In a bi-partisan effort to
|
||
address the nation's eroding educational levels, the Computer
|
||
Learning Foundation (CLF) today announced plans for a year round
|
||
campaign to promote computer literacy in North America. Supported
|
||
by major software publishing companies, as well as Apple and IBM,
|
||
CLF expects to recieve up to $1 million in funding this year.
|
||
|
||
The announcement coincides with predictions of a national
|
||
technologigal decline touched off by last week's release of an
|
||
Educational Testing Service study that showed 13-year-old U.S.
|
||
students scoring the lowest in an international comparison of
|
||
mathmatics and science skills. Earlier, a National Research
|
||
Council study reported that American students were being *left
|
||
behind* by a mathematics teaching system that set its
|
||
expectations too low.
|
||
|
||
The establishment of the non-profit Computer Learning Foundation
|
||
will extend the annual industry-sponsored Computer Learning Month
|
||
(CLM) public education campaign in October to a year-round
|
||
initiative. Last year's program reached more than 60 million
|
||
people and was the catalyst for nearly 3,000 computer literacy
|
||
events in schools and cities throughout the U.S. and Canada.
|
||
|
||
|
||
"With increasing concern over the high school drop-out rate, poor
|
||
student performance levels and the erosion of the country's
|
||
competitive edge, the importance of having an educated and
|
||
computer-literate population has emerged as a top national
|
||
priority as we experience a quantum leap in technological
|
||
development," said Sally Bowman, director of CLF.
|
||
|
||
Predictions by Forcasting International indicate that by the year
|
||
2010 every job in America will require some form of information
|
||
technology skills.
|
||
|
||
"Our number one goal os to motivate more effective uses of
|
||
technology in schools, homes and businesses by raising public
|
||
recognition of what is really possible with computers. In 1989,
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 4 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
we are building a broader coalition of partners to reach out to
|
||
children, adults and teachers from every socioeconomic background
|
||
and help to increase computer compfort and confidence around the
|
||
country. Computer literacy goes well beyond Silicon Valley: is is
|
||
the nation's future."
|
||
|
||
In 1989, for the first time, sponsorship of Computer Learning
|
||
Foundation activities will be open to organizations outside the
|
||
computer industry. Through joint promotional tie-ins with
|
||
mass-marketers of consumer products, CLF expects to extend its
|
||
"You Won't Believe What You'll Achieve!" message nationwide.
|
||
|
||
Industry sponsorship of CLM activities reached an all-time high
|
||
in 1988, up 300 percent from 1987. The 1988 coalition of support
|
||
included 61 software and computer industry members, 52 U.S. State
|
||
Departments of Education and Canadian Ministries of Education,
|
||
and 21 national non-profit organizations.
|
||
|
||
CLF 1989 programs, using the theme "You Won't Believe What You'll
|
||
Achieve!," will offer a variety of programs and materials
|
||
designed to reach millions of children, adults and educators in
|
||
the U.S. and Canada. Books that address computers and careers,
|
||
school lesson plans for all age ranges and educational levels,
|
||
and more will be published and distributed by CLF in the coming
|
||
year. Last year alone, CLM distributed millions of books, posters
|
||
and materials as part of its efforts to increase "computer
|
||
confidence" amoung all age groups. This year, in addition to its
|
||
books, CLF will also distribute posters and Computer Learning
|
||
Month event kits to schools and community groups to support their
|
||
efforts in increasing computer literacy.
|
||
|
||
CLF contest for individuals and educators prompted more than
|
||
100,000 entries last year during CLM. In 1989, CLF contests will
|
||
focus on effective uses of the computer at school and home, as
|
||
well as development of teacher training materials. Traveling art
|
||
exhibits featuring creative work done by school-aged children
|
||
using computers will be displayed at metropolitan libraries and
|
||
airports throughout the country. And, for the first time, CLF
|
||
will communicate its computer literacy messages via a nationally
|
||
syndicated television series entitled SOFTVIEW. The CLF series,
|
||
which begins airing in late February, will be produced in
|
||
conjunction with the Central Education Network (CEN) and is aimed
|
||
at increasing elementary and secondary school educators'
|
||
understanding and use of computers in the classroom. The weekly
|
||
programs will feature "hands-on" lesson plans that have
|
||
effectively incorporated computers and traditional materials, as
|
||
well as creative computing ideas for the classroom.
|
||
|
||
Published with permission of the Computer Learning Foundation
|
||
(CLF), Palo Alto, Calif.
|
||
|
||
I have initiated a National Computer Learning Month echo
|
||
available on Fido 1:288/525 by request. If you are interested in
|
||
carrying the echo which uses the name NCLM, please send a request
|
||
to Butch Witherspoon, Fido 1:288/525 (Continuous Mail (CM)), and
|
||
I will be happy to tie you into the echo and send it to your
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 5 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
system. You must be able to accept continuous Mail for this
|
||
request. This offer is good for the U.S. only until someone
|
||
offeres to gateway the echo to other regions. I would like to see
|
||
the echo carried on the Backbone if folks are interested enough.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 6 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
Les Kooyman
|
||
FidoCon Program Chairperson
|
||
1:204/501
|
||
|
||
FidoCon '89 Update: Dateline Silicon Valley
|
||
|
||
Planning for FidoCon continues at what is beginning to seem like
|
||
a hectic pace. As we get closer and closer to the actual date of
|
||
the convention, I'm sure we'll look back on this as our relaxed
|
||
time!
|
||
|
||
We've been successful enough at attracting speakers that current-
|
||
ly we're planning on 12 rather than 8 sessions. The conference is
|
||
still single-track, that is, only one session will be going on
|
||
att a time.
|
||
|
||
The current program listing for Fidocon '89 is as follows:
|
||
|
||
1: Tim Pozar on UFGATE
|
||
2: Vince Perriello and Bob Hartman on BinkleyTerm
|
||
3: Bob Hartman on Bix processing of FidoNet echomail
|
||
4: Phil Becker on TBBS
|
||
5: Tom Jennings on Fido
|
||
6: Chuck Forsberg on Zmodem and protocols
|
||
7: Mort Sternheim on FidoNet and IFNA
|
||
8: Chris Irwin/Joaquim Homrighausen on D'Bridge/Front Door
|
||
9: Rick Heming on Wildcat BBS software
|
||
10: OPEN
|
||
11: OPEN
|
||
12: OPEN
|
||
|
||
We'll be announcing the times and dates of the sessions in July,
|
||
in case you want to plan on attending a subset of the full con-
|
||
ference.
|
||
|
||
I would be remiss if I did not emphasize that the deadline for
|
||
discount registration is quickly approaching (July 15th). Both
|
||
the registration fee for the Convention itself and the hotel
|
||
discount rate increase on that date. The FidoCon registration
|
||
will increase from $60 to $75, and the discount hotel registra-
|
||
tion will END, meaning that you will pay full price for your
|
||
hotel room. So get those registrations in, folks! Please see the
|
||
registration form in this issue of FidoNews for details on the
|
||
way to proceed to take advantage of our discount offers. We'll
|
||
accept your registration for FidoCon after July 15 at the $60
|
||
rate if you netmail your registration form to 1:1/89 (the offi-
|
||
cial FidoCon '89 node) by midnight Pacific Time on July 15, and
|
||
(this is IMPORTANT) your hard copy confirmation and fees reach us
|
||
within 72 hours of that netmail reservation. This is important
|
||
both for payments by credit card or check. You cannot, however,
|
||
guarantee the discount hotel rate through netmail to 1/1:89, this
|
||
must be done as described in the registration form.
|
||
|
||
We've also arranged for discount automobile rentals through Alamo
|
||
Rent-a-Car. To take advantage of this discount, you need to call
|
||
Alamo at 1-800-327-9633 and request an automobile at the conven-
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 7 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
tion rate. Mention FidoCon '89 and the dates of the conference at
|
||
the time you request the convention rate. You must make your
|
||
reservation no later than 30 days prior to the event, which means
|
||
you would need to reserve your car by July 24th. All of the
|
||
following rates include automatic transmission, air conditioning
|
||
and radio. All of the discount rates include unlimited free
|
||
mileage.
|
||
|
||
Economy car (example: Geo Metro) $32 day/$109 week.
|
||
Compact car (example: Chevy Cavalier) $34 day/$120 week.
|
||
Midsize car (example: Pontiac Grand Am) $36 day/$135 week.
|
||
Standard car (example: Buick Regal) $38 day/$165 week.
|
||
Luxury car (example: Buick LeSabre) $40 day/$239 week.
|
||
|
||
Remember that you really don't have to rent a car in the San
|
||
Francisco Bay area if you don't want to, public transportation is
|
||
quite good. However, if you are interested in seeing as much as
|
||
possible of the area and making a real vacation of it, you should
|
||
consider a car, and these rates strike me as being very good.
|
||
|
||
That's all for the moment... see you in San Jose!
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 8 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
A network constitution?
|
||
|
||
I know it may sound kinda funny...but do we need such a
|
||
thing? I'm beginning to think that it might not be such a bad
|
||
idea to help us improve and expand our network. I have been
|
||
reading some of the echos floating around and the FIDOnet news
|
||
letters and it is beginning to get pretty hostile. Anyway after
|
||
some thought and discussion with other sysops I drafted the
|
||
following document as a proposed "constitution" for a logical
|
||
network called FREEnet. Such a net would include all sysops
|
||
whether they are in a organized network or not.
|
||
Now you are probably saying why? What good would this do
|
||
me the regular BBS sysop? Wouldn't this just be another layer
|
||
of stuff I would have to put up with! Well here in short and
|
||
sweet are some of the reasons that such a collective body can
|
||
be a benefit to you.
|
||
1) It would allow each member more democratic input into
|
||
the hows, whys, and whats of how the networks are run.
|
||
2) A collective body could exert influence on the
|
||
legislative bodies of state and federal governments.
|
||
Issues like the FCC's rate setting for long distance
|
||
telecommunication products/services.
|
||
3) Representation in national/international standards
|
||
meetings. Where things like X.400 are right now being
|
||
put on paper. The future of ISDN and how that will
|
||
impact Email and networking.
|
||
4) A collective force that can influence the computer
|
||
equipment producers and software vendors.
|
||
|
||
There are a lot more reasons than I have listed above and
|
||
I'm sure there are some that may or may not agree with the
|
||
ones I've listed. But I hope that we can somehow get together
|
||
as a group and tap some of the great potential we already have
|
||
as sysops. To get this thing started we need people willing
|
||
to function as a "constitutional congress" and designate
|
||
a legislative working group for each of the 50 states and
|
||
each over-seas country.
|
||
I hope I have sparked some interest in this idea....
|
||
Please contact me with your comments, thoughts, suggestions...
|
||
anything that you feel like saying on this constitutional
|
||
organization.
|
||
|
||
David Winters
|
||
The "Drifting Sysop"
|
||
|
||
MCImail: 328-8890
|
||
Telex: 6503288890
|
||
CIS: 73327,1075
|
||
Fido: 281/10 (route to 777/1)
|
||
DDN/Arpa: sac.23bms-do@e.isi.edu
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 9 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
FREEnet Constitution
|
||
9 June 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
PREAMBLE:
|
||
|
||
The rights and interests of computer hobbyists around the
|
||
world are diverse and ever changing. As each ventures to learn
|
||
and grow the need to communicate with their peers is a necessity
|
||
that fosters this expanding interest in the field. This
|
||
communication should be easy and agreeable with minimal
|
||
interference from outside organizations. The RIGHT of these
|
||
individuals to explore as they will must be protected and
|
||
nurtured as a fundamental goal. To this end the following
|
||
constitution is dedicated and drafted for those who hold to this
|
||
basic purpose.
|
||
|
||
ARTICLES of CONSTITUTION:
|
||
|
||
1. This constitution shall be a document used as a foundation for
|
||
all members participating in FREEnet and as a guide for
|
||
operations. It is ratified by each individual member's decision
|
||
to participate. As a guide it is not the absolute...but a living
|
||
changing document.
|
||
|
||
2. Each member of the network has the right to one vote on any
|
||
issue that concerns this network, its operation, or this
|
||
constitution and amendments. A member is an individual that has
|
||
identified themselves as a willing participant to FREEnet and
|
||
this constitution.
|
||
|
||
3. All operations of FREEnet will be in accordance with the laws
|
||
of the sovereign state in which the member resides. Any actions
|
||
which conflict with these local laws...the local law will take
|
||
precedence over the network constitution and amendments.
|
||
|
||
4. Any operations or subjects not addressed in these articles or
|
||
amendments are retained to the members and shall not be abridged
|
||
without their consent and approval.
|
||
|
||
5. There will be elected by simple majority a president and vice-
|
||
president, who shall function as the executives for FREEnet. They
|
||
retain the office for one year and have the power to appoint
|
||
individuals as assistants as needed. All assistants will be
|
||
confirmed by the legislative congress. The president will
|
||
represent the FREEnet and its members on all matters not retained
|
||
to the members or the congress. The vice-president will perform
|
||
tasks assigned by the president. The president also retains the
|
||
right of the VETO on legislation written by the congress.
|
||
|
||
6. The congress shall consist of members elected by majority in
|
||
their area of operation. Each 50 members shall have one
|
||
representative in the FREEnet congress. The area should consist
|
||
of members who are closely located geographically. In remote
|
||
areas of 5 or more there may be elected a representative upon
|
||
approval of the judicial council. The representatives will retain
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 10 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
office for one year. The congress has the power to put forth new
|
||
legislation that effects the operation of FREEnet.
|
||
|
||
7. The judicial council will consist of 12 members selected by
|
||
the president and approved by the congress. Each judge will
|
||
retain their office for two years. The judicial council will
|
||
arbitrate questions about operations with reference to this
|
||
constitution. The council has the power of REVISION for all
|
||
legislation where conflicts arise with this constitution and
|
||
amendments. The council will rule on matters between members,
|
||
members and the FREEnet organization, and non-member
|
||
organizations and FREEnet. The council may appoint sub-councils
|
||
to performs judicial tasks as assigned.
|
||
|
||
8. No member may hold more than one office in FREEnet.
|
||
|
||
9. Amendments to this constitution may be enacted by: a 3/4
|
||
majority of congress or by vote of 90 percent of the members.
|
||
Legislation may be introduced by any congress representative or
|
||
by a petition of 500 members. Introduced legislation must be
|
||
approved by a 3/4 majority of congress
|
||
|
||
10. The act of impeachment for any member, congress
|
||
representative, or president requires the vote of 90 percent of
|
||
congress and a majority of the judicial council.
|
||
|
||
|
||
WE THE FOLLOWING SIGN THIS DOCUMENT IN GOOD FAITH AND WITH THE
|
||
HOPE THAT IT WILL FOSTER EACH MEMBERS BEST INTEREST.
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 11 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
Jack Decker
|
||
(Formerly?) Fidonet 1:154/8
|
||
LCRnet 77:1011/8
|
||
|
||
THOUGHTS ON THE NODELIST (REVISITED)
|
||
|
||
This may well be my last Fidonews article as a member of
|
||
Fidonet. In a scant few hours, the new Fidonet nodelist will be
|
||
issued, and our Net will no longer exist as far as Fidonet is
|
||
concerned (although we are still quite alive and well, thank
|
||
you).
|
||
|
||
This particular cloud may indeed have a golden lining, however.
|
||
It has caused us to give some really serious thought to the
|
||
matter of the nodelist, and as a result, the "Official Public
|
||
Computer Network" Nodelist is now in production. The current
|
||
OPCNLIST and OPCNDIFF are requestable from 154/970, and that's
|
||
also where you can send your Net's nodelist segment if you'd
|
||
like to be included in the OPCN nodelist. The only problem, of
|
||
course, is that by the time you read this, 154/970 will no
|
||
longer be in the Fidonet nodelist, unless something pretty
|
||
miraculous happens between now and then. Never fear, at the
|
||
end of this article I'll give you enough information to
|
||
temporarily plug a subset of Net 154 into your private nodelist
|
||
long enough to file request a copy of the OPCN nodelist
|
||
(assuming you can't find a distribution point nearer to you).
|
||
|
||
I think the nicest compliment that we've received so far came,
|
||
believe it or not, from an RC (not ours!), who said "Nice idea
|
||
- perhaps what FidoNet was SUPPOSED to have been....." This
|
||
is, in fact, exactly what we're hoping for... to cut away all
|
||
the political crap and return Fidonet (or at least, computer
|
||
networking) to what it was originally intended to be.
|
||
|
||
We have made one change in the way we're doing things. We now
|
||
support the Fidonet style usage of the CM flag, that is, CM is
|
||
no longer assumed to be the default condition. While we still
|
||
feel that it would make more sense for CM to be the default
|
||
(since the majority of nodes are now CM), we also recognize
|
||
that it creates a hardship for NC's to have to make two
|
||
separate nodelists (one for Fidonet, and the other for the OPCN
|
||
nodelist). So, you can now send the same Net nodelist to both.
|
||
You still have the option of creating a nodelist just for the
|
||
OPCN nodelist (since we do support some additional nodelist
|
||
flags that Fidonet doesn't), but you don't HAVE to if you don't
|
||
want to.
|
||
|
||
Another reason you may wish to create a separate nodelist for
|
||
the OPCN nodelist is that the OPCN nodelist allows you a lot
|
||
more freedom to list all the nodes in your net. If you have
|
||
private nodes, or nodes that are outside your local calling
|
||
area that you haven't been listing for fear of bringing down
|
||
the wrath of the Fidonet *C's upon you, feel free to list these
|
||
nodes in the OPCN nodelist. The OPCN nodelist is in no way
|
||
affiliated with Fidonet. When you list your Net in the OPCN
|
||
nodelist, think of it as though you're actually listing a
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 12 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
private Net that just happens to use the same Net number as
|
||
your Fidonet Net, but that need not contain exactly the same
|
||
list of nodes as your net in Fidonet.
|
||
|
||
If you're an NC, we would like to invite you to have your Net
|
||
listed in the OPCN nodelist. You may use the same Net number
|
||
that you are now using in Fidonet (or in any other Network, so
|
||
long as it does not conflict with an existing Fidonet Net
|
||
number), so you need not alter your system's control files.
|
||
Send your net's nodelist updates (under the filename NET.xxx,
|
||
where the "xxx" is your net number) to George Kasica (the OPCN
|
||
nodelist compiler) at 154/970. (NOTE: Should you have a four
|
||
digit Net number, please use the filename xxxx.NET when you
|
||
send your nodelist segment in to 154/970). For those who'd
|
||
like more involvement in this project, we'll be forming a
|
||
"Nodelist Distribution Network" to assist in the distribution
|
||
of the OPCN nodelist, and to assist in the gathering of
|
||
nodelist segments from individual Nets. For more information
|
||
on the OPCN nodelist and/or the Nodelist Distribution Network,
|
||
please send netmail to George.
|
||
|
||
You might be asking why you would want your net listed in the
|
||
OPCN nodelist. There are several reasons, but here are a few
|
||
of the main points:
|
||
|
||
1) We've deliberately tried to make the OPCN nodelist as
|
||
non-political as possible. You do not have to agree with
|
||
anyone else's philosophy as to how a network should be operated
|
||
in order to be in the OPCN nodelist. Nor do you have to give
|
||
up any existing affiliation with Fidonet or AnyOtherNet in
|
||
order to be listed in the OPCN nodelist. You should consider
|
||
listing your net with us, if for no other reason than that we
|
||
could be a valuable "second source" listing of Fidonet
|
||
compatible nodes in the event that anything ever happens to
|
||
disrupt publication of the Fidonet nodelist.
|
||
|
||
2) We allow you to list ALL the nodes in your Net. No need to
|
||
"hide" certain nodes for fear that someone might complain that
|
||
they're on the wrong side of a geographic boundary.
|
||
|
||
3) If you are now listing certain nodes that are really full,
|
||
operational BBS's in a Point Net because they don't quite meet
|
||
certain technical standards, they can be listed as private,
|
||
unlisted nodes in the OPCN nodelist. We don't get our noses
|
||
out of joint because you have private, unlisted nodes in your
|
||
net. And as long as the Net's NC can connect with the private,
|
||
unlisted node to exchange mail, it's nobody's business if
|
||
anyone else can (since all inbound mail to such nodes will be
|
||
host-routed anyway).
|
||
|
||
4) If you're now listing certain nodes as "private, unlisted"
|
||
because you don't want your RC to know where they're really
|
||
located, you can list the phone number and location in the OPCN
|
||
nodelist (as far as the Fidonet people are concerned, these
|
||
nodes don't exist, because they're not in their nodelist!). We
|
||
don't care where your nodes are located. If you or they are
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 13 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
willing to bear the expense to connect with each other, it's
|
||
none of our business.
|
||
|
||
At this point, I can just hear some folks screaming that we
|
||
will increase the size of our nodelist by allowing private
|
||
nodes to be listed indiscriminately. Well, in the first place,
|
||
we don't have a size problem yet! But in the second place,
|
||
part of the blame for that problem can be laid on the shoulders
|
||
of the original designers of Fidonet software.
|
||
|
||
You see, the original designers opted to go with what might be
|
||
termed a "fully coupled" nodelist. Simply speaking, this means
|
||
that some pieces of software (Opus, for example) will not allow
|
||
you to send netmail to a net/node that is not listed in the
|
||
nodelist. This prevents a user from sending mail to a
|
||
non-existent node, BUT, it also means that all private nodes
|
||
must be listed in the nodelist, or users of software that
|
||
checks the nodelist for a valid address will not be able to
|
||
send mail to such private nodes.
|
||
|
||
Unfortunately, it soon got to the point where SOME people
|
||
started screaming about the size of the nodelist, and decided
|
||
that most private nodes had to go. But to where? That's about
|
||
the time the whole concept of "points" and "point nets" were
|
||
developed. So now, users of systems that check the nodelist
|
||
can now send messages to non-existent points. What have we
|
||
gained? The net is no longer "fully coupled", since point
|
||
addresses cannot be checked for validity, but we have added an
|
||
extra layer of complexity.
|
||
|
||
The Fidonet philosophy in cases like this seems to be to add
|
||
more software complexity. We in effect took a system that was
|
||
functioning very well using only nets and nodes, and added
|
||
"Points" and "Zones" which are essentially KLUDGES. To fully
|
||
support either of these extensions adds additional complexity
|
||
and software problems that can reach out to bite sysops in the
|
||
most unexpected ways. I feel it would have been much better,
|
||
and much simpler from a technical standpoint, to abandon the
|
||
idea of the "fully coupled" nodelist and to simply route any
|
||
traffic for "unknown" nodes to the appropriate net host. In
|
||
this way, "private, unlisted" nodes would not have to be in the
|
||
nodelist, and we could have done without the "Point" kludge.
|
||
|
||
To give you just one example of how these kludges can really
|
||
screw up a system... I have a point off of my system, so I run
|
||
ReMapper to remap netmail to his system. I also have a node
|
||
number in LCRnet, which uses Zone 77. Just today, I discovered
|
||
that if anyone sent me netmail at 77:1011/8, and the sender was
|
||
running a fully "zone aware" system that put in the ^AINTL
|
||
kludge line, ReMapper would happily readdress such messages and
|
||
send them off to non-existent node 1/77!
|
||
|
||
If those systems now operating as "Points" instead had "real"
|
||
net node numbers (albeit private, unlisted ones), netmail and
|
||
echomail routing to those systems would be a snap.
|
||
Unfortunately, because there's still some "fully coupled"
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 14 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
software out there, such private, unlisted nodes would have to
|
||
be listed in the international nodelist to be accessible to
|
||
everyone in the net. If we could move away from the idea of
|
||
the "fully coupled" network (which no longer exists anyway,
|
||
when points are considered), then such private, unlisted nodes
|
||
would only have to appear in the NC's nodelist, not the big one
|
||
that gets sent around to everyone.
|
||
|
||
Zones used as gateways to "other" nets are also a kludge, and
|
||
you can blame the Fidonet *C structure for that one. When
|
||
Alternet first started out, they asked that a group of Net
|
||
numbers be reserved for Alternet nodes. This would have made
|
||
things much simpler for everyone, Unfortunately, small minds
|
||
decreed that Fidonet had a God-given right to all possible net
|
||
number combinations, so Alternet was forced to resort to the
|
||
Zone kludge. The small minds are still at work... Alternet
|
||
first used Zone 4, and the *C's said they needed that for South
|
||
America (they wouldn't have DREAMED of just skipping Zone 4 and
|
||
using Zone 5). So then Alternet changed over to using Zone 7.
|
||
Now the Fidonet nodelist lists nodes 1/5, 1/6, and 1/7 as
|
||
"future Zonegates", effectively telling the Alternet folks that
|
||
they aren't authorized to use Zone 7, either. But when
|
||
penguins and polar bears start using computers, Fidonet will be
|
||
ready for them!
|
||
|
||
Now the Fidonet hierarchy wants other networks to use something
|
||
called "domains", the implementation of which will require
|
||
additional software and will make life that much harder for
|
||
sysops, as well as making it totally impossible for users of
|
||
most older software to send messages to those in other
|
||
networks. My guess is that most sysops will NOT run "domain"
|
||
software. The idea of adding yet another layer of complexity
|
||
onto Zones, Nets, Nodes, and Points is probably just too much
|
||
for the "average sysop" to stomach.
|
||
|
||
(By the way, when you dial a 1-800- call, do you know how the
|
||
phone company knows which long distance carrier to route it to?
|
||
Simple... they look at the first three digits of the exchange,
|
||
that is, the three digits following the "1-800-". For example,
|
||
if you dial "1-800-222-xxxx", the call is handled by AT&T. If
|
||
you dial "1-800-950-xxxx", it goes via MCI. And if it's
|
||
"1-800-877-xxxx", it goes by U.S. Sprint. Aren't you glad the
|
||
folks who are making decrees on how "alternate' networks must
|
||
interface with Fidonet aren't working for the phone company?)
|
||
|
||
We refuse to play these sort of politically-motivated games
|
||
with the OPCN nodelist, and intend to just list nets in North
|
||
America under Zone 11, nets in Europe under Zone 12, and so on,
|
||
regardless of what "network" the net is affiliated with. So,
|
||
sysops who use the OPCN nodelist won't have to try to figure
|
||
out if someone is in Fidonet, Alternet, Eggnet, LCRnet or
|
||
WhatEverNet. If they have the net/node number, and if the NC
|
||
of that net has permitted it to be listed in the OPCN nodelist,
|
||
they just type it in as if it were in their own net. No
|
||
Zonegating to "other" nets, no multiple outbound areas to
|
||
maintain, no worries about whether all your software is "fully
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 15 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
Zone-Aware" (it most likely isn't), and much less complexity
|
||
all around.
|
||
|
||
Before I close, I'd like to share with you part of a netmail
|
||
message I received from Carl Linden in response to my first
|
||
nodelist article. It makes some very interesting observations,
|
||
I think:
|
||
|
||
I read your article with interest, Jack, and couldn't
|
||
agree more.
|
||
|
||
However: . . .
|
||
|
||
The IFNA Nodelist already provides what you are
|
||
advocating. Following is an excerpt from the latest
|
||
Nodelist:
|
||
|
||
[Note that this is the text that appears at the front of the
|
||
Fidonet nodelist, reformatted to fit Fidonews:]
|
||
|
||
FidoNet Nodelist for Friday, June 16, 1989 -- Day
|
||
number 167 : 04941
|
||
|
||
Copyright 1989, International FidoNet Association
|
||
(IFNA), Missouri Corporation. All rights reserved.
|
||
|
||
NOTICE: This compilation is the property of IFNA as
|
||
its created work. This work includes certain
|
||
individual portions provided to IFNA by operators of
|
||
Fido and FidoNet Bulletin Boards. IFNA has the right
|
||
to create and distribute these Nodelists based, in
|
||
part, on rights granted to it by those originating
|
||
such portions. Other than the rights granted IFNA,
|
||
those creating and maintaining the portions retain
|
||
all residual rights in and to each's individual
|
||
portion.
|
||
|
||
IFNA grants unlimited duplication and/or distribution
|
||
for noncommercial purposes only and reserves all
|
||
other rights, including, but not limited to, any
|
||
commercial publication, distribution, republication
|
||
or redistribution in any way of all or any part of
|
||
the NodeList, except those nodes that are now or
|
||
hereafter registered in this NodeList shall be and
|
||
hereby are licensed to utilize this NodeList only in
|
||
the technical operation of those nodes. Any
|
||
distribution authorized herein may include recovery
|
||
of reasonable, actual costs of duplication and/or
|
||
dissemination.
|
||
|
||
No one is granted any other right to any use, sale,
|
||
duplication or distribution of this compilation for
|
||
any commercial purpose.....
|
||
|
||
[Mr. Linden continues:]
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 16 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
IFNA enjoys special tax status by being a corporation
|
||
for the good of the general public. IFNA cannot
|
||
restrict its services to only its own members,
|
||
members of FIDOnet, or any other organization. If
|
||
they do their preferred tax status is in jeopardy.
|
||
|
||
So, the bottom line is that we already have a public
|
||
nodelist. Being listed in the nodelist is not at the
|
||
pleasure of the *C's, or anyone else, it is required
|
||
for IFNA to keep its preferred tax status.
|
||
|
||
Ex-communication is currently used as a disciplinary
|
||
measure by the *C structure if the *C does not like
|
||
the views expressed by the "offender". This is a
|
||
violation of our right to Free Speech. But,
|
||
enforcing that is at best expensive & time consuming.
|
||
A much better approach would be to challenge IFNA's
|
||
preferred tax status if IFNA does live up to its
|
||
purpose to serve the general public.
|
||
|
||
For now I am not going to publicize this message in
|
||
any of the echoes, but you are free to do so as a
|
||
comment on your FIDOnews article.
|
||
|
||
Now, I'm not holding my breath until the IFNA nodelist begins
|
||
to fulfill its role as a truly "public" nodelist. We'll be
|
||
happy to do it if the IFNA doesn't want to. But, there are a
|
||
couple of points worthy of notice here. First, the Fidonet
|
||
copyright notice grants specific permission for others to use
|
||
it for non-commercial purposes. So, we COULD take the Fidonet
|
||
nodelist and merge it into the OPCN nodelist (which could
|
||
probably be described as "militantly non-commercial", to
|
||
paraphrase Wynn Wagner) and issue a truly combined nodelist if
|
||
we wanted to. I would personally prefer not to do things that
|
||
way, but apparently we wouldn't be violating anyone's copyright
|
||
if we did!
|
||
|
||
Second, regarding the recent expulsion of Net 154 from the
|
||
nodelist by a Fidonet RC... the NC of Net 154 happens to be a
|
||
member of the IFNA Board of Directors. The IFNA claims
|
||
ownership of the nodelist in the prologue to the nodelist.
|
||
Doesn't it seem a bit ironic that a member of the IFNA Board of
|
||
Directors (and his entire net) can be kicked out of the IFNA's
|
||
nodelist by an RC who is not (to my knowledge) even in the
|
||
IFNA, or at least not on the IFNA's Board of Directors?
|
||
|
||
But the real question is, does the IFNA have the right, as a
|
||
tax-exempt organization that is supposed to be serving the
|
||
public, to ONLY accept nodelist segments provided to them by
|
||
Fidonet *C's?
|
||
|
||
If the IFNA is obligated to serve the public interest, and to
|
||
specifically avoid furthering the goals of one particular
|
||
private organization, such as Fidonet (and particularly, the
|
||
RC/ZC/IC structure of Fidonet), then can they legally allow a
|
||
small group of individuals (the *C's) to decide who will and
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 17 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
who will not be allowed to be in the Fidonet nodelist? By
|
||
giving the *C structure control of who can and cannot be in the
|
||
IFNA nodelist (based entirely on their private interpretation
|
||
of Fidonet Policy documents), isn't the IFNA nodelist is being
|
||
used to further the goals of a specific parochial group,
|
||
namely, the Fidonet Coordinators at and above the RC level?
|
||
Doesn't this violate the provisions of the IFNA's tax-exempt
|
||
status?
|
||
|
||
These questions are ones that I'm sure we will be asking in the
|
||
weeks ahead!
|
||
|
||
I promised to provide an abbreviated Net 154 nodelist that you
|
||
can plug into your private nodelist long enough to get a
|
||
message to us. This is it. Just use a text editor or word
|
||
processor to clean it up and connect the two halves of each
|
||
line. If you're an NC, I hope you'll use this to send your
|
||
Net's nodelist to 154/970, for inclusion in the OPCN nodelist!
|
||
|
||
Host,154,/\/\ilwaukee/\/\etro,Milwaukee_WI,
|
||
Ted_Polczynski,1-414-282-4181,9600,CM,HST
|
||
Pvt,8,Northern_Bytes,Sault_Ste_Marie_MI,
|
||
Jack_Decker,-Unpublished-,2400,
|
||
,970,Forecast_Office,West_Allis_WI,
|
||
George_Kasica,1-414-321-7872,9600,CM,HST
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 18 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
Steve Palm
|
||
Fidonet 1:154/8.2
|
||
LCRnet 77:1011/8.2
|
||
|
||
MULTIPLE NETS IN A SINGLE GEOGRAPHIC AREA
|
||
|
||
After reading the policy documents that hold FidoNet together,
|
||
and listening to some of the bickering going on in the
|
||
Echomail areas, I have come to some conclusions. Please bear
|
||
with me as I point out what I see as some obvious points, which
|
||
may have been overlooked from time to time by those whom it
|
||
might benefit the most at the time.
|
||
|
||
Geography is quite an issue. Yes, it affects just about every
|
||
aspect of the way your system interacts with others in FidoNet.
|
||
You cannot become part of a Net that is outside of your
|
||
predetermined Geographic area, unless you can prove beyond a
|
||
shadow of a doubt that it will be of benefit to *everyone* else
|
||
in FidoNet. Well, maybe it isn't that bad, but it sure seems
|
||
like it sometimes, doesn't it?
|
||
|
||
It appears that things have been set up so that a certain
|
||
Geographic area is covered by a specific Net. Indeed, this may
|
||
be the best way to approach this situation. However, is it
|
||
necessarily the best way to handle it in *all* cases? I would
|
||
think not...
|
||
|
||
Many people have been quick to point out different cases in
|
||
favor of multiple nets in a Geographic area, if needed. For
|
||
example, one person has repeatedly mentioned that Cellular
|
||
phone companies are allowed to co-exist in the same area. Yet,
|
||
that doesn't in any way shape or form make it any more
|
||
difficult for you to get your call through to someone, now does
|
||
it?
|
||
|
||
I was thinking on this, and thought that perhaps only having
|
||
one Net in an area *would* be ideal. I mean, after all, then
|
||
you know that everyone in that area is going to be going to
|
||
THAT net. If you needed to get ahold of them, you would know
|
||
exactly where to go ahead of time. There would be *no*
|
||
guesswork involved. And forget about those costly connections
|
||
too. One phone call to each area, and you won't have to worry
|
||
about some facet of that group not getting it.
|
||
|
||
I think we should even extend this idea a little further,
|
||
outside of FidoNet altogether. What about our broadcasters?
|
||
Surely you must realize what an awful tragedy we have fallen
|
||
into here! I mean, after all, the FCC will allow you to have
|
||
more than one FM, one AM, and one TV station in the same area!
|
||
That should be stopped immediately!
|
||
|
||
Consider advertising costs! A business will have to put
|
||
his/her advertisement on how many stations to cover the wide
|
||
range of people in their own area. And if a news bulletin
|
||
needs to be delivered, *all* of the stations must be notified
|
||
lest someone not hear about it. Can you see the terror that
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 19 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
lurks here? You might listen to station X, while station Y is
|
||
broadcasting just what you needed to know. You have just
|
||
missed it, and it will not be repeated. Wouldn't it be great
|
||
if you only *had* station Y to listen to? Then you wouldn't
|
||
have to worry!
|
||
|
||
I hope that by now you can see the stupidity of this argument.
|
||
It in no way shape or form helps out the community by allowing
|
||
only one station. In fact, it hurts it. There is no variety.
|
||
No way for the people to have their choice of what to listen
|
||
to.
|
||
|
||
Do you think FidoNet should be different? Sure it might make a
|
||
slight bit of change necessary. But, if FidoNet is for the
|
||
people, why shouldn't they be allowed a choice? I find it
|
||
difficult to believe that it would make it impossible for mail
|
||
to flow. Nets will still exist, so you will still have focal
|
||
points to send things to. It will still be disseminated from
|
||
there. You just won't have these stupid restrictions on where
|
||
a person must get their stuff from.
|
||
|
||
I am not making references here to say that FidoNet is entirely
|
||
bad. Obviously there are folks out there that feel parts of it
|
||
are in rough shape, but I don't think anyone thinks it is *ALL*
|
||
bad. If they did, they wouldn't bother to use compatible
|
||
software, now would they?
|
||
|
||
In just the same way that people are allowed to choose which
|
||
magazines to read, which radio stations to listen to, which
|
||
movies to see, and which television programs to watch, I think
|
||
that they should also be allowed to choose which Net to belong
|
||
to. I think this could even go a bit further... They should
|
||
be allowed to chose which NETWORK to belong to, and *NOT* be
|
||
penalized for it not being FidoNet.
|
||
|
||
I don't think that the Nodelist should be used as some sort of
|
||
tool that is held over your head. "If you don't jump when I
|
||
say so, you are CUT!" I know that it isn't supposed to be used
|
||
that way, but there are several instances where it is and has
|
||
been.
|
||
|
||
I ask you to seriously consider this. POLICY4 is now in
|
||
effect. Many people have said that it gives the upper echelon
|
||
more power than they previously had. If you want to see things
|
||
change in FidoNet, *NOW* is the time. Don't wait for POLICY5
|
||
to come out eliminating the common sysop's view altogether.
|
||
|
||
If you think that you are not affected by a certain person's
|
||
argument and/or troubles, then think again. How long will it
|
||
be before you are the one on the chopping block, but there will
|
||
be no one around to help you because everyone who might have
|
||
backed you up has already been killed?
|
||
|
||
Please, I ask you to seriously consider taking a stand to make
|
||
FidoNet not only a system *FOR* the people, but one that is run
|
||
*BY* the people. Where the people have real input, and their
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 20 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
concerns are carefully looked into. If something isn't going
|
||
to kill anyone, then why should you say "No." just because it
|
||
hasn't been done before?
|
||
|
||
I know that this will take a lot of hard work, and that a lot
|
||
of people are going to get involved. It will definitely get
|
||
worse before it gets any better. But, I think that it is
|
||
needed, and the sooner it happens the better.
|
||
|
||
Thank you for taking the time to listen to me. I would really
|
||
appreciate it if you would drop me a note letting me know how
|
||
you feel about this and related issues.
|
||
|
||
Steve Palm @ 154/8.2
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 21 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
More of My Opinions if Anyone Cares
|
||
by Daniel Tobias
|
||
1:380/7
|
||
|
||
Gee, the opinions on FidoNet policy expressed in FidoNews
|
||
are getting more and more vicious. I entered the FidoNet
|
||
policy debate in the hopes of trying to resolve some of the
|
||
venomous squabbles, but if anything, what I've written has
|
||
only excerbated them.
|
||
|
||
Some of the things I've seen in FidoNews 6-26 bring me close
|
||
to recanting some of my earlier opinions. In some earlier
|
||
articles, I've regarded the passage of POLICY4 as generally
|
||
a positive step, dismissed the allegations that the policy
|
||
document is illegitimate due to irregularities in its
|
||
ratification procedure, and stated that it should be
|
||
considered binding on all zones despite the apparent intent
|
||
of the Europeans to override it. I believe this in spite
|
||
many disagreements with the specific tenets of POLICY4; I
|
||
simply feel that members of a private, voluntary
|
||
organization who disagree with elements of its rules should
|
||
either work within the system to change the rules (while
|
||
obeying them until they are changed), or leave the
|
||
organization and join or start another that is more
|
||
philosophically compatible. While much in POLICY4 is not to
|
||
my liking, I generally felt it was livable until a better
|
||
POLICY5 can be devised.
|
||
|
||
However, FidoNews 6-26 gives me some pause. I see there
|
||
that a node was excommunicated due to a good-faith
|
||
disagreement as to the validity of POLICY4. I think this is
|
||
going overboard; so long as the node doesn't actually
|
||
violate the policy document, it shouldn't be kicked out due
|
||
to the philosophical opposition its sysop holds. He should
|
||
have been asked simply to apologize for the unintentional
|
||
violation (the bombing run), and asked to promise not to do
|
||
it again, but shouldn't have been excommunicated unless he
|
||
actually committed further POLICY4 violations. (And,
|
||
despite the authoritarian elements of POLICY4, there still
|
||
is very little that an individual node (other than a *C) can
|
||
do which is excommunicatable; there is little change from
|
||
POLICY3 in this regard. Most of the changes, rather, deal
|
||
with administrative things of little interest to the average
|
||
sysop.)
|
||
|
||
The same is true of the Europeans; I sincerely hope that my
|
||
earlier comments about Zone 2 policy don't help cause the
|
||
excommunication of any Zone 2 node for the "crime" of
|
||
claiming that POLICY4 does not apply to them (as wrong as I
|
||
feel this opinion to be); action, if any is taken at all,
|
||
should be only in response to an actual policy complaint
|
||
with regard to a specific violation (e.g., if a node is
|
||
asked to pay a mandatory charge and refuses). To the extent
|
||
my previous comments may have disagreed with this position,
|
||
I now recant them. The EuroCon report in the current
|
||
FidoNews seems to show the Europeans attempting to create
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 22 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
constructive activity in their zone, and bring about grass-
|
||
roots democracy, something which deserves commendation
|
||
rather than condemnation; if elements of their plan conflict
|
||
with POLICY4 I must regrettably opine that they are
|
||
technically invalid and would not stand up upon appeal if
|
||
challenged, but I hope the good elements of their plan can
|
||
be adopted into a new POLICY5.
|
||
|
||
Since the legitimacy of POLICY4 is under fire, I feel
|
||
pressed to explain further why I accept its validity. The
|
||
main objection of those who deny its validity is that the
|
||
sysops didn't get to vote on it; it was enacted unilaterally
|
||
by the *C's. The implication is that POLICY1 through
|
||
POLICY3 were directly adopted by the sysops. Actually, I
|
||
was a sysop at the time (1986) that POLICY3 was enacted, and
|
||
I don't recall getting a chance to vote on it. I'm kind of
|
||
vague by now as to just how it was adopted, but I think some
|
||
high-placed *C's drafted it and nobody objected to its
|
||
adoption (this being before the faction fights got going).
|
||
No explicit vote was taken, though. Regrettably, unanimous
|
||
consent is now impossible given the size and diversity of
|
||
the network. As for a universal sysop vote, that has only
|
||
been tried once, for the initial IFNA bylaws, and the result
|
||
(a vote in which a tiny minority of the sysops participated,
|
||
and numerous factions claimed to speak for the silent
|
||
majority) led to the beginning of the horrible factionalism
|
||
the net has had ever since, but didn't seem to have before
|
||
that. Given this, one can see some non-authoritarian
|
||
reasons why this method was not used this time. I think the
|
||
*C vote was a reasonable compromise, and many NCs (including
|
||
my own) took some effort to solicit net opinion on the
|
||
policy and involve all of us in the decision.
|
||
|
||
The "Lost Archives" section illustrates the decidedly non-
|
||
democratic manner in which major policy change has been made
|
||
in the past. What is probably the biggest FidoNet change
|
||
ever, the switch from a single node number to the net/node
|
||
addressing system, was enacted by gathering together
|
||
whichever FidoNet people happened to be in St. Louis at
|
||
the time and having them hammer out a system. Many of the
|
||
nodes out in the far reaches of the net weren't even aware
|
||
of the change until the last minute, let alone being allowed
|
||
to vote on it. However, it worked: the switch was made
|
||
without major hassle or argument, due to the spirit of
|
||
cooperation that pervaded FidoNet then. Anyway, the trend
|
||
was set that no democracy was explicitly needed to ensure
|
||
the "legitimacy" of change. To change this, a new POLICY
|
||
document will have to be passed giving explicit sysop
|
||
democracy; no such "voting rights" are expressed or implied
|
||
in any current or prior document. As it now stands, the
|
||
*C's can be considered the "officers" of FidoNet, and are
|
||
entitled to take whatever action they deem necessary in the
|
||
absence of a "constitution" giving specific limits on their
|
||
powers and granting specific political powers to the sysops
|
||
as a whole. To remedy this, policy change is needed, and
|
||
POLICY4 at least gives a specific mechanism by which it can
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 23 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
be amended, unlike the earlier policy documents.
|
||
|
||
Jennings stated in that "lost" archive that the change back
|
||
in 1985 was intended to promote "DECENTRALISM"; his (valid)
|
||
objection to current policy decisions is that they instead
|
||
promote centralism. (And, it is my position that this is
|
||
not new to POLICY4, but was implicit in all the POLICY
|
||
documents beginning at the time that Jennings stopped
|
||
writing them himself.) It is incumbent on FidoNet to adopt
|
||
a new policy more in line with the ideals of its founder,
|
||
promoting more liberty, decentralism, and democracy.
|
||
|
||
If this does not occur, I might find myself agreeing with
|
||
Jack Decker's plan for a completely nonpolitical nodelist.
|
||
|
||
Meanwhile, I hope the feuding factions can attempt to defuse
|
||
their rivalries. I really don't think many (if any) sysops
|
||
or *C's can be fairly characterized as "Nazis", as somebody
|
||
did in the last FidoNews. The "Aryan Nation" NeoNazis run
|
||
bulletin board systems, but none is in FidoNet. Tossing
|
||
around such names is demeaning. In my opinion, while many
|
||
sysops and *Cs have very strong opinions on net politics,
|
||
they are generally sincerely-held beliefs about what is best
|
||
for FidoNet, rather than a desire for tyrannical power over
|
||
others. Maybe a couple of real tyrants exist (and I'm not
|
||
positive who they are; the issue is clouded by all the
|
||
namecalling being flung back and forth), but they are vastly
|
||
outnumbered by those who simply want to do what is right.
|
||
Perhaps some of the well-meaning feuders can try to back off
|
||
a little bit from one another's throats, and accept that
|
||
there may be something to the other side's viewpoint.
|
||
|
||
In the case of the node excommunicated for refusing to
|
||
accept the validity of POLICY4, some give-and-take on the
|
||
part of both antagonists could lead to this sysop making a
|
||
productive contribution to future evolution of FidoNet
|
||
policy from the inside, instead of sniping at FidoNet from
|
||
the outside. The excommunicated sysop might think of
|
||
issuing a statement like: "While I still question the
|
||
validity of the POLICY4 document, and will use every legal
|
||
means at my disposal to cause it to be replaced by a more
|
||
desirable policy, I promise [under duress from threat of
|
||
excommunication] to refrain from violating any terms of this
|
||
POLICY document so long as I remain in the nodelist and
|
||
POLICY4 has not been replaced or overturned." And the *C's
|
||
involved should accept such a statement and reinstate the
|
||
node, despite the continuing disagreement as to the
|
||
legitimacy of POLICY4.
|
||
|
||
Regarding the case of the net refusing to abide by
|
||
geographical rules, if no great harm is done from allowing
|
||
out-of-area nodes in the net in question, the RC should
|
||
consider using the powers granted him by POLICY4 to allow
|
||
the exception to be made. This would not be undermining
|
||
POLICY in any way, since such exceptions are specifically
|
||
provided for. However, if he continues to refuse the
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 24 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
exemption, the net in question should back down (again, this
|
||
may be openly done under duress, with a clear indication
|
||
that this action is not agreeable to the net; the NC
|
||
shouldn't be forced to lose face by recanting his opinion
|
||
on the issue, so long as he yields in action), and then
|
||
begin working towards the loosening of the geographical
|
||
restrictions in a POLICY5 document so that the nodes may
|
||
legally be reinstated later.
|
||
|
||
In general, *C's should be reasonably tolerant and easygoing
|
||
befitting FidoNet's status as an amateur, hobbyist network.
|
||
There's no need to go eagerly looking for violations of the
|
||
letter of POLICY and come down hard on them, in the absence
|
||
of any complaint from parties involved. On the other hand,
|
||
sysops should recognize that POLICY4 is in fact the "law of
|
||
the land" in FidoNet, and should try to obey it, while
|
||
working to change the parts of which they disagree.
|
||
|
||
If the *C's wish to show that they are not really
|
||
authoritarians, they must tolerate a wide range of opinions
|
||
from the sysops and lower-level coordinators, including
|
||
opinions to the effect that the present policy document is
|
||
flawed and possibly illegitimate, so long as the ACTIONS of
|
||
these people do not violate policy. On their own part,
|
||
dissident elements should not become martyrs to their cause
|
||
by brazenly violating policy and inviting expulsion from the
|
||
net; they can work more productively towards reform if they
|
||
remain in FidoNet. If they instead feel that FidoNet is
|
||
beyond saving, they should quit it now and join a net they
|
||
like better, rather than starting counterproductive battles
|
||
and daring the *C structure to excommunicate them. If you
|
||
do leave, please don't use your position outside FidoNet as
|
||
a platform from which to continue factional squabbles within
|
||
FidoNet; leave the rest of us who have remained to try to
|
||
work out our own affairs, and devote your efforts to the
|
||
affairs of whatever network you have decided to join
|
||
instead. Maybe then we both can progress.
|
||
|
||
Anyway, the above is just my opinion, not necessarily
|
||
representative of anybody else's. I sincerely hope that I
|
||
have done more to ease the internal fights than to fan their
|
||
flames, but one never knows. Some of you may already be
|
||
raging mad about something I've said here or in an earlier
|
||
article. If so, please send me a message, explaining as
|
||
calmly as possible why you think I'm completely wrong; I'll
|
||
try to listen, and if you convince me, I won't be ashamed to
|
||
completely recant earlier positions which prove on second
|
||
thought to be invalid. Bye for now.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 25 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
Ray Kaliss
|
||
The SDN Project
|
||
Fido 1:141/840
|
||
|
||
SDNet/Works! UPDATE 07/01/89
|
||
|
||
It has been six months since SDNet/Works! launched the
|
||
Shareware Distribution Network. In that time, even under our
|
||
limited plans for growth, SDN has gained over 130 participating
|
||
hobby BBS systems in the U.S., Canada and in European Zone 2.
|
||
|
||
Starting out and remaining a non-profit and hobby adventure,
|
||
SDNet/Works! has attracted quality shareware authors to send in
|
||
disks for distribution. There are no fees of any kind involved
|
||
for authors or sysops.
|
||
|
||
Oopps, you missed something you say? ... "What is
|
||
SDNet/Works!?"
|
||
|
||
SDNet/Works! is a participation of hobby BBS sysops and
|
||
Shareware authors. Shareware programs are received clean,
|
||
complete and up to date, directly from the authors and
|
||
distributed to the participating sysop members by routing in
|
||
netmail. The transfers are done automatically by simple
|
||
utilities. Once at the participating system, it is held for 30
|
||
days in a special download only file area - there for users and
|
||
other sysops alike to grab. SDNet/Works! distribution is a way
|
||
of removing the sometimes hazards of the user uploads. It is a
|
||
way to keep up to date on shareware versions and releases.
|
||
|
||
SDNet/Works! participating BBS systems are "distribution
|
||
points" for the shareware programs. Because we use
|
||
distribution points, the network and membership is limited but
|
||
the "points" are available for other sysops to File-Request
|
||
from - or download.
|
||
|
||
Net members run a conglomeration or OPUS, Binkley, FrontDoor,
|
||
Dutchie, RBBS, Quickbbs, Wildcat!... you name it!
|
||
|
||
There are two reasons I write this short notice...
|
||
|
||
1. To get more systems interested in SDNet/Works! as a
|
||
continuation of the hobby adventure and spread SDNet/Works!'s
|
||
coverage by adding more distribution points.
|
||
|
||
2. To let sysops know there are official SDNet/Works!
|
||
participating BBSs nation wide in the U.S. - some in Canada and
|
||
a few in Europe... these systems are for you, all sysops. You
|
||
can log on to the nearest one and make arrangements to find out
|
||
what comes down the SDN pike every week, and arrange to make
|
||
File-Requests of SDN distributed software.
|
||
|
||
Along with every shareware program shipped out by SDNet/Works!,
|
||
there is an accompanying .SDA (Shareware Distribution Abstract)
|
||
file. The SDA is usually a two screen text description of the
|
||
program, sometime written for SDNet/Works! by the author,
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 26 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
sometime by net members.
|
||
|
||
All SDNet/Works! files, recognized by the (filename).SDN
|
||
extension, are compressed with NoGates PAK format. As soon as
|
||
PAK version 2.0 comes out, SDNet/Works! will be the first to
|
||
compress BBS posted programs in a "security envelope" that can
|
||
be verified as unchanged from its original packaging at the
|
||
SDNet/Works! Distribution Center BBS. Essentially this
|
||
"hacker proof seal" will be verifiable on SDNet/Works! files no
|
||
matter how far they are further spread from SDNet/Works!
|
||
distribution points. Our contribution in a further effort to
|
||
preserve safety and the clean hobby spirit in BBSland.
|
||
|
||
At every participating BBS there is usually posted a net
|
||
listing of the locations and numbers of distribution points,
|
||
with a file name of SDN_NET.xxx (xxx=update version).
|
||
|
||
It's about time you contacted an SDNet/Works! site and took
|
||
advantage of the newest service and adventure the hobby BBS
|
||
world has to offer.
|
||
|
||
* Project Management *
|
||
SYSOP/CONN! - The SDN Project - Information and Publications
|
||
- Ray Kaliss
|
||
FidoNet 1:/141/840 203-634-0370 (2400 Baud)
|
||
South Meriden, Connecticut USA
|
||
|
||
SDN Central Distribution - System Coordinator
|
||
- Charlie Smith
|
||
FidoNet 1:141/880 203-628-4644 (9600 HST)
|
||
Compu$erve 72417,375
|
||
Milldale, Connecticut USA
|
||
|
||
* Regional Management *
|
||
ZONE 1 - North America
|
||
Penguin Place Hanford, CA Don Barnes 1:205/2
|
||
Innovations BBS Chicago, IL Peter Hur 1:115:736
|
||
Channel 23 Orleans, ON, Canada, Chris Weisner 1:163/223
|
||
Dog's Breakfast Tom's River, NJ Mike Fuchs 1:266/71
|
||
Towne Crier Sys Alliance, NE Tony Mace 308-762-3360
|
||
The Hour Glass Tucson, AZ Lyn Borchert 1:300/12
|
||
Wilton Woods Wilton, CT John Alton 1:141/250
|
||
Hotline Data Langley, BC, Canada, Bryan Bucci 1:153/133
|
||
StarScan Montgomery, AL Tom Jones 1:375/1
|
||
American Fido Oklahoma City, OK John Knox 1:147/7
|
||
Total Chaos Jonesboro, AR Dave Mingus 1:389/1
|
||
|
||
ZONE 2 - Europe/Africa/Middle East
|
||
Zone Manager: Ernesto Hagmann PC-Info <SFNA>
|
||
Titterten, Switzerland 2:300/51
|
||
|
||
Clones Best Frd Dortmund, W Germany, T. Zumbrock 2:509/6
|
||
Quick BBS AXE Hilversum, Netherlands, V. Verhagen 2:512/27
|
||
OS-68K Gepard Bx Zuerich, Switzerland, A. Wyss 2:302/801
|
||
|
||
ZONE 7 - ALTERNET
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 27 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
Zone Manager: Ivan Schaffel
|
||
The Library - New Haven, CT, USA, 7:640/390
|
||
|
||
ZONE 8 - RBBSNet
|
||
Zone Manager: Terri Rossi
|
||
RTC BBS - Medford, NJ, USA 8:950/1
|
||
|
||
ZONE 9 - EGGNET
|
||
Zone Manager: Ken Shackelford
|
||
AtlGate - Woodstack, GA, USA, 99:9000/1
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
Please don't ask a distribution point, an SDNet/Works!
|
||
participant, to automatically send you new SDNet/Works! files,
|
||
he or she has enough to do and automatic forwarding to
|
||
non-SDNet/Works! participants is against our policy... but
|
||
distribution points that have File-Request capable software,
|
||
should have it set so you can either request a weekly FILES
|
||
listing or a local SDNet/Works! information echo in the local
|
||
nets it has been set up in. Then you can File-Request, or log
|
||
on and download clean hazard free shareware for your own board.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Ray Kaliss
|
||
Project Manager
|
||
SDNet/Works!
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 28 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
Eric Asberry
|
||
The Outpost, 1:236/2 (219) 486-8208
|
||
|
||
"Us" versus "Them"?
|
||
|
||
Recently we have been inundated with numerous articles about
|
||
the slobbering hell-hound RC's we have, and the near martial law
|
||
status that our network is being run under. These have
|
||
inevitably been countered with articles portraying the "other"
|
||
side as hell raising rebels who simply want to upset the balance
|
||
and bring our net crumbling down to little more than chaos.
|
||
|
||
Enough, already. Which side am I on? Neither. POLICY4
|
||
definitely has its problem areas. We humans tend to be less
|
||
than perfect, so it is not surprising that a policy document
|
||
created by humans will probably be less than perfect, too.
|
||
However, generally speaking, POLICY4 is a pretty reasonable set
|
||
of guidelines for the net to follow. It DOES need some change;
|
||
for instance, the current system of selecting the *C structure is
|
||
pretty ridiculous.
|
||
|
||
But before classifying the entire *C structure as a bunch of
|
||
ruthless villians, I think that people should give a little more
|
||
thought as to all the things the *C structure is responsible for.
|
||
They really are not a bunch of power hungry "dictators" in my
|
||
experience. I just recently became NC for our small net, and our
|
||
RC (who has been called names aplenty) has been very helpful in
|
||
setting things up for the transition. If you think about it, the
|
||
*C's really do quite a bit for us. I tend to think some of them
|
||
are a little nuts, but I suppose they are no more nuts for doing
|
||
what they do than the average SYSOP is for using thousands of
|
||
dollars worth of equipment to entertain total strangers!
|
||
|
||
I think that the net's biggest problem is not POLICY4, not
|
||
the *C structure, and not even those "rebellious fools" who want
|
||
to "upset the balance" of things. No, the REAL problem we face
|
||
is the network's increasing failure to achieve its primary goal:
|
||
communication. Conversations can get pretty heated in echomail;
|
||
tempers flare, egos bulge and for the most part, nothing gets
|
||
solved. We need to remember that the guy sitting at the
|
||
computer hundreds of miles away is just as human as we are, and
|
||
deserves the same consideration we desire for ourselves. I
|
||
think it would do us a great deal of good to just remember the
|
||
"golden rule". It would solve a lot of our problems, or at
|
||
least make them easier to solve. Perhaps it's just wishful
|
||
thinking, but I for one am ready for the day when we can
|
||
concentrate on improving the net's technical operation instead
|
||
of bickering amongst each other. The "lost Fidonet archives"
|
||
have left me longing for the past...
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 29 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
Steve Palm
|
||
Fidonet 1:154/8.2
|
||
LCRnet 77:1011/8.2
|
||
|
||
A SHORT STORY, WITH A MORAL
|
||
|
||
Many years ago, Indian braves would go away in solitude to
|
||
prepare for manhood. One hiked into a beautiful valley, green
|
||
with trees, bright with flowers. There, as he looked up at the
|
||
surrounding mountains, he noticed one rugged peak, capped with
|
||
dazzling snow.
|
||
|
||
"I will test myself against that mountain," he thought. He put
|
||
on his buffalo hide shirt, threw his blanket over his
|
||
shoulders, and set off to climb the pinnacle.
|
||
|
||
When he reached the top, he stood on the rim of the world. He
|
||
could see forever, and his heart swelled with pride. Then he
|
||
heard a rustle at his feet. Looking down, he saw a snake.
|
||
Before he could move, the snake spoke.
|
||
|
||
"I am about to die," said the snake. "It is too cold for me up
|
||
here, and there is no food. Put me under your shirt and take
|
||
me down to the valley."
|
||
|
||
"No," said the youth. "I know your kind. You are a
|
||
rattlesnake. If I pick you up, you will bite and your bite
|
||
will kill me."
|
||
|
||
"Not so," said the snake. "I will treat you differently. If
|
||
you do this for me, I will not harm you."
|
||
|
||
The youth resisted a while, but this was a very persuasive
|
||
snake. At last the youth tucked it under his shirt and carried
|
||
it down to the valley. There he laid it down gently.
|
||
Suddenly, the snake coiled, rattled and leaped, biting him on
|
||
the leg.
|
||
|
||
"But you promised ---" cried the youth.
|
||
|
||
"You knew what I was when you picked me up," said the snake as
|
||
it slithered away.
|
||
|
||
------------------------ end of story ------------------------
|
||
|
||
Moral(s):
|
||
|
||
To people who might be tempted by things (i.e. drugs...),
|
||
remember the words of the snake: "You knew what I was when you
|
||
picked me up"
|
||
|
||
To those sysops of FidoNet: You knew what it was when you
|
||
agreed by policy to be in the NodeList.
|
||
|
||
I just wish those nasty (UPPER) *C people didn't have to be
|
||
such snakes...
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 30 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 31 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
Steve Bonine
|
||
115/777
|
||
|
||
The Facts Ma'am. Only the Facts.
|
||
|
||
Here are the simple facts concerning two current issues in
|
||
FidoNet. A great deal of smoke has been blown, in FidoNews and
|
||
other forums, in an attempt to "blow up" issues which are really
|
||
quite simple.
|
||
|
||
Net 154
|
||
--- ---
|
||
|
||
As Regional Coordinator, I received a netmail message from a
|
||
Network Coordinator pointing out that a system in net 154 was in
|
||
the geographic area covered by his net. Examination of the
|
||
nodelist segment for net 154 disclosed three systems which were
|
||
not within "Milwaukee Metro".
|
||
|
||
I sent netmail to Ted Polczynski, the NC of net 154, asking him
|
||
to arrange to move the affected systems to the correct net. This
|
||
is a routine matter which occurs from time to time; the message I
|
||
sent was worded the same as previous messages to other NC's.
|
||
|
||
Ted responded that he had the right to place any system in net
|
||
154, regardless of its geographic location. He explained that if
|
||
a sysop did not wish to be in the local net, then it was in the
|
||
best interest of FidoNet for that system to be listed in net 154.
|
||
My response was that this did not solve the problem -- why could
|
||
not the sysop obtain a listing in the correct net -- and thus was
|
||
not in the best interest of FidoNet.
|
||
|
||
Our opinions are moot, as Policy states "You may not assign a
|
||
node number to a node in an area covered by an existing network."
|
||
Repeated attempts by myself and David Dodell to obtain assurance
|
||
from Ted that he would abide by Policy resulted in responses
|
||
which did not address the question. Four words would have taken
|
||
care of this entire situation: "I will observe Policy."
|
||
|
||
|
||
Jim Grubs
|
||
--- -----
|
||
|
||
During the weekend of June 17, Jim Grubs conducted a bombing run.
|
||
When confronted by formal policy complaints, Jim's response was
|
||
that Policy4 did not apply to him, since he did not vote for it.
|
||
He made the same statement in the national SYSOP conference.
|
||
|
||
I sent Jim a netmail message, asking him to reconsider. He
|
||
refused. I then removed his nodelist entry.
|
||
|
||
The reason that I removed the entry, instead of letting the
|
||
Network Coordinator do it, was because of Mr. Grubs' threat to
|
||
use US Federal courts to protect his right to an entry in the
|
||
FidoNet nodelist. Although I feel that there is no grounds for
|
||
such a lawsuit, I did not wish to place Jim's NC in the position
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 32 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
of having to defend himself. Under normal circumstances, I would
|
||
not infringe upon the right of an NC to run the net, within the
|
||
bounds of Policy.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 33 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
LATEST VERSIONS
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
|
||
Latest Software Versions
|
||
|
||
Bulletin Board Software
|
||
Name Version Name Version Name Version
|
||
|
||
Fido 12m+* Phoenix 1.3 TBBS 2.1
|
||
Lynx 1.30 QuickBBS 2.03 TComm/TCommNet 3.4
|
||
Opus 1.03b+ RBBS 17.2A* TPBoard 5.2*
|
||
|
||
+ Netmail capable (does not require additional mailer software)
|
||
|
||
|
||
Network Node List Other
|
||
Mailers Version Utilities Version Utilities Version
|
||
|
||
BinkleyTerm 2.20 EditNL 4.00 ARC 6.02*
|
||
D'Bridge 1.18 MakeNL 2.12 ARCmail 2.0
|
||
Dutchie 2.90C ParseList 1.30 ConfMail 4.00
|
||
FrontDoor 2.0 Prune 1.40 EMM 2.02*
|
||
PRENM 1.47* XlatList 2.90 GROUP 2.10*
|
||
SEAdog 4.51* XlaxDiff 2.32 MSG 3.3*
|
||
XlaxNode 2.32 MSGED 1.99
|
||
TCOMMail 2.2*
|
||
TMail 1.11*
|
||
TPBNetEd 3.2*
|
||
UFGATE 1.03
|
||
XRS 2.2
|
||
* 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 6-27 Page 34 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
NOTICES
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
|
||
The Interrupt Stack
|
||
|
||
|
||
9 Jul 1989
|
||
FidoNet's Zone 4 (Latin America) adopts 0800 GMT as new Zone
|
||
Mail Hour, replacing the North American 0900 GMT schedule.
|
||
|
||
15 Jul 1989
|
||
Start of the SAPMFC&LP (Second Annual Poor Man's FidoCon and
|
||
Lake Party) to be held at Silver Lake Park on Grapevine Lake
|
||
in Arlington, Texas. This started as an R19-only thing last
|
||
year, but we had so much fun, we decided to invite everybody!
|
||
We'll have beer, food, beer, waterskiing, beer, horseshoes,
|
||
beer, volleyball, and of course beer. It's an overnighter,
|
||
so bring your sleeping bag and plan to camp out. Contact one
|
||
of the Furriers (Ron Bemis at 1:124/1113 or Dewey Thiessen at
|
||
1:130/24) for details and a fantastic ASCII map.
|
||
|
||
2 Aug 1989
|
||
Start of Galactic Hacker Party in Amsterdam, Holland. Contact
|
||
Rop Gonggrijp at 2:280/1 for details.
|
||
|
||
24 Aug 1989
|
||
Voyager 2 passes Neptune.
|
||
|
||
24 Aug 1989
|
||
FidoCon '89 starts at the Holiday Inn in San Jose,
|
||
California. Trade show, seminars, etc. Contact 1:1/89
|
||
for info.
|
||
|
||
5 Oct 1989
|
||
20th Anniversary of "Monty Python's Flying Circus"
|
||
|
||
11 Oct 1989
|
||
First International Modula-2 Conference at Bled, Yugoslavia
|
||
hosting Niklaus Wirth and the British Standards Institution.
|
||
Contact 1:106/8422 for more information.
|
||
|
||
11 Nov 1989
|
||
A new area code forms in northern Illinois at 12:01 am.
|
||
Chicago proper will remain area code 312; suburban areas
|
||
formerly served with that code will become area code 708.
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 35 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
REPORTS
|
||
=================================================================
|
||
|
||
Nominations and Elections Committee
|
||
1:107/233 1:107/210
|
||
|
||
LAST CHANCE TO VOLUNTEER TO BE AN IFNA DIRECTOR!
|
||
|
||
Time is running out to send notice of your willingness to serve
|
||
the FidoNet community as a Director of IFNA. The Nominations and
|
||
Elections Committee will indicate the names of all members who
|
||
wish to appear on the upcoming ballot. Please send notice of
|
||
your interest immediately to the Committee at 1:107/210.
|
||
|
||
Some thoughts to consider relative to this follow.
|
||
|
||
|
||
WHAT IS IFNA NOW?
|
||
|
||
IFNA, now, is what you have made it. If that is not exactly what
|
||
you expect, then perhaps you should consider how much you have
|
||
done to make that happen. IFNA is staffed solely by volunteer
|
||
sysops. As such, all of them already are very busy trying to
|
||
maintain their systems, and meet the more pressing demands of
|
||
everyday life. The lack of extra time available to them shows in
|
||
the lack of results seen around the Net. But don't be fooled -
|
||
just because YOU may not see evidence of IFNA at work first-hand,
|
||
does not mean that it is not accomplishing things nor that others
|
||
are not being benefitted. Lots of behind-the-scenes work is
|
||
being done, information and services are being provided to many,
|
||
and plans - and dreams - are being formed for the future of
|
||
FidoNet.
|
||
|
||
If you believe in the future of FidoNet, and expect IFNA to do
|
||
more things to promote it, then perhaps you shouldn't sit there
|
||
expecting that someone else does it. This is your chance to
|
||
really see that it gets done the way you believe it should.
|
||
|
||
|
||
WHAT WILL IFNA BE IN THE FUTURE?
|
||
|
||
What you make it.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 36 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
OFFICERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL FIDONET ASSOCIATION
|
||
|
||
Mort Sternheim 1:321/109 Chairman of the Board
|
||
Bob Rudolph 1:261/628 President
|
||
Matt Whelan 3:3/1 Vice President
|
||
Bill Bolton 3:711/403 Vice President-Technical Coordinator
|
||
Linda Grennan 1:147/1 Secretary
|
||
Kris Veitch 1:147/30 Treasurer
|
||
|
||
|
||
IFNA COMMITTEE AND BOARD CHAIRS
|
||
|
||
Administration and Finance Mark Grennan 1:147/1
|
||
Board of Directors Mort Sternheim 1:321/109
|
||
Bylaws Don Daniels 1:107/210
|
||
Ethics Vic Hill 1:147/4
|
||
Executive Committee Bob Rudolph 1:261/628
|
||
International Affairs Rob Gonsalves 2:500/1
|
||
Membership Services David Drexler 1:147/47
|
||
Nominations & Elections David Melnick 1:107/233
|
||
Public Affairs David Drexler 1:147/47
|
||
Publications Rick Siegel 1:107/27
|
||
Security & Individual Rights Jim Cannell 1:143/21
|
||
Technical Standards Rick Moore 1:115/333
|
||
|
||
|
||
IFNA BOARD OF DIRECTORS
|
||
|
||
DIVISION AT-LARGE
|
||
|
||
10 Courtney Harris 1:102/732 Don Daniels 1:107/210
|
||
11 Bill Allbritten 1:11/301 Mort Sternheim 1:321/109
|
||
12 Bill Bolton 3:711/403 Mark Grennan 1:147/1
|
||
13 Irene Henderson 1:107/9 (vacant)
|
||
14 Ken Kaplan 1:100/22 Ted Polczyinski 1:154/5
|
||
15 Scott Miller 1:128/12 Matt Whelan 3:3/1
|
||
16 Ivan Schaffel 1:141/390 Robert Rudolph 1:261/628
|
||
17 Neal Curtin 1:343/1 Steve Jordan 1:206/2871
|
||
18 Andrew Adler 1:135/47 Kris Veitch 1:147/30
|
||
19 David Drexler 1:147/47 (vacant)
|
||
2 Henk Wevers 2:500/1 David Melnik 1:107/233
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 37 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
__
|
||
The World's First / \
|
||
BBS Network /|oo \
|
||
* FidoNet * (_| /_)
|
||
FidoCon '89 in San Jose, California _`@/_ \ _
|
||
at The Holiday Inn Park Plaza | | \ \\
|
||
August 24-27, 1989 | (*) | \ ))
|
||
______ |__U__| / \//
|
||
/ Fido \ _//|| _\ /
|
||
(________) (_/(_|(____/ (tm)
|
||
|
||
|
||
R E G I S T R A T I O N F O R M
|
||
|
||
|
||
Name: _______________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Address: ____________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
City: _______________________ State: ____ Zip: ______________
|
||
|
||
Country: ____________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
|
||
Phone Numbers:
|
||
|
||
Day: ________________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Evening: ____________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Data: _______________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
|
||
Zone:Net/
|
||
Node.Point: ___________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Your BBS Name: ________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
|
||
BBS Software: _____________________ Mailer: ___________________
|
||
|
||
Modem Brand: _____________________ Speed: ____________________
|
||
|
||
At what hotel will you be staying: ____________________________
|
||
|
||
Do you want an in room point? (Holiday Inn only) ______________
|
||
|
||
Are you a Sysop? _____________
|
||
|
||
Are you an IFNA Member? ______
|
||
|
||
Additional Guests: __________
|
||
(not attending conferences)
|
||
|
||
Do you have any special requirements? (Sign Language translation,
|
||
handicapped, etc.)
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 38 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
______________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
|
||
Comments: ______________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
______________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
______________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
|
||
Costs How Many? Cost
|
||
--------------------------- -------- -------
|
||
|
||
Conference fee $60 .................... ________ _______
|
||
($75.00 after July 15)
|
||
|
||
Friday Banquet $30.00 ................ ________ _______
|
||
|
||
======== =======
|
||
|
||
Totals ................................ ________ _______
|
||
|
||
You may pay by Check, Money Order, or Credit Card. Please send
|
||
no cash. All monies must be in U.S. Funds. Checks should be
|
||
made out to: "FidoCon '89"
|
||
|
||
|
||
This form should be completed and mailed to:
|
||
|
||
Silicon Valley FidoCon '89
|
||
PO Box 390770
|
||
Mountain View, CA 94039
|
||
|
||
|
||
You may register by Netmailing this completed form to 1:1/89 for
|
||
processing. Rename it to ZNNNXXXX.REG where Z is your Zone
|
||
number, N is your Net number, and X is your Node number. US Mail
|
||
confirmation is required within 72 hours to confirm your
|
||
registration.
|
||
|
||
If you are paying by credit card, please include the following
|
||
information. For your own security, do not route any message
|
||
with your credit card number on it. Crash it directly to 1:1/89.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Master Card _______ Visa ________
|
||
|
||
|
||
Credit Card Number _____________________________________________
|
||
|
||
|
||
Expiration Date ________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
Signature ______________________________________________________
|
||
|
||
No credit card registrations will be accepted without a valid
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 39 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
signature.
|
||
|
||
|
||
Rooms at the Holiday Inn may be reserved by calling the Hotel at
|
||
408-998-0400, and mentioning that you are with FidoCon. Rooms
|
||
are $60.00 per night double occupancy. Additional rollaways are
|
||
available for $10.00 per night. To obtain these rates you must
|
||
register before July 15.
|
||
|
||
The official FidoCon '89 airline is American Airlines. You can
|
||
receive either a 5% reduction in supersaver fares or a 40%
|
||
reduction in the regular day coach fare. San Jose is an American
|
||
Airlines hub with direct flights to most major cities. When
|
||
making reservations, you must call American's reservation number,
|
||
800-433-1790, and reference Star number S0289VM.
|
||
|
||
The official FidoCon '89 automobile rental agency is Alamo Rent a
|
||
Car. Rates are as described below. All rates include automatic
|
||
transmission, air conditioning, radio, and unlimited mileage.
|
||
|
||
Economy car (example: Geo Metro) $32 day/$109 week.
|
||
Compact car (example: Chevy Cavalier) $34 day/$120 week.
|
||
Midsize car (example: Pontiac Grand Am) $36 day/$135 week.
|
||
Standard car (example: Buick Regal) $38 day/$165 week.
|
||
Luxury car (example: Buick LeSabre) $40 day/$239 week.
|
||
|
||
To take advantage of this rate, call Alamo at 1-800-327-9633 and
|
||
request the convention rate. Mention FidoCon '89, the location
|
||
and dates.
|
||
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
FidoNews 6-27 Page 40 3 Jul 1989
|
||
|
||
|
||
__
|
||
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
|
||
PO Box 41143
|
||
St Louis, Missouri 63141
|
||
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 second elected Board of Directors
|
||
was filled in August 1988. The IFNA Echomail Conference has been
|
||
established on FidoNet to assist the Board. We welcome your
|
||
input to this Conference.
|
||
|
||
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|