informis
/
textfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
textfiles/bbs/FIDONET/JENNINGS/CONTROVERSY/war.txt

3127 lines
124 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.

Original Message Date: 06 Aug 92 06:08:29
From: Paul Dickie on 2:256/62
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: Wherever he is (or just forward to R
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:256/62
* Forwarded from "REGION25"
* Originally by Pete Hosey
* Originally to Noel Bradford
* Originally dated 4 Aug 1992, 20:17
In message to all Noel Bradford the pretend RC said:
> Ladies & Gentlemen,
>
> As you are now ALL fully aware I have been appointed RC by
> the ZC, Ron
> Dwight. Please believe me when I say that this has came as
> a complete shock to
> me. I don't really want the job as it makes me look like
> Ron's minion,
If you don't really want the job why have you got it????? And as far as <20>
looking like Ron's minion you not only look it you have his name stamped <20>
all over your forehead. Not a very good start is it - trying to con us <20>
all?
> Which I am NOT!. I feel my duty as RC is to serve the
> Region.
The best thing you can do if you really feel that your duty is to serve <20>
the region would be to call a bona fide election and allow the region to <20>
select their own RC.
> These are the Proposals that I have put forward to the NC
> for there
> consideration.
Thankyou for putting the word *I* in the above. So these are your <20>
proposals on behalf of the sysops are they?
> 1) In accordance with Ron's wishes I remain 25/0.
In accordance with Rons Wishes!!! I thought you said a) you didn't want <20>
the job and b) that you weren't Rons minion and c) that you were here to <20>
serve the region! So what's this then? A sudden change of heart? Boy <20>
you're gonna go a long way!!
2) I function purely as an RC in the strictest technical
> sense
> (ie nodelist etc)
Yes but always in accordance with Rons wishes - don't forget to add that!!
> 3) The NC's form a council to discuss any of the changes
> that RD
> requires thus removing any POWER that I may have as RC. I
> will act as
> chairman of the council and have NO voting rights as such
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A bit like the position us sysops are in!!
> Task: Find some way to stabilize the region.
Solution: Allow the sysops in this region to elect an RC as is our <20>
democratic way. Kick out the power mongers and those who wish to impose <20>
their will on others then it will be not only stable but will also return <20>
to being a hobby instead of an arena for meglomaniacs!!
In short matey up yours!!
Pete.
--- D'Bridge 1.30/006666
* Origin: TAHUTI - Coventry +44 203 598939 (2:253/175)
Original Message Date: 06 Aug 92 21:40:31
From: Henk Wevers on 2:500/1
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: TO_TOM.ZIP
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:500/1
the file
Original Message Date: 06 Aug 92 21:18:42
From: Henk Wevers on 2:500/1
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: With a little help from your friends....
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:500/1
Hello Tom,
Its a long time....
Before I start the shit, when I told my wife that I was going to write <20>
you a
message she asked me to say hello...
OK, some month ago I sent some messages about a madman in the north, the
current ZC. Wel the political shit has started again and what's worse, <20>
this
may very well be start of me saying goodbye to fidonet forgood.
The fact is that we in region 28 (the netherlands) have a good working
fidonet system with so called overlapping social nets. They have been <20>
there
from around 1985, even before any political 'policy' was ever in place <20>
and
worked fine since then. You know the HCC net, you have seen that in
operation.
Ron has some religious ideas about the current policy and want to change <20>
all
that. Eg dismantling the HCC and PCC nets. As things run smoothly here
(except for the occasional 'mikey; we all have seen pop up now and then)
none of the so called *C's in region 28 want the change.
To get Ron of our backs we promised to discuss the situation (which we <20>
will
do in due (that is when we see fit) time).
Suddenly Ron has appointed some sysop here (a year in fidonet, very bad
reputation), probably the only one he could get, as RC. We were informed
wednesday, two days before the new nodelist caomes out.
A few hours before rons message this sysop sent all NC's a message
requesting a session level password because he was the new RC. We we told
him that anyone could say that we received a followup message telling us
that if we had no password in place he would replace the nethost
immediately.
We sent him a joint letter (ALL nethosts, regional coordinator and <20>
echomail
coordinator) telling him that we would not cooperate.
Appearently we have to make our point, so we sent a letter to Ron as <20>
well,
telling him to mind his own business and go do what he should do, <20>
compiling
an actual and recent list of nodes in fidonet, including region 28.
You find this letter and his answer in the To_Tom.ZIP file attached.
I am sorry to bother you with this shit. It's beautifull wheater here <20>
and I
can think of a lot better things to do than typing this message due to
political bullshit again. But I need some help urgently now. The next
nodelist will probably have NO entry for region 28 (except for some folk
that think they can gain something from the situation) and I don't see <20>
how
we all here can return to the fidonet nodelist easely. I have no <20>
intention
to give in to this fanatic ZC, but would like to stay in fidonet.
The last message you sent me told me that you were working on some
'weapons'. Well I desperately need them now. Any way you could help ?
(how about moving the whole region 28 to zone 1 ?)
Hope to hear from you. Route via Randy at 1:105/42. The TipTop
transatlantic link is operational and moves 3 to 5 M a day from zone 1 to
zone 2.
Cheers
Henk
Original Message Date: 06 Aug 92 21:18:42
From: Henk Wevers on 2:500/1
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: With a little help from your friends....
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:500/1
Hello Tom,
Its a long time....
Before I start the shit, when I told my wife that I was going to write <20>
you a
message she asked me to say hello...
OK, some month ago I sent some messages about a madman in the north, the
current ZC. Wel the political shit has started again and what's worse, <20>
this
may very well be start of me saying goodbye to fidonet forgood.
The fact is that we in region 28 (the netherlands) have a good working
fidonet system with so called overlapping social nets. They have been <20>
there
from around 1985, even before any political 'policy' was ever in place <20>
and
worked fine since then. You know the HCC net, you have seen that in
operation.
Ron has some religious ideas about the current policy and want to change <20>
all
that. Eg dismantling the HCC and PCC nets. As things run smoothly here
(except for the occasional 'mikey; we all have seen pop up now and then)
none of the so called *C's in region 28 want the change.
To get Ron of our backs we promised to discuss the situation (which we <20>
will
do in due (that is when we see fit) time).
Suddenly Ron has appointed some sysop here (a year in fidonet, very bad
reputation), probably the only one he could get, as RC. We were informed
wednesday, two days before the new nodelist caomes out.
A few hours before rons message this sysop sent all NC's a message
requesting a session level password because he was the new RC. We we told
him that anyone could say that we received a followup message telling us
that if we had no password in place he would replace the nethost
immediately.
We sent him a joint letter (ALL nethosts, regional coordinator and <20>
echomail
coordinator) telling him that we would not cooperate.
Appearently we have to make our point, so we sent a letter to Ron as <20>
well,
telling him to mind his own business and go do what he should do, <20>
compiling
an actual and recent list of nodes in fidonet, including region 28.
You find this letter and his answer in the To_Tom.ZIP file attached.
I am sorry to bother you with this shit. It's beautifull wheater here <20>
and I
can think of a lot better things to do than typing this message due to
political bullshit again. But I need some help urgently now. The next
nodelist will probably have NO entry for region 28 (except for some folk
that think they can gain something from the situation) and I don't see <20>
how
we all here can return to the fidonet nodelist easely. I have no <20>
intention
to give in to this fanatic ZC, but would like to stay in fidonet.
The last message you sent me told me that you were working on some
'weapons'. Well I desperately need them now. Any way you could help ?
(how about moving the whole region 28 to zone 1 ?)
Hope to hear from you. Route via Randy at 1:105/42. The TipTop
transatlantic link is operational and moves 3 to 5 M a day from zone 1 to
zone 2.
Cheers
Henk
Original Message Date: 06 Aug 92 14:28:41
From: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
To: matt on 3:3/1000
Subj: Z2, region 28, Ron Dwight
^AINTL 3:3/1000 1:125/111
Matt -- do you have an opinion on what Ron Dwight is doing? It sure
looks like it's time to step in to me. I know that no one is clean
over there -- or anywhere for that matter. But rearranging the network
for whatever purpose is going too far.
Unless I get some information otherwise, I'm probably going to cause
some trouble soon. Any info you give me would be appreciated --
anonymously, directly, by Postal, whatever. In any particular
direction. I have a hard time believing that Dwight is doing good
things, but surprise me... :-)
If I don't hear from you in a few days, I'll try to contact you some
other method...
Tom Jennings
email: tomj@fidosw.fidonet.org
voice: +1-415-552-8156 (10AM PST til...)
postal: 666 Illinois, San Francisco CA 94107 USA
Original Message Date: 03 Aug 92 09:27:47
From: Kerry McCandlish on 2:251/23
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: Greetings
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:251/23
Hello Tom,
I titled this message as 'greetings' as I want to set the mood!
This is NOT a flame...
Firstly, I should like to inform you that FidoNet is one of the most
interesting hobbies I've ever participated in! I have run a BBS for a
few months in the Outer Hebrides of Scotland. It's not very busy,
frequently only one call a day, but I really enjoy it...
The concept of FidoNet is great and until very recently I was happily
oblivious to the Zone 2 region 25 situation.
Wow! What a mess that all is... I won't trouble you with the details as
I might start catching fire :-)...
You see, I am approaching you as like a "Father of FidoNet" rather then
any notional position you may hold within Fidonet. This message is
really coming to you as a personal one and not an administrative one.
Please... Spare some time to look at R25 in zone 2 and perhaps we can
make Fidonet the way it should be... A nice hobby. Some people in Z2
want to impose personal viewpoints and it really is quite depressing for
me to see all the bickering.
For your interest, here is a copy of the letter I sent to my recently
installed (not elected) RC.
Ä Area: 9 <20>
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
Msg#: 4 Pvt Imm Dir Date: 03 Aug 92 <20>
08:06:36
From: Kerry McCandlish
To: Noel Bradford
Subj: Greetings
<EFBFBD>
ÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ
Hello Noel!
We have not messaged before, and until Ron's recent announcment I had
not even been aware of your prescence! :-)
It would seem that your appointment to RC25 has caused quite an uproar.
Perhaps you might be prepared to treat your new post as a temporary post
so that the people can have their vote.
I know that R25 seems to be having difficulty in managing it's own
affairs as far as RC is concerned, but I do feel that they should be
given the benefit of the doubt.
This is not a flame and is intended to let you know that I support the
those in R25 who are intending to take the vote into their own hands.
I would also like to make it known that I will partake in that vote,
wherever it may lead. I do not intend standing for the post myself. In
fact I would be very reluctant to wear any of the FidoNet 'hats' judging
by the way people seem to behave. The 'cap' of SysOp is more than enough
for me :-).
I know Ron Dwight was quite within his rights when he decided to appoint
you as RC and I don't question that in itself, but I do feel he should
have sounded us all out first.
Best Regards,
Kerry.
... Se Taigh An Duine seo A Chaisteal.
-*-*-*-> MESSAGE ENDS
You don't need to reply to me, unless you want to express a viewpoint,
but it is good for me to unload a little onto you and I apologise for
doing so.
Very best of luck with communications and keep up the good work.
Best regards,
Kerry.
Mr. K. McCandlish (Sysop Benbecula Shuttle).
... Isle of Benbecula, Western Isles, SCOTLAND (The Brave)
--- Blue Wave/RA v2.10 [NR]
Original Message Date: 07 Aug 92 09:40:15
From: Paul Dickie on 2:256/62
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: New RC/25 appointment
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:256/62
* Forwarded from "EURO_SYS"
* Originally by Ron Dwight
* Originally to Wally Beben
* Originally dated 2 Aug 1992, 19:51
Hi Wally,
> In a message to dieter soltau dated 27 Jul 92 08:34 Peter Burnett
> wrote:
> PB> My resigination was finanically
> PB> induduced, [...]
> And we know (at least most of us) that had you carried through
> your term as RC you would have done as excellent a job as you had
> begun.
With this I agree.
> However, the main purpose of this message is to let you,
> Ron Dwight, and everyone else in ENET.SYSOP know that I, for one,
> although reasonably content with some of RD's decisions and
> commitments, do not for one instant accept the imposition of an RC
> within R25 by virtue of a dictated ZC command, and I don't give a
> monkey's root about what POLICY4 says on the subject...
Well my friend, for the next 5 months (at least) you have no <20>
alternative. Noel Bradford IS the current RC/25 and unless he resigns <20>
(which I doubt) he will remain as RC/25 until at least the end of the <20>
year, at which time elections will once again be considered.
> The UK virtually introduced democtratic elections for the RC
> position, and up till recently has been working well.
Democratic elections for *C positions have been fully supported <20>
since the first ZC allowed them to happen. THey are NOT supported by <20>
Policy and sometimes they just must be placed (temporarily) to one side <20>
while problems are sorted out. If you find difficulties in handling this <20>
then I suggest a break from FidoNet for a few months, you will be a lot <20>
better for it.
> Unfortunately, through the actions of a small minority with IQ's
> no bigger than their shoe size, things have been getting ropey but
> certainly not enough to remove the power of the vote which right
> we (the R25 nodes) no doubt wish to retain.
The "power of the vote" as you put it is simply as a <20>
recommendation to the ZC to appoint who is elected. This has always been <20>
done in the past but at this period of time would not appear to be <20>
beneficial for either region 25 or zone 2.
> I have made it known within the REGION25 echo that I am calling
> for an election for RC25, and have also voiced my intention to
> stand this time for the position. If Ron D. doesn't like it then
> tough; I don't think I'm on my own on this point and I believe
> that pretty soon this will become apparent.
Feel free to call whatever elections you like, the results of <20>
such an election are NOT valid. Noel IS and will remain as RC/25 until at <20>
least the end of 1992.
> I think it may be well at this stage to mention that one matter of
> primary importance IMO is the settling and introduction (by
> majority agreement) of the Region 25 Admin and Echo FidoNet
> Policies which are currently being discussed. Hopefully this will
> again take the lead and other Regions follow suit in this
> regard...
As long as your policies are in accordance with the requirements <20>
of Policy 4 then we can talk about it. If you attempt to override policy <20>
4 then you are out of luck.
Cheers,
--- TosScan 1.00
* Origin: FrontDoor! Kirkkonummi, SF (2:220/22)
Original Message Date: 07 Aug 92 09:42:14
From: Paul Dickie on 2:256/62
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: New RC/25 appointment
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:256/62
* Forwarded from "EURO_SYS"
* Originally by Keith Wassell
* Originally to Ron Dwight
* Originally dated 6 Aug 1992, 0:49
* Replying to message originally to Paul Dickie on 02-Aug-92
RD> Perhaps for them they are right, but it demonstrates
RD> a total lack of understanding and a complete unwillingness to
RD> work together. FidoNet in general and region 25 in particular
RD> will be better off in the long run.
Oh hear ye high & mighty !...... How can you say we are unwilling to work <20>
with you ?. all you have done is squatted off on us, with no regard for <20>
History, and our feelings. all you have suceeded in doing is cause a storm.
Believe you me, we will do WHATEVER it takes to remove , or circumvent him <20>
!
RD> Great. Let's call it the "purging of the prats",
RD> shall we?
Brilliant idea ! Perhaps as their cheif, you care to do us a favour by
tendering YOUR resignation.
RD> > By appointing someone that you would prefer, you have
RD> completely
RD> > ignored the expressed wishes of the Region.
RD>
RD> What "expressed wishes?" Paul Blitz quit, "the
Do we need to xpost most of the R25 echo into this one so you can see ?
RD> In some quarters and by some people. Does this
RD> remind you of anyone else <grin> ?
Err, actually yes, you Ron.
RD> I do not believe so and I can GUARANTEE that it has
RD> woken a few people up.
Not Really, we were awake anyway, its just turned the hive into a hornets <20>
nest.
--- SuperBBS 1.15 Gamma-3 (Reg)
* Origin: PC FORUM * ERITH KENT * +44-322-350372/350190 (2:440/2)
Original Message Date: 07 Aug 92 09:42:24
From: Paul Dickie on 2:256/62
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: New RC/25 appointment
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:256/62
* Forwarded from "EURO_SYS"
* Originally by Paul Dickie
* Originally to Ron Dwight
* Originally dated 7 Aug 1992, 9:36
Greetings!
RD> Well my friend, for the next 5 months (at least) you have no
RD> alternative. Noel Bradford IS the current RC/25 and unless he resigns
RD> (which I doubt) he will remain as RC/25 until at least the end of the
RD> year, at which time elections will once again be considered.
You don't *need* to *prove* that you have utter contempt for Region 25.
We already *know* that you have.
RD> Democratic elections for *C positions have been fully supported since
RD> the first ZC allowed them to happen.
You have, in previous postings, indicated that you wanted *all* RC's to be <20>
elected. Now, it seems, you don't want that...
RD> sometimes they just must be placed (temporarily) to one side while
RD> problems are sorted out.
Well, written like that, it seems very reasonable. It's fascism, sure, but <20>
it all seems very reasonable. Tell me, Ron, will Noel also get the trains <20>
to run on time, or is that outside his remit?
RD> If you find difficulties in handling this then I suggest a break from
RD> FidoNet for a few months, you will be a lot better for it.
If you are unable to accept the fact that, by your actions, you have <20>
completely pissed off a Region, then I would suggest that *you* take a <20>
break from FidoNet, for a few months or for a few years. We will *all* be <20>
a lot better for that...
To suggest that if one doesn't like *your* choice of RC, one should simply <20>
get out of FidoNet, is quite the worst thing that I've read in this echo.
Quite simply, it is naked fascism.
RD> The "power of the vote" as you put it is simply as a recommendation to
RD> the ZC to appoint who is elected. This has always been done in the <20>
past
RD> but at this period of time would not appear to be beneficial for <20>
either
RD> region 25 or zone 2.
Oh, I suppose that we ought to be grateful for saving us from the <20>
necessity of having to think for ourselves? That's the next line, isn't <20>
it?
Just who the hell do you think you are to decide what's beneficial to <20>
Region25? Such "paternal care" is not part of your role, as defined by P4, <20>
and you know that it isn't.
RD> Feel free to call whatever elections you like, the results of such an
RD> election are NOT valid.
We shall see about that.
Earlier this year, you came pretty damned close to losing much of a whole <20>
Region. Now, you may well have the same thing happen again...
RD> Noel IS and will remain as RC/25 until at least the end of 1992.
If he is able to...
RD> As long as your policies are in accordance with the
RD> requirements of Policy 4 then we can talk about it.
You will surely have noted the opening preamble to P4 -- that local <20>
policies are permitted, with only the stipulation that such local policies <20>
may not impose additional restrictions on sysops than are outlined "in <20>
this document".
No additional restrictions are being considered.
RD> If you attempt to override policy 4 then you are out of luck.
No, Ron. It is you who will be "out of luck", for your actions here have <20>
made it rather more probable that the UK_Admin_Pol would be accepted by <20>
the Region. You would then have a clear choice -- accept it, or remove the <20>
Region.
If you opted for the former, you would appear as a sensible pragmatist, <20>
though your ability to interfere in future would be curtailed somewhat. If <20>
you opted for the latter, you would appear to be a power-crazed idiot, <20>
which is something that I'm sure you would seen as being...
Cheerio for now!
< Paul >
---
* Origin: Bozzimaccoo!! The Unfriendly BBS! (2:256/62)
Original Message Date: 06 Aug 92 06:08:29
From: Paul Dickie on 2:256/62
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: Wherever he is (or just forward to R
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:256/62
* Forwarded from "REGION25"
* Originally by Pete Hosey
* Originally to Noel Bradford
* Originally dated 4 Aug 1992, 20:17
In message to all Noel Bradford the pretend RC said:
> Ladies & Gentlemen,
>
> As you are now ALL fully aware I have been appointed RC by
> the ZC, Ron
> Dwight. Please believe me when I say that this has came as
> a complete shock to
> me. I don't really want the job as it makes me look like
> Ron's minion,
If you don't really want the job why have you got it????? And as far as <20>
looking like Ron's minion you not only look it you have his name stamped <20>
all over your forehead. Not a very good start is it - trying to con us <20>
all?
> Which I am NOT!. I feel my duty as RC is to serve the
> Region.
The best thing you can do if you really feel that your duty is to serve <20>
the region would be to call a bona fide election and allow the region to <20>
select their own RC.
> These are the Proposals that I have put forward to the NC
> for there
> consideration.
Thankyou for putting the word *I* in the above. So these are your <20>
proposals on behalf of the sysops are they?
> 1) In accordance with Ron's wishes I remain 25/0.
In accordance with Rons Wishes!!! I thought you said a) you didn't want <20>
the job and b) that you weren't Rons minion and c) that you were here to <20>
serve the region! So what's this then? A sudden change of heart? Boy <20>
you're gonna go a long way!!
2) I function purely as an RC in the strictest technical
> sense
> (ie nodelist etc)
Yes but always in accordance with Rons wishes - don't forget to add that!!
> 3) The NC's form a council to discuss any of the changes
> that RD
> requires thus removing any POWER that I may have as RC. I
> will act as
> chairman of the council and have NO voting rights as such
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
A bit like the position us sysops are in!!
> Task: Find some way to stabilize the region.
Solution: Allow the sysops in this region to elect an RC as is our <20>
democratic way. Kick out the power mongers and those who wish to impose <20>
their will on others then it will be not only stable but will also return <20>
to being a hobby instead of an arena for meglomaniacs!!
In short matey up yours!!
Pete.
--- D'Bridge 1.30/006666
* Origin: TAHUTI - Coventry +44 203 598939 (2:253/175)
Original Message Date: 06 Aug 92 06:29:21
From: Paul Dickie on 2:256/62
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: Funny Message
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:256/62
* Forwarded from "REGION25"
* Originally by Paul Dickie
* Originally to Frank Peterson
* Originally dated 6 Aug 1992, 6:28
Greetings!
FP> If you have any complaints take them to your NC who will pass them on
FP> to the Council of NC's who will take action if they feel it necessary.
Perhaps you could point out to me where in Policy such a "Council" is <20>
mentioned, either by name or by function? I've looked through P4 several <20>
times, and can find no reference to it anywhere...
FP> Nothing could be simpler or fairer than that could it.
Frankly, yes. The result of this little attempt at creating "democracy" <20>
by setting up an oligarchy, will be that the larger nets will have the <20>
same "clout" as the smaller nets and, fiddle with the nets however one <20>
might, some nets are still going to be considerably larger than others. <20>
This is the sort of non-democracy that has brought the Trade Union <20>
movement into disrepute, and it may do the same for FidoNet UK.
Consider, if you will, two hypothetical nets -- they're hypothetical <20>
simply to make the maths simpler. One has 120 nodes in it, whilst the <20>
other has only 30. To influence the NC, and to mandate the NC, a sysop in <20>
the larger net would have to enlist the support of *four* *times* as many <20>
of his fellow sysops as would someone in the smaller net. Is *that* <20>
democracy?
Too darned right it isn't!
FP> I'm sure you will understand the need for this kind of structure and
FP> I'm sure you will give us your full support.
If the RC is to follow P4, then he should follow P4. If he isn't, then he <20>
cannot logically claim any justification for trying to push through his <20>
ideas for Geo-nets.
He can't do both -- to use P4 as an excuse for some actions, and to <20>
abandon P4 when it pleases him so to do.
Cheerio for now!
< Paul >
---
* Origin: Bozzimaccoo!! (2:256/62)
Original Message Date: 06 Aug 92 06:54:02
From: Paul Dickie on 2:256/62
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: The revenge of the Power Seekers
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:256/62
Greetings!
You may have heard something of the recent upsets we've had in our Region. <20>
You may have heard that the RC quit, having being appropriately deluged <20>
with what he was pleased to call "hate mail", after he decided to try to <20>
curtail public discussion of the way that FidoNet UK was being run. You <20>
may even have heard that the ZC2, Ron Dwight, has seen fit to *appoint* <20>
someone of *his* choice to take over the running of the Region, and that <20>
Ron's choice is a cove called Noel Bradford.
You might even know Noel, for all I know.
If you do know the fellow, you may understand why it should be that his <20>
appointment has raised such strong feelings in this Region, and why not a <20>
few of the sysops, who normally don't say very much at all, have openly <20>
condemned his being *imposed* on us from "on high". If you don't, then the <20>
accompanying messages may go some way to explain what's happening here.
Noel Bradford is intent on introducing Geographically-orientated networks. <20>
That these would not exactly help the Region to prosper seems to have <20>
escaped his attention -- the ZC told him to jump, and Noel's response was <20>
to query, "How high, my Master?"...
Had the Geo-nets been based on local calling districts, it might have made <20>
some slight sense, even though the telecommuncations situation in the UK <20>
is markedly different from that in the US. That, however, would have been <20>
far too complicated, and would have required far too much careful <20>
thought,, so the basis seems to be a cross between a carve-up of the <20>
Region between the NC's of existing nets, and an allocation based on <20>
television station coverage. This, of course, has little rational bearing <20>
on FidoNet UK, or the way that it operates but, hey, what the heck? <20>
They're geographically orientated, aren't they? Policy dictates that all <20>
nets shall be geographically determined...
Earlier this year, a poll was held of the sysops reading the Regional <20>
echo, on whether or not they wanted geo-nets. The result was a not <20>
inconsiderable majority were against any such nonsense. To introduce <20>
geo-nets, therefore, is to ignore the expressed wishes of those of the <20>
sysops who cared to express a preference.
What's worse is that he's also trying to bring in a silly little <20>
oligarchy, to "run the region", even though this is manifestly <20>
anti-democratic.
Now, I know that you don't consider it proper to interfere with matters of <20>
this nature, but some interference is surely needed. We don't have <20>
omnarchism in this Region or Zone, more is the pity. We certainly don't <20>
have democracy, or the RC25 would not have been imposed on us, like Zeus <20>
sending the frogs a heron as their king. Maybe a comment or two in the <20>
next editorial of FidoNews would help, though? Maybe ...
Meanwhile, we'll just have to put up with the usual nonsense from the <20>
power- seekers and the power-mad, and somehow try not to let them push <20>
everyone around too much.
Someone once said that this was a *hobby*, I understand? They ought to <20>
try living in Britain...
Cheerio for now!
< Paul >
Original Message Date: 09 Aug 92 00:04:28
From: Peter Smink on 2:285/1
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: New RC appointment for region 28
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:285/1
* Original to: Ben de Goey (2:286/0)
cc: Ron Dwight, Henk Wevers, Hanno van.der.Maas, Joop Mellaart
cc: Peter Janssens, Max Keizer, Eelco De.graaff, Rick Kelly
cc: Eric Lotgerink, Patrick Maartense, Matt Whelan
Hello Ben!
That ain't nothing yet. Take a look at some quotes i've got from Frank van <20>
der Loos, our newly installed RC-28 by Ron Dwight :
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote 1 from Frank van der Loos :
> Kan ik me best wel voorstellen, ik kan het als RC een kleine NC, maar
> oer-domme
> NC, toch echt wel moeilijk maken, maar of ik daar nog zin in heb is 2.
> Misschien laat ik wel het gehele 285 net klappen, dat ben jij nog wel
> waard, de
> antwoorden die ik van jouw heb gehad en nu dus ook weer krijg laten
> wel zijn
> dat jouw (c) alleen geldt voor die ENE hersencel die jij meer hebt
> dan die koe
> bij jouw voor de deur, want anders schijt je de gehele keuken elke
> keer weer onder !
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Translation:
I can imagine. I, as RC, can give a little pityfull NC (and stupid like a <20>
mule) a very rought time. Perhaps i blow up the whole 285-net, your worth <20>
it. The answers i've got from you let it be clear that the (c) copyright <20>
only is valid for that one stupid brain-cell you have. Perhaps more than <20>
the cow in front of your door shitting the kitchen all over.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote 2 from Frank van der Loos :
> En trouwens heel die domme sysop-echo interesseert mij geen BAL !
> Zoals ik al eerder zei, JIJ VINDT AL DIE PEDO BERICHTJES dus wel lekker,
> maar ik heb er geen behoefte aan. Denk ook maar niet dat jij enigszins <20>
in
> staat bent
> om mij er van te weerhouden dat ik een echo wel of niet krijg, daar ben <20>
je
> nogmaals veels te dom voor. Ik kan je wel zeggen dat zolang ik een <20>
modem heb,
> ik de echo kan lezen die ik wil. Al moet ik ze halen in de USA of
> waar dan ook.
> Ik heb jouw dictatorschap niet nodig om te kunnen genieten van
> FIDONET. Je moet
> zo zien, ik maak niet in elke netmail die ik schrijf 10 werkwoords-
> spellings
> fouten, en jij dus wel. Zo zie je maar dat momenteel de domme mensen
> het voor
> het vertellen hebben in net 2:285 !
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Translation:
Btw, those all those stupid sysop conferences do not interest me one bit.
As mentioned before, you like all those messages about sex with childeren. <20>
I don't need it. Don't think you are capable to withold me if i do get a <20>
conference or not. Again, you are much too stupid for it. I can tell you <20>
that while i have a modem i can read every conference i like. Even if i <20>
have to phone to the states. I don't need your dictatorship to enjoy <20>
fidonet. Look at it this way, i don't make 10 typing errors in every <20>
netmail i write like you do. As you can see only stupid people are <20>
running 2:285 net.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote 3 from Frank van der Loos :
>> NEC-285
> Nog wel, maar als het aan mij ligt zal dat snel veranderen !
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Translation:
>> NEC-285
Still, but this will change very soon because of me.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote 3 from Frank van der Loos to hub 2:285/30 Arie Ballegooien :
> Hallo Arie,
> Hier dan de nodediff !
> PS: Nadenken kun je wel aan mij overlaten, en ik laat mij niet door
> ROn Dwight
> vertellen wat ik moet doen, dat weet ik zelf wel. Ik loop dus al
> langer met dit
> reorganisatieplan rond, en je weet dat ik het er al eens met je over
> gehad heb.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Translation:
Hello Arie,
Here the nodediff.
PS:Let me do the thinking and i don't let Ron Dwight tell me what to do, i <20>
know that for myself. I have this reorganisationscheme longer in mind (as <20>
i have mentioned in the past).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of quotes and translations.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A word to Tom Jennings; So this has become of fidonet in zone 2. Can't <20>
imagine that your proud of it (i would hang my head in shame :-(
A democraticalle elected RC-28 removed from office and replaced with <20>
someone (...)
Regards,
Peter Smink
Thought to be ex-communicated.
Original Message Date: 09 Aug 92 13:04:20
From: Ben de Goey on 2:286/0
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: New RC appointment for region 28
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:286/0
CC: Matt Whelan, Ron Dwight, Henk Wevers, Hanno van.der.Maas
CC: Peter Janssens, Max Keizer, Eelco De.graaff, Rick Kelly
CC: Eric Lotgerink, Patrick Maartense, Peter Smink
Continue
* Original to: Ben de Goey (2:286/0)
cc: Ron Dwight, Henk Wevers, Hanno van.der.Maas, Joop Mellaart
cc: Peter Janssens, Max Keizer, Eelco De.graaff, Rick Kelly
cc: Eric Lotgerink, Patrick Maartense, Matt Whelan, Tom Jennings
Hello Ben!
That ain't nothing yet. Take a look at some quotes i've got from Frank van <20>
der Loos, our newly installed RC-28 by Ron Dwight :
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote 1 from Frank van der Loos :
> Kan ik me best wel voorstellen, ik kan het als RC een kleine NC, maar
> oer-domme
> NC, toch echt wel moeilijk maken, maar of ik daar nog zin in heb is 2.
> Misschien laat ik wel het gehele 285 net klappen, dat ben jij nog wel
> waard, de
> antwoorden die ik van jouw heb gehad en nu dus ook weer krijg laten
> wel zijn
> dat jouw (c) alleen geldt voor die ENE hersencel die jij meer hebt
> dan die koe
> bij jouw voor de deur, want anders schijt je de gehele keuken elke
> keer weer onder !
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Translation:
I can imagine. I, as RC, can give a little pityfull NC (and stupid like a <20>
mule) a very rought time. Perhaps i blow up the whole 285-net, your worth <20>
it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote 3 from Frank van der Loos to hub 2:285/30 Arie Ballegooien :
> Hallo Arie,
> Hier dan de nodediff !
> PS: Nadenken kun je wel aan mij overlaten, en ik laat mij niet door
> ROn Dwight
> vertellen wat ik moet doen, dat weet ik zelf wel. Ik loop dus al
> langer met dit
> reorganisatieplan rond, en je weet dat ik het er al eens met je over
> gehad heb.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Translation:
Hello Arie,
Here the nodediff.
PS:Let me do the thinking and i don't let Ron Dwight tell me what to do, i <20>
know that for myself. I have this reorganisationscheme longer in mind (as <20>
i ha
------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of quotes and translations.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Regards,
Peter Smink
Thought to be ex-communicated.
===============================================
Matt,
WHO IS THE QUILTY ONE ?????????????
Ron with his blindfold over his eyes or
New RC F.v.d.Loos with a one-track mind (egotripper) and a bad language in
fido.
HOLLAND is a very small country but with a big lot of Fidonet BBS and <20>
users,
since some years well-organised and operating smoothly.
THEREFORE ?, WHY CHANGE A WELL RUNNING OPERATION ???????????????.
Kind regards,
Ben de Goey
Host 2:286/0
Dutch Independent Network.
Original Message Date: 09 Aug 92 12:31:41
From: Ben de Goey on 2:286/0
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: Re: New RC appointment for region 28
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:286/0
CC: Ron Dwight, Matt Whelan, Henk Wevers, Hanno van.der.Maas
CC: Peter Janssens, Max Keizer, Eelco De.graaff, Rick Kelly
CC: Eric Lotgerink, Patrick Maartense, Peter Smink
Hello Matt,
Hereby the continuing story of "Peyton Place" Holland. A story about how <20>
do we make life difficult for each other.
> Hi Ben,
>> ==========================================
>> Translate:
>> Hello Max,
>> I'm not like you and therefore I shall not express myself as
>> insulting as you did. I will expell you from the Nodelist as Entry
>> for insulting the R.C/28 as of now.
>> You shouldn't think I accept something like that, you can do that
>> to your nodes, if they want to follow you,for the have had it also
>> with your quarrelling I would think.
>> Complaints you can put to the ZC and them to the IC !
>> I won't let a little NC like you call me names, and certainly not
>> in a way you do.I can't help it if you are frustrated about World
>> War II, but in this case it only costs you your Node#, so the
>> damage isn't that big. ========
>> ==========================================================
>> ###############################
>> ####################################
>> Ron, this childish talk of F.vd.Loos, WE, MEN OF FIFTY YEARS AND
>> OLDER CANNOT ACCEPT.
> You must realise of course that he a little new to the job and
> has not yet learned tolorance. I am helping him to be a little more
> steady in his attitude and he has been told that random excommunication
> is NOT the way to go. It is not the correct way to go and he has also
> been informed that it is not the way to make friends. You must realise
> though that he is in a very difficult position right now and he is
> dealing with the situation as best as he knows how.
> Please realise as well, that ALL the RCs of region 28 are
> guilty of a GROSS violation of policy in setting passwords against
> 2:28/0. I do not take this matter lightly and you cannot expect the
Password:
---------
Since the new R.C. became active as of 08.05.92, the Dutch Fidonet is <20>
upside down.
> protection of policy or even my understanding while you (as a group) are
> behaving in this manner.
Quote: Password against 2:28/0 ???????????
The nets within region 2:28 acknowlege only the democratically elected RC.
Hanno v.d.Maas.
The new RC., forced on us by Ron Dwight, requested us to put a session <20>
password to 2:28/0. This we did but as he isn't acknowlegde by all the <20>
nets within 2:28 we didn't make the passwords known to him.
> Cheers,
> ^AVia FrontDoor 2:2405/100@FIDONET, Aug 8 1992 at 19:45
> ^AVia Dutchie 2:500/2 Sun Aug 09 02:02:17 1992 UTC
> ^AVia MsgTrack 2:28/6@fidonet, Sun Aug 09 1992 at 06:23 UTC
Is this a RC. ?????
<To be continued>
Original Message Date: 09 Aug 92 11:58:42
From: Ben de Goey on 2:28/6
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: Z-2 Region28 problems (2)
^AFLAGS DIR
CC: Matt Whelan
Msg # 57 Private
Date: 08 Aug 92 13:38:16
From: Ben de Goey
To: Ron Dwight
Subj: Re: New RC appointment for region 28
<EFBFBD>
____________________________________________________________________________
CC: Henk Wevers, Hanno van.der.Maas, Joop Mellaart
CC: Peter Janssens, Max Keizer, Eelco De.graaff, Rick Kelly
CC: Eric Lotgerink, Patrick Maartense, Peter Smink
PS. An example of F.vd.Loos way's to treat someone !.
Msg # 247 Private, Direct, Rcvd
Date: 07 Aug 92 16:10:19
From: Frank van der Loos on 2:28/0 Holland in NL
To: Max Keizer on 2:280/0 DFF Host Holland Capital & TipTop Gatewa in
Amsterdam NL
Subj: slechte zaak !
<EFBFBD>
____________________________________________________________________________
* Original to: Max Keizer
cc: Hugo van der Hoek
Hallo Max,
Ik ben dus niet zoals jij en ik zal dus ook geen beledigende taal uitslaan
zoals jij dus deed. Ik zal je dus wegens het beledigen van de RC/28 ook
terstond uit de NODELIST verwijderen als ENTRY. Je moet niet denken dat ik
zoiets pik, dat doe je maar met jouw NODES, als die er zin in hebben om <20>
jouw
te volgen, want die zijn het gekakreel van jouw ook wel zat denk ik !
Eventueel beklag kun je indienen bij de ZC, en daarna bij de IC !
Ik laat mij dus door een kleine NC zoals jij niet uitschelden, en zeker <20>
niet
op de manier zoals jij dat doet, ik kan het niet helpen dat jij nog
frustraties hebt overgehouden aan de WO II, maar het kost je in dit geval
alleen je NODE #, dus de schade is nog te overzien !
Frank van der Loos
Region Coordinator, Region 28
---
* Origin: Waar geen nodelist is, verliest de keizer zijn recht !
=========================================================================
Translate:
Hello Max,
I'm not like you and therefore I shall not express myself as insulting as <20>
you
did. I will expell you from the Nodelist as Entry for insulting the R.C/28 <20>
as
of now.
You shouldn't think I accept something like that, you can do that to your
nodes, if they want to follow you,for the have had it also with your
quarrelling I would think.
Complaints you can put to the ZC and them to the IC !
I won't let a little NC like you call me names, and certainly not in a way
you do.I can't help it if you are frustrated about World War II, but in <20>
this
case it only costs you your Node#, so the damage isn't that big.
==================================================================
###################################################################
Ron, this childish talk of F.vd.Loos, WE, MEN OF FIFTY YEARS AND OLDER
CANNOT ACCEPT.
Regards,
Ben.
Original Message Date: 09 Aug 92 11:55:21
From: Ben de Goey on 2:28/6
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: Z-2 Region28 problems (1)
^AFLAGS DIR
CC: Matt Whelan
Hello Matt,
Here 2 messages who I send it to Ron Dwight.
Msg # 56 Private
Date: 08 Aug 92 13:17:17
From: Ben de Goey
To: Ron Dwight
Subj: Re: New RC appointment for region 28
<EFBFBD>
____________________________________________________________________________
CC: Henk Wevers, Hanno van.der.Maas, Joop Mellaart
CC: Peter Janssens, Max Keizer, Eelco De.graaff, Rick Kelly
CC: Eric Lotgerink, Patrick Maartense, Peter Smink
Dear ? Ron,
Concerning your message,here an answer.Half a year ago you gave Hanno some
time to reorganise region28 and then I also refused to act as RC.
Fidonet is a hobby for me.
Region28 is functioning quite well for netmail between the nets and they <20>
are
cooperating very well without making trouble for each other.
As ZC you don't oversee the costs of exchaning netmail within region28.
Your task as ZC is to let the networks funtion within the regions for the
diffs and deal with the Complaints.
Also as ZC you shouldn't be influenced by some big mouths within certain
regions,and you also shouldn't let yourself be used to do the dirty work.
The relationship between the Nets is quite well,except for those big <20>
mouths.
You should have more confidence in a RC who is appointed (Eindhoven 3 years
ago) with support of Randy Bush and Henk Wevers, and who didn't make the
mistake to pull the plug as you did.
Ron, you put people in a postion,who hasn't been sysop for one year to have
it your way,but this hasn't anything to do with the functioning of a, until
now, well operating Region.
I advise you, bet be wiser!, look before you leap, as they say. This is a
hobby and not a way to make a living otherwise F.vd.L. was already in <20>
court,
not only for hacking but also for slander.
Hoping you 'll make up your mind and make the right decision and choose the
right person. Hanno has been elected democratically, and all NC's support
him.
<to be continued>
Original Message Date: 07 Aug 92 09:40:15
From: Paul Dickie on 2:256/62
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: New RC/25 appointment
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:256/62
* Forwarded from "EURO_SYS"
* Originally by Ron Dwight
* Originally to Wally Beben
* Originally dated 2 Aug 1992, 19:51
Hi Wally,
> In a message to dieter soltau dated 27 Jul 92 08:34 Peter Burnett
> wrote:
> PB> My resigination was finanically
> PB> induduced, [...]
> And we know (at least most of us) that had you carried through
> your term as RC you would have done as excellent a job as you had
> begun.
With this I agree.
> However, the main purpose of this message is to let you,
> Ron Dwight, and everyone else in ENET.SYSOP know that I, for one,
> although reasonably content with some of RD's decisions and
> commitments, do not for one instant accept the imposition of an RC
> within R25 by virtue of a dictated ZC command, and I don't give a
> monkey's root about what POLICY4 says on the subject...
Well my friend, for the next 5 months (at least) you have no <20>
alternative. Noel Bradford IS the current RC/25 and unless he resigns <20>
(which I doubt) he will remain as RC/25 until at least the end of the <20>
year, at which time elections will once again be considered.
> The UK virtually introduced democtratic elections for the RC
> position, and up till recently has been working well.
Democratic elections for *C positions have been fully supported <20>
since the first ZC allowed them to happen. THey are NOT supported by <20>
Policy and sometimes they just must be placed (temporarily) to one side <20>
while problems are sorted out. If you find difficulties in handling this <20>
then I suggest a break from FidoNet for a few months, you will be a lot <20>
better for it.
> Unfortunately, through the actions of a small minority with IQ's
> no bigger than their shoe size, things have been getting ropey but
> certainly not enough to remove the power of the vote which right
> we (the R25 nodes) no doubt wish to retain.
The "power of the vote" as you put it is simply as a <20>
recommendation to the ZC to appoint who is elected. This has always been <20>
done in the past but at this period of time would not appear to be <20>
beneficial for either region 25 or zone 2.
> I have made it known within the REGION25 echo that I am calling
> for an election for RC25, and have also voiced my intention to
> stand this time for the position. If Ron D. doesn't like it then
> tough; I don't think I'm on my own on this point and I believe
> that pretty soon this will become apparent.
Feel free to call whatever elections you like, the results of <20>
such an election are NOT valid. Noel IS and will remain as RC/25 until at <20>
least the end of 1992.
> I think it may be well at this stage to mention that one matter of
> primary importance IMO is the settling and introduction (by
> majority agreement) of the Region 25 Admin and Echo FidoNet
> Policies which are currently being discussed. Hopefully this will
> again take the lead and other Regions follow suit in this
> regard...
As long as your policies are in accordance with the requirements <20>
of Policy 4 then we can talk about it. If you attempt to override policy <20>
4 then you are out of luck.
Cheers,
--- TosScan 1.00
* Origin: FrontDoor! Kirkkonummi, SF (2:220/22)
Original Message Date: 07 Aug 92 09:40:38
From: Paul Dickie on 2:256/62
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: New RC/25 appointment
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:256/62
* Forwarded from "EURO_SYS"
* Originally by Pablo Kleinman
* Originally to Nicholas Williams
* Originally dated 2 Aug 1992, 20:42
Hola, Nick.
> I quite agree, and I think there is a great agreement
> with the sentiment you have shown here; I also know
> that a good number of Region 25 have announced that
> they will resign from Fido should Noel Bradford be
> (for want of a better word) imposed on us as R25C.
I personally have a very good impression of Noel Bradford (we just did a <20>
tour of London pubs last week when I was there and he was very friendly <20>
:)). But if indeed, he is the nasty character that a few have suggested he <20>
is, I simply can't understand how "leaving FidoNet" could be a <20>
contemplated alternative by any of the parties.
I mean, it looks to me like escaping death by burying your head on the <20>
ground like an ostrich... not very sensate, wouldn't you say?
One last thing: I haven't seen here yet the reasons that make Bradford <20>
such an "unpalatable" character in the islands... were they ever exposed, <20>
at least in private, to Ron Dwight? No, I don't agree with Ron's decision <20>
to "appoint" an RC. However, the complaints I read here are not about <20>
Ron's action but instead about Ron's choice.
Cheers,
-Pablo
---
* Origin: ...do you fuck on first dates? (1:102/631)
Original Message Date: 09 Aug 92 18:46:46
From: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
To: Henk Wevers on 2:500/1
Subj: HOLY WAR!
^AINTL 2:500/1 1:125/111
Yes, long time no talk to... I wish it were under happier
circumstances!
If the political climate here in the U.S. continues for say another 10
years, you may find me on your doorstep one day!
Luckily, FidoNet is not at that state yet. Or is it?!
I'll get straight to it. Let's talk war. I was hoping over the last
year that this shithead Dwight (why be nice) would go away, or flame
out more like it.
He did this 2 years ago, didn't he? Any documentation?
I am willing to turn this into a full-fledged conflagration. I think
it will be necessary. I think also that others would like to quietly
fix this, but I no longer think that is possible, and I am starting to
think also that making the process public and UGLY will head off (or
bring out of the closet) other things like it in other places.
We can use FidoNews as the publicity piece. What I need from you are
FACTS, FACTS, FACTS. Distilled stories, not huge quoted messages
(though some of it is obviously useful), but stats: echoes that have
been cut out (ie. censorship), toadies planted by Ron to further
plans, very specific harassment, etc.
I think the crux of the "defense" should simply be
ability-to-communicate, with self-determination second. Not because it
is of secondary importance (obviously the first comes from the last)
but because it is the most... obvious and direct to network users.
Coupling censorship directly to Ron would be useful. He talks "policy"
but he lies (and POLICY4 is bullshit). Can a few dozen of those
incidents be described in less than 50 words each?
The mere fact that R.D. is so contentious and unpopular is more
reason.
Many people want to see "democracy" (sic) in FidoNet; most seem to
think this means voting for RCs and NCs. It is certainly more
workable than a monarchy/dictator. The fact is the only "objection"
to voting is "efficiency", that false god so many people seem to
worship. It should be emphasized that selecting your own NC/RC is in
no way negative, compared to RDs method.
One of my so-called "weapons" is the following ARTICLES document. This
one is slightly different. It is < 200 lines long. I was stalled for a
while, because I could not fit ZCs and IC into it -- it took me a long
time to realize they seem to have ABSOLUTELY NO FUNCTION in the
network.
I propose we attack them as well, too. All of them. Matt is useless,
unless you've heard from him.
I called George Peace, Z1C, and felt him out. I even mentioned the
"abolish ZCs!" and he even went with it. I asked him plainly, what do
you think a ZC does? He mentioned only arbitration and a go-between
the various zones. Right answer! He had not heard anything about RD,
and he was surprised by that. I'm not. He's been kept in the dark. He
pointed out that RD has done this before and had his nose rubbed in
POLICY4 by the other ZCs.
I think POLICY4 should be destroyed.
I am partly to blame for this, as aren't we all, for not agitating to
get rid of this ZC/IC crap after we killed IFNA. But I realize why, we
were so burned out from dealing with lawyers, etc who needed it.
Also -- one of the best things possible would be if RD would actually
kick you out of the net. It would be a "public relations" coup.
Which brings me to a major point also, the importance of the nodelist.
Funny, lately i've been getting lots of questions, mainly from z2,
"why do we need the nodelist, it would be so much more efficient to
just send to the proper host (eg. net 125 host) and I wouldn't even have
to know if the particular node exists". EXACTLY. The nodelist is
freedom -- even if RD cuts R28, anyone in the net with your data (a
previous nodelist, or you providing it) can communicate with you
UNIMPEDED. This is a bit deal, that I have a hard time communicating
to people. NOW IS THE TIME TO MAKE THIS CLEAR. That 1.5M file is our
guarantee, like firearms in the U.S. Guerrilla warfare!
Another strategy potential is SECESSION. Could you get a significant
amount of defectors from z2 to pus the point? Followed up by actual
secession?
Another tactical device is the nodelist copyright. It says, "for use
by FidoNet" etc. It would be great, to have someone plant the idea
with RD that you guys, once clipped out of the nodelist, are NOT part
of the FidoNet, and therefore not allowed to use the nodelist.
How about: using a fake RD ally, suggest it in a public echo. Have r28
people become duly outraged. If he dares to use it to prevent you from
using the nodelist, I can hit him hard with it -- not much I can do
legally ($$$$!) but I can certainly grant you immediate and explicit
permission to use the nodelist, with great fanfare and publicity to
all Z/I/RCs from ME PERSONALLY.
Even if he does not follow this path, if you are removed, or even come
close, I can state clearly, I will grant you permission to use the
nodelist; at once implying that it was going to be revoked.
If I could cause him to get in a car accident, I would do it. I'm
pretty sick and tired of this crap. I want it to end. I am tired of
closed-door machinations, and politicking bullshit. Let's turn it into
a damn overt war, kick the bums out and maybe fix the structure at the
same time. At the least, it will be more fun this way.
PS: I hope it is completely true that R28 (and allies) are in fact
supporting open communications, etc. I know you live in Holland :-). I
also know no one is holy and pure, which is fine George.
The UK has been doing a lot of censorship. Wynn Wagner tells me about
troubles getting gay/lesbian conferences cut etc there. Is RD behind
this also? I hope so. More documentation...
I am going to quote some of Ron's crap in public, his "back to the
basics" nonsense. I will not play his game, which is the same one that
the Democrats and Republicans are doing here; letting the more-fascist
side claim "family values" and the other follow the "me too" catch-up
path. "Back to basics" to me means the actual ability to communicate
unmolested. Morals are disgusting private parts that should be kept to
themselves.
I'll send you the "policy" thing I have. My plan is to clean it up a
bit and run as an article. Please prepare anything you have, that will
tell the story in less than a page (!) and then followup articles, and
I will run them until FidoNews, you, me and FidoNet are dead, or Ron
is the fuck out of there.
Sorry for the long message. I have writing > 25 line messages. You
asked for it :-)
I can't write all of this stuff. I'll need "reporters" and article
authors working their butts off. I will not pretend to be objective. I
will not deal with RD's side of things unless it is harmful to him.
Fuck him.
I really think the whole strategy needs to be OFFENSIVE. Not defense.
This is why his is winning. Its a belief system, and it wont withstand
scrutiny, which we have to give it, publicly.
So here are some of my ideas. I think we need a radical departure to
get rid of the symptom (RD) and some of the causes (POLICY4, ZCs, etc).
I will do an editorial also. In it I will directly address my
unpleasant position, ie. am I throwing my weight around simply because
I don't like how it is now.
In fact, even voting is not "my vision". I wanted to see Nets (and
regions being exactly == nets) as the only layer of control, period.
And distributed nodelist generation like Randy proposed ("number nine").
My position is this: what RD is doing is a crime, relative to FidoNet
sysops. I don't even like the "solutions" (ie. voting) but it
certainly is not unfair, and fascism is. He is also violating the
letter of the law and its spirit in attempting to force one way on
many people.
More later, I'm sure... :-)
* from FidoMail v12u
Original Message Date: 10 Aug 92 20:39:42
From: PC Bear on 1:204/501
To: tom jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: Z2R25.TXT
Tom:
Wynn told me you wanted some of this info to follow up on. Here's the two <20>
messages I received from Michael Perierra. He's available in the GAYSYSOP <20>
conference and would also be willing to exchange netmail with you directly <20>
(if indeed he hasn't already done so).
Second file attach follows.
PC (Les Kooyman) Bear
Original Message Date: 10 Aug 92 19:41:40
From: PC Bear on 1:204/501
To: tom jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: BLITZ.TXT
This one is also interesting reading.
Original Message Date: 10 Aug 92 23:52:20
From: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
To: PC Bear on 1:204/501
Subj: re: eur001.txt
^AINTL 1:204/501 1:125/111
Umm, I have no idea what it means. It's just a quoted message. No
context. I have no idea who the players are, nor what they are talking
about. It mentions strife of some sort, but there's no facts. No
nuttin' ... I'm in the dark...
One of the biggest problems in FidoNet, and why a lot of serious
troubles go so far without any notice, is that no one ever gets any
information.
I told others in Z2, readers can't be expected to decipher what's
going on. Someone involved HAS TO write about the story, and turn it
into prose -- "In 1989, Joe Schmoe was voted RC... in January, So and
So caused this to happen, ..." etc.
I'm not complaining about you... I guess I'm venting my frustration
with the troubles all over, especially Z2, only because this is
another example. I do thank you for the message, I guess you talked to
Wynn.
I don't know what to do. I told others in R28 (Holland) who are having
amazing difficulties with Ron Dwight, the same thing. I can't decipher
their humongous blobs of text, with !3-level quotes! OK, so I puzzle
out some thing from it, the "other side" makes one claim countering
it. and I have to puzzle it out all over again. No one will do this...
we need reporters and writers!!!!!!
Original Message Date: 11 Aug 92 00:04:54
From: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
To: george peace on 1:13/13
Subj: POLICY4
^AINTL 1:13/13 1:125/111
Do you have a copy of POLICY4? Someone quoted some sections that I
jsut can't believe are there... I ahve to see this for myself! If not,
any idea who has it?
Hi Les
This is just an extract of the 'proposed' Region25 Policy of
Conduct for elligibility into Z2 R25 fidonet.
#########################################################################
Comments in between '#' are mine
#########################################################################
To: ALL
Subject: Conduct draft
This is currently a draft document released for discussion, it will,
upon adoption by a two-thirds majority of eligible persons voting
become adopted by Fidonet(tm) Zone 2 Region 25 as binding upon all
systems listed within the Zone 2 Region 25 segment of the FidoNet(tm)
nodelist.
Denis McMahon
2:251/20@FidoNet
========================================================================
FidoNet(tm) Region 25 Code Of Conduct
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Preamble
1. This is a code of conduct applicable to FidoNet(tm) Zone 2 Region
25, the constituent nets thereof, all nodes within those nets, and the
operators (sysops) of those nodes. The use of the masculine singular
gender in this document should be taken to include the feminine, and if
appropriate the plural.
Purpose
2. The purpose of this document is to define the acceptable social
behaviour of FidoNet(tm) systems. This document is intended to
complement any other policies which may be adopted concerning the
technical aspects of FidoNet(tm) operation and the administration
thereof.
Legal Aspects
3. It must be recognised that no FidoNet(tm) system nor the operator
thereof has any responsibility for the activities of any other FidoNet(tm)
system or operator. However, it is felt appropriate that FidoNet(tm) should
be seen to take a stance on the conduct of the individual members of the
network, insofar as their use of computers to process and transfer data is
concerned.
#######################################################################
Here we go...
#######################################################################
Conduct
4. The following types of conduct are forbidden, and such conduct may
lead to immediate and irrevocable exclusion from FidoNet(tm) Zone 2
Region 25. This list is not intended to be exhaustive, it is meant to
define the types of forbidden behaviour.
#######################################################################
This would kill any sexually orientated Echo. How this asshole can even
define what is indecent or obscene is really beyond me.
#######################################################################
4.3 Transmission of Indecent or Obscene Material: The transmission of any such
material is forbidden by the contract between individual telephone subscribers
and their service provider. This includes material of a nature apparently
intended to arouse or tittilate the viewer, material describing sexual acts or
visually depicting the genitals or female breasts.
######################################################################
The other points which dealt in s/w piracy and deception et al have no
real bearing. It is bullshit about the telephone provider &c.,&c. as if
this were the case any dirty or sexually 'titillating' conversation you
had with let's say your lover would land you in gaol. What the telecoms
Act says is if you send or submit indecent/obscene material to anyone
without their consent or as a form of sexual abuse over the phone et al
then you break their agreement.
#######################################################################
The next bit is the interesting bit...
#######################################################################
5 Acceptable Evidence
The following shall be deemed acceptable evidence of any
listed in section 4.
5.1 A public admission by the person concerned that they have
committed such an act.
#######################################################################
This would effectively mean any admission to belonging to ANY Network
that dealt in Adult conferences or your admission that you had GAYCHAT
on your System...
#######################################################################
5.2 The appearance in a files list obtainable from any computer
system operated by the person that indicates the presence of
material the transmission of such would constitute an activity
identified in section 4.
######################################################################
In my files listing I have marked as freqable the Policy docs for the
Echo's I carry - this would mean that I would be {for instance} thrown
out of R25 for having that IN MY FILES LISTING!!
######################################################################
6 Expulsion
Any FidoNet(tm) sysop having cause to believe that another has
committed an act prohibited by section 4 should draw this to the
attention of the maintainer of the nodelist segment in which the system
appears.
######################################################################
i.e. You have a grudge against someone, you forge their files list and
a massive witch hunt ensues.
######################################################################
The nodelist segment maintainer should then investigate the matter, and
if he feels that any act prohibited by section 4 has taken place, he
should remove that sysops entry from the nodelist segment. He may also
advise other nodelist segment maintainers of the action he has taken
and the reasons therefor.
######################################################################
So, from the above P4 no longer exists?? The relevant chain of *C is
not consulted? Removal by someone's discretion? ######################################################################
7 Appeals
Any FidoNet(tm) sysop expelled from the network through the procedures
defined in this code of conduct shall be entitled to appeal to the
person currently holding the post entailing co-ordination of
FidoNet(tm) Zone 2 Region 25 nodelist segments, who may be asked to
consider the activities of the person expelled and the reasons given by
the nodelist segment maintainer, and may subsequently over-turn the
expulsion, however this does not grant an automatic right of entry in
to the nodelist segment from which the system was expelled.
###########################################################
Above is very interesting...
###########################################################
8 Adoption
This code of conduct shall be adopted by a two thirds majority of
systems voting, the systems eligible to vote being defined by the
individual names appearing within the FidoNet(tm) Zone 2 Region 25
nodelist segment on the date that the FidoNet(tm) Zone 2 Region 25
nodelist segment co-ordinator announces that this code of conduct is to
be voted on. The vote is to be concluded within three weeks of any
such announcement, and if adopted, the code of conduct will come in to
force immediately. This code of conduct shall not be applied
retrospectively.
#####################################################################
Sounds like mutiny to me ?? Policy 4 has no relevance in any of this
and the process of coordination and within the *C structure is now
limited to that of R25. The Zone coordinator {note} is NOT informed
nor is the IC of what is happening....
#####################################################################
Need some more info, Les??
Regards
Michael.
---
* Origin: SCREWNet<tm>I.A.C.S.HQ[2:254/63f]+44.81.6600412MO,TAK (66:66/1)
Hi ALL
It is with _GLEE_ that I once again give you an example of my INFAMOUS {regionally generated} HYSTERIA amongst the U.K. fidonet{bless them} Community. A little preamble: Recently appointed 'incumbant' RC expounding my virtues to a wide-eyed {gullible} and rather bewildered Z2R25 audience:
......................................... Message #4138 - REGION25
Date: 06-04-92 00:56
From: Paul Blitz
To: All R25 Sysops
Subject:: Michael Pereira: a statement...
........................... @EID:e689 18c40735 4d453220
A statement concerning Michael Pereira.
=======================================
Last year, Peter Burnett Excommunicated Michael Pereira from Fidonet.
The excommunication was, for simplicity, based on a technical breach of
Policy 4's ZMH requirement.
However, I believe that Michael was guilty of much more than just that!
In the short time he was involved in Fidonet, he caused more trouble
than all the rest of the UK Fidonet sysops put together! He was, I have
no doubt, one of main reasons that David Rance finally stepped down as
RC.
Since Michael was excommunicated, we have all learnt more about the type
of BBS that he ran (and still runs). I am informed that it
contains not just "mildly pornographic" picture images, but HIGHLY
pornographic picture images including things which under the banner of
"highly perverted". Then there are the messaging areas with messages on
similarly "strange" sexual acts.......
From what I hear, it is very likely that such a BBS is actually BREAKING
THE LAW by making such "pictures" and messages available to telephone
callers (who could easily be under-age).
I'm sure you would all agree with me that this is NOT the type of BBS
that we all in Fidonet wish to be associated with!
In addition, I am told that he has has told "untruths" to many Fidonet
sysops.
I am therefore firmly of the opinion that I do not, ever again, wish to
see Michael Pereira, or indeed any person with similar tendancies, as a
member of Fidonet.
In the period between being ELECTED as RC, and being APPOINTED as RC, I
was informed that it appeared likely that Micheal would soon re-appear
in Fidonet. Unfortunately, as I was not then actually RC, I could do
nothing.
However, upon my appointment, one of the first things I did was to enter
a message into the UK_Host echo, stating very firmly that I would not
stand by and allow Michael Pereira to rejoin Fidonet. Here is that
message I posted........................
From: Paul Blitz
To: All Uk Net Hosts
Subject: Michael Pereira
2 June 92 18:30:51
Hello, All!
I apologise that this first message from me has to be so "sharp" and
"authoritarian", but I feel I need to be so so that a potential problem can
be nipped in the bud.
I would also appreciate it if you could pass this message on to your hubs.
------------------------
I have heard RUMOURS that Michael Pereira, currently acting as a point
address, might try to re-apply to join fidonet.
May I remind you that Michael Pereira has been formally ECCOMMUNICATED from
Fidonet, and is thus not eligible for Fidonet membership.
I will also add that I believe that, already, Michael Pereira has caused a
HUGE amount of damage to Fidonet in the UK, and I will not stand by and watch
him repeat such tricks.
As we are all "guided by" policy 4, I shall quote 3 parts from it:
1) Re RC Duties:
"If a node in your region is acting in a sufficiently annoying manner, then
you can take whatever action you deem fit, according to the circumstances of
the case."
2) Re XAB:
"The coordinator structure has the responsibility for defining "excessively
annoying". Like a common definition of pornography ("I can't define it, but
I know it when I see it."), a hard and fast definition of acceptable FidoNet
behavior is not possible. The guidelines in this policy are deliberately
vague to provide the freedom that the coordinator structure requires to
respond to the needs of a growing and changing community."
3) Re assisting Excommunicated nodes:
"It is considered annoying behavior to assist a system which was excommuni-
cated in circumventing that removal from the nodelist. For example, if you
decide to provide an echomail feed to your friend who has been excommuni-
cated, it is likely that your listing will also be removed."
My action is simple:
(1) I am making it 100% clear that I will NOT accept MP back into Region 25
of Fidonet unless the ZC or ZCC or IC tells me to do so;
(2) I have defined MP's behavior as XAB;
(3) anyone helping him to try to rejoin Fidonet will be dealt with very
quickly by being excommunated themselves.
As I said, I apologise that I have had to post such a message, but I would
rather be open and up front with you all about this, than spending hours
sorting out a problem afterwards.
Paul Blitz
RC25
....................................................................
Later, I spoke with Mick Spice, who informed me that Grant Burch had
ALREADY submitted his net's weekly nodelist info, (which had been by
then passed to the ZC for processing) and that his list HAD INDEED
included Michael Pereira as Node 254/63.
The nodelist, including 254/63 will be published on Friday by the ZC
(unless he has managed to remove the entry).
Grant will probably argue that he was within his rights to allocate him
a node number, as he (MP) was no longer "in breach of the reasons for
which he was excommunicated".
Personally, out of plain common sense, good manners, and decency, I
think that he should have referred the application to the RC, especially
considering that at least one NC, as well as the "temporary" RC had all
refused to allocate MP a node listing, and the fact that, technically,
MP IS STILL FORMALLY EXCOMMUNICATED.
I also believe that he used the "period of uncertainty", prior to my
formal appointment, to slip in a nodelist change, which he knew would be
CONTROVERSIAL (to say the least) but would actually be included in the
published list.
I have therefore crashed a message to Grant, making it clear that I
will not accept his (ie Grant's) behaviour, and if he does not REMOVE
Michael Pereira's entry from his nodelist next week, I will reserve the
right to remove him as NC254.
THIS IS NOT AN IDLE THREAT!
I hope you will all support me in my actions in trying to keep Fidonet a
"place we like and wish to stay"..... and to 100% honest, that is the
main reason I chose to stand as RC.
If you have any instant feedback, please feel free to netmail me. My
system, although not listed as CM, will accept mail most of the time.
====================================================================
PLEASE DO NOT TURN THIS TOPIC INTO AN INSTANT "REGION-25_ECHO BRAWL".
====================================================================
If you wish to make a formal complaint against Michael Pereira, then
please form an orderly queue.
If you would like me to remain as RC, then I strongly suggest you do not
take out *too* many XAB's against me!!
And remember, everyone: IT'S A HOBBY!
Paul Blitz
RC25
QM v1.00
(O)rigin: The Blitz Abode (2:252/201.0)
........................................................................
I suppose I'm not very popular in the U.K.<g>
Oh well, I suppose it's time for me to live _UP_ to my 'expected' reputation?
];)
Regards
MIchael.
---
# Origin: SCREWNet<tm>I.A.C.S.HQ 2:254/63f+44.81.6600412MO,TAK (66:66/1)
--- msged 2.07
* Origin: STARCOM - Milwaukee, WI - Your Midwest Echo Hub (1:154/69)
Hi Les
Whilst this message is _particularly_ RELEVANT to you and whatever 'wheels' you have placed in motion - it is _ALSO_ for _ANYONE_ who has helped in the campaign to rid Z2 R25 of homo{anysex}phobic's and those who would at best be
classed as 'moral fascists' within the Comms Community in this European Region; It's therefore with great PLEASURE that I now able to post this message from our Region25 Echo and the *EX-RC25* Mr. Paul Blitz.
{From my information the ZC2 had ordered Mr. Blitz to finally 'Put up or SHUT
the F*CK up' once and for all}.
______________________________ Message #3386 - REGION25
Date: 07-20-92 18:08
From: Paul Blitz
To: All
Subject:: READ THIS CAREFULLY:
------------------------------
@EID:4e51 18f4912e 4d453220
PB> Dear All!
PB> It appears that, as RC25, I have but two failings: everything I *SAY*, and
PB> everything I *DO*.
PB> When I stood as RC, I (stupidly) thought that I would be able to "ease
PB> myself gently into the job". Unfortunately, that shit called Michael
PB> Pereira decided to take advantage of the situation that was, and try to
PB> re-enter fidonet, and as a result, I had to "learn to swim" VERY quickly!
PB> Since that rather unpleasant start (which I really could have done
PB> without) it seems that every action / decision I have taken was wrong, I
PB> announced those decisions wrongly, I handled discussion wrongly etc.....
PB> I was intending to be as open as possible in the way I acted as RC... but
PB> when I did so (my original posting re MP.... remember that???) I got so
PB> much shit, that I gave up that silly idea.
PB> When there was a problem with the nodelist recently (ie 2 weeks ago) I
PB> bent over backwards to provide a solution for the many sysops who had
PB> little idea of what to do. This was also deemed by many to be "not my
PB> job". I therefore apologise to you all for trying to be helpful: I had
PB> forgotten that "working your bollocks off for the good of Fidonet as a
PB> whole" is no longer allowed!
PB> I have tried to get information from certain NC's to help with my job as
PB> RC (eg info for the appeal against MP). Many of the NCs have helped
PB> greatly. However, one NC stands out as not really pulling his weight: my
PB> thanks go to Grant Burch (NC254) for not being particularly helpful.....
PB> I am STILL awaiting a reply from at least one recent netmails, which *was*
PB> important. Grant also has, I am told, a reputation for giving out
PB> nodelist entries well before the systems are up & running... now you know
PB> who is an "easy touch". Not to mention the fact that his net has more
PB> -pvt- nodes than the rest of R25 put together! (which was one of the many
PB> things I WAS going to look at). PB> I must admit that I don't really give a PB> damn now: this is all something
PB> for the NEXT RC to sort out!
PB> I will now also give pleasure to a few others by mentioning their names:
PB> Paul Dickie.... your heart may be in the right place, but you can be a
PB> right pain in the arse at times. Paul Boakes: you have simply become a
PB> pain in the arse, and are likely to soon be treated at "the next Michael
PB> Pereira" with people wanting you out of Fidonet... unless you can become a
PB> little more human, pleasant and less agressive towards others.
PB> +---------------------------------------------------------+
PB> | So, as of posting this message, I am resigning as RC25. |
PB> +---------------------------------------------------------+
PB> I'm sure that this action will please many of you... I'm sure you will all
PB> now be able to say "yeah, well, we elected the wrong person......": feel
PB> FREE to say it... I will not be around to hear you: you may remember that
PB> I recently said that, had I not been elected as RC, I was seriously
PB> considering pulling out of Fidonet completely... I have decided to take
PB> that step too!
PB> So, there you go: your combined actions managed to make me do what I was
PB> going to do had I not stood as RC: I am leaving fidonet. So much for my
PB> "ideals" of trying to calm down the region....... enjoy your war!
{Further unimportant crap deleted but the below should be of interest...}
PB> 5) The MP appeal continues: I suggest someone contacts David Thomas at
PB> 253/600 to handle the appeal for Region 25. I shall send a FULL copy of
PB> what has been submitted to the PCC to Steve Cole. The appeal is still at
PB> an early stage: it's YOUR problem now!!!!!
PB> Please all take care that MP does NOT take advantage of this situation:
PB> unless Steve Cole or the next RC over-rules my decision, or the ZC2
PB> decides so in the current appeal, MP is still EXCOMMUNICATED. Note that,
PB> although the case has been referred to the new PCC, policy requires that
PB> the final decision is still taken by the ZC.
PB> So, it now only remains to say:
PB> Bye, bye....it USED TO BE NICE to be in Fidonet...
PB> Paul Blitz,
PB> (a VERY pissed off ex-RC25)
PB> (QM v1.00)
(*O)rigin: I don't give a SHIT any more...... (2:252/201.0) ___________________________________________________________ END MESSAGE
So there you go. A very 'embittered' {apparently} ex-RC25?? - all I can say is that if you adopt to live by the sword - you will also die by it. It may be of interest to note that the ZC2 has _ALREADY_ unilateraly appointed the _NEXT_ RC25 as of Nodelist.213 it will be Noel Bradford. Mr. Bradford _WAS_ the European gateway for Adult-Links awhile back {Sid could you confirm this??} and I believe is either still a Member of ADL or has connections to it {confirmed by an OLD AdultLink Nodelist segment I have}. This is a plus {I think} and my exchanges with Noel have been positive in the past {after a few minor disagreements ;} - but WE HAVE IMO ACHIEVED A VERY IMPORTANT STEP towards 'liberating' Region 25 of repression, oppresion and homophobic attitudes and descrimination towards our alternative lifestyles which we have unquestionable RIGHTS to persue and which should _NOT_ ever be prejudiced by those who have no understanding or sensitivity to our needs as a community and as HUMAN BEINGS!
THANK YOU ALL WHO HAVE CONTRIBUTED AND LENT SUPPORT TO THIS CAMPAIGN.
With Regards
Michael.
---
* Origin: SCREWNet<tm>I.A.C.S.HQ[2:254/63f]+44.81.6600412MO,TAK (66:66/1)
Original Message Date: 11 Aug 92 23:56:20
From: Uucp on 1:105/42
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: Re: Nick Reid
From m2xenix!rain.psg.com!randy
From: randy@psg.com (Randy Bush)
To: Henk.Wevers@f1.n500.z2.fidonet.org (Henk Wevers)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 22:21:14 PDT
Cc: tom.jennings@f111.n125.z1.fidonet.org (Tom Jennings),
Henk,
I think you're letting Ron get to you and it is spilling over into other
things. I gather that Ron is pissing TJ off as well, BTW.
Speaking of the devil, one Frank van de Loo (not sure of name) called me
at work today and said he was the new RC-2:28. I said I was uninterested
in Z2 politics. He said that I was giving echomail to Henk Wevers. I
said I was. He said you were using it for blackmail. I said I was
uninterested in Z2 politics. He asked me if I would give him echomail.
I said I would give echomail to anyone foolish enough to want echomail,
but I was in a meeting and he could call me back sometime. He said it
would take a while to talk because he wanted to tell me all about ... I
said I was not interested in Z2 politics.
He's not very smart, is he. <grin>
randy
Original Message Date: 12 Aug 92 04:04:11
From: peter janssens on 2:512/1
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: New RC appointment for region 28
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:512/1
* Original to: Ron Dwight (2:28/6)
cc: Matt Whelan, Henk Wevers, Hanno van.der.Maas, Max Keizer
cc: Eelco De.graaff, Rick Kelly, Eric Lotgerink, Patrick Maartense
cc: Peter Smink, Ben de Goey
Hi Ron,
>> Hereby the continuing story of "Peyton Place" Holland. A story
>> about how do we make life difficult for each other.
> While I can imagine making copies of your message to Matt
> Whelan, I have to be amused at your copies to TJ. This really shows
> that you are struggling to justify your own actions.
Your spasmodic attempt to belittle the situation is really beneath my <20>
level. I do notice however that you "forget" to respond to Ben's implicit <20>
statement "how do we make life difficult for each other".
Note: I am not struggling at all; I have no problem at all denying the <20>
existence of a hacking RC.
>> The new RC., forced on us by Ron Dwight
First of all, let me remind you of a message from Matt Whelan, which you <20>
forwarded on his request into ENET.SYSOP, which stated that a "higher" <20>
level should not interfere in "lower" levels in Fidonet. (I resent that <20>
statement, since in my belief *C's are the servants of Fidonet, and the <20>
sysops are the highest level; not the *C's!). Matt specifically wrote that <20>
he would not interfere in Zone 2's affairs since Zone 2 had an elected *C <20>
to coordinate Z2 affairs. Please do note that an analogy applies for the <20>
R28 situation. A ZC should not interfere in Regional issues if the Region <20>
has an elected *C to do just the same on the Regional level. In our case, <20>
the RC has been elected *twice*, which gives some indication on what <20>
people here think of him.
>> requested us to put a
>> session password to 2:28/0. This we did but as he isn't
>> acknowlegde by all the nets within 2:28 we didn't make the
>> passwords known to him.
> Thus you have password protected your systems against another
> FidoNet SysOp. By your own admission you are guilty of one of the most
> serious crimes in FidoNet.
It is well known to all people in Fidonet that systems respond to files <20>
like "NODEDIFF.A??" and such. If FvdL tries to send such files to our <20>
systems (which he actually did) then you can imagine that we protect our <20>
systems. You know very well that I get the original nodediff straight from <20>
your system every week and I distribute that file (unaltered, of course!) <20>
into net 512.
FvdL's attempt to send a nodediff.a?? to my system is in itself annoying <20>
behaviour which could have caused my batchfile to distribute (read: hatch) <20>
the file into the net, thus causing unneccesary cost. It is an unwritten <20>
law in Fidonet that one should not send files using "risky" names. The <20>
fact that FvdL ignores that says enough about his Fidonet knowledge, <20>
experience and capabilities.
> Until this time I have been very tolorant of
> the childish behaviour of the "old" *C structure in Holland. I have
> specifically request Frank NOT to excomunicate any NCs as it would not
> be a wise move.
Well, here's a big surprise. Frank specifically told me this afternoon <20>
that he would excommunicate EVERY NC in region 28. During the conversation <20>
he even defined a new Fidonet policy which, according to him, states that <20>
in every net there is a Host who has node number 0 and an NC who has node <20>
number 1. Even after I told him twice that I am not, nor will ever desire <20>
to become, an NC, he acclaimed that I was the current "NC" because I had <20>
node number 1 in our net and therefor he would put the Hold flag on my <20>
address for this reason.
Apart from that, he has been talking to my bussines associates, Advanced <20>
Engineering Sarl, to tell them a lot of flak and lies about me. This gives <20>
me reason to believe that he is in no way trying to act as RC, but merely <20>
on some sort of personal power trip, trying to *personally* hit people he <20>
doesn't like. If it weren't for AES, my *personal* income would be <20>
jeopardized by his actions. Please *do* note that I don't guarantee <20>
anything anymore when people start to jeopardize my business.
> You are testing my patience to the limit with these
> continued GROSS violations of policy.
In *your* message of december 1991 to me, with a carbon copy to Matt <20>
Whelan, I'd like to remind you that *you* pointed out that there are *two* <20>
ways to get things done in Fidonet:
1) So that it happens, and
2) According to policy.
You even wrote that you preferred method number 1, and thus would not <20>
organize a new ZEC election. True or false?
> It is quite obvious to me and to
> a growing number of SysOps in region 28
You don't have the slightest idea what sysops in region 28 want. Speak for <20>
yourself. If the sysops in region 28 would really dislike the situation <20>
then they would never have voted for one of the known favorites of the <20>
real R28 situation as their RC. There have been two clean votes for a <20>
Dutch RC, both times Hanno van der Maas was *democratically* elected by a <20>
HUGE majority.
Don't confuse the issue. If you say that you want to deny the wishes of <20>
the Dutch *majority* then please note that the same majority opposes your <20>
actions. Please delete the entire region from the nodelist and only <20>
provide those with access to Fidonet who comply with your wishes. As long <20>
as the majority of R28 *desires* the situation with our current nets, then <20>
the *majority* of R28 is GROSSLY violating policy, and should thus be <20>
excommunicated. (your words, not mine)
> that you (as a group) are not
> interested in anything other than retaining the absolute control which
> you profess to currently excersize over the SysOps. This will not be
> allowed to continue.
Try reasoning without abusing your emotions.
Region 28 is not bothering anyone, except maybe you. So leave us in peace!
If you really think that a majority of R28 sysops is served by "the <20>
ultimate view of FvdL" then let us give FvdL a new net number in R28. We <20>
will soon see whether or not the majority wants to be part of his net or <20>
not. If the majority applies for a nodenumber in his new to be founded <20>
net, then I am willing to give in and admit my error. However, should <20>
people want to remain in their current situation, then accept it and go <20>
mingle in your own region.
And don't use the word "policy" in my face, please. You have more than <20>
once explicitly stated that 'practice is more important than policy" and <20>
using dual opinions whenever it suits you isn't really helful to either of <20>
us.
Last but not least... I am sure you can find some way to spit your <20>
vocabulary over this message and misinterpret what I am trying to say <20>
(write). Please do try to respond adult. I am aware that I am Dutch and <20>
not someone whose native language is English.
Thanks, Peter
(*Elected* REC 28, no matter what someone's nodelist indicates)
Original Message Date: 14 Aug 92 18:44:37
From: Pablo Kleinman on 1:102/631
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: What the fuck is going on?
^AMSGID: 1:102/631@fidonet 7192a053
* Originally by Hanno Van.der.maas, 2:500/2@FIDONET
* Originally to Pablo Kleinman, 1:102/631
* Originally dated 14 Aug 1992, 10:36
Region 28 doesn't get along that well with Ron, as you might remember from <20>
a a
previous message I sent you. I'm a democraticly elected RC, for 2 years and
plain RC for over 6 years. So I can safely say that the
majority of the sysops are quite satisfied on how I run region 28.
For some unknown reason Ron hates dutch people and me in particular. In the
beginning of this year Ron had removed me from my RC office for not doing
my job right. I object and the IC, Matt Whelan received hundreds of <20>
complaints
and after a long period of time during which the region was frozen in the
nodelist, Ron saw that it was a no win situation for him.
The core problem is that he says that we should reorganize to get a better
mailflow and better echomail provisions. We don't agree, hey we live here, <20>
so
who knows best? Anyway, he wouldn't process the region segment unless I
reorganised or stepped down, but there was no successor, because most of <20>
the
sysops wanted me. After many talks to a brick wall (= Ron) we agreed that I
would sincerely TRY to reorganise the region. We agreed furthermore a <20>
period of
12 months and I explicitly said that I wouldn't argue with him anymore in <20>
the
mean time, we would talk again in 12 months.
Now, he looked at the nodelist every week and saw no reorganisation so <20>
far. I
have still 6 months to go. He thought I wasn't doing anything, (he knows
it all, he thinks), so 2 weeks ago he replaced me with a boy who just <20>
joined
fidonet. He didn't discuss the matter with anybody in the region, <20>
including the
NC's, so what could we do?
Well, we ignored the boy and still do. We produce our own region list with <20>
our
own region diffs. We alter the world nodelist and insert the real region 28
segment and distribute that nodediff in the region.
The story goes on and I'm very tired of mister Dwight, he spoiling <20>
everybody's
hobby. The only reason I can think of that he replaced now, is the upcoming
worldpol. If that document allows overlapping nets, then he is powerless. <20>
He
doesn't want to wait for that to happen, so he kicked me out.
That's all I want to say right now, this whole problem called Dwight is <20>
robbing
me from all my spare time and spoils the hobby. The situation is so tense <20>
that a couple of sysops in my region actually consider to fly over to Ron <20>
and destroy his house.
Hanno.
Original Message Date: 13 Aug 92 17:36:14
From: Eelco De.graaff on 2:281/1
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: New RC appointment for region 28
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:281/1
* Original to: Peter Janssens (2:512/1)
cc: Matt Whelan, Henk Wevers, Hanno van.der.Maas, Max Keizer (2:280/0)
cc: Rick Kelly, Eric Lotgerink, Patrick Maartense, Peter Smink
cc: Ben de Goey
> Hi Ron,
>>> Hereby the continuing story of "Peyton Place" Holland. A story
>>> about how do we make life difficult for each other.
Thanks Peter, this one saves me a lot of time, so i can take some time off <20>
to see how things are running at 281/1
Bye Eelco
Original Message Date: 13 Aug 92 16:52:52
From: Hans Barendregt on 2:512/512
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: R28
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:512/512
CC: Ron Dwight, Matt Whelan
Ron,
Again I have to complain to you for cousing serious trouble in region 28
The previous time you displaced Hanno van der Maas as RC28 you came back <20>
to that disission and gave Hanno one year to do what you have orderd him <20>
to do.
Even far before that year has past you again replaced him. This time by a <20>
point in region 28, Frank van der Loos.
First of all I believe that replacing someone important as the RC is not <20>
wise, especialy when that RC (Hanno) has the full suppport en cooperation <20>
of all nethosts and NC's. Second, to do that, while you promised him to <20>
give him a year is not very desent. And his replacement, a 23 year old <20>
point with one whole year experience in fidoworld, who is, according to my <20>
opion, based on a telephonecall from one hour, "powersick", isn't that <20>
good a prove of proper leadership either.
Further, the fact that, because of your hasty disission of replacement, <20>
the nodelist segment for region 28 isn't properly edited, will cause a lot <20>
of egony. For example, a sysop in my net died recently, because of your <20>
disfunction, his node is still in the nodelist. Can you imagine what hurt <20>
it is to the relatives to have the phone ringing all day long?
I myself (as NC of 2:512 net in region 28) see that the changes in the <20>
nodelist for our network aren't edited as well because of this trouble.
We, the sysop's, NC's, Host's' Hub's and sysop's in region 28 have told <20>
you before:
DONOT INTERFERE WITH LOKAL (regional) AFFAIRES !!!!!
We in region 28 have been proving to zone 2 and the world that we where <20>
quit able to manage our problems internely. And we proved that the way we <20>
handle OUR region, was satisfactional to both us and the rest of the world.
How on earth can someone way up north imagine the situation in an other <20>
part of the world and make such radical (undemocratic) desissions on our <20>
behalf.
Please STOP bugging us.
Do your job!!!
Edit the nodelist as you are suppost to and keep away from our region with <20>
your dictatorial replacementpolicy.
Because of the experience I suffered this spring, and the fact that you <20>
have caused the same trouble in region 25 (what more to come?) I doubt if <20>
this netmail will do any good.
But I no longer will accept that you ruine a good working fidonet in zone <20>
2!
Trow me out of the nodelist (like the rest of your oponents), appoint an <20>
other dummy, do what you please, but we're sick and tired of it.
regards, Hans Barendregt
2:512/NC
p.s. Hanno van der Maas still has my full support in his effort to try to
keep the damage you've done (and will do) as small as possible
Original Message Date: 17 Aug 92 03:23:23
From: Henk Wevers on 2:500/1
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: Hi !
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:500/1
Hi Tom,
Thanks for your messages. They were long and I had to change my editor to <20>
be able to read them (255 lines maximum, now 406). Thanks for your <20>
support. I will get to it in a few days, I need some thinking here about <20>
what yiu have said. I probably will take the 'reporting' stuff on me and I <20>
have asked my fellow sysops to let me know what they have kept in an <20>
archive that could help. (I got bombarded by 25 messages the first day...)
Anyway, here is a message I put into the european sysop conference to <20>
explain the situation. Is this something you could use as the 'reporting' <20>
stuff you were talking about ? Comments are appriciated. I will ask the <20>
sysops here fro comments as well.
+ my wife says hello ! And let you know that when you come over we have a <20>
bed if you need it.
Here follows my message. Things are getting dirty here, I rather would be <20>
out of the fireline !
Greetings there in Fidoland !
It has been a long time since I was actively involved in the politics in
fidonet. It has become necessairely to do so, just to be able to stay in
fidonet. As my name has been mentioned here with faint rumours about what I
was doing, going to do, was thinking or whatever, here is a summary on the
things that happen in region 28. Objective journalism is very difficult <20>
when
you are in the middle of a fight (and I call it a fight allright), so this <20>
is
how I see things. No doubt some here will tell me and you I see it all <20>
wrong.
For the hundreds of sysops that do not know me, I have been the first ZC in
europe, coordinating and extending fidonet from a few nodes to a network <20>
that
covered all of western europe.
I need to go back in fidonet history for a short while because the roots of
many conflicts we see in zone 2, including the one in region 28 have roots <20>
in
the past.
You must realize that in 1985 it was hardly possible for individuals to <20>
have a
mailer or a BBS. Both financially and technically. On the technical side, I
remember getting to the UK to get a prototype of the first hayes compatible
modem that could dial out (at 300 baud that is, the firm was dataflex). On <20>
the
financial side, the software came from the usa, as did the small nodelists <20>
via
the DECnet. Employees of DEC on both sides of the ocean got the stuff <20>
manually
over the pond. When Rod Smallwood had to quit doing that I stepped in and
could continue because I had the backing of around 60000 people, forming <20>
the
Hobby computer club (HCC) in holland. Due to their funding we could get
software here, and we even got Tom Jennings and later Wynn Wagner to <20>
europe so
they could meet europeans and get an idea on what was going on here. The <20>
very
first net in holland was formed by the HCC that bought the (Then very
expensive) computers. The host (me) had the only modem capable of dialing <20>
out
then (wires were sticking out of it everywhere).
In the mean time discussions were going on on how to maintain the nodelist
when fidonet would become bigger and bigger (we had visions of people
communicating not hampered by frontiers or goverment those days. Boy did I <20>
get
flames when I connected South Africa). Regions and zones were invented as <20>
an
aid for maintaining the nodelist. Ideas about administrative voluntair
functions as ZC and RC came up and executed.
A big problem (costly and technically) was being in touch with the RC's in <20>
the
USA. As it is still the case, we europeans get the stuff in the usa, not <20>
the
other way around. Contacts with the RC1 conference (echomail was so new <20>
then)
were on and off. Very late in the process I became aware that something <20>
like
our policy 4 was being in the works. I opposed to the way it was going to <20>
be
and asked for a way to include zone, region and net policies, so we would <20>
not
have one for all policy that had the USA situation as its base.
The HCC even paid my flight to the usa for a fidocon and after a meeting <20>
with the
RC's present, ZC3, and the IC david dodell we had an agreement that we <20>
should
go for a policy allowing 'sub' policies. The zone policy should be as <20>
short as
possible. (It costed us a good deal of the night). I had already made a
proposal that is very similar to the current proposed world policy.
Back in europe the IC let me know that after reconsideration the RC's would
not go for it and would put the policy we now know in place. I really felt
betrayed and told europe that I would resign the first opportunity, <20>
eurocon.
Being the only candidate present, Ron Dwight was voted in there. I asked <20>
Ron
to carry on to get a democratic type of policy in place, or at least let <20>
the
zone and regions decide what was good for them. He agreed.
In the mean time BBSing was becoming payable for individuals. In region 28
another club net was started and on my instignation a regional covering
network was founded so non members of the clubs could join fidonet.
So if you look at fidonet in region 28 today and you want to join fidonet <20>
you
have three choices: The regional net, and one of the club nets if you are a
member. The problems in holland were on the costsharing side of echomail. <20>
If
a number of people share there money to get echomail should others be <20>
allowed
to get it from them for free ? Did they have a right to get it? The HCC <20>
paid
the transatlantic link for about a year and then gave up, it was too <20>
costly.
Some people with a lot of money took the load, but after a while they had <20>
to
give up. To make a long story short: we solved the problem in region 28
in the beginning of this year by establishing one central echomail hub <20>
where
all nets connect. The hub would be paid for by all participants. To solve
the problem of all those hosts for people outside region 28 we established <20>
one
inbound gateway for the region. Inner region netmail is exchanged directly
between the hosts.
Back to Ron Dwight, the 2nd ZC2. After a discussion between Ron and some <20>
sysop
the sysop called Ron a lyer. When Ron complained at the IC he got an <20>
answer in
the line: "this is something a ZC should be prepaired for and he should not
easely be annoyed". Ron pulled the plug, we had no ZC.
The third ZC2 was Felix Kaska, He also was voted in being very popular <20>
because
he imported free of charge the echomail from the usa. Felix had to resign <20>
for
personal reasons, but not after a clash with region 28 where he tried to
reorganize the nets so the club nets would disappear.
In came Ron Dwight again. He was all for democracy. he would not follow <20>
policy
to the letter. He said then. Nowadays he writes policy with a capital P and
declares it the Law. And he is after every region that does not follow <20>
policy
to the letter. Democracy : No. Flexible interpretation of policy (what is <20>
in a
word, why did we call it policy and not Law back then eh ?): No. Thou Shall
Reorganize. Not because the region operates badly. Not because a sysop <20>
could
not join fidonet, but because the way some regions are organized is not
following policy. Especially region 28. But there were problems in region <20>
30,
29, 25 and maybe a lot more. Boy, did we regret we voted for RD the second
time !
Not being able to find a sysop in region 28 that could do Rons dirty work <20>
Ron
agreed with the then current (choosen) RC that the RC would try to <20>
reorganize
within a year. That was march.
10 days ago the dutch hosts found a message on our board from some unknown
dutch sysop telling us HE was the new RC and he demanded a session password
with our systems so the nodelist updates were protected. Without consulting
all of the NC's responded negative. A few hours later we received a message
from the ZC2 confirming that he had replaced our RC.
Now, there is a lot more cooperation in region 28 than Ron and the young <20>
guy
(only being in fidonet a year as a point, not having experience as hub or
host) thought. Within one hectic hour of voice telephone calls (we had each
other numbers of course) we agreed fully. We RC, REC and NC's would not <20>
accept
this replacement coup. On behalf of the group I wrote a message to the <20>
young
guy explaining that he would not get any support of the *C's of region 28 <20>
and
that he surely would recognize that he could not operate this way. We gave <20>
him
24 hours to reconsider. The response was that we would be thrown out of the
nodelist if we would not cooperate. I called him voice. Explained how we <20>
were
operating fidonet in the region. He responded that he would withdraw if he
'got something out of it'. When I asked 'what' he told me he should have a
'position' in fidonet after all the trouble he went through. I told him <20>
that
he was lucky that we would allow him his nodenumber if he withdrew.
24 hours later most of us had been 'thrown out of the nodelist', including
some sysops the guy had a personal problem with. At least one host had been
removed he told us. After another round of consulting our reaction was very
clear. A complaint was filed about Frank (the would be RC 28) and honored
within 5 minutes by his nethost. His actions were endangering the <20>
operation of
fidonet in region 28 and for us were extremely annoying. The punishment <20>
was a
three month removal from fidonet. We told him he could complain by the <20>
only RC
we recognized, the one that has been voted in. We also password protected <20>
our
links with our current RC28 so no games could be played by sending us <20>
nodelist
updates we did not want. We informed all of our nodes and advised them to <20>
do
the same and to NOT automatically process the next nodelist.
The same day we sent a message to our ZC stating that:
1. We would not accept a removal from our RC without any consulting.
2. We refuse to reorganize the region just because a ZC tels us to.
3. His actions were endangering the operation of fidonet because
people wanting to communicate with us would not be able to do so
when the nodelist was not updated or even totally changed (we should
all get a new nodenumber and a number of systems were 'thrown out
of the list'. We would consider a complaint at the IC.
4. We would continu to send our nodelist updates to the only RC we
recognize
5. We wondered how he of all people could have choosen Frank, someone
totally incapable of being a RC.
Up to now polls of our sysops have shown us that we have more than 90% of <20>
them
behind us. As usual the fighting has become dirty, on both sides. Frank <20>
(the
fake RC28) promised to reorganize everything, mail and echomail. In <20>
response
we announced that the regional costsharing system was only available for
systems in the regional nodelist published by our RC and that sysops that
would like to be on RD's and Franks side should get their echomail from <20>
them.
There should be no problem because the 'new RC' promised to get the <20>
echomail in.
And we would be crazy to pay for people that wanted us to be <20>
excommunicated.
Are you still with me ? Amazing !
The latest stand is that we jointly have set up a system that generates a
zonelist, zone update, world list and world list update excaxtly the same <20>
as
the one the ZC publishes, but with the correct region 28 included. Starting
next week we will even provide a diff that revert this and will get us back
on the ZC generated stream without having to turn to getting a full <20>
nodelist.
Also region 28 lists and diffs are available and are being sent to <20>
everybody
that communicates with the region.
How will this go further ? Actually I have no idea. Region 28 will stand
united against interference with our inner region workings. We will spread <20>
our
diffs to everyone that asks for them. We hope other regions will join us.
Sending your updates to region 28 as well as to the ZC should certainly <20>
make a
point. Many of us have thought about leaving fidonet as a region <20>
completely.
We decided to stay in fidonet and fight for the better of the worse. We <20>
have
a tradition of fighting against anyone outside our country that would tell <20>
us
what to do. In the past it has sometimes taken 80 years, sometimes 5 years <20>
to
win and often we have gotten the needed help from our friends. If YOU want <20>
to
help us in this, let us know.
Henk Wevers
Original Message Date: 18 Aug 92 06:27:46
From: Paul Dickie on 2:256/62
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: The revenge of the Power Seekers
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:256/62
Greetings!
TJ> I got your messages, I wish I could say "thanks"... :-)
Yeah, well, I figured that whatever you might have heard from certain folk <20>
might be less than wonderfully accurate.
TJ> Its not going ignored. rest assured of that.
Good. That was, after all, what I was afraid of. The best way of dealing <20>
with these plonkers is, I feel, to raise such a hell of a noise about <20>
their antics -- past, present and (probable) future -- that they are <20>
impeached, under their beloved P4. Then, maybe, we can get something in <20>
place that (a) accurately reflects the situation in the UK as it is, not <20>
as some folk might like it to be and (b) that restores any "power" to <20>
where it ought to be -- to the leaf nodes, to the sysops.
The latest idea is that there should be a "Net Coordinators Council" set <20>
up, to decide on how policy 4 is to be implemented. Note -- "how", not <20>
"if', for that much has already been decided, by the Regional <20>
"Coordinator" and His Master's Voice, from Finland. It is, therefore, <20>
something of a smokescreen, as it would permit the RC25 to say that it was <20>
the NCC who decided something, not himself. All he did was to implement <20>
their decision.
It's crap, of course. It's also being represented to the Region as being <20>
"democratic", whereas anyone with any wit would surely realise that it is, <20>
in fact, an oligarchy.
TJ> How much work are you willing to do for this?
How much work is necessary?
If you stop breathing, you die. If you stop fighting this sort of <20>
nonsense, FidoNet dies.
Cheerio for now!
< Paul >
Original Message Date: 20 Aug 92 22:44:18
From: Ron Dwight on 2:220/22
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: Copy of a message in ZCC
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:220/22
* Original to: Henk Wevers (2:500/1)
cc: Hanno van.der.Maas
Copied from "ZCC", but WHY TJ!
Matt,
> Ron,
> I agreed initially with your proposal to 'reorganise' Zone 2.
> I no longer agree, and do not support it.
In that case I would see it as your no longer supporting
policy 4. It is thus reasonable to expect either:-
a) Exemption from policy 4 geo-nets rules for FidoNet as a whole.
b) Your resignation as FidoNet IC.
As you obviously not supporting policy I suggest the latter
course of action. This will serve FidoNet in the long run as we could
then appoint an IC with a little more time to devote to the necessary
duties instead of the seconds snatched here and there which you are so
obviously putting in during the last few months.
> Don't claim you were relying on my support, either -- since those
> early messages I have several times cautioned you about the
> upheaval you would create, and asked you to back off.
Take it easy, not STOP. Over 8 months has passed since that
time and from the copies of messages which you already ahve between
myself and Hanno van der Mass, you can see that I have been MORE than
tolorant with him.
> I consider the situation in Region 28 unacceptable, and will take
> whatever steps necessary and available to me to calm things down.
> If I must, I will approve the introduction of regional policies in
> Zone 2.
If this is what you want to do, then go ahead. Don't threaten
me with it, it is absolutely NO problem for me if you should do this. I
am inclined to think it would be a VERY unwise move but it is yours to
make should you so desire.
> The juvenile delinquent you have installed as RC28 must be
> removed.
Frank will be removed as RC/28 from next week's nodelist. I
will NOT reinstate Hanno van der Maas as RC/28 and if necessary I will
put my own name in that position until another candidate can be found.
You have the evidence of his deception and his removal as RC/28 is
justified. If you cannot accept this then your ONLY alternative is to
remove me as ZC/2. Removal of a ZC for following policy, an interesting
concept.
> I insist you revert to the 'pre-war' status in all Regions until
> this is resolved. It can be resolved by:
There are few problems in any other regions so nothing will
change apart from the removal of Frank van der Loos as RC/28.
> 1) Presenting your case to the Zone Coordinators Council and
> getting their agreement to overrule me.
The ZCC should certainly make a decision as to whether policy
should be followed or not. If you are to remain as IC, with any
credibility at all, then it is YOU who must make a stance in this
matter. Simply being wishy washy and attempting to make things calm, no
matter what the long term effects, is a pathetic management technique at
best and outright dangerous at worst. It is not I who has to get his
act together but YOU and the ZCC as a body.
We HAVE a policy, do we follow it or throw it out of the
window? We are here to administer a TECHNICAL network but what we have,
in certain parts of zone 2 are absolute SOCIAL net entities which are
CONTROLLED for the benefit of other than the FidoNet SysOps. If that's
the way you want it to be then fine, issue the order and let's go with
it. If on the other hand we really ARE here to administer a TECHNICAL
network then let's stand by the documents which makes GUARANTEES
to SysOps and protects their rights.
> 2) Modifying your approach.
My approach is to follow policy. The approach of the region
28 "Control-Freaks" is to blackmail and threaten nodes into submission
and support for their own ideals and methods which have little or nothig
to do with FidoNet.
> Attacking me won't achieve anything, so don't bother.
Hopefully bringing this to your attention will not seem like
an attack. You have some WORK to do, if you do not have the time or the
inclination to do it, then please allow someone else to take the post of
IC and get some PROGRESS into FidoNet.
The ball is now in YOUR court.
Cheers,
Original Message Date: 22 Aug 92 19:34:41
From: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
To: Ron Dwight on 2:220/22
Subj: re: Copy of a message in ZCC
^AINTL 2:220/22 1:125/111
Please take me off all of your "CC" lists. I really don't want to get
this crap.
Original Message Date: 25 Aug 92 18:37:39
From: Ron Dwight on 2:220/22
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
Subj: RON_HENK.ART
^AINTL 1:1/1 2:220/22
Tom,
Herewith a reply to the article wriiten last week in FidoNews by Henk <20>
Wevers. This will give you a BALANCED view of the situation, although as <20>
we have discussed before matter like truth or a balanced viewpoint don't <20>
seem to enter too much into FidoNews these days.
Cheers,
Original Message Date: 28 Aug 92 12:02:01
From: Henk Wevers on 2:500/1
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: Next article
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:500/1
Hi Tom,
Already fed up with the situation ? I am. Therefor I am going away for <20>
holidays for 15 days or so. Will not look at a computerscreen during this <20>
time :-).
Below you find the next article for fidonet. As soon as I am back I'll <20>
take some time to get the submit docs, so you do not have to convert the <20>
message to an article. Right now my wife is pressing me to go, NOW.
A short notice:
We now have a new RC28. Ron could not find someone else and appointed
himself. Although we would like to revert to a situation that the ZC2
compiles our nodelist segment we do not bother that much. As I point out
in my article (you have said it also several times) the so called power
of a *C can be effectively neutralized by distributiong your own nodelist
segment. If you have enough support this works beautifully as Ron is <20>
finding
out at the moment. Also, the bringer of the bad news is always the one
blamed. So according to Ron, I have the region in an iron fist. He should
see my workload here. No time really for this kind of games. Hopefully we
can revert soon, but I have also the idea we can blow up this enough to
get some real changes (a back to the basics movement) going. How about <20>
that.
Policy just in two lines:
1. A person should be able to have his node listed in the nodelist as <20>
long
as he is up during ZMH and the software used is compatible
2. A *C should gather the nodelist changes, compile them and pass the
result towards the top of the nettree and to the roots.
Should work :-)
Ok, here is the article. I expect Ron to have one too. As he is a native
english speaker he is probably better with words than I am. I hope the
contents speaks for itself in my case.
Greetings from a rainy Holland.
------------ cut------ article ------
Do *C's have really power ?
===========================
Hello Fidonetters !
After the initial article about region 28 last week I will try to follow
up with short notices from region 28 and zone 2. I have had tremendous
response so a lot of you must be interested. Rightly so, because what is
happening could very well be the beginning of a change in fidonet. Kinda
back to the basics movement.
A lot has happened after last weeks article. The international coordinator
has written a message to the zone 2 coordinator to immediately restore
the situation in zone 2 to the state it was before the 'wars' started.
Also the new RC28 that was appointed by Ron Dwight should be removed.
The next thing that happened was that the zone 2 coordinator Ron Dwight
refused to go back to the pre 'war' status. He removed the guy he just
appointed to RC28 and tried to find another standin. No one was available
so the zone coordinator made himself the regional coordinator of region
28. This will be a surprice for people trying to communicate with the RC28
when their mailer calls long distance in stead of the expected regional <20>
call.
As you will be aware, the attitude of the sysops in region 28 is that no
*C should interfere in a lower level unless invited to do so. The IC has <20>
been
asked to help by us, we never asked the ZC2 to reorganize our region.
Personally I have been telling people that there is no real power in <20>
fidonet.
The only action a ZC for instance can take against you is to remove you
from the nodelist. If you are alone in your struggle you have a problem, <20>
but
if enough people support you there is an easy way out. Just distribute your
part of the nodelist. This is exactly what region 28 is doing at the <20>
moment.
We are producing our region segment and distribute it to every sysop, net,
region or zone that wants it. This fails if no-one asks for it, but in the
current situation there is much demand. As Ron is finding out at the moment
this effectively neutralizes his 'power' as a ZC. If you think about it,
this is a perfectly balanced situation. The power of a *C can be <20>
effectively
made zero by distributing your nodelist segment.
The last article I asked for help. A lot of people from different zones <20>
have
asked how. Here is the first suggestion: ask your *C to distribute the
region 28 nodelist segment. We can make it available in your zone if you <20>
want.
If they cannot or wil not do so, help us spreading it.
A very nice touch would be if the Zone coordinator would compile our <20>
segment
into his worldlist. Ask him to do so. After all a ZC should be there for
the sysops, right ? Wrong ! At least in zone 2 for the moment.
Maybe your ZC is different, try to find out.
I'll be back in two weeks.
Henk Wevers
Original Message Date: 01 Sep 92 11:37:37
From: Jan Vermeulen on 2:280/100
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: R28 has voted
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:280/100
*** Original to Ron Dwight ***
*** Copies to Tom Jennings, Matt Whelan and Hanno van der Maas ***
*** Posted in ENET.SYSOP and SYSOPS.028 ***
The following is the result of a poll conducted by Eelco de
Graaff, host of 2:281, on behalf of the hosts of nets 280
thru' 285, requesting by netmail all sysops of those nets
to express their opinion on the reorganisation of Region 28
into non overlapping nets as was demanded by the ZC2, Ron
Dwight.
The region 28 segment for day 241 contains 582 nodes, 210 of
them located in the so called social nets 286, 500 and 512.
In order to avoid any appearance of manipulation, the sysops
of these nodes have intentionally not been invited to parti-
cipate in those polls.
The distribution of voters per net was as follows:
net 280 - 35 sysops out of a total of 86 (40.7%) have voted
net 281 - 38 sysops out of a total of 56 (67.9%) have voted
net 282 - 21 sysops out of a total of 43 (48.8%) have voted
net 283 - 28 sysops out of a total of 61 (45.9%) have voted
net 284 - 23 sysops out of a total of 37 (62.2%) have voted
net 285 - 52 sysops out of a total of 89 (58.4%) have voted
-------------------------------------------------------------
197 sysops out of a total of 372 (53.0%) have voted
Thus the majority of the 'electorate' has voted.
Votes in favour of reorganisation: 23 sysops (11.7%)
Votes against reorganisation: 166 sysops (84.2%)
No preference was expressed by: 8 sysops ( 4.1%)
Considering that 210 other sysops have voted by obtaining a node
number in a social net, 376 sysops out of a total of 582 parti-
cipants in region 28 (64.6%) may be considered in favour of the
current situation, 23 (4%) were in favour of reorganisation and
of the remaining 183 sysops (31.4%) the opinion is not known.
-=<[ JV ]>=- NEC 280
Original Message Date: 02 Sep 92 10:11:00
From: Nick Reid on 2:253/159
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
Subj: R25
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:253/159
Hi, FidoNet Nodelist Copyright Holder -
ZC2 has recently been taking some rather bizarre steps, including
nodelisting himself as RC28 (Holland, "temporarily in Finland"), in a
campaign to geographicalize Z2, and his appointed RC25 is now making
moves of a similarly less than fortunate kind in the UK.
While there is room for argument on purely logical grounds about any
cost or other routing/network-expansion efficiencies that geographical
net topologies might achieve, I'm not interested in getting involved
in any discussion about it because I don't care that much either way.
If those who are convinced that it is unequivocally desirable and do
care have made it their business to implement it, OK by me PROVIDED
that it is done in a way which does NOT impose on either the goodwill
or checkbooks of ordinary nodes in the net (and/OR their users).
Basically, a refusal to list any non-conforming nodes that becomes
operational from some given non-retrospective date seems to be a
reasonable way to proceed, as the fact that most R25 nodes already
belong to the appropriate Net when coupled with (a) a NON-coercive
encouragment for existing non-conforming nodes to change to their
geo-appropriate Nets, (b) the current rate of expansion of the
nodelist, and (c) the current rate of attrition from the nodelist,
means that in a relatively short time the proportion of non-conforming
nodes in the Region will be minimal (if current trends continue, less
than 2.5% in three years and less than 0.5% in five). If it was good
enough to assign folks ABC/XYZ in the net months or years ago then it
is good enough to live with the consequences of that until altering
them is no longer a matter of disruption and inconvenience for them.
However, already several nodes have been effectively harrassed by RC25
in the last week or so by being told that a move in their own time now
will avert an unannounced cut-and-paste of the nodelist in the medium
term future, and 6 nodes, geographicallland Net location, including the <20>
Net Host, suddenly found themselves,
after compilation of last week's nodediffs, in a brand-new, previously
non-existent Net with no announcement or consultation having been made.
Several other instances of contempt for local sysops that I won't report
here have recently been alleged.
At the best of times the change to another Net is time-consuming and
often expensive business, but when coupled with authoritarian coercion
and unannounced nodelist tampering it becomes offensive and poisonous.
The express message from the RC verbatim, is "the next six months are
going to be a BUMPY ride so fasten your seatbelts as it is all for the
BENEFIT of FidoNet in the end". That is not the message to send to
nodes who were ALLOCATED their node numbers by a *C structure to which
they did not belong, and who then keyed software to them, set up email
addressing with correspondents worldwide based on them, and so on, even
if the *Cs involved SHOULD have been allocating numbers differently.....
It seems relevant that there is not in R25, nor has there been, any
sort of external-to-FidoNet club-membership requirement or limitation
on the freedom UK nodes to join the network at will of the type that
once existed in R28.
Although you are not in the *C chain, you are listed as the copyright
holder of the nodelist and I believe it to be important for the nodes
in R25 to know just what a FidoNet nodelisting is worth from your
point of view. For instance, if all the R25 NCs were to decide that
the WAY to implement geographical nets, if that is required by the
Zone Council or whoever, is NOT the way that ZC2 and RC25 have chosen,
what would be the status of submittal diffs mailed directly to you or
Matt Whelan, bypassing the scissors of both RC25 and ZC2? Etcetera?
Also, some time ago you republished an article by Randy Bush outlining
a method of distributing nodediffs by secured EchoMail specifically to
place full control of nodelisting back in the hands of the NCs. What
is the current status of that?
An early response would be greatly appreciated (and if you do reply,
please indicate its status re reposting in Regional echo or whatever).
Regards,
Nick Reid
2:253/159
P.S. Also, if you do reply, please do so direct (although listed as MO
this node is in fact CM and runs a BBS) or routed, at furthest, via my
Net Host: since the current RC took over, FidoNews has not been arriving
(and interestingly enough the last time FidoNews failed to get imported
the current RC was, as now, the importer and, although not then a *C,
was also at THAT time involved in an R25 organizational ruction) and
other failures of net traffic to arrive are beginning to be reported.
I will happily forward the cost of the call OR (if it hasn't evaporated
with time - and no problem if it has #|) use the few dollars I left with
you a while back for a copy or two of Homocore that are so far noshow.
P.P.S. I am not the best person to report on the full picture as I
haven't been in the UK for over a year (this node runs on almost 100%
automatic mostly for the benefit of its callers) but Pete Franchi of
2:253/157 (NC253 and ex RC25) is a reasonable guy with a reasonably
objective point of view on most things should anyone want to check the
situation out further....
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink