519 lines
25 KiB
Plaintext
519 lines
25 KiB
Plaintext
F I D O N E W S -- Vol.10 No.50 (12-Dec-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..................................................... 1
|
||
2. Articles...................................................... 2
|
||
Reply to "Conflicts With Moderators"........................ 3
|
||
Dear Editor:................................................ 4
|
||
Region 25 - Who is pulling RC25's strings?.................. 5
|
||
Spanish Translation......................................... 8
|
||
3. Fidonews Information.......................................... 9
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
Editorial
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
FidoNews 10-50 Page: 2 12 Dec 1993
|
||
|
||
|
||
We have a slim issue this week. I am wondering what we will
|
||
do the inevitable week that we look in the inbound and THERE IS
|
||
NOTHING THERE! Send you the editorial by itself, I suppose.
|
||
Anyway, there was some netmail stuff to round out the one
|
||
article in the inbound.
|
||
|
||
hmmm. We have to have an editorial within the next two hours.
|
||
|
||
Demands for censorship continue. Aside from the rather
|
||
snide insinuation that we will censor his article because he
|
||
disagrees with us, Mr Hagin's article in this week's issue makes
|
||
some good points. In fact, we both share a number of his
|
||
concerns. But.
|
||
|
||
This whole cencorship issue bugs me. Why, exactly, is it
|
||
supposed to be wrong to say some things, and wrong to not say
|
||
other things? What's the diff between tasteful and tasty?
|
||
Legal and morbid? One language and another?
|
||
|
||
It's difficult enough for people to try to say what they mean at
|
||
all, without worrying about varieties of standards for
|
||
communicating. I can see why we need something like an Ascii
|
||
standard or a modem protocol or a pen, but how many other rules
|
||
do we truly require? No-one is going to get duplicate or
|
||
grunged messages because someone has posted or uploaded or
|
||
spawned words not welcomed by everyone.
|
||
|
||
i had an interesting experience at a party last night.
|
||
Normally, when i go to parties, i cleave to someone i know and
|
||
wait for them to do the talking while i follow around or nudge
|
||
into corners. But last night i was all over the place. I went
|
||
from room to room and person to person, having experiences.
|
||
|
||
I was sort of worried that i was making a fool of myself, saying
|
||
whatever came to my head to anyone stationed on my orbit from
|
||
room to room. I heard all kinds of stuff i wasn't expecting,
|
||
too. i had fun. I had more fun than i've ever had at a party.
|
||
|
||
If i'd had to worry about what i should say, rather than what i
|
||
wanted to say, i would not have had so much fun.
|
||
|
||
moral: taste words before spitting them out. Taste a little bit
|
||
of everything. Some you will swallow and some you won't.
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
Articles
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
FidoNews 10-50 Page: 3 12 Dec 1993
|
||
|
||
|
||
Reply to "Conflicts With Moderators"
|
||
An open reply to "Conflicts with echo moderators", FNEWSA49.
|
||
By Jeff Cochran, 1:371/26, Moderator 4SALE18
|
||
|
||
The original article by Jamie Adams brought up some concerns that
|
||
have been voiced to me several times by users, and as a moderator
|
||
(and a user) I have what Jamie would probably call an "egotistical"
|
||
attitude toward those concerns.
|
||
|
||
> I may be just missing a vital piece of policy that I should
|
||
> have read here but I was just wondering how to file a greivance
|
||
> (sp) or complaint against a heavy handed, dictator type of echo
|
||
> moderator.
|
||
|
||
The proper way, in *my* echo (yes, it is *my* echo) is to make
|
||
your grievance to me. I am the final arbiter, and whether you
|
||
get yourself cut from the echo or not, I'm still available by
|
||
netmail (though I do elect to ignore the annoying netmail). But
|
||
remember, if I cut you, I expect you to stay cut until I allow
|
||
you back. Though I honestly believe I won't cut anyone needlessly,
|
||
I'm only human and if you tick me off I might react with some
|
||
hostility.
|
||
|
||
> The current policies regarding
|
||
> moderators states that the moderator has final say in all
|
||
> matters concerning his/her echo. This is fine as long as the
|
||
> moderator is right and just. But what happens when the moderator
|
||
> isn't?
|
||
|
||
The moderator is always right, never wrong. That sounds harsh, but
|
||
Fidonet is not a democracy, nor even a just world. And in the case
|
||
of echo moderation, I don't believe it should be. (I do hold
|
||
elections for moderator in my echo each year, but that's more so
|
||
I can get out of the job some day.)
|
||
|
||
> There should be some recourse for egotistical moderators to be delt
|
||
> with. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is a fact. Read
|
||
> just about any echo on just about any network and you will find
|
||
> some moderator admonishing some user. Most times their right in
|
||
> doing so, but sometimes their not. Moderators aren't gods, their
|
||
> moderators.
|
||
|
||
Actually, within the world of their echo, they are God (or should
|
||
I say "god-like beings" to appease Joe who lost his Sunday school
|
||
job?) The echo reader does have the ultimate power though, they can
|
||
stop reading the echo. Think of it, if every user of an echo just
|
||
stopped reading it and posting, the fiendishly corrupt, evil and
|
||
egotistical moderator would have nothing to moderate. A god with
|
||
no worshippers has no power.
|
||
|
||
> There are also times when basic rights gauranteed by the
|
||
> constitution are denied. Freedom of expression for example.
|
||
|
||
You have no freedom of expression within Fidonet echos outside that
|
||
FidoNews 10-50 Page: 4 12 Dec 1993
|
||
|
||
granted by the moderator. The Constitution doesn't apply, after all,
|
||
you are free to start your own echo and moderate it the way you wish.
|
||
|
||
> What I was getting at is I wish you could publish an article
|
||
> on user rights, redress proceedures, etc. If any exist. If not
|
||
> we need some.
|
||
|
||
Why? For what reason should the user be granted any rights? They
|
||
have the right to not read or post in an echo, and the right to start
|
||
their own. That's enough.
|
||
|
||
> I realize that my claims are somewhat suspect because I don't
|
||
> produce proof to back them up but I decided to write this after
|
||
> reading many messages over a long time on many networks and
|
||
> didn't think to save them as I went along.
|
||
|
||
Not suspect at all, I've seen some of the moderation you describe.
|
||
In fact, I've seen a lot of it. I've even gone so far as to leave
|
||
a number of echos because of the moderators (SYSOP, HST, PC_CONSULT
|
||
and anything connected to Steve Winter come to mind). But I haven't
|
||
ever whined or complained or filed a policy complaint. And despite
|
||
my leaving, none of those echos has died. There were always enough
|
||
fools that followed the moderator-gods to keep the echos flowing.
|
||
|
||
And that's the beauty of Fidonet. One size fits all, no matter what
|
||
the user's economic, political, sexual or religious standards might
|
||
be. They're free to access any of 600+ discussion areas, and if they
|
||
don't like the content, they're just as free to shut them off. If
|
||
the choice is too restrictive, they can start their own echo. And if
|
||
enough users believe the same way, a new Echo-God will arise and
|
||
settle in as the benevolent dictator they always hated.
|
||
|
||
Works for me.
|
||
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Dear Editor:
|
||
From: Daniel Hagan (1:381/61)
|
||
|
||
Note: If you care to place this in Fidonews you may...although I
|
||
doubt you will.
|
||
|
||
Dear Editor:
|
||
|
||
I can understand your reasoning in trying to allow "freedom of the
|
||
press", but there comes a point where common sense must be exercised.
|
||
As editor, it is your responsibility to overview the article
|
||
submissions and *NOT* just to be looking for ARTSPEC.DOC infractions.
|
||
I'm sure someone could write a program to handle that task if that's
|
||
all there is to your position.
|
||
|
||
Case in point: Your local newspaper has a "Letter to the Editor"
|
||
section which is as close as it comes to a Fidonews type delivery.
|
||
In that area, even though you are free to express whatever thoughts
|
||
you have on a subject, articles like those published in recent and
|
||
FidoNews 10-50 Page: 5 12 Dec 1993
|
||
|
||
past Fidonews would never make print. Why? Because it is assumed you
|
||
should be able to make your point without resorting to the types of
|
||
terms used in the .A46 release. Freedom of speech, YES...freedom to
|
||
print whatever arrives merely for "shock" value, NO!
|
||
|
||
As editor(s) of Fidonews, you should consider resigning the position
|
||
due to malfeasance. Fidonet is supposed to be a community network.
|
||
Its official publication should also follow suit with its overall
|
||
appearance and content matter being much like that of a community
|
||
newspaper or publication. In short, acceptable to all age groups.
|
||
|
||
I would appreciate a response as to whether or not these types of
|
||
articles can be expected in the future. As NC for my net, I am
|
||
required to "make Fidonews available" and that it may even "encourage
|
||
new sysops to join Fidonet." Currently, Fidonews is available to my
|
||
net via TICK and is also available to users as an article as well as
|
||
a download. If these types of articles are going to continue, I will
|
||
still "make Fidonews available" as required by Policy 4, however it
|
||
will be by File Request only and no copies will be available to users
|
||
off of my system. I will also discontinue collecting back issues as
|
||
I currently do.
|
||
|
||
Daniel Hagan
|
||
Net_381 NC
|
||
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Region 25 - Who is pulling RC25's strings?
|
||
Oliver Clarke (2:252/150)
|
||
|
||
I hesitate to increase the bandwidth on the subject of Region 25, but
|
||
I've just read Keith Wassell's apologia for GeoNets, and feel I
|
||
cannot let some of his comments pass:
|
||
|
||
KW > REORGANISATION - WHO IS FOOLING WHO
|
||
|
||
Indeed!
|
||
|
||
KW> However, This has caused a 'Snowball' effect in the UK, with less and
|
||
KW> less emphasis on Policy adherence. For instance, it is now impossible
|
||
KW> to make a policy complaint in the UK, as there is no way to uphold it.
|
||
|
||
It is rare for a Policy complaint, but that has more to do with the
|
||
bankrupt RC & ZC's (and even some NC's), who act out of self-interest
|
||
rather than acting for the benefit of all. Nets that are not
|
||
completely geographically organised do not prevent Policy complaints
|
||
from being upheld.
|
||
|
||
GeoNets permit the power-mongers to play their games at everyone
|
||
else's expense, because an unscrupulous NC now has the power to deny
|
||
someone membership of FidoNet for the wrong reasons. The fact is that
|
||
under GeoNets a prospective sysop has only one net he can join, and
|
||
if the NC refuses him a nodenumber for any reason, he is denied
|
||
communication. Yes, avenues of appeal exist, but how many
|
||
*prospective* sysops know the ropes enough to take advantage of them,
|
||
FidoNews 10-50 Page: 6 12 Dec 1993
|
||
|
||
let alone win his case if he's been treated unfairly. (What is more,
|
||
a prospective sysop is nobody according to Policy, and he has no
|
||
rights under policy whatsoever). In every issue, the pages of
|
||
FidoNews are littered with cases of sysops with a lot of experience
|
||
who have been unable to gain redress via a policy complaint when they
|
||
knew Policy back-to-front and were right, simply because the *C
|
||
structure tend to close ranks when threatened. RC's tend to support
|
||
NC's whatever the rights of the case, and, let's face it, an NC is
|
||
easily going to be able to dress up his spurious objection to a
|
||
prospective sysop in plausible language.
|
||
|
||
If geographical nets are not enforced, however, and a sysop is
|
||
refused a nodenumber on spurious grounds, he can simply apply to
|
||
another net. If accepted there, he is now in a far better position
|
||
from which to pursue a policy complaint against the original
|
||
offending NC, and is likely to have the support and advice of members
|
||
of his net.
|
||
|
||
KW> Indeed, it has lead to situations where certain NC's will try to
|
||
KW> avoid taking a node because of their 'Persuasions' or 'Personality'.
|
||
KW> So much for the level playing field where anyone can join regardless
|
||
KW> of race, creed, sexual persuasion etc.....
|
||
|
||
I think very few people would agree with any NC refusing a node
|
||
admittance on any those grounds, but that is really a completely
|
||
different question to the *node* having freedom of choice. What about
|
||
a solution whereby an NC was obliged to accept an compliant
|
||
application from someone within his notional area, but would have the
|
||
option of accepting a compliant application from someone outside his
|
||
area. The NC has little freedom of choice where someone in his area
|
||
is concerned, but the rights of a prospective sysop are better
|
||
protected. I'll go further, as many in R25 have suggested: What about
|
||
a compromise whereby existing nodes could move back to their local
|
||
net if they wished or stay where they were, but new nodes would be
|
||
directed to their local net. Given the exponential growth of FidoNet
|
||
(until the Zone 2 power games, that is), this would probably mean
|
||
that R25 was 95% "GeoNet" within a very short space of time.
|
||
|
||
Once again, the duty imposed on an NC is a completely different
|
||
question to the ability of a node to choose.
|
||
|
||
KW> IMHO, selective entry into networks is not desirable. The only way to
|
||
KW> get a good and balanced mix is for people to be spread evenly across
|
||
KW> the networks, and Geonets provides this. Its not good for the future
|
||
KW> of Fidonet for people to become polarised within networks. What
|
||
KW> happens when all the Fascists go into one net; All the Catholics into
|
||
KW> another.
|
||
|
||
That doesn't exist, and not imposing Geonets does not make it
|
||
remotely likely that it will. Is it really good for FidoNet (whatever
|
||
Policy thinks of the democratic principle) for a few NC's, the RC and
|
||
the ZC to force something on the sysops of a region, which only a few
|
||
people actually want, many oppose violently, and which results in a
|
||
large section of that Region disappearing from the worldwide
|
||
nodelist? I hardly think that is what Policy wants.
|
||
FidoNews 10-50 Page: 7 12 Dec 1993
|
||
|
||
|
||
KW> The Reorganisation will smash down these barriers of 'Selectivity'
|
||
KW> that have built up. There will be howls of protest at this you can be
|
||
KW> assured but its TRUE !.
|
||
|
||
Documented examples of prospective nodes refused admittance to their
|
||
local net on non-technical grounds please... I don't know of a single
|
||
one. Even if Keith can come up with a couple of them in the past few
|
||
years, to read the paragraph above you'd think it was happening 3
|
||
times a week. Come to that, why has Keith not helped those wronged
|
||
prospective nodes from pursuing policy complaints from these
|
||
"selective" NC's? The fact is that [1] it is very rare for anything
|
||
like that to happen (and I agree it should never happen), [2] Geonets
|
||
will not prevent it from happening (Policy states *now* that the
|
||
grounds for refusing a nodenumber should be technical ones and if the
|
||
*C structure won't protect wronged nodes *now*, I really cannot see
|
||
what difference enforced Geonets for existing nodes is going to
|
||
make), and [3] Geonets reduces the options and rights of someone
|
||
wronged in this fashion in that they are not free to seek a
|
||
node-number elsewhere.
|
||
|
||
KW> There will be elections for NC's and RC again within region 25. Its just
|
||
KW> there are a few wrongs to be sorted, and Geonets is a means to that end.
|
||
|
||
On the contrary, it's a clear attempt to restrict the ability of the
|
||
"grunt" sysop to stand up to a bunch of unscrupulous *C's who want to
|
||
concentrate very considerable power in their hands, power which
|
||
Policy does not intend them to have.
|
||
|
||
KW> Within the light of the abuses highlighted above,
|
||
|
||
What abuses? Keith hasn't given a shred of evidence that there has
|
||
been a single genuine case of abuse.
|
||
|
||
KW> (and here is the REAL admission 8-))
|
||
|
||
Comes as no surprise to *anyone* in R25...
|
||
|
||
KW> Some people were delighted, others were non committal, others said No
|
||
KW> way, and some were just downright rude !.
|
||
|
||
I can count the people who are publicly delighted with Geonets on the
|
||
fingers of 2 hands. A lot of people were non-committal, because the
|
||
changes wouldn't directly affect them. The size of the people who
|
||
were against can be judged by the numbers in the Classic 25 nodelist!
|
||
Some of the main people who have resorted to bad language over the
|
||
past 6 months have been the arch-proponents of Geonets such as Peter
|
||
Burnett and Keith Wassell! A region-wide vote was organised on
|
||
whether or not to submit a proposed local Policy for R25 to the IC,
|
||
and whilst the turnout was not spectacular it was larger than any
|
||
recent RC election, and the vote was massively (over 85% I seem to
|
||
remember) in favour of submitting a local policy for adoption which
|
||
would have made the enforcement of Geonets unnecessary because of
|
||
telco condition in the UK.
|
||
|
||
FidoNews 10-50 Page: 8 12 Dec 1993
|
||
|
||
KW> culminating in the unpleasant spectacle of RC25 reduced to the level
|
||
KW> of telling certain people to 'Fuck off' in public echomail.
|
||
|
||
Peter Burnett has been doing that a lot longer than the past few
|
||
months! :-)
|
||
|
||
KW> This, it must be pointed out, occurred after there was an election in
|
||
KW> NET 258, where it had been pointed out that if a candidate outside
|
||
KW> the NET258 Geo-catchment area won the election he would not be
|
||
KW> appointed NC. In the event that is what happened.
|
||
|
||
...and *STILL* the RC won't take the hint as to how deeply unpopular his
|
||
actions are...
|
||
|
||
KW> Finally, we came to a point where the Anti-Geo people said that they
|
||
KW> would compromise along the lines of Natural wastage, i.e New nodes
|
||
KW> strictly Geo, but existing nodes don't have to move.
|
||
|
||
That proposal has been "on the table" for a very long time. A couple
|
||
of years ago when I was briefly NC250, that was being seriously
|
||
suggested by a number of NC's *then*, and a number of NC's were
|
||
actually *doing* that at the time. It has *always* been an option,
|
||
and remains one now, one which will effectively achieve what the
|
||
Geo-Netters want, although over a longer time- span, one which will
|
||
hurt nobody, get very few people's backs up, and which will not
|
||
result is a large section of Region 25 disappearing from the
|
||
worldwide nodelist.
|
||
|
||
Why won't RC25 listen to more than his own little clique? Why cannot
|
||
he accept a compromise solution? Could there be an ulterior motive
|
||
here? I will leave you to judge...
|
||
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Spanish Translation
|
||
From: Richard Browne (1:273/323)
|
||
|
||
In the latest FidoNews (21 Nov 93), there is a poem and article in
|
||
Spanish. The poem, which was referring for the struggle for freedom in
|
||
Argentina, and elsewhere, went:
|
||
|
||
Hay hombres que luchan un dia y son buenos.
|
||
Hay hombres que luchan un ano y son mejores.
|
||
Hay quienes luchan mucho anos y son muy buenos,
|
||
Pero hay quienes luchan toda la vida,
|
||
esos son los imprescindibles.
|
||
(Bertolt Brecht)
|
||
|
||
Translation:
|
||
|
||
There are men who fight one day and are good.
|
||
There are men who fight one year and are better.
|
||
There are some who fight many years and they are better still.
|
||
But there are some that fight their whole lives,
|
||
these are the ones that are indespensable.
|
||
FidoNews 10-50 Page: 9 12 Dec 1993
|
||
|
||
(Bertolt Brecht)
|
||
|
||
The translator thought the last word meant invincible, instead of
|
||
indespensable, which made a big difference in the spirit of the poem.
|
||
The article, itself, was very well translated.
|
||
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
========================================================================
|
||
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
|
||
128 Church St.
|
||
Kitchener, Ontario
|
||
Canada
|
||
N2H 2S4
|
||
|
||
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
|
||
FidoNews 10-50 Page: 10 12 Dec 1993
|
||
|
||
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.fidonet.org, in
|
||
directory ~ftp/pub/fidonet/fidonews. If you have questions regarding
|
||
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
|
||
----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|