informis/textfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
textfiles/bbs/FIDONET/FIDONEWS/fido1036.nws
root@procul 278a90f7ce Initial commit
2021-04-15 13:31:59 -05:00

1188 lines
57 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters

This file contains invisible Unicode characters that are indistinguishable to humans but may be processed differently by a computer. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

F I D O N E W S -- Vol.10 No.36 (06-Sep-1993)
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| A newsletter of the | |
| FidoNet BBS community | Published by: |
| _ | |
| / \ | "FidoNews" BBS |
| /|oo \ | +1-519-570-4176 1:1/23 |
| (_| /_) | |
| _`@/_ \ _ | Editors: |
| | | \ \\ | Sylvia Maxwell 1:221/194 |
| | (*) | \ )) | Donald Tees 1:221/192 |
| |__U__| / \// | Tim Pozar 1:125/555 |
| _//|| _\ / | |
| (_/(_|(____/ | |
| (jm) | Newspapers should have no friends. |
| | -- JOSEPH PULITZER |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Submission address: editors 1:1/23 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Internet addresses: |
| |
| Sylvia -- max@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca |
| Donald -- donald@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca |
| Tim -- pozar@kumr.lns.com |
| Both Don & Sylvia (submission address) |
| editor@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| For information, copyrights, article submissions, |
| obtaining copies and other boring but important details, |
| please refer to the end of this file. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
========================================================================
Table of Contents
========================================================================
1. Editorial..................................................... 2
2. Articles...................................................... 2
Change Nodelist Archiver Rebuttal........................... 2
Announcing a new echomail conference........................ 4
Title: The Quest To Punish!................................ 6
"Oops."..................................................... 10
"New Backbone Policy Needs Work"............................ 11
"More on ZIP as the new standard - ZIP for Atari"........... 12
JUDGES IN THE FIDONET....................................... 13
Letter...................................................... 14
WILD WILLY AND THE FIDOZENS................................. 14
Open letter to ZCs and the IC............................... 18
Whatza EDoorSys Do?......................................... 20
3. Fidonews Information.......................................... 21
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 2 06 Sep 1993
========================================================================
Editorial
========================================================================
Another week and another issue of the snooze hits the wires.
As usual, here is hectic, with a couple of new installations
having to be delivered and set up in a hurry. Why is it that
we seem to starve for weeks and then get enough work to finance
NASA the fifth week? And it always has to be done yesterday ...
A personal request. Max and I are looking for an echo
devoted to fine/fringe art to run on Ex_Libris. It would be
nice if the echo covered Eastern Canada, but that is not a real
requirement. We have tonnes of echos about literature and music,
but we have been able to find little about the visual art scene.
If there is something out there, please send us a personal note.
On another issue, E-zines are germinating all over. Fidonet
could be leading edge in e-zines, but information seems to be
particularly spotty. If anybody considers themselves an expert
on the subject, an article would be nice. It would also be nice
to carry a list on what is available as a regular feature.
The zip/arc/arj/lzh/??? argueing is doomed never to end?
I suppose that is to be expected; technical progress always
involves people disagreeing with the Established method.
However, the one thing that has not appeared to date, and which
I have been a bit curious about, is just how the internal MODEM
compressions stand up. If we just let compressing modems do
their thing, particularly with local calls, would the clock time
from caller to caller, including all the packing and unpacking,
be longer or shorter?
packing up and onward...
========================================================================
Articles
========================================================================
Change Nodelist Archiver Rebuttal
By David Johnson 1:244/117
Quote from "Change Nodelist Archiver" by Rob Blackney
"Considering the obvious, why are we spending money to move even just
one file using this archaic archiver? My suggestion, in January pick
the one that currently are compressing the most, in two years review
and see if a change is necessary. We move these files 52 times a
year using even LHA (this year) would save us 35k a week (or 1820k,
over a meg using the above file). Mind you I received the Nodediff
above in Version six form."
My comments are as follows:
The nodelist is available in Region 12 archived as the following:
Pkzip by Phil Katz, and .ARC (ancient version of ARC used and not the
current release from SEA).
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 3 06 Sep 1993
The reasoning behind having the .ARC(old format) style is that there
is a version available that runs on every Personal computer that I've
seen that can both create and unpack this method of file compression.
This in itself is the crux of the matter.
.LZH is available on a majority of computer computers but LHA format
is not, so that rules it out.
.ZIP - an unzip package is available for every machine that I know
of, but the corresponding .zip create requires more memory than is
available on ALL machines.. Will both the Create and UnCreate run in
64K is probably a reasonable criteria for determine whether or not a
specific archiver will be used.
.ARJ - there is the unarj source available but no corresponding
create utility except for 808xx machines.
So for maximum compatibility we are left with .ARC (old) nodelists
having to be available if requested. The individual NC can request
the Nodelist coming into his NET using PKZIP compression and if asked
can convert it to the needed compression that any of his nodes may
because of system requirements require.
Now for his second arguement about breaking apart the nodelist:
"Breaking the Nodelist into individual ZoneLists would have at least
been less expensive to the world at large. Consider for a moment how
small the individual nodediff files would be? How much shorter the
download times would be? Its time to consider the future, consider
the growth of the nodelist, consider the possibility of this
happening again. This is just an opinion, not an expert solution to
things. No, I'm not out to stir up trouble."
In Region 12 one can get the following nodelists:
R12-LIST (and correspondind R12-DIFF) that only contains nodes within
R12 and the primary Fidonet Z1 sites..
Z1-LIST (and corresponding Z1-DIFF) that contains only Zone 1 members.
Within this net we used to have available a Net244list that was
updated as frequently as needed. This was to allow a node that
hadn't made it into the full nodelist or R12list to be able to be a
viable member of Fidonet as soon as their application was processed.
If all you really need is your Regions Nodelist then why even carry
the full nodelist? Many sites could probably get away with just a
NET specific Nodelist.
So I don't see the authors point. The information is available all
one has to do is ask.
David
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 4 06 Sep 1993
Announcing a new echomail conference...
Carl Declerck 2:292/500.10
" Death, when it comes, can be cruel and unfair to those
who find joy and happiness in their short lives on this
Earth. Yet that same death, to some, is the ultimate
messenger of relief, the carrier into peaceful oblivion
from which naught but an endless void returns.
It is the latter that I eagerly await now, my whole
being in a state that resembles only a faint, mocking
parody of that what they call humankind. I have locked
myself up in the library of the house. It has been my
study, kitchen and sleeping-room for the past few weeks
since the rest of the house has become increasingly more
difficult to live in, especially at night...
It all began when I started getting acquainted with the
strange, wierd, yes sometimes maniacal writings of that
sinister writer called H.P. Lovecraft. His stories,
fitting all together to form a complete, devillish
mythos about aeon-old cosmic beings of unnamable evil
that once tried to conquer our planet but then banned to
its inner regions and the infinitely far outer space,
were mere fiction... I thought. In his works, Lovecraft
also wrote about various books; secretly kept tomes of
such evil content that would jeopardise our very
universe if it were all brought to light. Although that
same light itself would surely vanish into an abominable
gulf of eternal darkness. Foolish as I then was, I set
out in my search for these hidden tomes, and after
months of whispering questions at various libraries
around the world, I occasionally found myself glimpsing
at such works as the abhorred Necronomicon by the mad
arab Abdul Alhazred, the Unausspraechlichen Kulten by
Von Junzt, the Cultes des Ghoules by the Comte d'Erlette
and many more texts whose names I won't mention here for
the sake of my own twisted sanity.
When I returned home from my travels, I knew I had to
take action to prevent the horrors contained within
those obscure tomes from reaching any stage of reality.
I then did what I now know is the act that made /them/
start to come after me; I started a conference in the
fidonet network, wholly dedicated to all the abysmal
horrors I had come to know since I first set my eyes on
those dreadful Lovecraftian writings. This open display
of my so called 'interest' in the occult lore of the
Mythos was soon to be rewarded by a series of
inexplicable and particularly loathsome events here in
the house, which I hadn't left since my return home.
Some nights I could hear a faint chanting from below
the house, a chanting which was in no tongue known to
this world and which would suddenly turn into a horrific
ululation, rising from a faint wailing to unmentionable
bursts of acoustic blasphemy. After a while, these
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 5 06 Sep 1993
ululations would die away and be followed by unearthly
footfalls seeming to come up the staircase, accompanied
by a strange sloshing, sucking noise. Each attempt to
witness these phenomena by sight had caused them to
cease instantaneously, leaving only a trail of black
slime along the walls. Yet each night the slimy trails
reached nearer the library-door and somehow I knew they
would not go beyond it...
It is half past midnight. The ululation is reaching its
climax. It is hardly bearable, yet I have a feeling that
this time /they/ will venture further than /they/ ever
did before, so I keep on writing. A faint purple glow
surrounds the house, the gas lamp sputters as if it's
going to go out any moment now... I can hear the
footfalls, tens, maybe hundreds of them, and the weird
sloshing, sucking. It sounds like living flesh being
torn apart and pushed together again. /They/ have
reached the corridor to the library... I can hear them
advancing... must be near the door now... the lamp won't
last much longer... the knob moves... the door opens...
MY GOD!!!... their aspect... curse them...
THEY'RE coming for me... GOD!!! THAT HORROR!!... I.... "
Thus ends the note found on Lorne Solbury's library desk
at his house just outside Arkham, Massachusetts. Of him
not a single trace could be found.
Mr. Solbury's last contacts with the outside world had
been through an electronic network called FidoNet, in
which he had only recently started a public conference,
called LOVECRAFTIAN, for the discussion of _anything_
related to the late writer H.P. Lovecraft, the Cthulhu
Mythos, and the Necronomicon. The current conference
moderator told us that it is available from at least the
following systems:
2:25/52, 2:252/151, 2:253/157, 2:258/101,
2:291/799, 2:292/500
Mail-links into other zones/regions are still being
looked for. If you can help or want more information on
the conference, contact Carl Declerck at 2:292/500.10 or
Nigel Hardy at 2:252/151.
Carl Declerck, 2:292/500.10
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 6 06 Sep 1993
Title: The Quest To Punish!
<or> Who REALLY Wants Democracy?
<or> Are You Annoyed, or Annoying?
By Tim Winters 1:170/609
I noticed in issue 1035 of the "Snooze" an article written
by Mr Stanton McCandlish, at 1:301/2
First let me say, no I am NOT related to the Steve Winter that
Mr McCandlish mentioned in his article.
(Notice no "s" on the end of his name.)
Also, I'm sure some of you will recognise my name from some of the
national sysop echos, and you know that I make no qualms about
speaking my own mind in public, sometimes very aggressively.
But disagreements are one thing. Going on a crusade to "punish"
others is quite another.
It seems that everybody is becomming "PC Crazy", not to
mention the suggestion of making PCs for less than
justifiable reasons.
In his article, Mr McCandlish recommended that everybody
who "felt" affected by recent events, file PCs against
those whom he sees as the "badguys" in this issue.
He even went on to present the complaints that he felt
should be filed.
He said they should all be based upon "extremely annoying behaviour".
It seems that people keep forgetting that the other side of that P4
rule (?), is that one should not be too easily annoyed.
In many of the cases Mr McCandlish quoted, I too feel anger and
frustration at what has been happening.
But to carry things "too far" is just as annoying when done
with what is felt to be "justifiable reason" as when it is
done with unjustifiable reason.
And "intentions" should be weighed, are they "good" ones?
Many people have bad ones in their "Quest To Punish Others".
Too many use the "excessively annoying" complaint, far too often
and far too loosely, for me to believe that they themselves are
not being too easily annoyed and/or are becomming the very same
"power freaks" and "control freaks" that they are complaining against
in the first place. (I do not refer to Mr McCandlish here, and give
his intentions the benefit of the doubt at this point as being
"good intentions". Nor am I referring to any one specific person.
Normally at this point I would simply say "You know who you are",
but I'm truly afraid that many actually do NOT know who they are!)
While I understand the frustration caused by many of the recent
events, at the same time too many people are letting this
frustration mutate them into the very same monsters that they
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 7 06 Sep 1993
claim to abhore to begin with.
On that note, I would like to comment upon these two aspects,
IE the "quest to punish others" that seems to be rampant lately,
and also the too loosely used jusitification of "Excessively
Annoying Behaviour" as an excuse to file a PC against someone.
If I repeat myself here and there, please have the courtesy
to overlook it, as I sometimes am a bit repetitive.
But some things do bear repeating.
First, the dispicable "Quest To Punish Others".......
Seems people are losing sight of things around FidoNet lately.
People keep bringing up their "personal VENDETTAS" into the
recent disturbing events scattered about Zone 1 lately.
Anybody can file a PC, right or wrong, like ANYBODY can do.
Its up to the NC/RC/ZCs to rule upon a PC.
Its the ruling(s) that count, not who made the PC.
And the thing about our ambiguous P4 document is, that it
can be interpreted in more than one way, by more than one person.
The only solution that may be close at hand is to ELECT people
into those positions that you TRUST to interpret P4 in the
way you most see fit!
Many *Cs are just interpreting policy in the best way they see fit,
and truly do have the "best intentions" at heart, even if their
interpretation of P4 does happen to be disagreed with by many others.
Other *Cs truly do have "bad intentions" and are themselves on
their own "Quest to Punish", however I do not believe that to be
the case in *all* of the instances that Mr McCandlish brought up
in his article.
Lacking bottom-up elections requirements being a part of P4,
the current best part about policy, is the appeals process.
Next, lets shoot for bottom-up democracy, ay?
Personal vendettas are a waste of time.
Anybody can file PCs day after day, as many do.
(I'm proud to say, that I *NEVER* have filed even one PC
in the nearly three years I've been nodelisted.)
A node is not responsible for how his PC was ruled upon
by the *C who reviewed it.
A node *IS* annoying *IF* they continue to file PCs,
after a *C has ruled that there were no grounds for making
the original PC, unless of course they are still climbing the
"appeals ladder" for the original PC made.
Comon folks. This is just a hobby. Really, it is.
This is not a "PUNISH WHOMEVER I CAN, WHERE EVER I CAN, WHEN I
DISAGREE WITH SOMEONE" club. Some people are *BECOMMING* the
SAME as the ones they've been yelling against by doing so!
IE, "unfair control/power freaks"!
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 8 06 Sep 1993
Lets get bottom-up democracy into policy, and then everybody has
a realistic recourse in future elections.
In the meantime, lets all try to practice what we preach against
others, IE "TOLERANCE". It is a hobby. Lets quit being so damn
serious that disagreements continually mutate into
"quests to punish excessively".
Lets all get real, and lighten up some.
Fairness and tolerance (for ALL) should be the keyphrase.
Things are starting to change for the better, (in some aspects).
Lets all become a part of that change, instead of BECOMMING the
"punishers" and "control freaks" that everyone has been yelling
about. There is NO ROOM for personal "vendettas" in a "Fair FidoNet".
It does the hobby, and the people in it, not one bit of good if the
"Control Freaks" and "punishers" are simply replaced by another group
doing the exact same crap all over again, but only the names have
changed.
I am against giving power to *anybody* who would be
EXCESSIVE in their personal "QUESTS TO PUNISH/CONTROL" others.
There is *no* justification for "rubbing someone's face"
in their mistakes. How about just making sure it doesn't happen
again?
And now my comments on using "Excessively Annoying Behaviour"
as an excuse for filing frivilous PCs...................
Anybody in the nodelist can file a PC. <groan>
And anybody can "claim" to be annoyed.
However, there is the rule of "DO NOT BE EASILY ANNOYED" that one
must first contend with, and also, being annoying is not
automatically EXCESSIVE!
A PC is made up of steps, according to P4.
1. Contact the node/person directly, and attempt to work it out.
2. File the PC.
If one skips step 1, then they have no PC.
If the person is willing to "work it out", or agrees to NOT repeat
the action that is being complained about, then one has no PC.
(Unless they actually do repeat the action afterwards anyway.)
If the person refuses to cooperate, and/or does not agree that they
have done anything wrong, and tells you they will repeat the
performance again, then you can file a PC.
This brings us to step 2.
Anyone can take this step, if step one was used first, and if they
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 9 06 Sep 1993
"believe" that policy has been broken.
In other words, it must say somewhere in P4, that it is against
policy to do what you believe this person has done.
(At least, that must be your honest interpretation of P4).
And there you have it.
However, if one wishes to file a PC based simply and solely upon
"Excessively Annoying Behaviour", one must keep the following things
in mind.
1. It is also a rule that one is not to be too easily annoyed.
2. Number one tells me, that unless P4 defines a certain action as
being "annoying" but one files a PC anyway, then they are being
too easily annoyed and can have a PC filed against *them*.
3. If P4 defines an action as being "annoying", so be it.
But "annoying" is not enough.
A PC must be based on "EXCESSIVELY" annoying,
IE *repeated* occurances of the P4-defined annoying behaviour.
Please everybody, LIGHTEN UP.
IE, the "quest to punish" has gotten out of hand.
Disagreements are one thing, and people need to learn to live
with them and tolerate everybodys inalienable right to disagree!
But striving to "PUNISH OTHERS THAT DISAGREE" is VERY annoying!!!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is where the "do not be easily annoyed" rule comes into effect.
Yes, this includes every single listing in the nodelist. Every one.
Its only a hobby. Please EVERYBODY LIGHTEN UP, and shoot for
bottom-up democracy, NOT "Quests to Punish Others".
If your quest is to punish others, then *YOU* have now become the
control-freak and the power-freak, and it will be *YOUR* turn
to be "dealt with" on the next round!
P.S. Even though it should NOT make any difference whatsoever,
before replying with hate mail, be aware that I was against
the original "Bodger vs Garcia" ruling from the very start.
But that should not change a thing in the above article.
The moral of this story, and it bears repeating, and it bears
repeating, and it bears repeating, is....
Its only a hobby. EVERYBODY LIGHTEN UP and tolerate differences!
Its only a hobby. EVERYBODY LIGHTEN UP and file that PC in the trash!
Its only a hobby. EVERYBODY LIGHTEN UP and work for democracy!
Its only a hobby. Kindly send any flames in the form of a rebuttal
article to FidoNews, and keep them the hell outa' my Netmail Folder!
:-)
Or do you want to punish me for having my own opinion too?
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 10 06 Sep 1993
Wake up. :-) (This is supposed to be fun!)
"Oops."
Stanton McCandlish, 1:301/2
OK, OK, enough already.
This is a partial retraction of my previous article ("Tired of people
misusing Policy? Use it yourself!", FIDO1035.NWS).
I have nothing against any of the people I suggested example PCs
against.
I realize that the examples were full of misinformation, since they
were all culled from nothing but angry gripes in FNews. They were
only ONE side of the story. This was intentional. Though I agree
with SOME of the ideas, a careful reading will show you that many of
the "charges" are contradictory doublethink. I was simply reflecting
FNews articles back to the people who wrote them. Many have
misinterpreted that article to mean "These are the facts". * In many
cases they are not. *
The point was not that this is my opinion of their behaviour (you
will note that my opinion was clearly expressed, that the people
enumerated in the article were making mistakes; well, whoop-dee-doo),
but rather that people, IF this is how they feel, should DO something
about it, instead of just whining in FidoNews. If you feel policy
has been violated, and that J. Random *C is the Child of Satan (R),
test your opinion in FidoNet "court". If you are right, something
might change. If you are wrong, well... But doing nothing but
posting in FNews will not solve anything.
Since that article I've had some reasonable, and quite interesting,
discussions with both Christopher Baker and Ron Dwight, and to them I
apologize for making their "jobs" more difficult, if that is the
result. As for the others, I tend to agree with the example
"charges": FidoNet is NOT the Shareware Registration Enforcement Net.
It has nothing to do with supporting piracy or not, it's simply a
matter of misusing one's "power" over the nodelist to force people to
do what you want them to do, with no basis in Policy. But, since I
was not directly affected by this stuff, I won't be filing a PC about
it. That's up to Jason Garcia.
And I stand by much of what's been said concerning Mr. Winter, who in
the opinion of many, and me in particular, is genuinely insulting and
annoying to a large number of people.
Hope this clarifies the situation some.
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 11 06 Sep 1993
"New Backbone Policy Needs Work"
Stanton McCandlish, 1:301/2
I'll keep this short, since my virtual face has been gracing these
electronic pages quite a bit lately.
It's good to see that a new backbone policy is being worked on.
However, in my opinion it still needs work.
In various sections, the longstanding, and worse than worthless, Fido
practice of appointing this person and appointing that person, is
perpetuated. I mean, really. Do we need this? I think a democratic
system will work just fine.
In section 3.4, subsection c., no allowance is made for the echo's
own rules determining a new moderator. It just says the ZEC can
"cause" one to be appointed, whatever that means.
Section 4.3, subsection a.: This appears to be in direct
contradiction to P4, which allows any node to get mail from anywhere
they please. I have yet to see anything in P4 that requires one to
participate in a CRP, if mail can be had elsewhere at less expense.
This subsection strikes me as singularly totalitarian. Subsections
b. & c. give a wee bit too much power to ?ECs. Up until now, these
positions have been more or less powerless. And <gasp> they actually
do something useful. As soon as ?ECs are given the power to yea or
nay people's echomail feeds, their usefulness will come to an end,
and the arguments and fights will simply double. Not just problems
with ?C's, but now ?ECs as well. Just great. Subsection d. would
also appear to be counter to P4, since it again tries to directly
restrict where people get their mail from and what they do with it.
In my opinion, the entirely of Section 4.3 should be replaced with
the following:
"4.3 Cross-Net/Region feeds
[1st paragraph from the original is fine, and should be included here]
A node or a net is expected to obtain any desired Backbone echomail
feed from the appropriate NHub or RHub respectively. Cross-Net or
cross-regional feeds are discouraged. However, any node or Net may
obtain such a feed, with the proviso that it is their responsibility,
and that of the feeding system, to ensure that no circular
feeds/duplicate mail loops result."
Much simpler, and really, "unrecorded sub-feeds" are not even an
issue, unless one is attempting to FORCE people to participate in
CRPs, which is clearly a policy violation.
Section 5.1 states, despite any disclaimers to the contrary, will
have the result of DIScouraging inter-network mail, since it attempts
to force any other net to play by the rules of Fido. Enumerating a
few SPECIFIC rules that must be followed (i.e. technical
specifications) would be sufficient. But no one can reasonably expect
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 12 06 Sep 1993
other networks to simply scrap their policies on moderation, etc,
simply because someone somewhere wants to gate the mail to Fido.
It's just not going to happen.
5.2 just needs to be scrapped. Period. This anti-encryption stance
is going to leave FidoNet a dinosaur if it continues.
In section 3.1: "There is no attempt in this document to determine
the distribution arrangements within individual nets." Nice
hand-wave, but it is not a factual statement.
Section 3.4 "recognizes that a moderator has complete authority."
Wow, that's just dandy. Now, any attempt to establish moderator
guidelines will founder, if this policy goes into effect. Better to
leave it open: "recognizes that a moderator has complete
authority...except as restricted in any future moderation policy or
guideline document(s)."
Section 4.5 is perhaps the worst of the document. All that needs to
be said is "Provided the participants can ensure that circular feeds
which produce duplicate messages will not result, any new technology
may be utilized in the distribution of mail." The flaw with this
section as it stands is that it WILL hamper progress, again despite
any disclaimer to the contrary. When policy makes it the
responsibility of a *C to "ensure that unforseen distribution methods
are adequately examined", you can bet that this will slow things to a
crawl. Its funny, but people keep trying to tell me that FidoNet is
not heirarchical and is an anarchy. What hogwash. At any rate,
responsibility for examination of a new technology for its
suitability in mail distribtion should lie with those implementing
it, not with a *C, who would end up having to "adequately examine" a
large number of systems, none of which are conveniently located on
their own property.
Also, much of the language of the proposed policy is sexist. I'd
recommend replacing "he" with "they"; they has been used regularly in
spoken English as a neuter 3rd person singular pronoun for well over
a century, and it is beginning to be acceptable to do so in written
English as well, provided context makes it clear that it's singular.
For an example, see the last sentence of the previous paragraph.
Sorry to sound "PC", but lack of gender-neutrality really does annoy
a lot of people.
Besides these faults, it looks pretty good to me. Just one man's
opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"More on ZIP as the new standard - ZIP for Atari"
Stanton McCandlish 1:301/2
I've been informed that a PKZip2.04g-compatible archiver IS available
for the Atari (ST/TT, Falcon, 16-bit). This file was passed on to me
by Bill Jones, 1:231/370. It's a self-extracting archive,
STZIP23.TOS, and is FREQable under that file name from 1:301/2, by
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 13 06 Sep 1993
ANY system. It can also be downloaded from the ATARI file area on
the BBS, Noise in the Void, +1-505- 246-8515. You can also FREQ
magicname ZIPS to get a list of all the ZIP- format [un]archivers I
have available, for all platforms. Currently, this consists of the
list I posted in FIDO1035.NWS, with STZIP23.TOS added.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDGES IN THE FIDONET
By: Jason Robertson
In recent issues of the Fidonews, an issue about fairness within
echoes has appeared and ideas have been brought up. One such idea
that perked my attention was that of a Person to act as a Judge, one
who could make an impartial judgement on the situation at hand.
The basis of this proposal is well-formed, if it works in
reality, then it should work in Cyberspace. This idea has rattled
around here in T.O. The following ideas have come out from this
process.
The first idea to come out is how do you communicate to either
source, secretly, with both knowledge of the others precise words.
The only idea is on the officiating system to create an echo for both
to access. With this you could set-up many echoes to use for many
different problems. This point is based on A - B are in JUDGE1 C - D
are in JUDGE2 and so on.
The next thing in the trip of a human's psyche, is the method of
feeds, say user A has no feed as user B, has had it cut, user A, will
get a feed with only the echo that he is presently in, which in this
case is JUDGE1. This method also gives the chance, for the Accused
or the Accuser to request a Jury type of System. In which they could
also get a feed to an area like: JURY1 JURY2 and so on. The second
addition will then give the chance for a judgement that is not
prejudiced as much. The JURY echo would only be opened for the
Jurists when the preceding have closed.
Other things that may be for judgement, by a external Judge is
that of problem areas like that, which recently happened in Net250.
Which an election was cancelled and re-done, because of a judgement
call, by the officiating members. The only problem with this is that
a Judgement, in this type of case would be hard with out facts. So
in a case like this, the set- up would also include an area, for
Questions and Answers of certain users. This Q&A period would be
carried out in an echo called WITNESS1 WITNESS2 and so on. Each of
the participants in the dispute would request of the Judge users from
the case, via Netmail, and the message would be passed on to the
opponent, then a separate message would be created and sent to the
Witness, giving him the echo name, and other things to reply to.
If this idea was allowed to expand and flourish, the Fidonet
would become a peaceful society, of humankind, from all walks of
life, that would respect each other. This will decrease the
Moderators influence on peoples beliefs, though, speech, and freedom.
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 14 06 Sep 1993
The Fidonet, has welcomed me, but it has also become an area, with a
lack of thought, only following what they are told to say, by the
moderators. Even in areas that are prone to these types of messages,
or even the Moderator who is just having a bad day.
If anyone has any ideas, information, thoughts, flames, or
anything, please send a Netmail message to me @ 1:250/802.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter
From: Michael Muellenmeister
To: Editors
Well i was trying to call 1:221/194 but i keep getting this board so
i assume that its related. I run a small board in Memphis Tennesse
and i have recently been hooked up to fidonet. While reading through
the National For Sale Echo i came upon an add and sent some Money To
HANK SHAMUS for a computer. Unfortunately he skipped town and hasn't
sent my computer. I wish to ask a favor if you'd post an ad in the
Fido News that if any one sees this man on any boards to call Michael
Muellenmeister at 901-377-5964 i would really appreciate it. Thanks
/\/\ichael
/\/\uellenmeister
Editor's note: 1:221/192 and 1:221/194 are different nodes of the
same board. They exist so that both Max and Don are in the nodelist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
WILD WILLY AND THE FIDOZENS.
By J.K.A. Singh @ Fidonet 2:292/859
Once Upon a Time in The West, Wild Willy and his buddies,
each according to their wealth and status, rode on their horses,
ponies, mules or asses into the wildest west in search of that
heavy metal that blinded every man with its glitter - so blind that
brother didn't see brother, nor father the son, nor the son the
father. They saw only Wild Willy and what he held in his hands.
They did only the things Wild Willy said they could do. All with
the hope of getting a pinch of gold dust that Wild Willy would
give them if they did what they were told to do. In the eyes of
gold all men are not equal. But, in the eyes of men all gold is
equal.
"Gold! Gold! Gold! Man will do anything for gold," sang that
famous singer El Filiciano who was void of sight. If a sightless
man should preach that, what about the rest who have the eyes to
see what gold really is and what it can do to men and women.
Man is for sale. Woman is for sale. And everything is for sale. If
you don't believe it, just look around and see how bitterly
husbands and wives, who once dearly loved each other, fight
when it comes to gold, marriage and divorce. Even children are
put up for sale - alas, sometimes to their own fathers - the more
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 15 06 Sep 1993
they pay the woman the more he can see his own children. No
wonder, some wise man once said, speaking on behalf of God
Almighty: With fire do we test gold. And, with gold do we test
man. Of course, in today's highly developed society the word
"man" usually includes women also.
The power of gold is immense. So immense that to many God
comes next to gold. With gold you can convert anything to
anything else - a heathen into a believer and a believer into a
heathen, an enemy into a friend and a friend into an enemy. And
above all, hunger into satisfaction, cold into warmth, heat into
coolness, austerity into opulence and so on and on - depending
upon one's definition of home - food, shelter and clothing. In the
evolution of its importance, gold replaced currencies like "You fix
my window, I will graze your live stock. So, there wasn't enough
gold in the world for everyone survive in peace and harmony. To
circumvent that law of nature, someone invented that famous
I.O.U. documents though which Kings and plebes with power and
without exchanged goods, services and favours against its tender,
often with the full knowledge that the document was not fully
redeemable. Some even relieved you of the burden of carrying the
heavy metal (density 19.1 gms/cc). So game the gold certificates
that became legal tender and so came the banks into existence
and so came the Kings who wrote gold certificates even when the
treasury was empty. Now, most of the world turned into republics
or constitutional monarchies, and elected or self appointed
governments continue to indulge into this game and what they
print in lieu of gold certificates has come to be called money. In
the least, this indulgence has given rise to some of the most
attractive piece of intricate miniature art of its own without
diminishing the opulent designs on postage stamps.
Money or gold, it is all the same. There is nothing in this world
that is more readily convertible to just about anything else. Money
and Gold are but the two faces of the same coin although they
each compete for a great value and contribute to inflation in their
own ways and change the destiny of many nations and many
people very much against their will.
Today, the Wild Willy has multiplied himself into many more.
Horses, ponies, mules and asses have been replaced by executive
private jets and long black limousines. Wild Willy has shed off
his crude dust worn clothing and is neatly draped in a haute
couture hand tailored silk suit. He is clean shaven and his face is
framed within a haute coiffure school boy cut even when he
crossed the middle age and looking down the pipe at his
retirement. He has even learned how to smile and when and at
who.
Coming to think of it, I sometimes wonder, if there isn't a bit of
the Wild Willy in each of us - except that we all know how to
curb his impulses, and that to most of us the importance of gold
comes after God, The King, The Family, etc. and our need for
gold is just to be able to serve this modern day trinity (with a
small "t") and none of us would sell that for anything. Otherwise,
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 16 06 Sep 1993
it would be like selling your car to buy a few tyres and then all
you have is tyres and tyres and no car.
Now, let us take a look at more conspicuous things of our daily
lives. We all have much more things in common than you could
imagine. We all rise up from our beds, some early and some late.
But, we all do brush our teeth, wash our faces, and take, if not a
bath, at least take a shower - at least I do and hope that others do
too. We go to work and return home after work, although in some
cases, via a favourite pub or depending upon other things, in and
out of somebody else's door. We all eat, watch TV and eat and
then go bed hoping the next day would be better than the day that
has just gone by.
However, we all seem to habitually overlook the most obvious.
Otherwise we would all be Sherlock Holmes or that legendary
Belgian Hercules Poirot who is credited with putting his country
on the world map - or was it actually his friend, Miss Marple
disguised as Agatha Christie.
However, coming to that most obvious common thing that we all
seem to overlook - the recently discovered continent - a new
world, a household talk in the community of the sysops world-
wide - you have guessed it! Fidoland.
If you study the history of the North American Continent
immediately following its discovery by Columbus and Vespucci
in the late 16th century and compare it to that of our newly found
continent, Fidoland, you would be amazed at some of the
similarities.
The North American continent was discovered in 1592. Since
then, almost every other European monarchy that had a naval
force, even a one boat fleet, made a rush to the new world and
occupied what land they could. In the new continent, they fought
against each other for nearly 160 years - I even believe that if the
Russians and the Prussians had gone there, the very need for the
two World Wars would have become non-existence. Those wars
went on until one day some people gathered together and said
enough is enough and had that historic Boston Tea Party where,
ironically enough, not a single cup of tea was consumed, but
shiploads of tea leaves arriving from Britain were lavishly thrown
into the sea until the while cargo had exhausted - actually, if cods
and turtles could write their history that event would be rightfully
recorded as their TEA PARTY, not as that of the rebels. "This is
OUR COUNTRY and WE WILL FIGHT FOR IT," proclaimed the rebels at
the end of the party lasting, perhaps, some days. They all agreed
to fight under the leadership of one man called George Washington.
So came the War of American Independence (1775-81) with the victory
over Cornwallis in Yorktown. Funnily enough, for a long time after
that the British used to call that army as rebels and today they are
buddy-buddy allies in just about everything from wanting the ouster
of Saddam Hussein to torpedoing CIS-EEC relations to Maastricht Treaty.
A Cure to "Pulloplug" Syndrome Finally in Sight
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 17 06 Sep 1993
Since its discovery er ..... its inception in 1984, the politics of
this large continent Fidoland has seen the same kind of wars and
has gone through some of the same pains of growth. One marked
difference is that in the case of America the stakes were gold,
glory and freedom whereas in the Fidoland they are echomail,
files and glory. What we are going through in this history is that
we have defeated several Wild Willies and we are approaching
Yorktown to deal the final blow to the Greatest of the Great
Willies of all. Mind you, this Willy is not embedded in just a
person. It is the state of being, rather than a person. It used to be
manifested in the now dying philosophy of "You bring me my
mail and files" on one side and "Okay, I will, so long as you do
what I ask you to do." That was the most devilish spirit to
operate any healthy organisation, especially, when our May Fair
passengers coined that memorable phrase - "............... or I will
pull the plug." When cost sharing has become everyone's
interest, isn't that a serious defeat to this notorious Wild Willy?
When we have developed a workable way we will have won our
historic battle of Yorktown.
From Yorktown in 1781, the march to final democracy took seven
more years to Philadelphia where they wrote the great
Constitution, in 1787, guaranteeing the freedom of all its peoples.
Our Yorktown is in sight and we know that the enemy is weaker
after several losses. We know that we have the strength and the
will - and above all, the Wild Willy knows that the end of his
reign is fast approaching.
George Washington and his men were only speculating on their
victory of Yorktown. So, as of 1781, they did not have any
concrete plans to write a constitution. But, today, we want our
Yorktown - and we know it would most definitely be ours. So we
can already start thinking of Philadelphia or even make one
master plan to cover both - Yorktown and Philadelphia, or in
more direct terms: COST SHARING - and its management.
Our pennies are our soldiers and they need to be organised and
put under one efficient commander-in-chief. We need to identify
our George Washington, be it one person or a body of elected
volunteers.
We also need, hardware, technical expertise, time and man power
to make things operational and maintain things that way. We
need managerial skills that will coordinate everything from fast
procurement of echomail and files down to its distribution.
A well managed, centralised, democratically managed system is
indeed ideal to any establishment that aspires to accomplish its
goal. In the first place, the citizenry of Fidoland have come to
want it even if costs them their dear pennies. Gee ... That is an
example of real Mailiatrism ... or Fileotrism and long live our
Fidocracy and the land of echomail, files and glory - and of
course, of Hope.
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 18 06 Sep 1993
When it concerns money, we all wish to get what we paid for.
Even when you make a donation you expect something in return -
at least that your money was spent on what YOU wanted it to be
spent on, cancer research, ecological education, etc.
In our case also there is MONEY that would flow out of our
pockets and to balance that something must flow in. Remember
that when we pay, we are going to pay in advance, not because we
are not to be trusted. But, simply because that there is no one
person who has such enormous resources to spare for something
that is a pastime, a hobby and a pleasure that comes next to
various other things. So we have to put our money somewhere,
perhaps a blocked bank account from where the money would be
released under definite conditions before a certain date failing
which the fund will be returned to the depositors.
None of us need to pay any penny without a guarantee that our
Netmail, our Echomail and the files that we desired files will be
delivered to us in return. That is what I compare to Philadelphia
1787 - A CONSTITUTION that guarantees you rights to the
material and services you pay for. In our case, it cannot be called
a constitution - statutes would be a more appropriate word.
Statutes is to an organisation what constitution would be to a
country. But, essentially the two documents are identical in spirit
so far as they are written and legalised to protect definite rights of
the individuals.
When we will have crossed our Philadelphia, we would all be
holding documents that would specify a kind of a contractual
bindings between the users and the organisers. Within each zone,
region and net, Fidonet is composed of a different powerful
splinter groups, often with international links. Some of them are
registered organisations and therefore are legal entities with
definite obligations to their members. So, at every level, zonal, a
regional or net, Sysops and Points have a choice either to use an
existing organisation by making appropriate changes to its
statutes or even found a new organisation entirely based upon a
totally new constitution ... er statutes, that incorporate the Fidonet
Policies as its statutes.
If you are all interested, we can start doing our home work right
from now and bring out what YOU want on this historic
document and WHO you wish to be in charge of YOUR money
and YOUR E-Mail. I propose that we elect a governing body of
nine members who would initially manage the task of mobilising
the COST SHARING project. I will write about it separately. But,
in the meantime, please give some thought to what you have just
read and bring forward you ideas to your net, region and zone as
to we can realise this dream.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Open letter to ZCs and the IC
by JoHo, 2:270/17@fidonet
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 19 06 Sep 1993
Open letter to 1:1/0, 2:2/0, 3:3/0, 4:4/0, 5:5/0, 6:6/0, and the IC.
"Morality's not practical. Morality's a gesture. A complicated
gesture learned from books."
-- Robert Bolt
Gents, what exactly is going on here? I have received forwarded
messages that were written by Bob Satti (or appear to have been
since we don't have any widely used message authentication
mechanism yet :-) and been part of CC lists of messages written by
various NCs and RCs in Zone 1 and Zone 2.
Those from Zone 1 mostly indicate that illegal use of software is
not illegal unless proven by a US court of law. Those from Zone 2
mostly indicate that it is unacceptable that a node hold an entry
in the FidoNet nodelist if it is known that he/she distributes,
uses, or promotes the use of illegal software. I have not yet heard
from Z3, Z4, Z5, or the Z6 ZCs regarding this matter. Nor have I
heard anything from the IC.
I am not whining or complaining about something that only affects
me. Nor am I talking about what I think of various situations where
nodes have or have not been excommunicated for (what I would
consider) illegal use of software. This is not a matter of losing
sales or money. I know that many people have the opinion that I have
interests in many camps and from time to time get my wires crossed.
What IS illegal use of software. What IS promoting the use of
illegal or pirated software? What software is capable of falling
into this category?
I've heard things like "No, using a hacked copy of 'YowsaBBS' is not
illegal because it is not FidoNet software." But what if 'YowsaBBS'
has FidoNet NetMail or EchoMail capabilities, or allows the users to
access the FidoNet nodelist, does that make it FidoNet software?
I have never asked the NCs, RCs, or ZCs to act as the police or
watchdogs on my behalf. It is obvious that this is not the function
of any FidoNet official. But if a complaint is made about a person
running hacked software - FrontDoor for example - I think it IS the
business of FidoNet officials to uphold these complaints.
It is stated over and over again that FidoNet is an amateur network.
In which case, what does the US (or any nation's) justice system
have to do with an amateur network? A copyright is a copyright. It
is not a grey area of definitions that can be judged or interpreted
by means of personal opinions, or is it?
If a company is making excessive use of FidoNet, that company
usually gets a warning from a *C that this is not acceptable in an
attempt to maintain the integrity of the "amateur network". What is
the difference between that, and receiving a complaint that such and
such node or person may not use a certain piece of software because
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 20 06 Sep 1993
the software may only be used by private persons participating in an
amateur network; and that such and such node does not qualify as a
private person?
If software "SuperMailer" exist in several forms of which one is
clearly commercial and has a valid copyright; at the same time
"SuperMailer" exists in a noncommercial, freeware, and/or shareware
version. Why is it not considered illegal to run a hacked or patched
copy of "SuperMailer"?
If a system starts to distribute a mailer without an agreement with
the author(s), and charges money for the distribution (more than to
recover the cost of the distribution, i.e. a profit is being made),
is that not considered illegal by FidoNet policy until it has been
proved in a court of law?
Then why do we have that clause in the FidoNet policy? And if it is
to remain, why doesn't it state that this clause has no effect
unless the case has been proven in a court of law?
If I pick the lock to your front door, enter your house, steal a few
minor, just minor, things; and nobody sees me, is that not illegal?
Yes it is. I don't even have to steal anything for it to be
considered unlawful entry.
I'm sure I'm out of line, have used all the wrong examples, gotten
the picture wrong, and everything else that can be said about this
message.. so, with all due respect, GMAFB.
%JoHo%
joho@abs.lu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Whatza EDoorSys Do?
By Eddie Rowe, Fidonet 1:380/14
You've just downloaded this incredible "MUST HAVE" door for your
BBS users...Uh Oh, it wants some file called DOOR.SYS in order to
work. You scurry to your documentation (softcopy if you're lucky)
and search high and low for info on DOOR.SYS. Alas, your BBS can
only create a file called DORINFOx.DEF. 8-(
What to do, what to do...
Introducing EDoorSys -- a DORINFOx.DEF -> DOOR.SYS converter! EDoorSys
v1.00 is written for the DOS platform and obviously can be used with
the outstanding OS/2 operating system in a DOS session. EDoorSys is
written primarily for RBBS-PC sysops (which just happens to use the
DORINFOx.DEF file), but is NOT specific to RBBS-PC -- it is specific
to the standard DORINFOx.DEF file.
EDoorSys has been released into the SDSRBBS file distribution system
as EDORSYS1.LZH (10k), and may also be file requested from my system
using a "magic name" of EDOORSYS.
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 21 06 Sep 1993
========================================================================
Fidonews Information
========================================================================
------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION ----------------
Editors: Sylvia Maxwell, Donald Tees, Tim Pozar
Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell, Vince Perriello,
Tom Jennings
IMPORTANT NOTE: The FidoNet address of the FidoNews BBS has been
changed!!! Please make a note of this.
"FidoNews" BBS
FidoNet 1:1/23
BBS +1-519-570-4176, 300/1200/2400/14400/V.32bis/HST(DS)
Internet addresses:
Don & Sylvia (submission address)
editor@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
Sylvia -- max@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
Donald -- donald@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
Tim -- pozar@kumr.lns.com
(Postal Service mailing address) (have extreme patience)
FidoNews
172 Duke St. E.
Kitchener, Ontario
Canada
N2H 1A7
Published weekly by and for the members of the FidoNet international
amateur electronic mail system. It is a compilation of individual
articles contributed by their authors or their authorized agents. The
contribution of articles to this compilation does not diminish the
rights of the authors. Opinions expressed in these articles are those
of the authors and not necessarily those of FidoNews.
Authors retain copyright on individual works; otherwise FidoNews is
copyright 1993 Sylvia Maxwell. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or
distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in
other circumstances, please contact the original authors, or FidoNews
(we're easy).
OBTAINING COPIES: The-most-recent-issue-ONLY of FidoNews in electronic
form may be obtained from the FidoNews BBS via manual download or
Wazoo FileRequest, or from various sites in the FidoNet and Internet.
PRINTED COPIES may be obtained from Fido Software for $10.00US each
PostPaid First Class within North America, or $13.00US elsewhere,
mailed Air Mail. (US funds drawn upon a US bank only.)
INTERNET USERS: FidoNews is available via FTP from ftp.ieee.org, in
directory ~ftp/pub/fidonet/fidonews. If you have questions regarding
FidoNews 10-36 Page: 22 06 Sep 1993
FidoNet, please direct them to deitch@gisatl.fidonet.org, not the
FidoNews BBS. (Be kind and patient; David Deitch is generously
volunteering to handle FidoNet/Internet questions.)
SUBMISSIONS: You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in
FidoNews. Article submission requirements are contained in the file
ARTSPEC.DOC, available from the FidoNews BBS, or Wazoo filerequestable
from 1:1/23 as file "ARTSPEC.DOC". Please read it.
"Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered
trademarks of Tom Jennings, and are used with permission.
Asked what he thought of Western civilization,
M.K. Gandhi said, "I think it would be an excellent idea".
-- END
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink