informis/textfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
textfiles/bbs/FIDONET/FIDONEWS/fido1528.nws
root@procul 278a90f7ce Initial commit
2021-04-15 13:31:59 -05:00

2002 lines
86 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 -- Volume 15, Number 28 13 July 1998
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| The newsletter of the | ISSN 1198-4589 Published by: |
| FidoNet community | "FidoNews" |
| _ | 1-209-251-7529 [1:1/23] |
| / \ | |
| /|oo \ | |
| (_| /_) | |
| _`@/_ \ _ | |
| | | \ \\ | Editor: |
| | (*) | \ )) | Zorch Frezberg 1:205/1701 |
| |__U__| / \// | |
| _//|| _\ / | |
| (_/(_|(____/ | |
| (jm) | Newspapers should have no friends. |
| | -- JOSEPH PULITZER |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Submission address: FidoNews Editor 1:1/23 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| MORE addresses: |
| |
| submissions=> editor@fidonews.org |
| |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| For information, copyrights, article submissions, |
| obtaining copies of FidoNews or the internet gateway FAQ |
| please refer to the end of this file. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
In the Kingdom of the Blind...
Table of Contents
1. EDITORIAL ................................................ 1
2. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR .................................... 3
3. ARTICLES ................................................. 6
Z1C tries to bully Z1R10 refugees ........................ 6
Region 25 Has a New REC .................................. 7
The Story of Statistics .................................. 7
Zone 1 Region 10 nodes speak out ......................... 9
4. COLUMNS .................................................. 14
The rancid reek of Zorch's vendettas ..................... 14
5. NOTICES .................................................. 29
Future History ........................................... 29
6. FIDONEWS PUBLIC-KEY ...................................... 30
FidoNews PGP Public-Key Listing .......................... 30
7. FIDONET BY INTERNET ...................................... 31
8. FIDONEWS INFORMATION ..................................... 34
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 1 13 Jul 1998
=================================================================
EDITORIAL
=================================================================
More of the same, just weirder. A serious eye problem has kept me
from doing much with computer screens for the past week, but it is
slowly healing....enough for me to scan over the usual and see that
the same continues...and perhaps a bit more keenly...
This week, the same perceptions are brought forward, while more goes
on in the background...perhaps it's time to bring some of it forward.
After looking over Cindy Ingersoll's list published here last week,
I find it interesting to note that nearly every Zone 1 node that
offers Fidonet via Internet charges for access, but nearly every
non-Zone 1 node does not.
This at a time when Fidonet is shrinking in Zone 1, but growing in
other countries, and despite the fact that Internet access is cheaper
in Zone 1 than anywhere in the world. For that matter, so is
telephone service, computer equipment, and everything else involved
in running a BBS.
It's hard not to attribute a cause-and-effect relationship to this
correlation but I suppose I can manage.
After all, the Stars manage, no?
Likewise, the consistent threat of at least one such provider to 'no
longer carry FidoNews' if it contravenes that person's 'view' as to
what the FidoNews should or should not publish, carry or cover has
worn thin. The less-than-veiled threat of censorship by not carrying
FidoNews only makes the threat more visible for what it is...plain,
simple censorship.
Besides, without the FidoNews, that same provider would not have a
own platform to spew forth a version of hate, innuendo and less than
complete truth...as much an accusation as has been slung at this
Editor by the same person.
I suppose no one will truly be happy until the Snooze is controlled
by a group devoted to their own agenda...or until their coalition of
convenience breaks down.
Likewise, the comments on vendettas and other alleged pogroms being
carried out by this Editor pale compared to the same vendettas and
pogroms being carried out by our long-time columnist, and in his own
published column...but, then, I suppose it is acceptable until your
own ox is gored, no?
In the same vein, it is also interesting to see a pair of articles
submitted by someone who has openly declared that FidoNet Policy is
but merely a 'suggestion'...then acts to have that same Policy used
to protect his own agenda.
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 2 13 Jul 1998
One note: Didn't David Hallford publicly declare he would never
return to FidoNet so long as Bob Kohl was in a coordinator post?
How odd, as well, that the happy neighbors of the late Roy Rogers
have pulled up stakes and moved to Canada from California...but, then
again, the same persons behind the move also have distinct problems
in following Policy as well, so perhaps it is a good thing to keep
them all together.
After all, trying and convicting people by the court of 'public
opinion' is so much more convenient than getting both sides of a
story.
In brighter news, Damian Walker has published election results in
from Zone 2's recent elections...and we've published the first page
of available Fido-Over-IP listings, since the Falcon site went 'dark'
in Region 50.
And, with great appreciation and honor, I'd like to point out a new
FidoNews site in Estonia, a former holding of the defunct Soviet
Union, which is translating the FidoNews into the Estonian language.
As well as the sister site in Sweden, we see two sysops willing to
translate the FidoNews for their own members in their own languages.
Translation is a time-consuming and tedious prospect, especially to
those who are not truly fluent in the other language; the efforts of
these sysops should not go unrecognized, either within their own Zone
or by FidoNet itself.
As with the other listed sites performing similar translations to
present Fido information in native languages, it is an honor and
privilege to see that those sites in the other Zones still observe
the original mission of FidoNet...communication, at a lower cost and
convenience to all.
Perhaps Zone 1 can learn from this before it allows politics to tear
it apart, hmmmmm?
-zf-
### 30 ###
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 3 13 Jul 1998
=================================================================
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
=================================================================
"MISDIRECTION -- TOO GOOD TO STOP NOW"
by Ben Hamilton, FidoNet 1:124/7008
bk> First point, the ZEC duties were written with input not only
bk> from the RECs, but from the sysops of Z1 themselves. There was
bk> no single author to the list.
Bob Kohl was the lone original author of the list. It was he who
wrote the first draft and then submitted it to all for their
comments.
I have since changed the way I refer to the ZEC duties. I now say:
"The ZEC duties, as originally written by Bob Kohl, amended and
approved by the RECC, and sanctioned by the ZC." Hopefully that
covers all of the bases. :-)
bk> More to the point is some of the RECs convenient use of the
bk> list selectively without "remembering" that the list also
bk> notes the use of an interim ZEC.
So?
bk> When I was elected, I started sending out netmail looking for
bk> a replacement for the Elist keeper. In the end, there were two
bk> individuals that were working on a replacement for the Elist:
bk> Thom (the appointed replacement Elist keeper), and Marshall
bk> Presnell. Marshall is a professional software engineer and has
bk> been for years. Marshall was also a Fidonet sysop for many many
bk> years. He offered to help and, as Thom was, in the process of
bk> building an Elist replacement. As things progressed, I
bk> continued to give feedback on the issue to the ZC in an
bk> impartial manner as I felt I was expected to.
Without consulting or informing the RECs in any way.
Yes, Bob Kohl chose to keep the information about Marshall's project
a secret from the RECC. The RECC could have made a more informed
decision on the best replacement for the echolist if it had been
properly informed of any and all projects that any *ECs knew of.
bk> In the end, Thom was selected by Bob, and my congratulations
bk> or condolences as the case maybe.
Amen!
BH> As I must continually remind you because the editor keeps
BH> asking, Kohl's first act after winning the ZEC election was to
BH> ask the RECC how he should go about removing an NEC from office.
BH> He did remove the NEC.
bk> Wrong, as noted both in the REC echo and in other echos the
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 4 13 Jul 1998
bk> question was one that was brought to me by the *C side and
bk> possibly looking for an alternative to the normal means of
bk> an RC dealing with the issue.
What's wrong? The NEC *was* removed from office. That is a fact.
If Bob Kohl was not also an RC, there would be no issue, since ZECs
cannot remove NEC flags from the nodelist.
bk> There is nothing wrong with looking for an alternative means
bk> to deal with an issue except of course when it's turned around
bk> to make it look like there's political motivation involved.
Bob Kohl has said many times that he does not discuss his RC duties
in the REC echo, yet above he says that he brought up the issue
himself. Both cannot be correct.
If the motivation was not political, I invite Bob Kohl to explain
what the reasons were for the removal of the NEC flag.
BH> He soon removed an NC.
bk> I'd like everyone to remember Ben's statement that what goes
bk> on in Reg 10 is none of his business. Sounded good at the
bk> time, didn't it?
It still sounds good now! I'd like to remind Bob Kohl of the entire
statement about Region 10, as it was posted a few weeks ago in Fido-
News:
BH> Region 10 business, frankly, is none of our business. However,
BH> things that happen in Region 10 do make it easy to see what can
BH> happen when the "multiple hats" suggestion in Policy 4 is
BH> ignored.
Translation:
I am by no means interested in the internal workings of Region 10 so
that I can change them. I am only interested in them because it
proves that if Bob Kohl acts this destructive in his own region, it
is bound to overflow into his Zone duties. That is when it is
important to me.
BH> His REC quit, saying that he could no longer stand working with
BH> Kohl.
bk> Ben's memory of the time line is a bit shakey. The REC quit
bk> before any action about this issue took place.
Time is not the issue. The REC did quit because he could not stand
working under Bob Kohl's thumb. That is a fact.
BH> He disclosed some in-transit netmail.
bk> Ben also likes to paint with a very broad brush. There were
bk> two complaints brought up. One was dismissed, the other was
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 5 13 Jul 1998
bk> explained and apologized for. Someone sent me netmail and I
bk> cc'ed Bob Satti when I responded.
The fact is that the netmail was not "to" Bob Kohl. And:
bk> While technically it is disclosing in-transit mail, ...
Bob Kohl admits to disclosing in-transit netmail. The sender and
recipient probably do not care if it was "technical" or not, and
I do not think that the writers of FidoNet's policy did either, else
they might have written the section on in-transit mail differently,
perhaps choosing to cover this exact situation.
I suppose it just goes to show that Bob Kohl cannot be trusted with
the confidentiality of any netmail passing through his system, so
everyone would be wise to use other more private means of transport,
as suggested in policy.
BH> Are these the actions of a active, effective, responsible ZEC?
BH> Can you honestly say "yes" in good conscience?
bk> Is this the same Ben Hamilton that suggested to a sysop that
bk> he should change his node number to poll someone? Using an
bk> unissued nodenumber? Ben should spend a moment reading P4.
I have read P4 many times. I suggested to a sysop that he change his
node number to something that a new sysop might use, like /9999, long
enough to determine whether or not Bob Kohl had him passworded out of
his system or not. There is no harm in that, as no mail transfer
would be taking place, and the rest of the sysop information (sysop
name, location, etc.) would still be passed.
It should also be noted that, if Bob Kohl did indeed password this
sysop out of his system without his knowledge, this entire procedure
would not be necessary. Since Bob Kohl will not answer (or has not
yet answered) whether or not he did password out this sysop, we may
never know the truth.
If the truth is that the problem was elsewhere, I would appreciate
an explanation so that I can offer an apology.
bk> I find it interesting that [Ben Hamilton is] now suggesting
bk> behavior that is generally frowned upon or considered illegal
bk> per P4.
I encourage Bob Kohl to quote the section of policy that states that
my suggestion is unacceptable.
-Ben Hamilton
FidoNet 1:124/7008
Internet: ben.hamilton@compconn.net
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 6 13 Jul 1998
=================================================================
ARTICLES
=================================================================
Z1C tries to bully Z1R10 refugees
by Dave Beach, 1:163/222
An entire net in Zone 1 Region 10 recently voted unanimously that
they had seen enough of their region and wanted to go somewhere they
thought they'd be appreciated in Fidonet. Region 12 accepted them as
net 1:2404.
In a similar development, Region 12 accepted as a Regional
Independent node the former Regional Echomail Coordinator of Z1R10,
who had been hounded out of Fidonet by Bob Kohl, the present (and
perpetual?) Z1R10C.
Eager readers may wish to refer to another article submitted for this
issue, which documents a survey in which 74.2% of respondants
indicated that they were not satisfied with Bob Kohl representing
them as their Regional Coordinator.
These nodelist developments were reflected in nodelist.191. Welcome
1:12/120 and net 1:2404, Region 12 is pleased you wanted to become
part of our little corner of Fidonet.
The Zone 1 Coordinator, Bob Satti, recently had this to say about
the issue:
BS> I notice you have 'adopted' an R10 node as an RI (independent),
BS> and an R10 network in total. I was not consulted about either
BS> of these items, and I doubt that RC10 was consulted.
BS> I'll come straight to the point...
BS> I want to see a segment arrive here from you before next
BS> Thursday's (July 16th, 1998) nodelist production with the
BS> aforementioned network AND the RI items deleted.
BS> These nodes are not to stay (or reappear) in your segment
BS> unless the RCC overrules me on this matter.
I'm not sure why Bob Satti thinks that Fidonet sysops are his
subjects, bound to accept his dictates, but he's surely forgotten
that Fidonet is a loose collection of sysops and systems who share
some common goals, and is not about forcing them into political
subdivisions because you're a Coordinator-for-life and have
decided that means you must Exercise Power Over Your People.
Perhaps rather than use bullying tactics to force sysops to
do something they've collectively and unanimously decided they
don't want, Bob Satti's time would be better spent analyzing
what's going so tragically wrong in Z1R10 that would prompt an
entire network to thumb its nose at its regional nodelist clerk.
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 7 13 Jul 1998
Eager readers may wish to refer to another article submitted for this
issue, which documents a survey in which a majority of respondants
indicated that they were not satisfied with Bob Satti representing
them as their Zone Coordinator.
It's up to you, Bob. Will you acknowledge that the "command and
control" philosophy that you and some of your colleagues on the
Zone 1 RC Council have promoted and promulgated are running this
Zone headlong into oblivion, or will you sit back while it happens,
secure in the knowledge that when the last Zone 1 sysop calls it
quits at least you'll still be "in charge"?
### 30 ###
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Region 25 Has a New REC
Damian Walker, 2:2502/666
Occasionally I see requests from international moderators for
information on getting echomail to and from region 25, better known
to some as the UK. So I thought it might be appropriate to post in
Fidonews the summarised results of our recent REC election. The
positions were:
1st. John Burden 41 votes
2nd. Steven Gare 14 votes
Congratulations to John Burden and commiserations to Steven Gare.
John Burden's address is 2:255/1, although shortly he should be
contactable at the region's standard REC address, 2:25/10. I hope
someone finds this information useful.
### 30 ###
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Story of Statistics
by Bob Kohl, 1:102/861
> Zone 1 Region 10 nodes speak out on the issue of the recent
> "election" for Z1R10C
> by Dave Beach, 1:163/222
> On the subject of the recent Zone 1 R10C "election", the Z1C,
> Bob Satti, made recent statements in the Z1C echo that indicated
> that he had his finger on the pulse of Z1R10, and that anybody
> who questioned him on the issues simply didn't have all the
> information.
Interesting to note that, unlike Dave Beach or Doc (Gossip Queen)
Logger, the ZC does take the time to look at both sides of an
issue and, of course, the facts. It would seem that the self-
appointed Guardians Of Fidonet up in net 163 do not have those
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 8 13 Jul 1998
capabilities given their preference for "Trial by public
opinion, hearsay and innuendo".
> Bowing to growing public pressure to do something
> about a system that has him maintained in office with the support
> of unelected, appointed Regional Coordinators,
Of course Dave and Doc forget that there are many elected RCs
since it serves their purpose better to misrepresent this fact.
> began. Only NCs in the region were eligible to vote, and Bob Kohl
As is the favored way of many Fidonet sysops including several from
their admin friends in southern regions.
> had spent the last couple of months replacing NCs with which, as
> Z1R10C, he had decided he "couldn't work".
Ahh yes! The use of 'facts according to Dave'. Got to hand it to
him, since he seems to have no shame. There was only 1 NC replaced
for the mentioned reason. In fact during the course of my term as RC
there have only been two "active" NCs replaced.
Both the NCs that were replaced could be counted on to vote against
me in the RC 10 election due to the influence that the old NCs have
in their respective nets. One of the old NCs and the past NEC run
their echomail feeds for free. A healthy influence on the way that
the sysops of the net think since bribery is an well established
source of influence down through the ages.
> Needless to say, Bob Satti's handpicked incumbent, Bob Kohl, was
> the successful candidate.
I'm sure that Dave couldn't possible accept the fact that there are
many NCs in Reg 10 that seem to little if any problems in the way
Reg 10 has worked these past years.
> for each warm body in Region 10 minus the Network Coordinators.
> The survey forms were all host-routed through the recipients'
> respective NCs.
> 36 replies were received, of which one was from an NC who had
> mistakenly been sent a survey form (and whose reply was therefore
36 replies! Wow, now there's a real representation of the region with
many times that number in sysops. It's interesting to note that Dave
little submission to the Snooze and in the echos runs almost on a par
with those of Spiro Agnew many years ago.
It would also due to note that the number of "dissatisfied" sysops
runs roughly about this same number and the "infamous" list server
had about just this many particpants. What a coincidence! I'd have
to say that Dave took this survey into net 2004 before they decided
to "go north", chuckle...he needed those numbers.
Yep, nice to know that Dave thinks that roughly 10% of a region is a
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 9 13 Jul 1998
true repesentation of that region's opinion.
Besides Dave, please don't bother to tip-toe around that fact that
Bob Satti is not on your list. We've known that you have wanted him
and at least two other RCs out for some time now along with some
of the other misfits and gossip queens that are local to you. Nor
do we need Ben Hamilton's hypocrisy towards other region's affairs.
Below is a rather typical response from a Reg 10 sysop towards
Dave's little poll:
Msg # 193 Kill/Sent
Date: 27 Jun 98 10:19:38
From: Joe Nicholson
To: All
Subj: Outside interference
_____________________________________________________________________
Did anyone other than NET202 receive netmail with a survey from
Dave Beach in Canada? We don't need interference in R10 from
any other region, and I refuse to answer when the person who
asked Beach to conduct the survey refuses to identify himself.
I think he's a yellow-bellied, chicken-livered skunk to hide
behind Beach.
... 9-1-1 makes firefighters come.
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
--- GEcho 1.00
* Origin: 9-1-1 San Diego's HOTTEST BBS (619) 441-9679 (1:202/911)
SEEN-BY: 10/2 3 102/2 125 861 103/328 125/5109 161/84 202/5 701 707
SEEN-BY: 202/746 800 805 911 1100 1330 1401 1601 203/3333 205/1701
SEEN-BY: 207/0 208/1 212/1002 213/213 218/907 219/300 345/0 2004/209
3000sl/001347
BK
### 30 ###
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Zone 1 Region 10 nodes speak out on the issue of the recent
"election" for Z1R10C
by Dave Beach, 1:163/222
On the subject of the recent Zone 1 R10C "election", the Z1C,
Bob Satti, made recent statements in the Z1C echo that indicated
that he had his finger on the pulse of Z1R10, and that anybody
who questioned him on the issues simply didn't have all the
information. Bowing to growing public pressure to do something
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 10 13 Jul 1998
about a system that has him maintained in office with the support
of unelected, appointed Regional Coordinators, he called an
"election" for the position of Z1R10C and provided the sysops with
a mere couple of days in which to nominate candidates before voting
began. Only NCs in the region were eligible to vote, and Bob Kohl
had spent the last couple of months replacing NCs with which, as
Z1R10C, he had decided he "couldn't work". Needless to say, Bob
Satti's handpicked incumbent, Bob Kohl, was the successful
candidate.
In order to try and verify the statements that Bob Satti made, a
survey of Z1R10 nodes was commissioned.
Some 339 survey forms were sent out, the intent being to account
for each warm body in Region 10 minus the Network Coordinators.
The survey forms were all host-routed through the recipients'
respective NCs.
36 replies were received, of which one was from an NC who had
mistakenly been sent a survey form (and whose reply was therefore
not counted), one was a completely blank netmail other than header
info and kludge lines (a request for clarification was sent, no
reply received), one was from a node who claimed utter and complete
apathy, and two were demands to know what right I had to be asking
Region 10 sysops for their opinions on anything. Despite persistent
rumours that a Region 10 NC netmailed my NC and RC demanding to
know what I was doing "butting into Region 10 business", I never
did hear from her myself.
The responses break down as follow:
----------------
| Question (1) |
----------------
Are you aware that it's common practice in other Regions to have
direct sysop voting for the RC position?
Yes 51.6%
No 45.2%
Other 0.03%
----------------
| Question (2) |
----------------
Do you feel that your Network Coordinator adequately consulted you
for your views prior to casting his/her vote in the election?
Yes 87.1%
No 12.9%
----------------
| Question (3) |
----------------
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 11 13 Jul 1998
Were you informed by your Network Coordinator as to how his/her
vote was cast?
Yes 90.3%
No 9.7%
----------------
| Question (4) |
----------------
Are you in agreement with how your Network Coordinator cast his/her
vote?
Yes 83.9%
No 9.7%
Other 6.5%
"Can't answer since he won't tell me which way he voted. It was
top secret..."
"don't know, [he] refuses to say how he voted."
----------------
| Question (5) |
----------------
The Zone 1 Coordinator, Bob Satti, has stated that he called the
kind of election that he preferred. Are you in agreement with the
way this election was conducted?
Yes 12.9%
No 87.1%
"As all but two of the NC's of this region are all appointed or
grandfathered in by the RC, a NC only vote only showed the
support of those NC's who are afraid of or in cahoots with Bob
Kohl."
"There was little if any communication."
----------------
| Question (6) |
----------------
Would you have preferred to have the opportunity to directly cast
your own vote in the RC election?
Yes 87.1%
No 9.7%
Other 3.2%
----------------
| Question (7) |
----------------
Are you aware that there has been at least one policy complaint
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 12 13 Jul 1998
filed against Bob Kohl relating to his disclosure of in-transit
netmail, and that the Zone 1 Regional Echomail Coordinator Council
has voted overwhelmingly that they do not support Bob Kohl in one
of his other capacities, that of Zone 1 Echomail Coordinator?
Yes 80.6%
No 19.4%
----------------
| Question (8) |
----------------
Are you satisfied with Bob Kohl representing you as Region 10
Coordinator?
Yes 12.9%
No 74.2%
Other 12.9%
"Bob Kohl does NOT belong in any administration position within
Fidonet."
"He does his job (for the most part) but his people skills
suck, he can never give a clear answer, and he holds personal
grudges."
----------------
| Question (9) |
----------------
Are you satisfied with Bob Satti representing you as Zone 1
Coordinator?
Yes 32.3%
No 51.6%
Other 16.1%
"I thought I was at first. The more I see, the less I believe
he is what a ZC should be."
"I feel he is (sic) been one sided in the RC10 mater (sic) and
should now also step down."
-----------------
| Question (10) |
-----------------
May the commissioners of this survey match you with your responses
as part of the compilation and publication processes (if you answer
no, your identity will be kept confidential, provided you don't
route your answer through someone who might divulge the contents of
in-transit netmail)?
Yes 80.6%
No 19.4%
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 13 13 Jul 1998
"Just don't get me thrown out... He has done that to net xxx
and without regard if it hurts Fido or a Network in general."
---------------------
| General comments: |
---------------------
"It would have been nice to have a more advanced noticed (sic) to
the election. I believe several sysops may not have had an
opportunity to voice their opinions with their Net coordinators."
"I am leaving Fidonet as a direct result of this election. The
way it was conducted shows the ZC cannot perform his duties. The
results are not representative of the concerns of the members of
this region.
Also, the NC's acted as the sysops representatives; thier (sic)
votes should have been published."
"My BBS will go down on or before July 31st, because of the
recent decisions of Satti, and the so-called election of Kohl."
"I am glad to see that this is being done after the so-called
election farce that was held in our Region."
"Down with King Kohl, and Bob Satti is next on our list if he
fails to recognize our backing him so far, and relying on him to
impeach Kohl for malfeasance of office. I hear the grass roots
growing!"
"Have a great day!"
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 14 13 Jul 1998
=================================================================
COLUMNS
=================================================================
Dear Editorbeing,
This article is submitted by Doc Logger (163/110) who was
busy drinking Absinthe on the slopes of Gornergraat. Across
the valley, the Matterhorn rises in purple splendour and
below, chubby gentlemen in leather training pants are
blowing elongated horns which produce sounds akin to moose
in full rut.
Roll da flic, Zorch....
Dear Reverend Visage,
Being stuck in Switzerland in July has many drawbacks, not
the least of which is that the charming international
tourists who are busily photographing everything in sight.
Even the bronze frog which spouts into a fountain in Zermatt
has started to develop a squint from the incessant camera
flash discharges.
The Snooz was rather chunky last week including two articles
by Kohl whose ghostwriter made their presence obvious by the
lack of spelling mistakes and mangled grammar. Even His
Zorchness' editorial was a monument of disingenuousness. It
would probably be unkind to mention that His Zorchness has
been in high dungeon lately over a supposed "second" elist
robot program. What makes Zorch's editorial bellowing more
amusing is that he forgot to disclose his personal interest
in the other elist proposal. Mercifully, any newspaper
writer who has a conflict of interest takes pains to make
disclosures and we can look forward to seeing Zorch
correcting his inadvertent omission of that relevant fact.
I note that Kohl's ghostwriter had this cheesy excuse for
his disclosure of in transit netmail. "There were two
complaints brought up. One was dismissed, the other the was
explained and apologized for. Someone sent me netmail and I
cc'd Bob Satti." Actually, they did not send netmail *to*
Kohl, they sent it to another system which passed through
Kohl's system. Kohl extracted the contents on the way
through, responded to it, revealed its contents, and then
made the fatuous claim that it was a technical glitch
resulting from the way his system is set up. If Kohl is to
be believed ( a dubious proposition) then he must have been
disclosing *all* intransit netmail to Bob Satti. Satti,
being a man of few words, has studiously avoided confirming
whether Kohl's version of reality is correct. Kohl cites the
other instance where he was caught disclosing in transit
netmail as being "dismissed" which is not to say that the
act didn't happen.
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 15 13 Jul 1998
In Kohl's second alleged article wherein he uses the word
"diatribes" which is well beyond his actual vocabulary
grasp, Kohl winds his way through a cloud of smoke without
bothering to deny that his vendetta against Ruth Argust
results from a pathetic incident over a horse. I am quite
willing to post a retraction if Kohl can send me a
correction as to the facts.
At the risk of writing a tautological article that
references past Snoozs, I was disappointed by Andrea Santos'
article which advocates the equivalent of designing a camel
by striking a committee charged with designing a horse. The
issue is not the dispersion of titles and responsibilities
for the Snooz, but the simple need for people to submit
content. Creating nine new admin Snooz positions will do no
good at all unless those individuals are actually writing
copy. If there is a criticism to be made of His Zorchness,
it is the fact that unlike previous editors of the Snooz, he
does not appear to be actively soliciting articles. As an
example, I'd dearly love to see an article from some of our
Russian brethren describing the changes over the last decade
that have fostered the incredible growth of fidonet. I'd
also like to see an articulate discussion of the Zone2
policy debate which seems to be surfacing in the ZCC echo.
On the matter of his Zorchness' policy complaints against
Ruth Argust, it is simply amazing that he was joined by
three other cretins who filed identical complaints. Knowles,
George Kuhl, and Dan Sherman should have a deserved place in
the Fidonet Hall of Shame for lending their names to the
venal actions of Frezberg in this matter. There is something
truly rotten in the state of Denmark if these idiots are the
NCs of which anyone in Fidonet could be proud. It is small
wonder that the stench of Kohl's presence pervades Region10
considering the low quality of the NCs that he has
appointed. If ever there was a case to be made for the fact
that Peefour only arms socially maladroit morons, a reading
of Frezberg's policy complaint would suffice to settle the
argument.
Yo Zorch, did you vote twice in the ZEC election?
I have some interesting quotes for this week's column. The
first is taken from a message that Bob Kohl sent out to his
loyal fartcatchers in Region 10:
"You'll note that not every NC and NEC in Reg 10 is getting
this note. I'm sending it mainly to the key group of Admin
folks in Reg 10 that I've worked with these past years to
rebuild and revive Reg 10 or that have shown concern for the
smooth operation of the Region and their own nets. It is
also this group that I expect to keep this note within the
group.
...
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 16 13 Jul 1998
We are Reg 10, let's make sure that everyone is aware of
this, including Bob Satti. And as a statement from the NC's
of Reg 10, I sincerely hope you'll support and sign a PC
against Ruth when it gets put into motion. While I could
have easily done it myself, I sincerely think it sets a bad
precident for my to do so or to be involved in it
directly."
That gem was written by Kohl in an effort to garner support
for a Policy Complaint campaign organized by His Zorchness.
The following quote is very long, but well worth including
because it contains the entire text of Bob Duckworth's
ruling on Zorch's policy complaint. (For those concerned
about the niceties, I have received Bob Duckworth's
permission to quote his ruling in full) Read and weep...
* * * * *
"Thu 25 Jun 98 22:21
By: Bob Duckworth, * *Bob's Duck Pond (2004/209)
Re: Policy Complaint filed by you against Ruth Argust
Original to: Zorch Frezberg (1:205/1701)
Zorch Frezberg,
It is extremely disturbing that I have to send this message
at all. With your being a Network Coordinator I am sure you
understood the action you were taking when you filed a
Policy Complaint against Ms. Argust. Per Policy 4.07 a
Policy Complaint is not an action to be taken lightly.
Your Policy Complaint against Ms. Argust is rejected in
total.
The opening portion of your Policy Complaint against Ms.
Argust is a very disjointed mish-mash and very hard to
follow. However, Ms. Argust did rebut your statements, and
also pointed out that some of the submitted documents have
also been tampered with (ie. missing subject lines and
appended orgin lines.)
A single netmail tittled "official inquiry" does not
constitute an earnest effort to resolve a problem. Ms.
Argust submitted a copy of a message in which she replied to
you in the hopes of resolving the problem between the two of
you. She claims that you never responded to the questions
she raised in netmail in reponse to your "offical inquiry"
netmail, and you failed to provide any proof that you did in
fact respond. You did include the netmail that she replied
to your "offical inquiry" netmail with so by all
indications, you in fact were the one who failed to resolve
the problems. In hopes that you did indeed follow policy and
continue your attempt to resolve the problem, I did read all
the echomail which you enclosed, and did not see her
questions to you answered via that medium either, although
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 17 13 Jul 1998
she did in fact provide evidence of why her name was
presented during the EMSI portion of mailer handshaking.
Reading through Policy 4.07 it does not say that the
informal attempts to resolve a problem prior to the filing
of a policy complaint must be made in private. That you
failed to try complete a resolution informally can not be
blamed on the fact that she posted anything in the echoes
when in fact you could have netmailed her and asked that she
work with you only via netmail on what you considered to be
problems.
I reject this policy complaint from you in total because of
your failure to continue your attempts to resolve the
problems. I am also presenting my findings on each of your
separate charges.
zf> = CHARGE 1
zf> = Violation of Netmail confidentiality under section
2.1.6.2; specifically, the release of netmail for the
purpose of annoying others, and in this case, involving
others not in the chain of appeal, as defined in Section
9.1, last para of Policy 4.07; further, that such release
was done in order to make improper accusations and undue
disruption of FidoNetconstitutes EXCESSIVELY ANNOYING
BEHAVIOR.
zf>
I find in favor of Ms. Argust on charge 1.
The netmail which you sent to her with the subject line of
"offical inquiry" was not marked as confidential. Since you
failed to mark this message as confidential, Polcy 4.07
Section 2.1.6.2 shall apply here, specifically where it
states
"The issue of private mail which is addressed to you is more
difficult than the in-transit question treated in the
previous section. A common legal opinion holds that when
you receive a message it becomes your property and you have
a legal right to do with it what you wish. Your legal right
does not excuse you from annoying others.
In general, sensitive material should not be sent using
FidoNet. This ideal is often compromised, as FidoNet is our
primary mode of communication. In general, if the sender of
a message specifically requests in the text of the message
that the contents be kept confidential, release of the
message into a public forum may be considered annoying."
It is clear in policy that the message in question was hers
to do with what she wished. If the public release of your
netmail was annoying to you, it is not covered by policy
since you did not take the proper measure to prevent her
from posting your message in a public echo by clearly
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 18 13 Jul 1998
marking the message as confidential.
Even more important, I did not see any proof that Ruth
Argust disclosed the netmail in question. All I saw in her
post was the header and the cc:'s of the messages. There was
no disclosure at all of the body text.
zf> = CHARGE 2
= 'As indicated in the logs submitted by the various NCs of
Region 10, it is clear that the system Ruth Argust used to
mail out from was representing itself as 1:2004/0. Ruth has
offered several clarifications in an effort to explain this,
but has not explained the one most significant problem;
whyshe felt it necessary to register the software *as*
1:2004/0, since she and Gerry claim that their net has
elections (See CHARGE2.001).The fact that the clarifications
are specious is obvious...thenode in question will
consistently display itself as 1:2004/0 regardless of who
the NC is, and will interfere in mail routing and
distribution upon their removal/departure from the posts
that they hold.
This failure, along with the fact that numerous mailer
programs cannot distinguish between a multi-line and a
single-line node, as seen in the attached logs, clearly
shows the connecting mailer as being 1:2004/0. There is no
specific mailer in place which lists Gerry Calhoun as
NC2004, operating 1:2004/0 as the nodelist defines.
This is indicated in the various logs included in the
evidence file (See CHARGE2.004, CHARGE2.005, CHARGE2.006 and
CHARGE2.007).
This would be no significant matter, and likely to be
dismissed, per Ruth's numerous claims that "this is just the
way that the software is set up", save for _one_ salient
point:
In the recent Z1 EchoMail Coordinator election, Ruth Argust
had submitted her vote, presenting herself as "1:2004/0",
and Gerry Calhoun had submitted his vote, presenting himself
as "1:2004/205" (See CHARGE2.002 and CHARGE2.003; note that
CHARGE2.003 is the roster of voting nodes from the Election
Coordinator).
Likewise, as can be noted in the log files, it does not
matter to which phone number/node that one is connected
to...*all* nodes on the connection present themselves as
"1:2004/0" and with Ruth Argust as the sysop of the node
reserved for the N2004C, without regard for the reality of
the situation. This can be seen in the log files, as the
"home node", "Node #2" and "Node #3" all present as
"1:2004/0" on connection, and all as "Ruth Argust".
Under Sections 1.2.3 and 1.2.4, the NC is normally
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 19 13 Jul 1998
responsible for the exactness of the network nodelist
segment, and also may not delegate the responsibility to
mediate disputes. Given the nature of the identity problem
with the /0 node, and with regard to who the system is
operated by, as well as the chaos which such a system
identification can cause, is clearly disruptive now, and
will be disruptive to the smooth operation of FidoNet, the
Region and their own network in the near future. Such
disruption is in violation of Policy 4.07, Sections 1.2.1.1
(identifying users), section 2.1.3 (identifying who is
responsible for entering traffic), and Section 1.2.8, second
para (smooth operation).
Since the system in question was co-operated by the then-NC
of Net 2004, the above should have been well known and
familiar as a part of the knowledge of Policy 4.07 that all
Network Coordinators are to be familiar with. However, as
the actual software is registered by someone who is not nor
has ever been the Network Coordinator, as well as co-opting
the reserved address for the Net Coordinator of Network
2004, the action is now the responsibility of the node
operator...which is listed as being Ruth Argust.
Such actions and efforts by Ruth Argust do constitute
EXCESSIVELY ANNOYING BEHAVIOR.'
zf>
Zorch Frezberg, you have not provided proof that Ruth Argust
sent mail out from the Fido address of 1:2004/0. During
handshaking in the emsi portion, the line SYSOP: Ruth Argust
was presented.
Note that Policy 4.07 is very clear in sections;
1 Overview
1.2.1 Individual Systems and System Operators
1.2.1.1 Users
2.1.3 Responsible for All Traffic Entering FidoNet Via
the Node
1.2.8 (second paragraph)
1.3.4 Nodelist
that the system operator is defined by the nodelist.
Your statement that the system software is registered to
1:2004/0 is not backed up by the included file CHARGE2.001.
What I see in CHARGE2.001 are statments by Ms. Argust that
the mailer software is registered in her name. She further
states the the system the software operates on is
co-operated by Gerry Calhoun and presents the addresses of
1:2004/0, 1:2004/200 and 1:2004/201. Nowhere does she state
the software is registered as 1:2004/0. In Ms. Argust's
reply to the Policy Complaint, she included a message from
the software author with what must be placed in the sysop
name field for the software to operate in the registered
mode.
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 20 13 Jul 1998
You further claim that the software will always present
itself as 1:2004/0 without any proof to this fact. The
addresses for the system which Ms. Argust and Mr. Calhoun
co-operate can be changed at will. This claim is based
solely upon your conjecture and is not backed by any
evidence you have submitted. Policy 4.07 is very clear the
charges must be supported by evidence. For a NC to make such
a claim and provide no evidence, displays an obvious lack of
understanding of Policy 4.07.
After Zorch Frezberg's netmail message with the subject line
of "offical inquiry" was received, a change was made to the
system which had the address of 1:2004/0 to present SYSOP:
Gerry Calhoun NODE X (where X is the node connected to) in
addiction to SYSOP: Ruth Argust. This shows that Ms. Argust
did attempt to rectify what Zorch Frezberg had a problem
with, although Frezberg did not specify what portion of
Policy 4.07 mandates what must be presented during emsi
handshaking.
Ms. Argust claims the system in question had been
functioning in the same manner well over two years. During
that time, she says she had never received any other
comments as to the way the system presented itself. That she
reconfigured the system after your concerns were voiced
shows that she made an earnest and honest attempt at
resolving the issue. The fact that Zorch Frezberg never
responded back after Ms. Argust changed the manner her
software was setup shows that Zorch Frezberg did not attempt
to resolve the issue. Zorch Frezberg also failed to state
what section of Policy 4.07 was being violated by presenting
SYSOP: Ruth Argust during the emsi handshake.
Zorch Frezberg's "salient point" is based upon the fact that
Mr. Belcke recorded the vote as orginating from the wrong
system. Mr. Belcke was in error in recording the vote and
Ms. Argust attempted through netmail to correct the way the
vote was recorded. The blame for Mr. Belcke to not correct
the vote after he was in fact informed of his error does not
reflect on Ms. Argust. Ms. Argust did include copies of her
exchange with Mr. Belcke with only the candidate names and
her password blocked out and Mr. Belcke's replies.
Zorch Frezberg, you should read the Policy 4.07 in its
entirity and not just read it so that you can file a Policy
Complaint. Policy 4.07 clearly states that the system
operator is defined by the nodelist. Zorch Frezberg, you
have failed to show where Policy 4.07 or any approved FTS
document mandates what MUST be shown during emsi handshaking
or in a mailers logs.
Zorch Frezberg, you claim that there was an "identity" with
the /0 node in net 2004. However, Policy is quite clear as
to who the /0 node belongs to as Policy 4.07 clearly states
that the nodelist defines who operate what nodes. You
further state "Such disruption is in violation of Policy
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 21 13 Jul 1998
4.07, Sections 1.2.1.1 (identifying users), section 2.1.3
(identifying who is responsible for entering traffic), and
Section 1.2.8, second para (smooth operation)." Yet, those
same sections clearly state that the nodelist defines the
operator of a node.
The system in question was and is co-operated by the then
NC. This was in fact the system the then NC used to perform
his NC duties. Being the system that did such duties, it
rightly used the /0 node number. The node operator of the
system that presented the /0 address has never been Ruth
Argust, since the node operator per Policy 4.07 is defined
by the nodelist issued by the I.C. and had always been
listed to Gerry Calhoun until his removal from that
position.
You are correct in one small statement in this CHARGE 2.
That is that the NC is to be familiar with Policy 4.07.
However, your lack of knowledge in regards to this charge
inparts a great deal of questioning in regards to your
knowledge of Policy 4.07.
I totally reject and dismiss CHARGE 2 and clear Ms. Argust
of any wrong doing in regards to CHARGE 2 and Policy 4.07
for the following reasons.
1. The netmail with the subject "official inquiry" does
not appear to be an attempt to resolve a problem, rather it
appears to be an investigation. After Ms. Argust changed
what her system presented upon emsi handshaking and
contacted Zorch Frezberg back, Zorch Frezberg did not
continue to attempt to resolve his "perceived" problem.
Therefore, I can not find that an attempt was made to
resolve this in an informal manner. In fact, I find that
Zorch Frezberg has not made any comment on what was
presented after Ms. Argust changed what was presented during
the emsi handshake after Zorch Frezberg expressed his
concerns. Therefore, I can only conclude that the problem
was resolved. If a problem is resolved between two sysops,
there is therefore no need for a policy complaint.
2. Zorch Frezberg failed to state what section of Policy
4.07 or what part of any FTS document was violated by the
presentation of SYSOP: Ruth Argust during emsi handshaking.
It being that Zorch Frezberg is a member of the standing
FTSC, he should be familiar with the FTS documents and been
able to provide such evidence.
3. Zorch Frezberg has failed to provide what section of
Policy 4.07 states what must be present in a mailers
logfile, therefore the mailer logfiles are not relevent in
this issue.
4. Zorch Frezberg as a Network Coordinator should be
familiar enough with Policy 4.07 to know that the nodelist
as issued by the I.C. defines who a system operator is.
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 22 13 Jul 1998
5. Zorch Frezberg has failed to present a single message
signed by Ruth Argust as Network 2004 Coordinator.
zf> ' = CHARGE 3
In addition to the above, the constant posting of mail
intended for the discussion of administrative functions in
Region 10 has been consistently cross-posted out of netmail
and Region 10 administrative conferences, in an effort to
"expose" matters in Region 10.
However, the messages posted to national and international
echoes are also with respect to questions of character and
ability for other posts and actions, with the use of Region
10 as no more than a cover for harrassment and calls for
interference.
The sheer volume of mail, both in echomail and netmail, has
started a self-regenerative loop with rumor feeding rumor,
and rumor then becoming "fact" in the minds of many.
For example, there has been a consistently posted comment
that a "netmail smear campaign" was begun by Bob Kohl; yet
no evidence of such a message has been made available, and
all inquiries for a copy of it have been fruitless.
Everyone seemed to have "heard of it", but not one
individual or group of individuals has been able to
demonstrate a copy of such messages.
Likewise, as the message is supposedly between other
individuals and sent to Argust and Calhoun, the disclosure
of such contents is in violation of Policy 4.07, Section
2.1.6.1, as no Policy Complaint has been attached to such a
message, and by their own description, the message was sent
as NetMail, and not as EchoMail.
This portion of the Policy Complaint will be conceded and
withdrawn, provided proper evidence is shown that the
so-called "netmail smear" message was posted as EchoMail or
as 'private mail' intended to keep a 'sysop-only' echo
restricted.
However, as to the portion in which excessive echomail and
netmail is being generated for no other purpose than to
interfere in the ability of the Region Coordinator to
perform duties properly, I will not withdraw that portion of
the Policy Complaint, and will carry it forward regardless.
The specific harm, per Section 1.3.5, is that the efforts of
Argust and others have caused Region 10 to be unable to
locate and obtain an acceptable and qualified Regional
EchoMail Coordinator. The annoyance is now excessive in
that the failure to appoint a new REC has become a
'rallying point' in use by Argust and others in a new wave
of harrassment, despite being caused by the efforts of
Argust and others (See CHARGE3.ZIP, please note summation
in CHARGE3.000).
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 23 13 Jul 1998
Further, that Ruth Argust has made the effort and
succeeded in posting to a Regional administrative echomail
conference that she had been specifically removed is a more
clear indication that her interests are specifically for the
purpose of disruption of Region administration;
significantly, since this requires the Regional Coordinator
take additional actions to prevent any further incursions,
and thus adding to his duties and efforts. Inteference on
the Network, Regional and Zone levels indicates EXCESSIVELY
ANNOYING BEHAVIOR (See CHARGE3.042).'
zf>
CHARGE 3 deals with echomail. While some points dealing with
echomail are mentioned in Policy 4.07, the points you, Zorch
Frezberg, bring up in CHARGE 3 are not applicable here.
2.1.6.1 deals with IN-TRANSIT netmail. In reading your
evidence for CHARGE 3, I do not see that Ms. Argust posted
any netmail at all, let alone any IN-TRANSIT netmail. If she
had posted netmail addressed to her and sent to her, it was,
therefore, her personal property to do with what she
pleased.
1.3.5 Deals with excessively annoying behavior. Zorch
Frezberg, you claim that Ms. Argusts posts are excessively
annoying because they are preventing Bob Kohl, the R10C,
from performing his duties. Yet, you have not presented a
single message from Bob Kohl that states such. You also
state that talking about regional issues creates
controversy. If such actions create controversy, then
perhaps it is time to look at the issues.
You further state that Ms. Argust posted to a regional
Administrative echo from which she was specifically removed,
yet you have not provided any proof for the claim that she
was removed from this echo.
I hereby reject and dismiss the claims against Ms. Argust in
regards to CHARGE 3 and do not find her guilty of any wrong
doing in respect to Policy 4.07 and CHARGE 3 for the
following reasons.
1. You, Zorch Frezberg, have not provided any proof of
any attempts to resolve this problem before filing this
policy complaint as spelled out in Section 9.1 of Policy
4.07
2. You, Zorch Frezberg, have provided no proof that Ms.
Argust was guilty of disclosing IN-TRANSIT netmail per your
charge of violation of section 2.1.6.1. I see no netmail
disclosed in any of the many posts you have presented.
3. You, Zorch Frezberg, seem to have this CHARGE 3
confused with CHARGE 1 where you claim she disclosed private
and confidential mail and offer as evidence CHARGE1.002. I
state again that she did not in fact disclose anything other
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 24 13 Jul 1998
than who received the mail since she quoted only the message
header and the cc: list. Her quote stopped right after the
private and confidential per Policy 4.07 line and she did
not quote any of the message text.
4. You, Zorch Frezberg, have failed to prove that the
behavior of Ms. Argust in any of the echomail had anything
to do with preventing the RC from fulfilling his duties.
zf> ' = CHARGE 4
= The fact that a number of public posts have been made by
both Argust and Calhoun that they have no access to the
Region 10 administrative echoes, and are thus locked out of
any forum to present their case is proven false, based on a
NetMail sent to the RHub Sysop, M Hernandez, at 1:10/2, in
which Calhoun asked for all passwords to be removed from
that system which allowed connection to his own (See
CHARGE4.001).
That Calhoun would ask is a clear indication that he is
indeed aware of the other sources for the administrative
echoes to be available; that he still denies his ability to
access shows a contradiction that he has not been able to
clarify adequately. Clearly, in EchoMail, Argust and Calhoun
are claiming that they have no access to administrative
echomail in Region 10.
Yet in the NetMail shown in CHARGE4.001, Calhoun declares he
wants an already available connection to remove all
passwords, making it impossible for him to connect to an
available source for those same administrative echomail
areas for Region 10.
The obvious problem is that Calhoun as well as Argust are
maintaining a public image that is in direct opposition to
what they know to be true...that a connection exists.
Please note; the point is not that no connection exists, but
that one was available to Net 2004, but was deliberately
turned off and refused, at the same time as claims were made
that no such connection was available to Net 2004.
As with Charge #3, this seeming contradiction serves little
purpose than to bring about unwarranted traffic for no other
purpose than to harrass and interfere with the smooth
operation of Region 10, by interfering with the duties of
the Regional Coordinator, both directly and indirectly.
By lying over the issue of connectivity, a deliberate action
as opposed to an honest mistake, the fabrication becomes an
intentional one, and thus excessively annoying behavior in
that the action affects not one or two nodes but an entire
Region of sysops, and thus affecting the smooth operation of
Region 10.
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 25 13 Jul 1998
While the specifics against Gerry Calhoun are best addressed
by the Regional Coordinator, that such actions were both
condoned and carried out by Ruth Argust in an effort to both
diminish and harrass the administration and function of
Region 10 necessitates that a Policy Complaint is in order.
By affecting the RC in the performance of duties, it is the
responsibility of the RC to take action against an offending
node; when the node is a Network Coordinator under the
Regional Coordinator, it is clear that the Network
Coordinator is no longer able to hold that position. As
Gerry Calhoun has been replaced as the N2004C, that avenue
is already dealt with and now moot.
However, when it is a sysop that pushes the envelope in a
manner to take action to disrupt the administration of the
Region, it is the duty of a Network Coordinator to take
actions necessary to insure that a clear 'line of
communication' exists between the Network and the Regional
Coordinators, and it is necessary to adopt a stand of "zero
tolerance" towards behavior designed and taken for no less a
purpose than to disrupt the function of the Region; thus
Ruth Argust is charged within the confines of Policy 4.07,
Sections 1.3.5, for what is EXCESSIVELY ANNOYING BEHAVIOR.'
zf>
Charge 4 also deals with echo mail content. I fail to see
where you, Zorch Frezberg, have included a single message
from Ms. Argust to in your documents submitted for this
charge backup this claim of excessively annoying behavior.
In fact the only thing you submitted to backup this charge
was a single netmail from Gerry Calhoun, asking that all
passwords be removed from a system that presents the address
of 1:10/2. This is not a policy complaint against Mr.
Calhoun, rather, it is one against Ms. Argust. The sole
evidence you have submitted with this charge has also been
tampered with since Mr. Calhoun does not append an orgin
line with the address of 1:205/0 to his netmail messages.
You also make the claim that the actions of Ms. Argust have
prevented the R10C from fullfilling his duties as a Regional
Coordinator. You have failed to present any evidence to
backup this claim. You have not submitted a single message
from Bob Kohl, R10C, that states this fact. I only have to
rely upon your statements that the R10C can not fullfill his
duties because of the actions of Ms. Argust in echomail. You
have once again neglected in CHARGE 4 to provide any proof
that simple basic communication between yourself and Ms.
Argust took place in regards to CHARGE 4 before your action
of filing this complaint.
CHARGE 4 is hereby dismissed in total for any and all of the
following reasons:
1. You, Zorch Frezberg, have failed to submit any proof
that you attempted to resolve this matter with Ms. Argust
before filing this policy complaint.
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 26 13 Jul 1998
2. You, Zorch Frezberg, have failed to provide any
verifiable evidence per Policy 4.07, section 9.1 that states
in part "Complaints must be accompanied with verifiable
evidence, generally copies of messages; a simple
word-of-mouth complaint will be dismissed out of hand." You
sole item of evidence to back up your claim against Ms.
Argust, was a netmail writen by Gerry Calhoun which had been
tampered with. Nothing was submitted that was written by Ms.
Argust or that even mentions Ms. Argust.
3. You, Zorch Frezberg, have even failed to show that
Ms. Argust was NOT denied access to any regional echoes as
she claimed. As the accuser it is up to you to provide the
proof of any crime. In this charge the crime that you claim
is that she said she did not have access to regional admin
echoes. A simple netmail from her uplink to remove passwords
with an unrelated node does not provide such proof. Ms.
Argust had indeed questioned Bob Kohl, the R10C, in echoes
about her access and feed to regional echoes but in
particular the regional SYSOP echo. Had Mr. Kohl responded
in the echoes that she did indeed have access and you could
have provided that message, then that could have been
admitted to evidence to her having access to the echoes. Mr.
Kohl however did not respond to her questions that I ever
saw though. In fact, Mr. Kohl has sent netmail to me as
N2004C stating that Ms. Argust and Mr. Calhoun can not in
fact have access to the regional echoes, and has stated in
the R10 admin echoes themselves that Ms. Argust and Mr.
Calhoun are not allowed access. When I asked Ms. Argust if
she did in fact ever get a notice from Mr. Kohl himself on
the matter, she stated she never has in respect to the
regional sysop echo which is the echo that she was
questioning as I saw it in the national echoes. I could in
fact send you copies of the messages I have seen by Mr. Kohl
regarding this if you require them, but since this policy
action is not against myself, I can see no reason to furnish
you with them.
zf>' These charges do not rest lightly, nor is this document
posted frivolously; it is posted in the sincere effort that
Ruth Argust understand the consequences of her actions and
the affect that they have on others who care not for her
polarization of attitudes in FidoNet.
Zorch Frezberg, I fail to agree with you in regards to the
action of your filing this policy complaint not being
frivolous. In fact I find it quite trivial, especially in
regards to your CHARGE 2. As a member of the FTSC, I would
have expected you to be able to provide proof of what was
violated during the EMSI handshake if in fact anything was
violated. One of the people that you in fact sent the policy
complaint to for them to file for themselves in fact is even
more guilty of any perceived violation than Ms. Argust.
Please note the segment of my FD log below:
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 27 13 Jul 1998
Log of Bob Duckworth, 1:2004/209 and 1:2004/0
---------- Tue 23 Jun 98, FD 2.12.SW
+ 19:42:16 Event 0-@
+ 21:14:54 Calling Region 10 Echomail Coordinato, 1:10/1,
1-510-841-9481
= 21:15:18 CONNECT 14400/ARQ
+ 21:15:22 Sci-Fido II, World's Oldest SF BBS, Berkeley,
CA, 1:161/84
~ 21:15:22 SysOp: Richard Knowles Ja
~ 21:15:22 Using: Opus 1.73
21:15:22 sType: FTS-6/ZedZap
* 21:15:24 Sent I:\FD212\PACKETS\000A0001.REQ; 7b, 3 CPS
+ 21:15:31 Mail transfer completed
$ 21:15:31 To 1:10/1, 0:13, 0.
I do have full logging turned on but the system that answers
the phone at 1-510-841-9481, which is listed in the current
nodelist.170 as the phone number of the system operated by
Jan Murphy, 1:10/1, Region 10 Echomail Coordinator does not
present the AKA of 1:10/1. It also does not present Jan
Murphy as being the system operator, rather it lists Richard
Knowles Ja as shown above.
The policy complaint in total shows one thing very clearly.
That is that you, Zorch, did not undertake this policy
action with the intent of making sure policy was enforced
but you filed it because you had disagreements with another
sysop and are merely attempting to use policy to silence her
for the sake of your own agenda.
With this response to you, I am also sending a message to
Bob Satti, requesting that he grant a change of venue should
Ms. Argust request one if you take this complaint to appeal
since the Regional Coordinator is clearly involved in at
least two of the four charges.
Bob Duckworth, 1:2004/0
Network 2004 Coordinator"
* * * * *
Visage, I don't think I would want to bet long odds on
whether Bob Duckworth's courage in writing that decision
will go "unrewarded" by Kohl and his legion of trolls. It
does much to explain why syncophants like Knowles are so
desparate to keep Region10 nonsense "in the family" because
the reek of their actions doesn't look too appealling when
exposed to daylight.
I must go Visage, the cable car operator has announced the
last run down to Zermatt and I can only hope that another
U.S. jet doesn't clip the cables on the way down. Your
secretary is in fine fettle and has left a wake of broken
arms on the Italians who have mistakenly tried to pinch her
ass.
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 28 13 Jul 1998
Regards,
Doc Logger
stuck in Switzerland
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 29 13 Jul 1998
=================================================================
NOTICES
=================================================================
Future History
25 Jul 1998
SUPCon, Swedish FidoNet Convention at Sannabaden,
Jankaping, Sweden.
14 Sep 1998
Start of International BBS Week [thru 20 Sep 98].
22 Sep 1998
First anniversary of the FidoNews domain of www.fidonews.org.
1 Dec 1998
Fifteenth Anniversary of release of Fido version 1 by
Tom Jennings.
24 Jul 1999
XIII Pan American Games [through 8 Aug 99].
9 Jun 1999
Tenth Anniversary of the adoption of FidoNet Policy 4.07.
31 Dec 1999
Hogmanay, Scotland. The New Year that can't be missed.
1 Jan 2000
The 20th Century, C.E., is still taking place thru 31 Dec.
1 Jun 2000
EXPO 2000 World Exposition in Hannover (Germany) opens.
15 Sep 2000
Sydney (Australia) Summer Olympiad opens.
1 Jan 2001
This is the actual start of the new millennium, C.E.
-- If YOU have something which you would like to see in this
Future History, please send a note to the FidoNews Editor.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 30 13 Jul 1998
=================================================================
FIDONEWS PUBLIC-KEY
=================================================================
FidoNews PGP Public-Key Listing
[this must be copied out to a file starting at column 1 or
it won't process under PGP as a valid public-key]
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Democracy Requires A Free And Uncensored Press.
mQENAzUDQfgAAAEH/2cZjrzKxinfyk1NRYy2D78JEU8jFx6fvGyisnN2SX+QwRrA
AxBbsMuseM3x60SFhHV7r93CxKWJylPCBJKvDazmWwy+vgBr+ZJvl7Ypj/IB4pWS
Apngg8cmDH1h5d0VeYNORsuJ2udHZYRezkZ0eeJlaOsJCj5Xu0QImSp++VU/0oB1
6XRoNPy548xq8Qles1pLC8Kw7HU7Vff1WeaU3mPPQeaGZqn2qSAu5t6Z0Bhm27Pq
zNaJ+JWNHaLCHlwrRHV+p9bCdfl3u303OxKPne0cSpxfe+gQBTlVta7B14ssgnzQ
mnBFhvKWgM7LT105YD3EcWW9IJE1ByNHwo25a3EABRG0D0ZpZG9OZXdzIEVkaXRv
cokAlQMFEDUKMDDrSgiY3KJNQQEB16YD/2tYVRC+dxghA/OwIWNH20GvQXw1zgfv
cB6r8gYHcczTCqGu5qbjDOTftoBXY9vI3/CZNsSbvp0ibQinpN6zSgyy2+4wwPbu
db/VnjXwBByq7ygTpNwQBMsYjs+iyndwTnR90dH3FewsveBCzeqjmP0Y/PJliElw
zEmGKxoFr1SM
=G82W
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
File-request FNEWSKEY from 1:1/23 [1:205/1701] or download it from
IKVHFoT! BBS at 1-209-251-7529 anytime Zone 1 ZMH at 300-9600+ V34.
The FidoNews key is also available on the FidoNews homepage listed
in the Masthead information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 31 13 Jul 1998
=================================================================
FIDONET BY INTERNET
=================================================================
This is a list of all FidoNet-related sites reported to the
FidoNews Editor as of this issue; see the notice at the end.
============
FidoNet:
Homepage http://www.fidonet.org
FidoNews http://www.fidonews.org [HTML]
http://209.77.228.66/fidonews.html [ASCII]
WWW sources http://www.scms.rgu.ac.uk/students/cs_yr94/lk/fido.html
FTSC page http://www.goldware.dk/ftsc
Echomail [pending]
WebRing http://ddi.digital.net/~cbaker84/fnetring.html [TFN]
General http://owls.com/~jerrys/fidonet.html
============
Zone 1: http://www.z1.fidonet.org
Region 10: http://www.psnw.com/~net205/region10.html
Region 11: http://oeonline.com/~garyg/region11/
Region 13: none
Region 14: none
Region 15: none
Region 16: none
Region 17: none
Region 18: http://techstop.pdn.net/fido/
Region 19: http://www.compconn.net
============
Zone 2: http://www.z2.fidonet.org
ZEC2:
Zone 2 Elist: http://www.fbone.ch/z2_elist/
Region 20: http://www.fidonet.pp.se (in Swedish)
Region 23: http://www.fido.dk (in Danish)
Region 24: http://www.swb.de/personal/flop/gatebau.html (German)
Fido-IP: http://home.nrh.de/~lbehet/fido (English/German)
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 32 13 Jul 1998
Region 25:
http://www.bsnet.co.uk/net2502/net/
Region 26: http://www.nemesis.ie
REC 26: http://www.nrgsys.com/orb
Region 27: http://telematique.org/ft/r27.htm
Region 29: http://www.rtfm.be/fidonet/ (French)
Region 30: http://www.fidonet.ch (Swiss?)
Region 33: http://www.fidoitalia.net (Italian)
Region 34: http://www.pobox.com/cnb/r34.htm (Spanish)
REC34: http://pobox.com/~chr
Region 36: http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/7207/
Region 38: http://public.st.carnet.hr/~blagi/bbs/adriam.html
Region 41: http://www.fidonet.gr (Greek/English)
Region 48: http://www.fidonet.org.pl
============
Zone 3: http://www.z3.fidonet.org
============
Zone 4: http://www.altern.org/zone4
Region 90: http://visitweb.com/fidonet
Net 903: http://www.playagrande.com/refugio
Net 904: http://members.tripod.com/~net904 (Spanish)
============
Zone 5: http://w3.eastcape.co.za/fidonet/index.htm
============
Zone 6: http://www.z6.fidonet.org
Region 65: http://www.cfido.com/fidonet/cfidochina.html (Chinese)
============
Pages listed above are as submitted to the FidoNews Editor,
and generally reflect Zone and Regional Web Page sites. If
no Regional site is submitted, the first Network page from
that Region is used in its place. Generally, Regional pages
should list access points to all Networks within the Region.
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 33 13 Jul 1998
TCP/IP accessible node access information should be submitted
to the FidoNews Editor for inclusion in their Region or Zone.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 34 13 Jul 1998
=================================================================
FIDONEWS INFORMATION
=================================================================
------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION -------
Editor: Zorch Frezberg
Editors Emeritii: Tom Jennings, Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell,
Vince Perriello, Tim Pozar, Sylvia Maxwell,
Donald Tees, Christopher Baker
"FidoNews Editor"
FidoNet 1:1/23
BBS 1-209-251-7529, 300/1200/2400/9600/V.34/V.90
more addresses:
Zorch Frezberg -- 1:205/1701, zorch@repairnet.com
zorch@qnis.net
zorch@kumr.lns.com
(Postal Service mailing address)
FidoNews Editor
P.O. Box 642
Fresno, CA 93709-0642
U.S.A.
voice: 1-209-446-9038 [voice mail = 'blind' numbers not returned]
------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews is 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 1998 Zorch Frezberg. All rights reserved. Duplication
and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For
use in other circumstances, please contact the original authors, or
the Editor.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
OBTAINING COPIES: The most recent issue of FidoNews in electronic
form may be obtained from the FidoNews Editor via manual download or
file-request, or from various sites in the FidoNet and Internet.
PRINTED COPIES may be obtained by sending SASE to the above postal
address. File-request FIDONEWS for the current Issue. File-request
FNEWS for the current month in one archive. Or file-request specific
back Issue filenames in distribution format [FNEWSFnn.ZIP] for a
particular Issue. Monthly Volumes are available as FNWSmmmy.ZIP
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 35 13 Jul 1998
where mmm = three letter month [JAN - DEC] and y = last digit of the
current year [8], i.e., FNWSJAN8.ZIP for all the Issues from Jan 98.
Annual volumes are available as FNEWSn.ZIP where n = the Volume number
1 - 15 for 1984 - 1998, respectively. Annual Volume archives range in
size from 48K to 1.4M.
INTERNET USERS: FidoNews is available via:
http://www.fidonews.org
http://www.fidonet.org/fidonews.htm
ftp://ftp.fidonet.org/pub/fidonet/fidonews/
ftp://ftp.aminet.org/pub/aminet/comm/fido/
ftp://ftp.irvbbs.com/fidonews/
ftp://ftp.nwstar.com/Fidonet/Fidonews
And in non-English formats via:
http://www.hvc.ee/pats/fidonews (Estonian)
http://www.fidonet.pp.se/sfnews (Swedish)
*=*=*
You may obtain an email subscription to FidoNews by sending email to:
jbarchuk@worldnet.att.net
with a Subject line of: subscribe fnews-edist
and no message in the message body. To remove your name from the email
distribution use a Subject line of: unsubscribe fnews-edist with no
message to the same address above.
*
You may retrieve current and previous Issues of FidoNews via FTPMail
by sending email to:
ftpmail@fidonews.org
with a Subject line of: help
and FTPMail will immediately send a reply containing details and
instructions. When you actually make a file request, FTPMail will
respond in three stages. You find a link for this process on
www.fidonews.org.
*=*=*
You can read the current FidoNews Issue in HTML format at:
http://www.fidonews.org
STAR SOURCE for ALL Past Issues via FTP and file-request -
Available for FReq from 1:396/1 or by anonymous FTP from:
FIDONEWS 15-28 Page 36 13 Jul 1998
ftp://ftp.sstar.com/fidonet/fnews/
Each yearly archive also contains a listing of the Table-of-Contents
for that year's issues. The total set is currently about 13 Megs.
=*=*=*=
The current week's FidoNews and the FidoNews public-key are now also
available almost immediately after publication on the FidoNews Editor
homepage on the World Wide Web at:
http://209.77.228.66/fidonews.html
There are also links there to jim barchuk's HTML FidoNews source and
to John Souvestre's FTP site for the archives. There is also an
email link for sending in an article as message text. Drop on over.
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
A PGP generated public-key is available for the FidoNews Editor from
1:1/23 [1:205/1701] by file-request for FNEWSKEY or by download from
IKVHFoT! BBS at 1-209-251-7529 as FIDONEWS.ASC in File Area X. It
is also posted twice a month into the PKEY_DROP Echo available on the
Zone 1 Echomail Backbone.
*=*=*=*=*
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 Editor, or file-requestable
from 1:1/23 [1:205/1701] as file "ARTSPEC.DOC". ALL Zone
Coordinators also have copies of ARTSPEC.DOC. Please read it.
"Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered
trademarks of Tom Jennings, P.O. Box 410923, San Francisco, CA 94141,
and are used with permission.
"Disagreement is actually necessary,
or we'd all have to get in fights
or something to amuse ourselves
and create the requisite chaos."
-Tom Jennings
### -30- ###
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink