informis
/
textfiles
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
textfiles/bbs/FIDONET/FIDONEWS/fido1029.nws

1699 lines
72 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Blame History

This file contains invisible Unicode characters

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

F I D O N E W S -- Vol.10 No.29 (19-Jul-1993)
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| A newsletter of the | |
| FidoNet BBS community | Published by: |
| _ | |
| / \ | "FidoNews" BBS |
| /|oo \ | +1-519-570-4176 1:1/23 |
| (_| /_) | |
| _`@/_ \ _ | Editors: |
| | | \ \\ | Sylvia Maxwell 1:221/194 |
| | (*) | \ )) | Donald Tees 1:221/192 |
| |__U__| / \// | Tim Pozar 1:125/555 |
| _//|| _\ / | |
| (_/(_|(____/ | |
| (jm) | Newspapers should have no friends. |
| | -- JOSEPH PULITZER |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Submission address: editors 1:1/23 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Internet addresses: |
| |
| Sylvia -- max@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca |
| Donald -- donald@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca |
| Tim -- pozar@kumr.lns.com |
| Both Don & Sylvia (submission address) |
| editor@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| For information, copyrights, article submissions, |
| obtaining copies and other boring but important details, |
| please refer to the end of this file. |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
========================================================================
Table of Contents
========================================================================
1. Editorial..................................................... 2
2. Articles...................................................... 3
AEGIS....................................................... 3
"Madness in FidoLand... Part I?"............................ 3
region25 ZC2 does it again.................................. 4
ARJ vs ZIP, The Faceoff..................................... 5
Fido ENFORCES ShareWARE Registrations!!!.................... 7
R24 Update & Some More Thoughts............................. 8
ZC Is Out of Order.......................................... 9
To: Billy Cash (1:226/70.0)................................ 11
Change nodelist achiver..................................... 11
Policy4's 4th birthday!..................................... 13
Free Expression in FidoNet (Open letter to Tom Jennings).... 15
New and Eclectic Environmental and Science Echoes........... 16
Why do we want geonets??.................................... 18
MegaLoMania................................................. 20
UK FidoNet Policy (UKPOL) Document Draft 003................ 23
New Echos Announcement...................................... 28
What's actually happening in Region 18?..................... 29
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 2 19 Jul 1993
3. Fidonews Information.......................................... 29
========================================================================
Editorial
========================================================================
Ahhhh, sunburn.
We went to the free Home County Folk Festival this weekend,
which is a better-than-usual excuse for getting down to writing
the editorial late. I met an archetypal old man there who wore
dread-locks in his *long* beard, and bag-man clothes except they
were perfectly clean and his fingernails were manicured. He has
dedicated a book of poetry to Greg Curnoe, and agrees that the
only reasons for not being a student (i mean, trying to
understand stuff, not necessarily having an ID card that says
"student") are laziness or despair. If i hadn't actually
chatted with him i might have avoided him as a wino. Funny how
misleading appearances can be, or at least how bound by
preconceptions i can be.
Anyway, reflecting upon recent mail, i must apologize to readers
who might be offended by some small language contained herein below.
Being revolted by violence, i'm not up to cutting articles.
Perhaps proper, linguistically sensitive readers might employ
the 'page down' key, or some similar contrivance if they want
censorship to happen in their Snooze. As far as i can tell,
nobody's submitted anything to us that is simplistically intended
to be offensive (thankyou and i'm not surprised), so i can continue
to avoid the possibility of being overbearing and repressive over
yet another issue.
I'm worried a wee bit that accepting submissions by net mail
might be misleading here and there. We are still happily
accepting Net Mail submissions of *articles*. Just because
the submissions may come by mail doesn't mean FidoNews is now
an edited echo. Please do not use quotes in articles that are
submitted by Net Mail, because they get scrambled when we format
them for the Snooze, and because reprinting what everyone read
last week meagrely interspersed with comments, is boring.
three r's: rant, rave, revel...reel real reveal..revellation
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 3 19 Jul 1993
========================================================================
Articles
========================================================================
AEGIS
From: Kenny Teel (1:141/650)
A global consortium of non-profit BBS in FidoNet has been
forming.
What's it called? "AEGIS" (AIDS Education General Information
System).
The AIDS Daily Summary and various other data are made available
each weekday. Data orinates from the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, American Foundation For AIDS Research, National
Institutes of Health and the likes.
This is a new, exciting service that has sprung from FidoNet,
bringing the latest news of research and other developments from
the various scientific sources to scores of systems around the
globe!
The data is freely available to all who request it.
Echomail stars are:
West Coast - HIV/AIDS Info BBS - 1:103/927
Midwest - Starcom - 1:154/69
North East - NHGCS Network BBS - 1:141/650
AEGIS media consists of seven Echomail conferences and
twenty-four TICK style file echos.
I feel this is news because everything is 100% voluntary and
free (in the spirit of FidoNet -<g>-).
Thanks for your attention-
kt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Madness in FidoLand... Part I?"
From: Karl Davis (3:712/510)
Well, Well, Well.
I am writing to raise a few points concerning Jeremy Dailey
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 4 19 Jul 1993
(1:2613/276)'s article about "Madness in FidoLand... Part I?".
The main reason I am writing this is to point out to him (and
other like-minded sysops), that ARC, although being
'antiquated', is widely supported! There has been a hullabaloo
here in Zone 3 on compression formats, and rather than repeat
all that, please, Jeremy, and others, remember that
NOT EVERYONE uses a PC. * NOT EVERYONE else uses a Mac or an
Amiga.
There are other computers connected to Fidonet, and I think it
is time that everyone was reminded of that. ARJ is not the
answer to life, the universe and everything. Neither is LHA.
Fidonet is a machine-independent network, so please keep things
that way. Although ARC is not new, and probably doesn't give the
best compression rates, it scores very high on the
platform-independent stakes.
For Example - I use the Acorn Risc OS based system with various
BBS utils and a very good port of BinkleyTerm. I can de-archive
most formats, but only create ARC or SPARK-16 formats. This is a
pain, but it shouldn't be a problem as the 'official' archiver
of Fidonet is ARC. End of problem. At least until the bloke with
a 486 wants to change the compression format to, say, ARJ. I am
probably not the only one who faces this problem. Take our Mac
friends, and then the Atari ST, then ......
I am also not flaming you, just pointing out a mis-conception
that a lot of sysops have; namely that everyone is forced to use
a DOS/OS2/Win etc PC. Some of us are more fortunate than that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
region25 ZC2 does it again
Hi Folks, I have been reading a lot lately about region 25 and
Policy 4. For those who "truly" believe that policy 4 is NOT in
force in zone 2 or region 25, the following may be illuminating:
##Some text deleted for the sake of brevity.##
Let's assume that region 25, as a whole, votes against Policy 4.
The majority of the SysOps (worldwide) vote in favour of it.
Does this mean region 25 is exempt from it?
I hope that you can clearly see how ludicrous it is to state
that simply because region25, or even zone 2 voted against the
proposition of Policy 4, it cannot apply to them.
For those of you, and I am sure there are still a few, who
cannot understand even this simplistic logic and who occupy the
position of NetWork Coordinator, I suggest the following.
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 5 19 Jul 1993
Poll the members of your net and find out their opinion on the
applicability of policy 4. If they disagree with you, then it's
time to give up the job and hand it over to someone with a
better understanding of FidoNet. If they agree with you then
send me a message informing me that you do NOT accept Policy 4
as being applicable to your net. Send the same message to every
member of your net as well as your Regional Coordinator. I will
see to it that you are no longer bothered by Policy 4.
Ron Dwight, ZC/2, sometimes known as RonBo ###
He striketh again and it looks like that unfortunately for some
of you you will in the future get another massive update. What
can be done? When is a more realistic policy which allows
regions to have some say going to be written? Even asking IC for
help seems to fall on death ears, we asked for an exception
policy to be applied for special local circumstances for UK
telephone charging structures it was turned down or even blocked.
It means that many of us may perhaps lose our node numbers,
there is no path of appeal left to us, since now ZC2 has decided
in his infinite wisdom to become RC25 as well. Lunacy is an
understatement, one sysop has already bee expelled from Fidonet
because he tried to get an injunction to stop this madness. I
ask does Fidonet want to grow and encourage Human communication
or does it want to shrink into the dark ages.
Those at the top are the only ones that can stop this madness.
Please help, before we are all renumbered in zone2 and really
huge nodediffs are seen and the sysops no longer have the
control over their own systems
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ARJ vs ZIP, The Faceoff
By Scott Miller, The Star Board BBS (1:123/416)
Who will win the battle of the Archivers? Read on to find out!
Okay, we have all argued the subject of which compression/
decompression utility is best. I have been fed up with this subject
for a while, and since then I have been releasing tests of all the
major archivers, and have found that two really stand out. Robert K.
Jung's ARJ, and Phil Katz's PKZIP. There has been much heated debate
about which of these two arvhivers should prevail as the best in the
BBS community, so I set up a little test. I completely demolished all
the resident programs, except DOS, and 4dos. No caches, No memory
managers, just ARJ, ZIP, and the Unreal Graphics demo, (Thanks to
Future Crew, for this really fine and BIG demo, which I am proud to
use in this test.) which is a bit over 2 megabytes in size. Both
archivers were set to their maximum compression levels, ARJ with the
-M1 and -JM flags, and PKZIP with the -EX flag. I set up a batch file,
which used 4DOS's TIMER command to be the most accurate, and it wrote
the results directly to the below list. Well here it is, the answer,
to life the universe and everything, or at least the archiver question
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 6 19 Jul 1993
(a little joke to all you Douglas Adams fans).
Test results. The Faceoff. ARJ v2.41 vs PKZIP v2.04g.
-------------------------------------------------------
File sizes before:
-----------------------------
Volume in drive C is STACVOL_DSK
Directory of c:\test\*.*
. <DIR> 7-11-93 22:24
.. <DIR> 7-11-93 22:24
readme.now 4521 8-05-92 18:48
unreal.exe 2310375 8-05-92 19:17
2,314,896 bytes in 2 file(s) 2,334,720 bytes allocated
50,012,160 bytes free
Compression times. ARJ:
-----------------------
Timer 1 on: 22:28:01
Timer 1 off: 22:29:22 elapsed: 0:01:20.96
File size after. ARJ:
---------------------
Volume in drive C is STACVOL_DSK
Directory of c:\test\unreal.arj
unreal.arj 1310268 7-11-93 22:29
1,310,268 bytes in 1 file(s) 1,335,296 bytes allocated
47,620,096 bytes free
Compression times. ZIP:
-----------------------
Timer 1 on: 22:29:22
Timer 1 off: 22:31:58 elapsed: 0:02:35.17
File size after. ZIP:
---------------------
Volume in drive C is STACVOL_DSK
Directory of c:\test\unreal.zip
unreal.zip 1326664 7-11-93 22:31
1,326,664 bytes in 1 file(s) 1,327,104 bytes allocated
45,318,144 bytes free
Decompression times. ARJ
------------------------
Timer 1 on: 22:32:03
Timer 1 off: 22:33:01 elapsed: 0:00:58.27
Decompression times. ZIP
------------------------
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 7 19 Jul 1993
Timer 1 on: 22:33:04
Timer 1 off: 22:33:59 elapsed: 0:00:55.20
Well, from these results which I have looked over, I believe
it was a very close race. PKZIP was actually SLOWER in compressing the
two files, which is a definite change over time, but it remained
faster in decompressing the file. Take in mind however that the actual
time difference is very small, but time can be precious. As far as
file compression, ARJ did better than PKZIP by 1639 bytes, which is a
tiny difference, but can make a difference when you are dealing with
hundreds of megabytes, so a little is better than nothing. I would
just like to say CONGRATULATIONS to the winner, who I personally would
like to think is ARJ v 2.41, which has taken great steps in many areas
over the earlier versions, and good luck to both authors, until the
next faceoff.
Scott Miller
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fido ENFORCES ShareWARE Registrations!!!
From: Mike Lester 1:170/10011
Once upon a time in fidonet........
Shareware Author: Mr. NC ANYNET, I wish to file a policy
complaint against NODE GRUNT SYSOP, he has (sniff sniff) been
running my software well past its registration time, and I want
him FORCED to either cough up money he owes me, or i want him
FORCED out of the nodelist, or FORCED to STOP using my software
past its "trial time limit".
Mr. NC ANYNET to Shareware Author: Fine, I will EXCOMMUNICATE
Node Grunt Sysop, for running illegle software.
From Mr. NC ANYNET to NODE GRUNT SYSOP: I have had a POLICY
COMPLAINT on your NODE. You are to cease and desist using the
Shareware from the referanced author. he wants his money or he
wants you to stop using it. I find that this is within policy4
guidelines and i want an answer now or i will be forced to
"EXCOMMUNICATE" you.
From NODE GRUNT SYSOP to Mr. NC ANYNET: Stuff it, i can run ANY
software i want, and its no ones business if its registered
shareware or not.
From Mr. NC ANYNET: your outa here, i will remove your node
number from the next nodelist update.
End of Story........
Sound like FICTION????
NOPE, its for real, and the characters names in this story are :
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 8 19 Jul 1993
Mr. Fidonet NC: 1:170/0, JB Graham
Software Author Rep?? (Shareware Police) Policy Complainer:
Bruce Bodger 1:170/400 (btw, this Complainter has no known
AUTHORITY to ACT in behalf of RA ) ( He is only a Support
board, and collects no money, or does any ) ( RA registrations
according to the RA Docs... )
NODE GRUNT SYSOP, Jason Garcia, 170/506....age 16 yrs.
My Policy Complaint is a matter of public record against Bodger,
and may be file requested from 1:170/10011.0 as BBAPPEAL.TXT
Mike Lester - Alarmist.
Comments anyone???
Is it me, or does anyone else feel there is a terrable
injustice here...and an opening of one LARGE can of really BAD
worms by a really BAD DOOD...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
R24 Update & Some More Thoughts
"R24 Update & Some More Thoughts"
by Juergen Hermann (still one of the good guys),
NL.169 2:241/7554 (49-721-826310, V.32bis),
Internet jh@ccave.ka.sub.org
"... the question is, how do we achieve that the consciousness
of the function of law and of its enforcement is brought to a
consent among the whole population. That are processes that
take years. And what you have neglected there, you cannot
repair over night by a certain action."
(Richard von Weizsaecker, 1987 in German TV)
First some current statistics: R24 now has 1015 sysops, 83 of them new
since NL169, therefor only (1015-83)/1743 = 53% have accepted their new
NCs and the attendant circumstances of joining the new and improved
R24. All of this numbers represent _persons_, since the latest R24
sports seems to be to create 2-4 additional (ISDN) lines for a node.
Honi soit qui mal y pense! ;-)
The R24C claimed that one of the main reasons for his action was that
several NCs abused their power, that NCs fought for nodes ("if you come
into my net you'll get echo mail much cheaper than now") and so on.
Well, so far I didn't see any prove supporting this reasoning, but
let's be trusting. What's much more important is that if it's true, the
R24C failed _miserably_ in performing his duties for approximately two
years! Then, one summer day, he decided to do something against the
"saustall" (pigsty) he did not care to prevent in the first place, by
acting in a way that's totally against THE POLICY, and instead of
resigning and thus making room for a more capable guy.
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 9 19 Jul 1993
Furthermore, what makes this attempt of enforcing parts of THE POLICY
which had been ignored for years in many Z2 regions quite ridiculous is
that, without being listed at all in the world-wide nodelist, we (parts
of the old region with the _old_ structures) can perfectly and smoothly
communicate with other regions and zones. The only critical spots are
the out-of-region links, a local issue (local in the meaning of
just-one-session-away). You may believe it or not, and it's just my
personal experience, but after my HUB changed feeds I got echomail in
international conferences that had been dead for a long time. The only
major problem is netmail, but after all Fight-O-Net is there to support
the over-sized egos of *Cs and not to communicate with each other. Not!
This indicates that there were no other reasons for this action than
that this rules were there. No operational or other technical reasons,
certainly not the cost issue, it was PURE POLITICS. This is just a
hobby, but I fear some people are mixing hobby communications with
hobby politics.
It is also a strong point for the proposed domain name services, they
WOULD work if you only let them and somebody puts enough work into an
implementation. They would also take away the power to remove a whole
region at the will of two persons (RC+ZC), because an alternative name
server can be set up just as easily as alternative echomail links. But
of course no *Cs wants that, because he would lose his only weapon to
force people to accept his subjective view of "FidoNet Paradise".
Sweet dreams, Juergen
P.S.: To our American friends, Richard von Weizsaecker is the German
President, if you failed to know that. ;-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ZC Is Out of Order
by Denis McMahon @ 2:252/20 (for now)
Is ZC2 truly acting in the best interests of FidoNet? Look at his
recent record:
(a) ZC2 (who lives in Finland) appointed himself RC28 (The
Netherlands) for several months in direct contravention of Policy 4
section 3.5.
(b) ZC2 collaborated in the RC24 "geographisation" where several nodes
were allocated node numbers without warning, a move that, whether
permitted under Policy or not, was it seems somewhat lacking in
planning and consultation.
(c) ZC2 has found that a Region25 node is guilty of blackmail
(demanding money with menaces) for threatening to take legal action to
prevent the withdrawl of a nodenumber. Does ZC2 place Policy 4 above
national law? It certainly looks like it. ZC2 of course is safe from
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 10 19 Jul 1993
British Justice in Finland, and thus he is happy to take action that
is in contempt of the British courts in a case that is sub-judice. I
would suggest that ZC2 would be well advised not to visit the UK in
future, he may find that a warrant has been issued for his contempt.
(d) ZC2 has now appointed himself RC25, despite the fact that he
resides in Finnland (region 20) and that he is thus wearing multiple
hats once again (in direct contravention of the spirit of Policy 4).
This may well be my swansong, and you may well see a greatly reduced
region 25 segment in the nodelist shortly - as ZC2 is taking a course
of action which may drive sysops away in droves - and I would not be
surprised if I am now removed from the nodelist for dissension. So,
why do I write this? Simple - FidoNet must find a way to prevent *Cs
abusing their role of co-ordinating node-diff segments! Until FidoNet
can do this, FidoNet will remain at risk of being hi-jacked by people
like ZC2 who are more interested in their petty power games than in
the long term good of the network. Lets look at the way this problem
developed......
(1) ZC2 mandated that Region25 must reorganise geographically -
despite the fact that the only complaints about the non geographic
organisation were purely based on policy, and not any problem that the
non-geographic nets were causing.
(2) A lot of people opposed geo-nets, but were prepared to accept a
natural wasteage solution, where over a period of, say, a year, people
would move across to the geographically correct nets.
(3) RC25 / ZC2 were not prepared to accept this, and in one case, when
a sysop said "We will incur costs" said "So what, Sue Me."
(4) When the sysop concerned responded to RC25s public taunts to sue
him by doing just that, both RC25 and ZC2 deemed the sysop to be
excessively annoying.
(5) When the RC25 realised that the sysop concerned had a cast iron
case for a restraining suit, he chickened out and resigned the Post.
As a result, ZC2 has now imposed himself as RC25, unwanted by a large
number of sysops in the region.
Does FidoNet really want people who seem committed to a route of
disharmony in positions where, by editing a file, they can remove
sysops from the nodelist? I think not - yet this is the state we are
in, today, in Zone 2. *Cs are charged with the technical management of
the network, and to decide that a sysop exercising his legal rights is
worthy of excommunication is a dangerous precedent to set.
This may be the last article you see from me, ZC2 will doubtless state
that this is excessively annoying and remove me from the nodelist as
soon as he sees it. More power to his elbow - the only change that
will make over here is that I will no longer be able to import
echomail from Zone 1 and feed it on to Zone 2. That's not my loss, in
fact, it's my gain - as it means my telco bills go down!
Sysops in Region 25 and those other parts of Zone 2 that get the feeds
to the echoes concerned through me might feel differently though.
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 11 19 Jul 1993
To: Billy Cash (1:226/70.0)
Re: Teen Net
In Vol. 10, No. 28 of FidoNews, Billy Cash stated the following in
response to Matt Riedel's Teen Net advertisement:
>In an article almost completely devoid of grammar, the author Matt
>Riedel says teenagers are treated differently just because of their
>ages. Rubbish! Do the spelling errors, capitalization mistakes and
>missing verbs mean anything? And what's wrong with being "grown up?"
>I'd hate to be in this network. (Imagine City Council run by a bunch
>of pimply high school kids!)
I have to respond to this. Upon first reading your message, I had no
idea you yourself were a teenager you stated it. This may bring up the
question: besides the SysOps of boards you call, who even knows you're
a teenager?
If you act like an adult, you can do more than merely get by with their
"good example" - you can actually hold a FidoNet position! There is no
age restriction on being an NC, RC, or even ZC of FidoNet. Even a 10
year old, presuming he acted like an adult and knew what he was doing,
could run Zone 1 of FidoNet!
Not to say you should fake your age, but this isn't the United States
government. You don't have to be 35 or older to hold an important
position. I think the question here isn't age, it's maturity. Just
ask any teenage SysOps who were called "Sir" by a 40 year old caller.
;')
There are, I am sure, some teenage Net Coordinators among us in
FidoNet. If any of them wish to speak up on this, I think this would be
an excellent opportunity. And I am certain that they do not consider
themselves "pimply high school kids".
Thomas Head 1:3632/37
Age 15
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Change nodelist achiver
By Rob! Blackney "New Kid In Town"
Well, how should I start??? Well, I'm no writer (you'll see!),
So I guess I'll just start. After several attempts at starting
a Front End Mailer (FEM) in 92 with some "Help from others" type
document files (Who also could NOT write), I finally in Feb. of
93 sat down and READ the docs for Front Door (FD). Should have
done that in the first place (Oh Well!), set it up and Bingo! I
was on-line. Mind you I had a lot of help from a couple of
GREAT SysOp friends down state (Thanx Doug & Bob). After
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 12 19 Jul 1993
several more months of "Learning the Ropes" (and still learning)
I finally feel comfortable.
Then, one morning I decided to read the news (Fnewsa26, 27, 28).
Now I've seen some messages concerning the changing of the
NodeList because of its size and some other "traffic". But
after reading this thing about R24!!! Well, here are my
thoughts.
First, IMHO I really think the "Powers that Be" set a new
"standard" for Archiving. If the current XARC (10/90) were
still supported (updated regularly) there could be no argument
from anyone. However, while XARC still sits there, the others
go on.....
Its time a new Standard was chosen, doesn't really matter which
as long as it's better. A new standard IS necessary, take the
current NodeDiff (as of this writing).
NODEDIFF.190 220,945 (Raw, Day 190, 1993) NODEDIFF.A90
120,669 (ARC a, V6, 1989) NODEDIFF.A90 120,513 (ARCA, V5,
1988) NODEDIFF.LZH 85,817 (LZH, 1991) NODEDIFF.ARJ 83,488
(ARJ, 1992) NODEDIFF.Z90 83,159 (PKZip, 1993) NODEDIFF.Z90
82,014 (PKZip -- ex, 1993)
Considering the obvious, why are we spending money to move even
just one file using this archaic archiver? My suggestion, in
January pick the one that currently are compressing the most, in
two years review and see if a change is necessary. We move
these files 52 times a year using even LHA (this year) would
save us 35k a week (or 1820k, over a meg using the above file).
Mind you I received the Nodediff above in Version six form.
Reality is we all have just about every one, because not every
file is self extracting, so we need the errant copy or two.
Changing the standard shouldn't be such a big deal. Is Fidonet
pushing ARC or have they just not thought to change the
standard. Now I don't often need to be hit in the face with a
brick to see what is in front of my eyes. Greater compression
means fewer dollars. In this case save more dollars for
everyone.
A standard is important, but when it becomes ridiculous, its
time for a change. Even the military changes when standards
become obsolete or inefficient........... If we're going to
"set a standard" (which IS necessary) let's consider everyone,
and everyone's wallet.
Second, the NodeList itself. Isn't it about time it was in the
form of a zone?? I currently run a program called ZONE. It
breaks the NodeList into its 6 zones. It takes up less space,
and because it's smaller, less time to compile. It makes more
sense to have it in zone form at our current size. How many
folks are sending mail to ALL six zones on a regular basis? I'm
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 13 19 Jul 1993
sure it's a very low figure in comparison to everyone not doing
it.
Which brings me to this overthrow, rebellion, correction, or
what ever you want to label it. How long was that region out of
policy? Was the world Fidonet community considered, let alone
the respective nodes concerning the expense of their actions?
Think about the money spent moving the large nodediff files
because of this problem. It has IMPOSED an expense to the
entire world Fidonet community. Could that expense have been
avoided for everyone?
Breaking the Nodelist into individual ZoneLists would have at
least been less expensive to the world at large. Consider for a
moment how small the individual nodediff files would be? How
much shorter the download times would be? Its time to consider
the future, consider the growth of the nodelist, consider the
possibility of this happening again. This is just an opinion,
not an expert solution to things. No, I'm not out to stir up
trouble.
Someone or something needs to be in place to avoid this
happening again possibly a safe guard to keep it from ever
happening all. Yeah! no big deal, it cost me a few bucks. Does
anyone want to see it happen every month, because someone
realized people were doing things incorrectly? I'm not saying
let people do things wrong mind you. Surely the "Calling Areas"
alone should have been the number one consideration; Second,
should have been the total effect of changing things. Could it
have been done slower and gradual, so the rest of us were not as
impacted?
Better yet, would simply changing the Nodelist into ZoneLists,
reduce the impact of such a change on the entire Fidonet
community? You decide.
Maybe it's time for some folks to sit back and look at things
objectively, without being defensive. Think about improving the
system, just for a while, see how many answers you can come up
with. I'm just a new guy. I may have no idea or clue. What if
things could be improved? Can we save ourselves some time and
money? Is there a better "Mouse Trap" out there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Policy4's 4th birthday!
"They [politicos] sold us so much bullshit that now we don't even
believe the traffic lights..."
-- Tato Bores, Argentine TV comedian
Pablo Kleinman
On the road in Ensenada, Mexico
I told you, I told you... I TOLD YOU, DAMNED!
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 14 19 Jul 1993
("Celebrating" Policy4's 4th Anniversary)
Okay, so you don't like the title, so what? The facts are on the
table, fellas, and reality is frightfully frightening.
When I wrote the previous article ("Oy vey..."), I didn't know or
imagine that so many articles with the same topic would come for
the same issue of FidoNews as well as for the two issues that
followed. Just a few days ago I was still laughing at the couple of
episodios ridiculos I wrote about, but now the "laughter" has been
replaced by a grimmer "concerned look" as I get more acquainted
with their consequences.
I'd like to dedicate this article to all the many out there that
vocally opposed change for so long, from the good-for-nothing IC
Matt Whelan to "FidoNet celebridades" such as Vince Perriello and
Tomasito Jennings himself... Last month was the 4th anniversary of
the adoption of Policy4 and we still have the same old piece of
shit policy, and you all did your good part to ensure that we'd
arrive to year 4!
By no means will I suggest that the "WorldPol proposal" would have
eliminated all the chances for the present trouble the network is
immersed in. WorldPol, for instance, wouldn't have effectively
stopped a "politico RC" like Region 18's. However, ugly episodes
like the German autocoup wouldn't have taken place because the
sysops would have had the power to prevent them.
And now that we talk about Germany, I can sadly say that what I
predicted on FidoNews 1026 has happened. Let me quote some
statistical data posted by Roland Schiradin on ENET.SYSOP (the
zone two sysops' conference):
NODELIST: '169 '176 '183 '190
Entry total 2240 2214 1651 1403
unique system-name 2195 2154 1611 1366
unique SysOp-name 1725 1653 1228 1040
unique phone-number 2119 2028 1495 1267
Hold-systems 13 12 23 60
Down-systems 11 5 7 6
Is this progreso? Progreso las bolas!!!
What good can the change be when just over two weeks after it's
happened, 837 entries are history and many more are on their way
to becoming so? All my friends in Germany (I have many) have
disappeared from the nodelist thanks to this putsch... Never before
have I seen anyone do so much harm in FidoNet in so little time
like the German RC Erich Janssen and his cronies have. And the
scary part of this is that the crusade to enforce Policy4's
geographic restrictions is not over. Region 25 (Britain) and Region
28 (Holland) are marked targets.
What to do? I have no clue, but something must be done.
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 15 19 Jul 1993
Personally, I plan to assist any sysop (or group of sysops, as in
R24's case) being persecuted by power-loco coordinators, in
whatever ways I can. This week it seems that a friend who runs an
echomail-hauling system in Hamburg will start picking up echomail
for distribution from me (he had 3 or 4 entries for his multiline
system on the nodelist a few weeks back, but now he's no longer
listed). A group in Germany is coordinating a parallel pre-putsch
REGION24 nodelist segment so all the "exiled nodes" can still
receive mail... hopefully.
Time permitting, I will work with whoever is interested in trying
to formulate a solution (and a defense against the dictadores-
coordinadores) so that we can get back to normality and
constructive reality... Yes, I guess I never learn to ignore and
keep my mouth shut, but even if I have little hope of achieving
anything radical, it's better than to watch with cara de culo
what's going on now.
I hope others will do something too; the most alternatives, the
most chances we have to get some change. As far as I'm concerned,
the WorldPol concept is no longer practical and we need a very,
very, VEEEEERY brief document that most of all defends the rights
of the members of FidoNet, without whom this network would
obviously cease to exist.
I will welcome all mail at either of my nodes (1:10/100 in
Hollywood or 2:343/111 in Barcelona) and hope to hook up with
others out there that are willing to help and to invest some time
in finding (drafting?) a solution. I don't know if creating an echo
conference again is a good idea, but I'll see what others
suggest... Adelante then!
Besitos,
-Pablo
pablito@scf.usc.edu
PS: I heard EuroCon in Luxemburgo was a BIG success despite the
badmouthing it had received on the snooze... any attendees willing
to tell us more?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Expression in FidoNet (Open letter to Tom Jennings)
By Merrill Guice
1:3645/50 (close to the Okefenokee Swamp)
Dear Tom,
First, good to hear from you in the snooze again. For someone who has
been reading that fetid bog called the Region 18 Sysop Echo, it was a
much needed cool breeze. Did you notice that other nodelist issue
running just above yours in the snooze? Don't you find it hilarious
that someone can attempt to call their bbs the:
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 16 19 Jul 1993
20,THE_FUCK_YOU_CHRIS!_BSS_:Home_Of_Bytes_&_Pc's_Rbbs,....
and be removed as NC of their net? From what I can tell, if I decided
to call my bbs the:
ANAL_SEX_WITH_DOGS_BBS
Then my NC is supposed to refuse me a nodelisting or be threatened
with losing his "position". In other words, he's supposed to censor
me.
What is even more funny is that I can write down both pseudo-listings
here in the world-wide read pages of the snooze and its ok -- just
don't try to put it in the nodelist where it may offend someone!
In your article last week you said:
"no person or group can control the content of a persons
communications"
You also said:
"Anyone who tells you your ability to communicate with FidoNet
depends on the good will or actions or rulesheet of another
is a conniving shit up to no good. Plain enough?!"
As the owner of the nodelist, do you allow the /0's to make decisions
of content outside of technical considerations? Are the /0's out of
line if they try to censor the name of a bbs? I sure hate to have you
consult that expensive lawyer again, but me and Pogo and the rest of
the creatures here in the Okefenokee Swamp would like to know your
answer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
New and Eclectic Environmental and Science Echoes
by Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch BBS FidoNet 1:128/23
You'd think that the hundreds of backbone echoes would
satisfy my conversational needs. What else is there to talk
about?
Well, I have a few interests that are NOT covered by
existing echoes. To satisfy my insatiable need for
conversation, I've created the four off-backbone echoes
described hereafter.
WILDLIFE
~~~~~~~~
WILDLIFE is a forum for discussing issues about wild
animals. Naturalists, ecologists, hunters, animal-rights
activists, nature photographers, and anyone else concerned
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 17 19 Jul 1993
with wild animals should be involved in this conference. I
regularly post news articles about a variety of topics,
ranging from Animal Damage Control to endangered species to
the latest research.
WATER
~~~~~
Water is vitally important to life. Living in the semi-arid
Southwestern U.S., I've become intimately involved in water
management issues. I also spent four years working for the
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. I'd like to find others who are
interested in discussing topics such as: quality, politics,
law, conservation, flood control, etc.
BACKROAD
~~~~~~~~
As a non-fiction writer, I travel. The Interstate may be
nice, but I'm happier traveling back roads and jeep trails.
My venerable '77 Jeep Cherokee and I have learned a great
deal about exploring the wilderness and rural areas. I want
the BACKROAD echo to present tips on finding interesting (if
obscure places), vacationing by car, and back country (jeep
trail) driving ethics and techniques.
DINOSAUR
~~~~~~~~
I'm an amateur paleontologist; fossils have fascinated me
since my early childhood (long, long ago... <grin). With the
recent interest spurred by the movie Jurassic Park, it seems
only logical that FidoNet should support an echo devoted to
dinosaur fans! In the DINOSAUR echo, I'd like to have
discussions of fossil hunting, news, and recent discoveries.
I'm looking into connecting the Dinosaur Society to this
echo...
Anyone is welcome to join these echoes; simply drop me a
line via Fido or Internet, and I'll add you on. To get
things going, I'll be willing to ship these echoes long
distance until they can reach the backbone. Entries for all
four echoes have been submitted to the EchoList.
<<<----------------------()=()-------------------------->>>
Scott Robert Ladd coyote@latrans.alphai.org
Coyote Gulch Productions fido: 1:128/112
423 North Cooper Avenue native net: 90:80/3
Colorado Springs, CO 80905-1120 bbs/modem: 719/578-1340
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 18 19 Jul 1993
Why do we want geonets??
========================
(By a fidonetter, who may well soon become an ex-fidonetter
through his own choice)
(*** Hey, look, ANOTHER article from ZONE 2!!! ***)
--------------------
In days of old, when there were few members of fidonet, the
imposition of Goenets wasn't so silly: it made the mail a bit
easier to send ... or so I am told. You see, the geonet policy
was written in the US, where the telco tarrifs make the use of
geonets more sensible.
However, when the US accepted Policy 4, it was accepted as a
guideline by Europe too. Unfortunately, power-mongers since then
have had that policy set into european cement!
But policy for the US is NOT neccessarily correct for the rest of
the world.
In the UK, we have some very strange long-distance tarrifs:
1) Our main carrier, BT, chages for calls (local and LD) in 5
pence "units", so the minimim cost for all calls is 5p. Our
alternative LD carrier, Mercury, charges for calls by the 1/10th
second, minimum 3p, excepet for LOCAL calls (where the minimum is
7p... kinda discourages you using them!!). So, a local netmail
costs 5p (BT) or 7p (Mercury) to send, but a NON-local one is 5p
(BT) or 3p (Mercury).... hey, you know it's CHEAPER to send a
LONG-DISTANCE netmail, if you use Mercury!!!
2) There is a special BT Tarrif called MIDNIGHT LINES: for a
single quarterly charge, all inland calls between 00:00 and 06:00
are FREE!! Yes, as many free calls to ANYWHERE in mainland UK as
you can make! As a result, we have many hubs running Midnight
Lines, distributing the mail for their subscribers. For a fixed
cost to the sysop (anbd usually a LOT cheaper than making their
own calls), they get all their mail delivered..... and it matters
not whether the mail is from 500 yards away or 500 miles away!
So, where is the rational behind enforced geonets?? Simple:
POLICY SAYS YOU MUST HAVE GEONETS! So it is that "the powers that
be" in Europe are insisting that Geonets are enforced.
Geonets are supposed to exist to keep costs down. I don't need a
policy to tell me that I want to save money. I already do what I
can to save on my phone bill! If I could do better, and keep the
reliability & convenience, then I would....
However, there are many more factors to consider in 1993 other
than the actual call cost. What about:
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 19 19 Jul 1993
1) reliability of the system you call (some are good, others are
always dying.... so why can't *I*choose?)
2) compatibility of the mailer systems (don't try and tell me
that ALL mailer software works perfectly together.... we ALL know
that is not true!)
3) compatibility of the modems (yeah, we all know V.32 is a
STANDARD... so how many standard modems do YOU have trouble
calling into??)... oh, assuming that they HAVE V.32 (or HST, or
PEP....)
4) How HELPFUL is the hub/host?? If it takes me a single (short)
long-distance netmail to get something done, then this is a LOT
cheaper than 5 or 10 LOCAl ones to get nothing done.
I'd much rather be involved in a network where the mail flows in
a way to save me money OVERALL, even if it may not be the
closest.
So why am I writing all this???
Well, we all read recently about what has happened in Germany,
with THEIR enforced re-organisation.
Well, despite the feelings of the voting majority in R25 (see
below for explanation...) our "powers that be" seem to change
their opinions / attitudes with their pants.... one moment we
have a good reason for an EXEMPTION from geonets, the next we
need to instantly re-organise INTO geonets.
(a recent referendum OVERWHELMINGLY supported the presenting of a
"R25 geonet exemption policy" to the IC. This is still being
considered [delays due to apparent "technicallities"] yet our
"powers that be" seems to want to do a u-turn)
Well, from the feelings I have heard in my local net, if our
"powers that be" wish to play silly buggers, then they may end up
being a "power that is" of one less NET..... yes, there is
currently serious feeling that maybe our WHOLE NET should leave
fidonet.
Isn't this silly???? After all, the network is supposed to be
something that's there FOR THE SYSOPS.....
Luckily, I am already in another network..... I may well join
another one or two soon..... that way, leaving fidonet won't
hurt. But I'd rather not leave.....
You know, it's odd how almost every OTHER network around doesn't
have any form of geonet rule, yet THEY don't seem to have
anywhere near the problems that Fidonet has! Nor the same number
of "power grabbers"...
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 20 19 Jul 1993
A final thought:
Fidonet (= Matt Whelan, IC): it is time to change, or you will
become a network linking NOONE!
Simply get rid of formal geonets, and replace it with an "open
network", where "closed nets" are not allowed, such that an NC
must, generally, allow ANYONE within their "geo-net area" to
join. Those who wish to "geonet" can, those who don't won't! And
that way Fidonet might again become somewhere that sysops WANT to
be!
***********
Stop Press:
***********
Our "power that be", our RC25, has just resigned. We are not told
why, but there is NO DOUBT that the current "geonet problem" has
played an important part in his decision!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MegaLoMania
MegaLoMania
===========
By: Nils Hammar
2:205/601@fidonet.org
4341@msg.abc.se
Lately I have seen too much about NC:s and/or RC:s that doesn't
do this or do that.
From what I see, there are two groups of those people. One group
that doesn't answer netmail for some reason and are almost
non-existent. The other group is attacking anything and
everything. (According to the articles in FidoNews.)
Groups.
-------
The first group is not a big problem until they fail to update
the nodelist and other things that is important to the net.
Since this is only a hobby, we may accept a delay up to a month
for our coordinators to react (due to vacations and several
other things out of our own control).
The other group is a problem, because if every region (or network)
have their own policy about what's legal and illegal inside their
region, it will result in anarchy. Say that I want to be MO, and
my NC says that I couldn't be that since he wouldn't permit
that (Nothing bad about my NC, he's a really nice guy.),
this might result in a badwill for him. If I for some
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 21 19 Jul 1993
reason want to have the MO flag in the nodelist, it's my
problem. It's not necessary to have a BBS behind a fidonet
nodenumber. It isn't even necessary fr a fidonet node to carry echomail!
The net.
--------
The only thing a fidonet member has to be able to do is
accepting netmail during ZMH following the FTS-0001. Everything
else is just add-on that isn't necessary.
If I want to have a fidonet nodenumber to get netmail that way,
and then get my echomail in another net, region or domain, it's
only my problem unless I create a dupe loop. If I create a dupe
loop, I will probably be one of the first persons to know about
it, and if I create one, I will know how to avoid one the next
time I set up a new echo. We will all have to accept that dupes
will be generated now and then, and experience is the only way
to avoid the worst cases. If people doesn't have the ability to
run the trial and error race, they wouldn't learn anything.
Doing anything wrong?
---------------------
How many of you have ever formatted the wrong diskette?
Will you do it again?
I will suggest that the answer to the first question is that
almost 95% of the fidonet users have formatted the wrong
diskette, and that at least 20% will do it again.
The nodelist.
-------------
As I can see, some people care about the contents of the
nodelist, I don't care about the BBS name at all, since It's
unimportant. The necessary information is the flags and the
phonenumber. Everything else is just occupying space. I don't
care if a node is calling itself "Peter's prick". (Yes we have a
point here in sweden that has that name, "Prick" in swedish is
"Dot" or "Point" in english, so much for that annoying word...)
The only part of the non-tech stuff in the nodelist that is
useful is the sysop name, but that is a limited field with
limited use.
Policy.
-------
My opinion about a policy is the following:
- Try to use software that follows the FTS standards.
- If you are a coordinator, serve your nodes with the necessary
information to let them be a well-functioning fidonet member.
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 22 19 Jul 1993
- Don't annoy any other people.
- Don't be too easily annoyed.
Coordinators.
-------------
As I stated above, a coordinator should serve the nodes with
necessary information.
What the necessary information is depends on your status as a
coordinator. A NC serves the nodes with general policy
information nodelists and netmail.
A NEC serves the nodes with echomail (But the NEC doesn't have
to be the echomail feed.)
The R*:s and Z*:s are just one step higher in the responsibility
chain, which will render them a larger amount of work.
A hub is like a small NC, and I see no big difference between a
NC and a HC (Hub Coordinbator). Even though the normal policies
doesn't state that a HC has any rights to do things in this or
that way, nor has any real network-oriented responsibilities, I
think that the HC can take a lot of the NC:s work, since a lot
of trouble might be solved better if it is solved as close to
the source as possible.
Caller-ID.
----------
From what I have seen about the caller-ID war, I think that it
is too extreme at both sides. If anybody want to use caller-ID
on his/hers BBS, then do so, but expect to loose users to those
who doesn't use caller-ID. I don't care about if my users use
fake names or not, as long as they behave well. The good
behaviour is the goal for me, not the big brother mentality.
International problems.
-----------------------
Since I am outside the united states, I have found out that
there are other problems here, that doesn't occur in the US.
Here we have a different action (as it seems from the articles)
from the police when it comes to the raiding of BBS:es, even if
we have had our raids here too.
Another problem that we have is the different character sets
that are used. A lot of US programs are more or less annoying to
the swedish users, since we are using the characters over 127
very frequently, and those aren't supported by all US programs.
This has resulted in either usage of other programs or some sort
of kludge solutions. I have invented one myself, and that
solution is a character set translator that I am distributing in
an archive that currently is named PKTXL46.ZIP. This package is
around 50k, and converts the character set on messages in
PKT-files. Three of the most common 8-bit character sets are
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 23 19 Jul 1993
handled (PC, MAC and ISO-Latin 1) and several different 7-bit
character sets, as well as the german "umlaut" format.
This package is now available from a few FTP sites, and a few
nodes, mostly here in Sweden. It is of course possible to
request from here.
(Yes this later part is more a commercial than an regular
article, but I hope you don't mind...)
Complaints?
-----------
I think that I reflect the opinion of many members of FidoNet in
this article, and if you have any complaints, please use
netmail, and not yet another article in this war of articles.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
UK FidoNet Policy (UKPOL) Document Draft 003
UK FidoNet Policy (UKPOL) Document Draft 003
July 1993
D McMahon, FidoNet 2:251/20, 1993
=====================================================================
Some of you may ask why the UK (Zone 2, Region 25) wants its own
Policy document. The answer is simple - a lot of sysops feel their is
too much power vested outside the region, and that we have lost our
right to a bit of self determination!
The UK is in a mess, and a lot of sysops are concerned that it could
get worse with a Region-24 style debacle.
This is intended to be a policy proposal that, if adopted by the UK as
a local policy, will get us out of a lot of the present mess.
Basically it give us a little more self determination than we have
under Policy 4.06. Anyway, as this is the official bulletin of
FidoNet, this is where I formally publish it.
Note, this is for comment, it is still a draft document, and it is
here so that others can see what we're trying to do in the UK - we're
looking for a sensible solution to the deep pile of manure that seems
to be developing!
If you can see your net / region or zone going down the same road as
Europe, then perhaps you want to think about doing something the same.
I can warn you of two pitfalls I can see already:
(1) If your proposal sets itself up to override future policy
versions, the IC will, and in my opinion quite correctly, refuse it.
(2) If your proposal is worded in such a way as to antagonise someone
up the *C chain, don't be too surprised if it doesn't get through!
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 24 19 Jul 1993
=====================================================================
This is a draft working document. It is issued to promote discussion
of its content. Recipients are requested not to modify the document,
proposed changes and accompanying rationale should be submitted to the
the above address to enable configuration management. Recipients are
welcome to forward unmodified copies to other parties who they feel
may have constructive comment to offer.
=====================================================================
Summary:
Sections 1 .. 3
The document applies to R25 if accepted by the sysops and ratified by
the IC. It is dependant upon P4.06, and is revoked if the IC decides
to do so, if P4.06 is superseeded, or if the sysops vote it out.
Section 4
P4.06 applies unless this document explicitly states otherwise.
Section 5
RC is chosen by simple majority vote of the NCs from amongst the
sysops in the region. RC may not also normally be an NC or ZC.
Impeachment by electorate (ie NCs), removal by ZC. Emergency procedure
for vacant post is choice of ZC.
Section 6
Geographic organisation of networks, but RC may grant an exemption.
Nets may have local policy, such policy not to contradict UKPOL /
P4.06 combination without IC approval.
Section 7
NC should be chosen etc in accordance with net policy (s6), failing
that apply RC procedures but electorate is whole net concerned. RC may
replace NC for failing to comply with requirements of UKPOL / P4.06.
Section 8
Duty of *Cs to consider the implications for all aspects of network
operations and all network users when making decisions.
=====================================================================
FidoNet Zone 2 Region 25 Policy Document.
(1) Scope.
~~~~~~~~~~
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 25 19 Jul 1993
This document (UKPOL) defines the operating policies and procedures of
FidoNet within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland (FidoNet Zone 2 Region 25, or R25), and where appropriate
expands upon or modifies FidoNet International Policy version 4.06
(P4.06) as implemented by an announcement in FidoNews on 12th June
1989. It is a local policy within the meaning of Section 1 of P4.06,
and is only applicable to R25.
(2) Adoption.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(2.1) This document will come in to force upon its approval by the
FidoNet International Coordinator (IC), to whom it shall be offered
for approval upon a simple majority vote of the sysops within the R25
nodelist segment indicating that they wish it to be adopted within
R25.
(2.2) Such vote will be carried out by secret ballot, and the only
valid votes for the determining of a simple majority will be those
either in favour of, or against, the adoption of this Policy.
(2.3) The schedule and procedure for the vote is:
The person proposing this policy to the Sysops of R25 will do so by
publishing it in national sysop conferences, and sending copies to all
current NCs within R25, and the current RC of R25.
The Nodelist published the following Friday will be used to determine
those sysops elegible to vote.
Within 7 days, the Regional Co-ordinator (RC) of R25 will appoint a
Returning Officer (RO) to receive votes.
Voting will commence 14 days after the Friday referred to above, and
will be open for 21 days.
Votes are to contain a password for authentication. They are to be
delivered by direct netmail to the RO.
Within 7 days from the close of polling the RO shall publish a list of
the sysops who have voted, and a list of the validation passwords both
for and against adoption.
Publication of the list of passwords enables sysops to verify that
their vote has been counted correctly. Publication of the list of
sysops voting enables those sysops who do not vote to ensure that
their vote has not been fraudulently applied by another node.
Provided that there is no challenge to the published results within 14
days of their posting, the RO shall declare the result.
(3) Modification, Withdrawl, Revocation.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This document will be deemed to have been automatically revoked should
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 26 19 Jul 1993
any of the following occur:
(3.1) If P4.06 changes or is replaced, in which case to remain in
force the document shall require to be re-adopted (with any
appropriate modifications to take in to account the changes to FidoNet
International Policy) by the sysops of R25, and re-approved in
accordance with that new FidoNet International Policy.
(3.2) If the IC changes, in which case to remain in force the document
shall have to be re-approved by the new IC.
(3.3) If the Sysops of R25 vote for its withdrawl, in which case R25
will revert to P4.06.
(3.4) If the Sysops of R25 vote to replace this Policy, in which case
it will remain in force until such time as the replacement UKPOL has
been approved by the IC.
(4) Compatibility With The Rest Of FidoNet.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unless this document explicitly details otherwise, all nodes within
R25 will comply with all aspects of P4.06.
(5) The Regional Co-ordinator.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(5.1) Selection of Regional Co-ordinator
Selection of the Regional Co-ordinator (RC) is carried out using the
method for the selection of a Zone Co-ordinator (ZC) under P4.06,
extended to a Regional level. The RC is selected from amongst the
Sysops of R25 by means of a simple majority vote where the persons
elegible to vote are the NCs within R25. The tenure of the RC post is
a period of one year. RC25 shall not, whilst holding the RC25 post,
hold any NC post within R25. Should the RC be chosen as ZC2, then he
shall be deemed to have resigned the post of RC. Should an NC be
chosen as RC, they shall be deemed to have resigned the NC post. The
procedures and timescales for balloting are to be those outlined in
paragraph (2.3) above.
(5.2) Removal of RC25
The FidoNet Zone 2 Co-ordinator (ZC2) may require that a new RC25 be
selected if it appears that the RC25 is not complying with the
requirements of P4.06 as amended by UKPOL.
The NCs within R25 may remove the RC25 by means of a simple majority
vote requiring that the RC25 be replaced. If this is the case,
paragraph (5.4) comes in to force. This shall be carried out in the
same manner as the ballot for adoption of this policy described at
(2.3) above.
(5.3) Procedure on Adoption of UKPOL
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 27 19 Jul 1993
Upon adoption of this policy, the current RC25 shall remain in that
position until they become inelegible to hold that post under
paragraph (5.1) above, or are removed under paragraph (5.2), or until
a maximum of one year has passed from the date of coming in to force
of this policy.
(5.4) Emergency Procedure
In the case where, for whatever reason, the RC25 post falls vacant
unexpectedly, ZC2 shall appoint a temporary RC25 who shall be required
to initiate the selection procedure (5.1) within two weeks of the
appointment. Under this clause, the restriction on RC25 holding an NC
post within R25, or the ZC2 post, is relaxed, but not P4.06 section
3.5.
(6) Networks.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(6.1) R25 is divided in to networks organised on a geographic basis.
As the number of nodes in these networks increase, it is anticipated
that new networks will form, and the areas allocated to these new
networks will include nodes in existing networks. Such nodes in
existing networks are encouraged to join the newly formed network. New
nodes are likewise to be encouraged to join the network appropriate to
the area in which they are located.
(6.2) No sysop may be refused entry to a network for any reason apart
from those identified in P4.06, as amended by UKPOL. Likewise, no
sysop shall have grounds to not join the appropriate network unless
they can show good reason that they should be either a regional
independant node, or located in a net other than the one
geographically allocated to the area in which they are situated. In
such cases the RC in consultation with the NC(s) concerned shall
consider the case for the node being independant or in a network other
than the one in which it would normally be located, and may approve
the non geographic entry, just as a ZC may approve a node being listed
in a region other than the geographically correct one (P4.06 section
1.3.2).
(6.3) Networks may implement local policies covering matters such as
the selection method of the NC, local network mail periods, internal
mail routing procedures etc. Provided those policies do not contradict
UKPOL, and where applicable P4.06, network policies may be implemented
without recourse to any authority outside the network. If such local
policy contradicts P4.06 as modified by UKPOL, then the IC shall have
to approve the local policy.
(7) Network Co-ordinators.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(7.1) NCs shall be chosen, dismissed etc in accordance with the policy
in place within the network. Where no such policy is in place, or such
policy does not define such procedures, the procedures outlined in
paragraphs (5.1) through (5.4) shall be applied, with the following
modifications:
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 28 19 Jul 1993
For "RC25" read "NC"; For "NCs within R25" read "all sysops within the
network"; For "ZC2" read "RC25".
(7.2) Paragraphs (6.3) and (7.1) notwithstanding, RC25 may require the
replacement of any NC who is, in the opinion of RC25, not carrying out
the requirements of P4.06 as amended by UKPOL.
(8) Echomail Traffic, Points, Users and Files Distribution.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Whilst none of these is formally recognised as having any direct
bearing on network operation and / or administration by P4.06, it
would be foolhardy and irresponsible in a network dedicated to
promoting electronic communication and data transfer to fail to take
in to effect, when making decisions, the effects upon all aspects of
network traffic, and all persons potentially affected by the decision.
Thus the RC and NCs should take in to account the effect upon the
administration etc of Echomail Traffic and Files Distribution, and the
implications for users and point operators as well as sysops, of the
decisions they make.
=====================================================================
Footnote - I have attempted to use non gender specific text wherever
possible, I apologise to anyone who is offended either by my
deliberate use of non gender-spoecific text, or by any gender-specific
references that I have failed to re-word.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
New Echos Announcement
Announcing the formation of the following private(for the moment)
Echo's:
Tag Name Definition
TOASTER_PRO All Video Toaster related Chat(non-LightWave)
Amiga (or Mac?) Related
LIGHTWAVE_PRO LightWave related Chat(Toaster 3D software)
Amiga Related
3D_PRO All other 3D chats
All 3D platforms related
If any node is interested in carrying this, please send NetMail to me:
Jim Mixon--SYSop
Media Zone BBS
1:135/355
ThankYou.......
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 29 19 Jul 1993
What's actually happening in Region 18?
Christopher Baker
Rights On! Titusville_FL_USA
1:374/14 [1:18/0 - RC18]
"MadDog, My Aunt Susie's Petunia!"
It is quite common for Sysops who imagine slights or injuries to
themselves by way of their FidoNet membership to post one-sided
and very colorful articles to FidoNews proclaiming their complete
astonishment that little old them could possibly have been removed
or replaced or repositioned for any real reason. It's common and
it's very misleading for the casual FidoNews reader although the
experienced FidoNetter knows most of these are a case of 'doth
protest too much'.
Such is 'the case of the replaced NC' in Net 3655 of Region 18
you were all lambasted with in FidoNews 1028 on 12 Jul 93.
The former NC in question failed to perform his duties and
responsibilities in accordance with the requirements of Policy4,
the standard practices of FidoNet, and the simple direction of
his RC.
That's all there is to it. Anything else is imaginary on the
former NC's part and is not supported by any of his traffic or
actions. He did his best to be disruptive and got his wish to
be replaced for failing to get the job he VOLUNTEERED for done.
That is the way things work in FidoNet. It's not mysterious nor
Machiavellian nor 'maddog'.
There will probably be a few more of these "we're being driven
to hell in handcart by our egomaniac dictator RC" articles. These
things often get out of hand. I'll apologize in advance for any
you have to read. Some people just don't get the whole FidoNet
concept. Don't send them any nasty Netmail. It won't help.
A vast majority of the volunteer coordinators in this Region and
elsewhere in FidoNet do their jobs quite well. It's ONLY a hobby.
Thanks.
TTFN.
Chris
RC18
----------------------------------------------------------------------
========================================================================
Fidonews Information
========================================================================
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 30 19 Jul 1993
------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION ----------------
Editors: Sylvia Maxwell, Donald Tees, Tim Pozar
Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell, Vince Perriello,
Tom Jennings
IMPORTANT NOTE: The FidoNet address of the FidoNews BBS has been
changed!!! Please make a note of this.
"FidoNews" BBS
FidoNet 1:1/23
BBS +1-519-570-4176, 300/1200/2400/14400/V.32bis/HST(DS)
Internet addresses:
Don & Sylvia (submission address)
editor@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
Sylvia -- max@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
Donald -- donald@exlibris.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca
Tim -- pozar@kumr.lns.com
(Postal Service mailing address) (have extreme patience)
FidoNews
172 Duke St. E.
Kitchener, Ontario
Canada
N2H 1A7
Published weekly by and for the members of the FidoNet international
amateur electronic mail system. It is a compilation of individual
articles contributed by their authors or their authorized agents. The
contribution of articles to this compilation does not diminish the
rights of the authors. Opinions expressed in these articles are those
of the authors and not necessarily those of FidoNews.
Authors retain copyright on individual works; otherwise FidoNews is
copyright 1993 Sylvia Maxwell. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or
distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in
other circumstances, please contact the original authors, or FidoNews
(we're easy).
OBTAINING COPIES: The-most-recent-issue-ONLY of FidoNews in electronic
form may be obtained from the FidoNews BBS via manual download or
Wazoo FileRequest, or from various sites in the FidoNet and Internet.
PRINTED COPIES may be obtained from Fido Software for $10.00US each
PostPaid First Class within North America, or $13.00US elsewhere,
mailed Air Mail. (US funds drawn upon a US bank only.)
BACK ISSUES: Available from FidoNet nodes 1:102/138, 1:216/21,
1:125/1212, (and probably others), via filerequest or download
(consult a recent nodelist for phone numbers).
A very nice index to the Tables of Contents to all FidoNews volumes
can be filerequested from 1:396/1 or 1:216/21. The name(s) to request
FidoNews 10-29 Page: 31 19 Jul 1993
are FNEWSxTC.ZIP, where 'x' is the volume number; 1=1984, 2=1985...
through 8=1991.
INTERNET USERS: FidoNews is available via FTP from ftp.ieee.org, in
directory ~ftp/pub/fidonet/fidonews. If you have questions regarding
FidoNet, please direct them to deitch@gisatl.fidonet.org, not the
FidoNews BBS. (Be kind and patient; David Deitch is generously
volunteering to handle FidoNet/Internet questions.)
SUBMISSIONS: You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in
FidoNews. Article submission requirements are contained in the file
ARTSPEC.DOC, available from the FidoNews BBS, or Wazoo filerequestable
from 1:1/23 as file "ARTSPEC.DOC". Please read it.
"Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered
trademarks of Tom Jennings, and are used with permission.
Asked what he thought of Western civilization,
M.K. Gandhi said, "I think it would be an excellent idea".
-- END
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink