410 lines
16 KiB
Plaintext
410 lines
16 KiB
Plaintext
Original Message Date: 23 Mar 92 01:36:17
|
|
From: Ron Dwight on 2:220/22
|
|
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
|
|
Subj: FidoNews editorial
|
|
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:220/22
|
|
Hi Tom,
|
|
I'd like, in a friendly manner, to take exception to your editorial
|
|
in FidoNews 912. Not because I feel threatened by it, but simply because
|
|
what you are saying is obviously misinformed and basically untrue.
|
|
|
|
For the reason that, like it or not, you ARE an influence to the
|
|
SysOps, I feel you should consider a little before writing something which
|
|
could be potentially damaging to a large number of SysOps.
|
|
|
|
I quote from your editorial:-
|
|
|
|
> Oh, I bet if you ask a few of the multiple-hundred people about to
|
|
> be viciously cut from the nodelist for not following the arbitrary
|
|
> machinations of a small, greedy power elite, you might find some
|
|
> of them starting to appreciate that redundancy.
|
|
|
|
I presume that you are talking about zone 2 here and as I accept
|
|
responsibility for the current situation, you are talking about me.
|
|
|
|
1) No-one, I repeat NO-ONE, is about to be cut, viciously or otherwise,
|
|
from the nodelist. If you have heard differently, then you have heard
|
|
wrong. It might have been nice to get information directly from the
|
|
horse's mouth, but this is one of the advantages of editorializing, truth
|
|
does not have to be a high priority.
|
|
|
|
2) Zone 2 is rapidly deteriorating into a set of locked (closed) nets
|
|
where the criteria for joining are becoming less and less related to
|
|
FidoNet activities.
|
|
|
|
One example is in Swizerland. They have two nets and the net in
|
|
which you are allocated a number is dependant upon whether you charge your
|
|
BBS users for access to International EchoMail or not.
|
|
|
|
Another example was that a node was not allowed to join FidoNet
|
|
unless he ran a BBS and had been running it for at least 6 months. That
|
|
situation has at least changed.
|
|
|
|
What I am trying to achieve here in zone 2 is the move back to a
|
|
TECHNICAL net, nothing more. I believe VERY firmly it's what we should be
|
|
and I have never, nor ever will attempt to influence the USE to which
|
|
FidoNet is put, I simply try to preserve what it IS.
|
|
|
|
> If they had been relying on their neighbors for connectivity
|
|
> (and they upon their neighbors, etc) they'd find themselves
|
|
> *completely* at the mercy of the holders of the lists. If the
|
|
> worst happens, as it appears is about to in zone 2,
|
|
|
|
Please see above. I repeat, NO-ONE has been even threatened
|
|
with removal from the zone 2 nodelist. What I have done, is to remove
|
|
FROM OFFICE, two Regional Coordinators, but they have NEVER been removed
|
|
from the nodelist as a whole. The removal was in accordance with policy
|
|
and executed according to policy. Situations have changed somewhat and in
|
|
fact one of them is already back in office as RC.
|
|
|
|
> all they have to do is retain the last nodelist they are in,
|
|
> regenerate the net fragments (if necessary), and generate a
|
|
> new nodelist. Hopefully displacing the idiots trying for the
|
|
> power play.
|
|
|
|
I have NO idea who you are talking about here as I am not an
|
|
idiot and certainly not implementing a power-play. Perhaps you should
|
|
look to Henk Wevers, he was the one who brought up the idea of creating an
|
|
alternate nodelist in zone 2. You might try finding out who would benefit
|
|
from that particular move. Don't ask him, FIND OUT.
|
|
|
|
> Consider also that the list fragments are COPYRIGHTED TO THE LOCAL
|
|
> NETS.
|
|
|
|
Consider also that the copyright must be passed to the
|
|
processing *Cs in order for the nodelist to be MODIFIED and processed by
|
|
MAKENL.
|
|
|
|
The statements that you make either as editor of FidoNews or a
|
|
Tom Jennings the founder of FidoNet are capable of having a very profound
|
|
effect on some of the more juvenile minded of FidoNet's SysOps, you have a
|
|
duty and a responsibility to feed them on truth. I really used to believe
|
|
that you held truth as a worthwhile quality, but I ain't so sure any more.
|
|
|
|
Ron Dwight, ZC2 and still trying to get something GOOD done.
|
|
|
|
Original Message Date: 30 Mar 92 01:01:17
|
|
From: tom jennings on 1:125/111
|
|
To: Ron Dwight on 2:220/22
|
|
Subj: re: FidoNews editorial
|
|
^AINTL 2:220/22 1:125/111
|
|
|
|
> I presume that you are talking about zone 2 here and as
|
|
> I accept responsibility for the current situation, you are
|
|
> talking about me.
|
|
|
|
As you wish...
|
|
|
|
> It might have been nice to get
|
|
> information directly from the horse's mouth, but this is one of
|
|
> the advantages of editorializing, truth does not have to be a
|
|
> high priority.
|
|
|
|
I did. There are other people involved, as well. You may recall, a few
|
|
messages back to jokingly referred to "putting some people into line
|
|
in Zone 2", which I thought was completely inappropriate for a ZC.
|
|
|
|
> 2) Zone 2 is rapidly deteriorating into a set of locked (closed)
|
|
> nets where the criteria for joining are becoming less and less
|
|
> related to FidoNet activities.
|
|
|
|
Why people join FidoNet is up to them. It is noones business why they
|
|
join. It is not the ZCs job to "manage" the net.
|
|
|
|
> One example is in Swizerland. They have two nets and
|
|
> [..] FidoNet unless he ran a BBS and had been running it for at
|
|
least
|
|
> 6 months.
|
|
|
|
I have no information on these, and of course terrible things *are*
|
|
done in FidoNet, by both individual sysops an the so-called *C
|
|
structure. I dont see it as black vs. white.
|
|
>
|
|
> What I am trying to achieve here in zone 2 is the move
|
|
> back [a] to a TECHNICAL net, nothing more. I believe VERY firmly
|
|
> it's what we should be [b] and I have never, nor ever will attempt
|
|
> to influence the USE [c] to which FidoNet is put, I simply try to
|
|
> preserve what it IS [d].
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ah... the very crux of the problem contained in a few words.
|
|
|
|
Note my added [x]'s above. [a] [b] and [d] are simply your personal
|
|
interpretations. "should be" is very subjective. "influence the USE"
|
|
is exactly what you are doing. "Back"?! This is fantasy, it was never
|
|
"only technical" and besides, lets move forwards. "What it is" is
|
|
diverse, and trying to push things into some direction you prefer or
|
|
truly believe is correct (others obviously disagree) is exactly the
|
|
problem.
|
|
|
|
Nor do I simplisticly assume "you" are an Evil Monster controlling
|
|
things, etc. Lots of people belive this stuff. Coupled with
|
|
complacency, and poor communication...
|
|
|
|
> having a very profound effect on some of the more juvenile
|
|
> minded of FidoNet's SysOps, you have a duty and a responsibility
|
|
|
|
No one "knows better" enough to tell others how to run their systems.
|
|
|
|
The POLICY documents are useless garbage. Anything that gives a ZC the
|
|
power to appoint RCs, then reserves the power to pitch out the ZC to
|
|
the RCs, is a joke. I made my opinion on POLICY4 very clear years ago.
|
|
I do not consider it in force, nor do many others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I do not wish to cutoff communications. The force with which you
|
|
believe something does not make it true. Other peoples realities are
|
|
equally valid. In fact, FidoNet works quite well, and "consistency" is
|
|
not a virtue. Diversity is. This is communications, not a technical
|
|
corporation. It will not run like a corporation if I have any
|
|
influence.
|
|
|
|
If net members want to have multiple overlapping nets within a zone,
|
|
arranged by interest rather than geographic, so be it. Those
|
|
geographic arrangement "rules" were very naively done, here in North
|
|
America, where the "free local call" was the dominant factor. I know.
|
|
I designed it. The playing field has changed, and this concept doesnt
|
|
even exist outside the US!
|
|
|
|
----------------
|
|
|
|
In the future, potential interests of other FidoNet members, I've
|
|
saved your message, and this reply, in a text file. Do you mind if at
|
|
some later date I make this avilable to others? I'll only do so if
|
|
this conversation "goes somewhere". I will save everything from this
|
|
point onward (fair warning :-)
|
|
|
|
My goal is documentation. I wanted to define the expectation of
|
|
privacy also, anything less would be unfair at best. Let me know what
|
|
you think.
|
|
|
|
Original Message Date: 02 Apr 92 08:48:35
|
|
From: Michael Bravo on 2:5030/2
|
|
To: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
|
|
Subj: ZONE2TXT.ART
|
|
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:5030/2
|
|
* Zone 2 - what's going on?
|
|
|
|
by Michael Bravo of 2:5030/2
|
|
|
|
Hello you out there! The following is a comment triggered by a comment
|
|
Tom Jennings made in Fnews 912 about Zone 2. Among other words, he
|
|
wrote:
|
|
|
|
> etc) they'd find themselves *completely* at the mercy of the holders
|
|
> of the lists. If the worst happens, as it appears is about to in zone
|
|
> 2, all they have to do is retain the last nodelist they are in,
|
|
> regenerate the net fragments (if necessary), and generate a new
|
|
> nodelist. Hopefully displacing the idiots trying for the power play.
|
|
|
|
I understand that there's almost no idea outside Zone 2 about what's
|
|
going on in there, except muffled rumours. I'd like to clarify the
|
|
situation, or at least say how _I_ see it from my place. Well, some
|
|
might wonder why the only defence for the whole zone comes from xUSSR
|
|
- hmm, I don't know. It's always so in unfair arguments - the right
|
|
side prefers to be silent, and those wrong are shouting the most.
|
|
|
|
Okay, let's go on with the story. What it all started with, our
|
|
previous esteemed ZC, Felix Kasza, did resign. The reasons for that is
|
|
a separate story, so I will not embark on that. Suffice to say, he was
|
|
good ZC, and we all owe him a lot (literally, too - he has paid out of
|
|
his own pocket for many, many mails). Then Ron Dwight stepped in. What
|
|
he had to begin with, there was no Santa Klaus delivering mail to
|
|
regions on his dime, and many people DID have to do something on their
|
|
own. The growling began, but invisible as yet. But what really started
|
|
the thing, it was simple _suggestion_ ZC made in ENET.SYSOP (Zone 2
|
|
sysop echo) that nodelist size can be somewhat reduced with _small_
|
|
efforts from *Cs doing their job more thoroughly (well, Tom, noone
|
|
complains about big nodelist, but what if it can _really_ be made less
|
|
in size without anyone hurt?). Noone was FORCED to do anything or
|
|
threatened with anything. It was a _suggestion_. Anyone having reading
|
|
skills above such of 7 age old kid could prove that reading Ron's
|
|
messages. But the hounds were off the leash. Since that, Ron is
|
|
receiving such an amount of bashing, kicking, and outright insults,
|
|
that it's a pain just to read ENET.SYSOP. The story continues, but I
|
|
don't want to bore you readers with details. If some people will
|
|
write me and tell they're interested, I can try and make some mor e
|
|
reports on the Zone 2, if noone of its sysops don't care <wicked
|
|
grin>.
|
|
|
|
So the abstract is: please don't believe when you're being told about
|
|
Zone 2 tiranny - IT DOESN'T EXIST. What does exist, it is stout ZC,
|
|
trying to make Fidonet Zone 2 better, looking into the future and not
|
|
in his pocket or list of political opponents.
|
|
|
|
Original Message Date: 13 Apr 92 04:05:06
|
|
From: Michael Bravo on 2:5030/2
|
|
To: tom jennings on 1:125/111
|
|
Subj: The article follows
|
|
^AINTL 1:125/111 2:5030/2
|
|
*** Answering a msg posted in area MBOX (Personal mail to read/answer).
|
|
|
|
Hello tom!
|
|
|
|
Sunday April 05 1992, tom jennings writes to Michael Bravo:
|
|
|
|
tj> Thanks for your article; it will run in fidonews 9-14...
|
|
|
|
It did. Let's see if it'll trigger ANY reaction. Noone wrote so far,
|
|
except you and Ron Dwight...
|
|
|
|
tj> There are other sides to this issue. I dont pretend to knwo them all.
|
|
tj> Neither side are all angels. Different people have different agendas,
|
|
tj> and treat different people differently.
|
|
|
|
Sure. I just told what _I_ am thinking. IMHO, if , say, half of the Fido
|
|
sysops _cared_ about what is going on around them, Fidonews would have to
|
|
change publishing policy or go hardcover :)
|
|
|
|
tj> In any case, I wish you luck, and thanks again for the article!!
|
|
|
|
Thanks for you too! After all, it was you who started the whole thing. Two
|
|
years ago I did read the word 'telecommunications' or 'BBS' as a fair
|
|
dream only. Today I am an NC, have had my own BBS (now closed because it
|
|
did ran on college equipment, so I'm collecting some scrap details around
|
|
to put up something at home), currently sysoping a BBS in another small
|
|
private company, helped to rise a dozen of nodes and a couple of nets, had
|
|
hundreds of talks with exciting people, got tens of new friends etc etc
|
|
etc. So thanks again!
|
|
|
|
/\/\ike
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
Original Message Date: 04 Aug 92 21:11:22
|
|
From: Tom Jennings on 1:125/111
|
|
To: matt on 3:3/1000
|
|
Subj: Ron Dwight...
|
|
^AINTL 3:3/1000 1:125/111
|
|
He does seem to be a royal pain in the ass. What is his problem?! I
|
|
get weekly complaints about heavy-handed behaviour; ignoring elections,
|
|
threats, etc. Ihad an argument with him once. He talked about FidoNet
|
|
"returning to the old days" and all that horseshit. I told him
|
|
outright, no such shit existed. Stuff about content; should be
|
|
technical only etc.
|
|
|
|
I think he's a flaming asshole and should be tossed out on his ear. In
|
|
case you were about to ask... :-)
|
|
|
|
(I get complaints about lots of things, both because I'm 1:1/1 (people
|
|
seem to think it a magical address) and because of my name. I have to
|
|
say at least half of them are quite rational-looking, and jive with my
|
|
experiences with him. He thinks he's god.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Original Message Date: 04 Aug 92 23:54:28
|
|
From: Brian Timmins on 2:251/666
|
|
To: Tom Jennings on 1:1/1
|
|
Subj: Region25
|
|
^AFLAGS A/S,DIR
|
|
Hi Tom,
|
|
|
|
This is more for information than the desire to bother you, or the hope
|
|
that you might wish or be able to do anything.
|
|
|
|
Best Regards, Brian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here follows a letter sent to Matt Whelan:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Msg # 1696 Private, Archive/Sent, Direct, $2.72
|
|
Date: 04 Aug 92 23:50:20
|
|
From: Brian Timmins on 2:251/666 RIDJEK THOME Mail Centre in Emsworth
|
|
To: Matt Whelan on 3:3/1000 International Coordinator in Sydney Nsw
|
|
Australia
|
|
Subj: Region 25
|
|
|
|
____________________________________________________________________________
|
|
|
|
Hello Matt,
|
|
|
|
Sorry to be a pain but I wish to register a formal objection to the
|
|
high-handed treatment of Region25 by the ZC, Ron Dwight.
|
|
|
|
Given the peculiar circumstances, I have no objection to the appointment of
|
|
an RC pro tem - TO HOLD AN ELECTION.
|
|
|
|
I have a strong objection to having anyone forced on me and I suggest it is
|
|
contrary to everything that FidoNET stands for.
|
|
|
|
Brian Timmins
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
looking like Ron's minion you not only look it you have his name stamped
|
|
all over your forehead. Not a very good start is it - trying to con us
|
|
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
|
|
the region would be to call a bona fide election and allow the region to
|
|
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
|
|
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
|
|
the job and b) that you weren't Rons minion and c) that you were here to
|
|
serve the region! So what's this then? A sudden change of heart? Boy
|
|
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
|
|
democratic way. Kick out the power mongers and those who wish to impose
|
|
their will on others then it will be not only stable but will also return
|
|
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)
|
|
|