Volume 7, Number 1 1 January 1990 +---------------------------------------------------------------+ | _ | | / \ | | /|oo \ | | - FidoNews - (_| /_) | | _`@/_ \ _ | | International | | \ \\ | | FidoNet Association | (*) | \ )) | | Newsletter ______ |__U__| / \// | | / FIDO \ _//|| _\ / | | (________) (_/(_|(____/ | | (jm) | +---------------------------------------------------------------+ Editor in Chief: Vince Perriello Editors Emeritii: Dale Lovell Thom Henderson Chief Procrastinator Emeritus: Tom Jennings FidoNews is published weekly by the International FidoNet Association as its official newsletter. You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in FidoNews. Article submission standards are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC, available from node 1:1/1. 1:1/1 is a Continuous Mail system, available for network mail 24 hours a day. Copyright 1989 by the International FidoNet Association. All rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances, please contact IFNA at (314) 576-4067. IFNA may also be contacted at PO Box 41143, St. Louis, MO 63141. Fido and FidoNet are registered trademarks of Tom Jennings of Fido Software, 164 Shipley Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94107 and are used with permission. We don't necessarily agree with the contents of every article published here. Most of these materials are unsolicited. No article submitted by a FidoNet SysOp will be rejected if it is properly attributed and legally acceptable. We will publish every responsible submission received. Table of Contents 1. ARTICLES ................................................. 1 COMMENTS ON INTERNETWORK POLICY .......................... 1 Netmail Handling within Fidonet .......................... 5 Results from IFNA Vote ................................... 13 2. WANTED ................................................... 21 WANTED: Korean War Veterans .............................. 21 3. LATEST VERSIONS .......................................... 23 Latest Software Versions ................................. 23 4. NOTICES .................................................. 26 New Anesthesia Echo ...................................... 26 The Interrupt Stack ...................................... 26 FidoNews 7-01 Page 1 1 Jan 1990 ================================================================= ARTICLES ================================================================= COMMENTS ON INTERNETWORK POLICY - or - Observations From The Cheap Seats Whether for better or for worse, the IFNA election is over. The question of what the ultimate result will be from the outcome is one that can only be left to be answered in the future. Other things, it appears, have been in the works that perhaps we should be concerned about, so on with the new! First and foremost would have to be the appearance of the Internetwork Gateway Policy draft as presented by Tim Pearson in FidoNews 651. There has obviously been a lot of effort put into this proposal by such FidoNet luminaries as Bill Bolton (ZC3), Steve Bonine (Zone 1 Coordinator), Randy Bush (Zone 1 netmail gateway to Zones 2, 3, 4 and 5), David Dodell (retired Interna- tional Coordinator and Zone 1 Coordinator), Rick Moore (FidoNet Technical Standards Committee Chairman), Tim Pearson (Region 14 Coordinator), Vince Perriello (FidoNews Editor and BinkleyTerm Author), Tim Pozar (InterNetwork Coordinator), and Matt Whelan (International Coordinator). That's quite an impressive collec- tion of titles, by anyone's definition. Given the prominence of the individuals on this committee, and that it has obviously been working on this proposal for quite a long time, I'm at once forced to wonder why the draft couldn't have been released prior to or during the IFNA election so that people could have had a little more of an idea of the possible alternatives should IFNA fail to succeed. However, I'll come back to that later. Right now I'm going to address some of the things that about the proposal that are troubling me, ignoring the trend toward the micromanagement of FidoNet that began with Policy 4 and continues with the current proposal. You see, I believe that FidoNet always has been, and should always remain above all a hobbiest network. I believe that most of us run our systems for our own enjoyment and pleasure, and that we're not overly concerned with anything beyond communicat- ing with others who do the same. The results from the recent IFNA election would appear to indicate that I'm correct in at least the second, if not the first of these beliefs. I also believe that FidoNet technology is a wondrous thing, in that it allows us to accomplish the act of communicating with each other with pretty fair reliability in a relatively simple manner. It even works, and works well, for messages that need to travel between systems in one network and systems in another, as long as both systems are compatible with the FidoNet mail proto- col. From an operational standpoint, it's no more difficult than operating in a single network. A lot of us have been doing it for a couple of years now, and though there have been a few FidoNews 7-01 Page 2 1 Jan 1990 difficulties from time to time, most of these were a result of personal problems, not technical issues. Even some of the tech- nical difficulties that did occur could often be attributed to simple operator error rather than problems with the technique itself. Certainly there must be special requirements and techniques for passing mail between systems that use the FidoNet protocol and those that do not, and certainly there must be agreements for establishing connections to professional and/or commercial net works that exist. However, the proposal as it stands would appear to put more emphasis on protecting these other networks from FidoNet than on protecting FidoNet and its hobbiest standing from these professional and/or commercial giants. At least one of the members of this committee has been espousing the necessity of making FidoNet a professional network for years, and the proposal shows more than a little of an influence in that direc- tion. But all of those special requirements and techniques simply aren't necessary for communication between networks based on the FidoNet protocol. However, now we have a proposal from a group of individuals who apparently feel there is a need to increase the complexity, the difficulty, and in most cases the cost for anyone within FidoNet who wants to communicate with his neighbor down the street who also runs a FidoNet compatible mail system but happens to be a member of a different network, for whatever reason. Interestingly enough, several of these same individuals have been the most outspoken of the "my net or no net" camp - you know, those folks who say "if you don't like it, you can leave", knowing full well that they've got the biggest (and arguably best) game on the block, and knowing that most people will just resign themselves to take it on the cheek. Note that I'm not saying that there aren't some good things in the proposal. There most certainly are, for if nothing else the document at least acknowledges the fact that there are net- works based on the FidoNet protocol other than FidoNet itself in existence and that they're not going to just dry up and go away - an acknowledgment that previously had never been formalized. There's also an indication that there may be some willingness to establish agreements with these networks for communication be- tween them and the resolution of problems that may occur. Howev- er, even here the bully attitude reasserts itself in the "my way or no way" philosophy and method of handling such problems. Other FidoNet technology networks are, plain and simple, reduced to the same status as private point networks by the proposal and its mechanisms. Now, all of this may not concern most of you in the least. But it is, after all, remotely possible that someday you too may want to join a different network for social reasons or special benefits that it may offer. Should that happen, would you want to be placed in the position of having to go through unnecessary contortions simply to send a message to your FidoNet friend across town? I wouldn't. However, getting back to my earlier FidoNews 7-01 Page 3 1 Jan 1990 question about why this proposal was released at this time. Frankly, if I were doing it and had control of the situation, I could think of absolutely no better time. Why? Because there are those who would see this as an undeniable attempt to increase the control of FidoNet by a few select indi- viduals (as opposed to IFNA). Had it been released prior to or during the IFNA election, it's entirely possible that the outcome would have been much, much different. Also, there are a number of proposals for a new FidoNet policy being worked on at the present time, most of them based to one extent or another on moving toward a truly democratic network. Should one of those be passed and come into effect prior to this proposal, it certainly might have a difficult time of passage without being reworked to be a little more appropriate for a hobbiest network. Of course, that's all conjecture on my part, but it seems a bit too conven- ient to have happened just by coincidence. Because of all the above, I want to make a couple of suggestions. First, to all sysops of FidoNet or other FidoNet technology networks. This proposal represents a serious threat to your capability to continue communication with systems in other net- works in the most efficient, cost-effective manner. Read it closely. If implemented, it will in most cases take at least two calls to send the message that now takes one, and additionally will have to undergo some sort of processing on one or more gateway systems, quite probably resulting in an increase in costs, increase in time lag, and lower reliability as a result of dependence on an increased number of other systems to be involved in the transmission of your internetwork messages. Second, to all sysops of FidoNet. You should demand to have a personal voice in the adoption of ANY policy that has the potential, now or later, of affecting your day to day operation in any manner. You should demand that any such election be conducted in a similar manner to the IFNA election, i.e., that any policy can only be implemented by a YES vote from over 50% of the nodes in the network, and that no "formulas" be applied for adjusting the outcome of the vote. Anything less than this, and you are leaving yourself open to the possibility of being con- trolled by the desires of a few individuals who "know what's best for you". Third, to all sysops of all other FidoNet technology net- works. If you're also still a member of FidoNet, then now is the time to let yourself be heard, both by the drafters of this proposal and by your fellow sysops. You should also let those within the hierarchy of whatever other network you may be a member of know that you feel it's time for all the other networks to attempt to overcome their differences and speak to the FidoNet with a single voice, through netmail, newsletter articles, con- ferences between FidoNet coordinators and those of your own network, regaining control of your network's conferences from FidoNet if necessary, or whatever other actions may be available to you. FidoNews 7-01 Page 4 1 Jan 1990 Last item from the cheap seats, to everyone. Whatever you do or don't do, agree with or don't agree with, make sure to make your opinions known. Along with any benefit comes responsibili- ty, if nothing more than the responsibility to participate when asked. Most of the time, it's just a matter of giving an honest answer when you're asked what you think or how you feel about something, or taking the time to cast your vote when there's an election. If you do nothing else, at least make the attempt to stand up and be counted when it's time! John Roberts FidoNet 1:385/49 ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 7-01 Page 5 1 Jan 1990 Jack Decker 1:154/9, 11:154/8 NETMAIL HANDLING WITHIN FIDONET The purpose of this article is to stimulate you to think for a moment about netmail (also known as "Matrix Mail" if you run an Opus system). I'd like to make some statements about netmail, and ask how many of the following you'd agree with: 1) In the early days of Fidonet, netmail was what held us together. Without it, we'd have been just a loose collection of BBS's, if that. 2) In the past two or three years, most new sysops have joined Fidonet primarily to gain access to echomail, and many sysops don't even use netmail, nor offer it to their users. 3) From the user's perspective, sending or replying to a message in echomail is thought of as being "free", while sending netmail costs money, if the BBS you're using even allows you to do so. 4) From the sysop's point of view, outgoing echomail costs very little compared to outgoing netmail (for which a separate call may have to be made to deliver each single netmail message). The exception to this is in the (relatively few) nets that have OGATEs. 5) If a sysop has a really important netmail message to send, he'll usually send it directly to the destination system (using "crash mail") rather than take the risk that it will be lost or grunged in transit through other systems. 6) Calling an unknown node to deliver netmail can be risky. While all nodes in Fidonet are supposed to be able to talk to each other, it turns out that certain modems and/or mailers will refuse to communicate more often than we'd like. 7) If you wish to send netmail within your own zone, and you do not have an OGATE in your net, you must send it to the destination node or to his net host on your own nickel (and hope that your system and the one at the other end will communicate). 8) Most sysops have no idea how to go about sending a netmail message to someone in a different Fidonet-compatible network, let alone to a non-Fidonet network such as Usenet, Internet, etc. 9) If someone told a Fidonet sysop that he had an account on Usenet, chances are that the Fidonet sysop would not be able to tell that person how to address mail to the sysop at his Fidonet address. In fact, most Fidonet sysops would never expect to receive mail from another network in that manner. FidoNews 7-01 Page 6 1 Jan 1990 10) Many messages that are currently placed in echomail could go by netmail, which would cut down on much of the extraneous and off-topic discussion that today permeates the echo conferences. 11) It is much easier and less expensive to send netmail in other networks (such as Usenet) because mail is routed through other systems. That's the end of the "pop quiz." How many of the above statements did you agree with? If it was five or more, then you probably realize that we have a bit of a problem with netmail right now, in both Fidonet and most of the "alternative" networks that use Fidonet technology. How would you like to be able to handle outbound netmail in this way: When you post a netmail message, if your system "knows" the destination system (for example, it's another system in your local calling area, or one with which you regularly exchange netmail or echomail), your system would send the message direct, as it does now. Or, if the message was really important and had to get to the destination quickly, your system would crashmail it to the destination, just as it does now. But, for all other netmail... the stuff that goes to systems you don't "know" but which is not time-sensitive... you'd simply dump it on one node in your net and he'd see that it got delivered! That would be simple and convenient, right? Ah, but what does that node do with it? Well, suppose he collects all the long distance netmail from your net, and makes ONE long distance call each night and dumps it on a node at the regional level? Still pretty simple, right? And what does the regional level node do? Well, if it's mail for a net in his region, he holds it for pickup by the node that calls in from that net (the netmail hub for that net, in other words). Otherwise, he bundles it up and sends it to a zone level node, which holds it for pickup by the proper regional level node. Now, this is all pretty straightforward up to the regional level. Either you "know" the destination net of any given message and send it directly to that net, or you don't, in which case the message it sent "upstream." But above the regional level, there has to be some way to know which regional hub gets any particular netmail message. It would be nice to assume that we'd always have one regional netmail hub for each Fidonet region, but that may not always be the case. In reality, we might have one hub that serves two adjacent regions. Or, there may be some technical or economic reason why a particular net may need to connect with a mail hub in a different region. Since we're designing this from the ground up anyway, we might as well build in some flexibility to handle these types of situations. FidoNews 7-01 Page 7 1 Jan 1990 So let's suppose we have a network-wide "topology map." This would have to be maintained, but not anywhere near as frequently as the nodelist. It could probably be distributed as an SDS file. Its greatest benefit would be to those at the regional level and above, so minor changes could probably be made manually (and immediately) by sending out netmail messages to the parties who really need the information. The map would make the assumption that each mail hub knows how to get to the levels above and below it (that is, the full net/node address of those nodes above and below it), so the map itself would really only have to list net, region, or zone numbers. That way, when the functions of a particular hub are transferred to a different node, the map doesn't necessarily have to be redrawn. As an example, the following might be the basic outline for a map for a mythical zone 6 that has three regions (67, 68, and 69) which each serve three nets: NET REGION ZONE 230 67 6 311 395 320 68 373 377 121 69 162 331 (This may seem like it reads backwards, but it creates a smaller file than if written the other way around, and is probably easier to parse). So, if you want to send a message to zone 5, net 373 and it arrives at the zone-level node, it can check the "map" and determine that it can send the message to the region 68 hub. A couple more technical points about the map: First, there would be separate maps for each zone, not a combined map. It's really nobody's concern how mail is routed in a different zone from their own. Also, it would be permissible to have listings ABOVE the first zone listing, particularly during the time frame when this scheme is first being implemented. This would indicate regions that have intra-regional routing but that do not tie into any zone-wide routing scheme (yet). Net hubs would know that in such cases they could not use the regional hub to send mail outside of their own regions. Actually, a fourth field could be used in such a case, to indicate those other regions that a particular region DOES connect with (see the technical appendix at the end of this article). FidoNews 7-01 Page 8 1 Jan 1990 Would you believe that we already have the beginnings of such a netmail routing scheme in Fidonet, but few know about it? For example, in at least one region that I know of, the Regional Echomail Coordinator handles inter-net netmail within his region, and in a different region, the Regional Coordinator performs this service. Under policy, neither of these folks is REQUIRED to perform this service, they just do it because they are nice folks. And in Fidonet Zone 2, it appears that netmail routing is being accomplished routinely. A message from Tomas Gradin to me in the NET_DEV conference (in response to an earlier message of mine) stated: JD> NODE ==> NC ==> RC ==> ZC ==> [OTHER ZONE ZC ==>] RC ==> NC ==> NODE I agree. We have done it exactly this way in Region 20 (consisting of the seven nets in Sweden) for several years by now, and it works *excellently*! We do it like this: node -> [hub ->] NC -> RC -> NC -> [hub ->] node Mail to other regions is sent by the RC to the RC of the destination node, or to the proper zonegate. The quoted line of yours shows exactly how I would like FidoNet netmail to work in all regions/zones. It's the best way, doubtlessly. I've been around Fidonet long enough to know that if we try to mandate any sort of netmail routing scheme upon the network, it will never happen. For example, if we tried to pass a Policy that stated that REC's or RC's HAD to handle netmail within their region, those who don't want to do it will scream bloody murder and try to make life miserable for everyone else, and will do their darndest to make sure that the idea never comes to fruitation. So, let's avoid that problem. What I propose is that we create a totally new, totally voluntary position... The zone/region/net NETMAIL Coordinator. This doesn't even have to be an "officially recognized" position, though it would be nice if it was. But, keep in mind that distribution systems like the SDS and SDN got started without a whole lot of "official" blessing, yet they are widely recognized within the net now. The one thing that would differentiate the Netmail Coordinator (*NC) position from the others is that in this case we would allow (and even encourage) folks to wear "two hats." It makes a LOT of sense for an existing *EC or *C to also be the *NC for his net, region, or zone. Only in the case where neither the *EC nor *C wanted the job would we start asking for volunteers. The reason, of course, is that it makes a lot of sense to "piggyback" netmail on existing structures where possible, rather than creating totally new structures where these are not FidoNews 7-01 Page 9 1 Jan 1990 required. For example, if the Net Echomail Coordinator makes outgoing calls to virtually everyone in his net every day, he might not feel that it's such an imposition to deliver the occasional piece of netmail at the same time, during the same call (then again, he might, which is why we make it voluntary!). In order to make this work, those who volunteer to be Netmail Coordinators would be wise to agree to follow a few common sense rules: 1) Delivery of mail takes precedence over political considerations. In other words, you don't withhold delivery of someone's mail in order to make a political statement. 2) Every reasonable effort should be made to deliver netmail. It's not reasonable to expect you to make a call to Timbuktu to deliver mail on your nickel, but you should be willing to "go the extra mile" to see that mail passing through your system gets delivered. 3) If you're at the region level or above, no checking for the existence of a node is allowed before mail delivery is attempted. If the NET number is valid, you at least should deliver it as far as the net hub for that net. The net hub just might know what to do with it, even if you don't! The destination node may be a new node that's not yet in the nodelist, or a private node in that net that's not listed in the nodelist, or even a node that's existed for years but that through some accident or screwup by man or machine, got omitted from this week's nodelist. 4) Anyone who has a "chip on their shoulder" in regard to the alternative networks will probably not make a good Netmail Coordinator, and probably should not apply for the position. Eventually "Domain Gating" may be worked into this scheme (indeed, "Domain Gating" really only becomes viable when a netmail routing scheme such as this one exists on both sides of the Domain gate!) so if you just can't stomach the idea of handling mail that originates in networks other than your own, you probably ought to let a more open-minded individual take the position. 5) You also probably shouldn't get into this if you think you're going to charge other people money for providing this service. One of the major problems we've had in Fidonet is people who take a position with the idea that somehow it's going to financially enrich them, and when that doesn't happen, they start pushing for "chargeback" schemes and the like (which generally go over like lead balloons, and cause all sorts of problems, flames, and policy complaints). FidoNews 7-01 Page 10 1 Jan 1990 6) Geographic boundaries are not idols, and are not "cast in concrete." If it makes more sense (from a cost standpoint, or for some technical reason such as modems or mailers that refuse to communicate with each other at a reasonable speed), a net distribution point may be allowed to connect into the netmail routing scheme at some point outside of their own region. That's why we have the topology map! Even though I use the word "region" in this proposal, it's not my intent to say that netmail routing regions must *exactly* follow Fidonet regional boundaries. It's also not my intent to say that mail going between political subdivisions MUST flow through the next higher level. If the Netmail Coordinators of two different nets or regions wish to send direct to each other, that should be encouraged since it will take some of the load off of the system at the next higher level! Those of you who think that this idea stinks (for whatever reason) probably wonder why anyone would volunteer their time and, to some extent, their money to provide this service. My answer to that is that I don't know WHY folks do things for others, but many do. Consider again the SDS and SDN nodes, which in many areas spend no small amount of money to bring the "latest and greatest" software into their nets, in most cases without recompense. Also consider that many nets have echomail hubs that absorb the expenses incurred in bring echoes into the net. Still other nets presently have OGATEs that send outbound netmail at their own expense. Why do any of these folks do what they do? For that matter, why do sysops set up free BBS's? I don't know, but I'll bet there's more folks out there who would be happy to have a chance to make a meaningful contribution to this hobby that we call Fidonet. Technical Addendum: ================== My actual proposal for the map differs slightly in implementation from the very general outline mentioned above. The actual format would be: ;Entry_type [for Zone_Map entries:] net[,region[,zone][,other connected regions]] For example: ;Zone_Map 289,24,,25 26 27 256 203 315,25,,24 26 27 362 101,15,6 124 161,11 129 FidoNews 7-01 Page 11 1 Jan 1990 Note that in the above example, no zone is specified until the seventh line. Nodes list above that line are not tied into the zone-wide netmail routing scheme, but do participate in multi-regional routing between regions 24-27. Eventually the fourth field may become unused, but in the beginning it will allow netmail routing to begin in portions of the zone prior to implementation of a full zone-wide delivery system. In other words, the fourth field would be considered temporary, and would probably be abolished after zone-wide netmail routing becomes a reality. The ";Zone_Map" keyword is REQUIRED and allows the list to be expanded with other useful information, with each type of information having its own specific format. For example, if it were desired to place the actual network addresses of the regional hubs in the map (again, as a temporary measure until full zone-wide routing is achieved), it could be done in this way: ;Region_Hubs 24,24/0 25,25/99 26,265/111 ...and, it would even be possible to include Domain Gating information to make it easy for folks to find domain gates. The syntax might be: domain name,domain gate address[,net/regions served] For example: ;Domain_Gates Hairnet,304/252,r24 25 n124 Usenet,412/287 In the first example, the "Hairnet" gate would be the one actually accessed by the region 24, region 25, and net 124 hubs for transmission of inter-net mail. In other words, this field would be for informational purposes ("this is the domain gate we are currently using") rather than as an imperative ("if you are in region 24 you MUST use this gate only!"). Having this information available from one centralized location within a zone would make it much easier for mail hubs to construct meaningful routing control files. None of the above is "cast in stone" and I am certainly open to suggestions on how it might be improved. One thing to keep in mind is that the more information that is included with the map, the more useful it becomes, BUT it will have to be updated more frequently. FidoNews 7-01 Page 12 1 Jan 1990 One other note... I have deliberately avoided mentioning the ZoneGate in this document because, although I feel it would be better if the ZoneGate were at the "top of the pyramid" in any netmail routing scheme, the current ZoneGate operators may not wish to participate. Therefore, for the time being, if a piece of mail for another zone turns up on a Netmail Coordinator's system, it should be handled just like any other piece of mail destined for the ZoneGate's net (for example, in zone 1, it would be handled just like any other piece of mail going to net 105). Also, the current zone 1 ZoneGate operator has indicated that he will destroy rather than deliver mail that originates in a network outside of Fidonet; therefore, if full inter-domain routing ever becomes a reality, it may be appropriate at that time for the Netmail Coordinators to find an alternate routing for mail which originates in other domains (but which is destined for a Fidonet node in another zone). ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 7-01 Page 13 1 Jan 1990 Steve Bonine 1:115/777 Chair of IFNA Elections and Nominations Committee At this Summer's FidoCon, the IFNA Board of Directors passed a resolution affectionately known as YPOP (Yellow Piece of Paper) which decreed that a vote would be taken to determine the future of IFNA. The rules for this vote were published in FidoNews 644. The polls were open during the month of November, and the vote totals were tabulated and reported up the FidoNet coordinator structure during the month of December. This article reports those results. The resolution passed by the Board stated that the outcome of the vote was to be based upon the total of ELIGIBLE voters, not on the number of actual votes received. It thus was as important to develop a count of eligible voters as to record the votes received. Network Coordinators who conducted the vote were requested to forward three numbers: YES votes, NO votes, and number of eligible voters. A mechanism was developed to adjust the total of eligible voters to compensate for nets which did not report any results or for which no number-eligible was reported. This mechanism, described in the published rules, involves calculating a ratio of the number of eligible voters to the number of nodelist entries and then applying that ratio to nets which did not report. In summary, the numeric results are as follows: YES votes received: 1417 NO votes received: 480 Eligible voters reported: 3741 Nodelist entries represented by these 3741 voters: 4373 Nodelist entries represented by nets not reporting: 1484 Calculated eligible voters in nets not reporting: 1269 Total eligible voters: 5010 Percentage of eligible voters voting YES: 28% As Chair of the IFNA Nominations and Elections Committee, the Board of Directors should consider this my formal report that the required majority of eligible voters was NOT received in this election. Now that I have presented the numbers, I want to editorialize just a bit. I want to thank everyone who helped conduct this election. The cooperation from the entire FidoNet coordinator structure was excellent and quite gratifying. After all, it wasn't the coordina- tors who asked for this, and it is no small amount of work to hold this type of election, especially in a large net. Considering the number of people involved and our experience level at doing this, the number of problems encountered was vanishingly small. FidoNews 7-01 Page 14 1 Jan 1990 Which brings me to a related topic. There are almost 2,000 votes tallied in this election. I am certain that, somewhere, there must be a typo or a net's vote which somehow was mis-recorded. Let's not nitpick on this. A few votes one way or the other really isn't going to change anything. A few HUNDRED votes wouldn't change the outcome. In fact, it would take more than 1,000 additional YES votes to change the outcome. Everyone involved has done their best to insure accuracy, and flames about misrecorded votes just aren't called for. In conclusion I present the vote tally by net. This list is based upon NODELIST.300, which was the nodelist-of-record for the election. It does not purport to reflect current reality in terms of NC names, etc. The line length was chopped at 65 characters to allow it to appear in FidoNews with one line per net, which mutilated some NC's names; for that I apologize. The three numbers shown are YES votes, NO votes, and number-eligible. In those cases where the number-eligible is blank (including those indicated as "no report"), the eligible count was adjusted using the ratio technique described above. YES NO Elig 12 4 26 Net 100,St Louis Area,St Louis MO,J Harre 16 3 33 Net 101,Boston Metro,Swampscott MA,HAL DuPrie 10 1 61 Net 102,SoCalNet,Los Angeles CA,Richard Martz 14 3 28 Net 103,Orange Co CA,Anaheim CA,Jim Bacon 8 13 71 Net 104,Denver Area Net,Denver CO,Rod Lamping 6 28 62 Net 105,VanPort Net,S Wash & N Ore,The Curmudgeon 4 6 74 Net 106,Houston Area,Houston TX,Merrilyn Vaughan 84 10 100 Net 107,NY/NJ MetroNet,East Brunswick NJ,Fabian G 5 1 6 Net 108,CincyNet,Cincinnati OH,Jesse Armontrout 51 2 89 Net 109,Spooks R Us Net,DC MD NoVA Metro,Bill And 1 7 8 Net 110,DAYTON Area,Dayton OH,Decker Doggett 0 0 Net 112,NE Florida Coast,Jacksonville FL,Dana San 17 9 48 Net 114,Phoenix Area,Phoenix AZ,John Valentyn 20 8 42 Net 115,ChicagoLand,Chicago IL,Tom Etheridge 0 0 Net 116,Greater Tenn Area,Nashville TN,Mike Black no report Net 117,Brazos County Area,College Station TX,Pau 11 1 13 Net 119,ChicoNet,Chico CA,Bob Campbell 12 2 Net 120,Detroit MetroNet,Ferndale MI,Mike Bader 2 0 4 Net 121,Madison Area,Madison WI,John Galvin 4 1 Net 123,Mid-South Net,Memphis TN,Bill Paul no report Net 124,Dallas Metroplex,Dallas TX,Jon Sabol 12 1 31 Net 125,SF Bay Net,San Francisco CA,Mike Moore 14 1 23 Net 128,Southern Colorado,Colorado Springs CO,Woo 32 1 34 Net 129,Pitt-Net,Pittsburgh PA,Paul Kelly 5 1 42 Net 130,FTW Gateway,Fort Worth TX,George Braswell 10 9 36 Net 132,New England-North,Nashua NH,Kath Kirby 8 0 Net 133,ATLNET,Atlanta GA,Steve Antonoff 15 13 29 Net 134,Southern Alberta,Calgary Alta,Norbert Lan FidoNews 7-01 Page 15 1 Jan 1990 18 1 38 Net 135,SFLorida Net,Miami FL,Christopher Baker 1 1 4 Net 136,Del Rio,Del Rio TX,James Johnston 0 0 Net 137,Fla Suncoast Net,Sarasota FL,George Emigh 0 14 15 Net 138,South Puget Sound,Washington,Steven Barne 7 0 8 Net 139,Eastern WI & U.P. MI,Neenah WI,Bruce Casn 1 8 25 Net 140,Sask Net,Saskatchewan Canada,Ken Read 26 21 77 Net 141,ConnCentral,New Haven CT,Emmitt Dove 7 1 10 Net 142,Hartford Area,Farmington CT,Maynard Marqu 10 1 21 Net 143,Silicon Valley,Sunnyvale CA,Jim Cannell 17 3 43 Net 147,OKC MetroNet,Oklahoma City,Kris Veitch 2 8 10 Net 150,First State,Wilmington DE,Dave Hart 0 0 Net 151,NC Net,Greensboro NC,Michael Hill 9 0 34 Net 152,The Oregon Network,Eugene OR,Paul Ortman 3 1 60 Net 153,Pacific Rim,BC MAN YUK NWT,Len Boscoe 13 0 20 Net 154,Wisconsin S.E.(lata),Milwaukee WI,Ted Pol 6 2 18 Net 157,Northeast OH,Cleveland OH,Bob Abbott 0 8 21 Net 159,Mid Michigan Net,Lansing MI,Bob Peel 6 0 13 Net 160,South TX Gulf Coast,Corpus Christi TX,Bob 11 0 34 Net 161,SF EAST BAY\VALLEY,Benicia CA,Derek Koopo 2 4 51 Net 163,Ottawa Net,Ottawa ON,Bruce Miller 1 2 40 Net 167,QUEBEC WEST,Brossard Que,Renald Loignon 11 18 43 Net 170,Tulsa Area,Tulsa OK,Bruce Bodger 3 0 19 Net 200,South Net,Malmoe Sweden,Mats Knuts no report Net 201,Lafayette Net,West Lafayette IN,Don Ault 5 0 35 Net 201,Mid Sweden Net,Sweden,Thomas Bergstam 22 2 33 Net 202,San Diego Co CA,San Diego CA,Jim Dailey 4 0 22 Net 202,TCL-NET,Tungelsta Sweden,Hakan Andersson 30 11 41 Net 203,SacraMetro Valley Net,Sacramento Ca,Ralph 1 0 19 Net 203,West Swedish Net,Gothenburg Sweden,Anders 1 0 8 Net 204,Central Net,Orebro Sweden,Thomas Stjernst 2 3 16 Net 204,SF Peninsula Net,San Mateo CA,Les Kooyman 13 1 17 Net 205,Fresno/Central Valley,Clovis CA,Ken Wecte no report Net 205,Norrland Net,Sundsvall Sweden,Roberth Lin 4 1 21 Net 206,Ventura County Net,Thousand Oaks CA,Steve no report Net 207,Inland County Net,Colton CA,Rod Bowman 2 0 13 Net 208,Stockton/Modesto Net,Modesto CA,Stephen E 4 0 4 Net 209,Vega$Net,Las Vegas NV,Jeff Marsh 0 0 12 Net 221,SouWest O Net,London ON,Erik Sea 0 0 7 Net 222,The Soo Net,Sault Ste. Marie ON,Mario D'U 2 0 5 Net 225,Near North Net,North Bay ON,Jesse David H 24 1 30 Net 226,Buckeye Net,Columbus OH,David Pointer 3 0 5 Net 227,Michiana Net,South Bend IN,Bob Heide 5 2 22 Net 228,West Michigan Net,Grand Rapids MI,Kevin O 7 1 24 Net 229,Durham Net,Ajax ONT,Rick Bates 11 0 13 Net 230,DANE TECH,Denmark,Mik Tuver 5 10 22 Net 231,Central IN Fido Net,Indpls IN,Brian Murre 3 0 25 Net 231,DaneNet,Denmark,Johnny Odgaard 2 2 9 Net 232,Central IL,Peoria IL,Lee Busby 14 1 18 Net 233,Chambana Net,Urbana IL,Wayne Hamilton 13 1 14 Net 234,Maumee Valley Net,Toledo OH,Jim Dunmyer no report Net 234,Mosquito Network Ass.,Denmark,Keld Hansen no report Net 236,NE Indiana Net,Fort Wayne IN,Ron Kuhn no report Net 237,State Line ,Niles OH,Orren Zook FidoNews 7-01 Page 16 1 Jan 1990 3 0 3 Net 238,Central WI,Schofield WI,William Huther 4 0 6 Net 240,QUEBEC EAST,QuebecCity Que,Doug Kitson 0 5 5 Net 241,European HST NET,West Germany FRG,Mario R 4 2 11 Net 242,AltiPlex Net,FRG,Leo Moll no report Net 243,Big Science Net,West Germany FRG,Ruediger 8 0 17 Net 244,RHEIN-AREA-NET,West Germany FRG,Helmut Sa 1 4 8 Net 245,MUG-Net,West Germany FRG,Klaus Schaefer 4 0 10 Net 246,Bavarian Net,West-Germany FRG,Tommy Roede 0 0 9 Net 247,Niagara Net,St. Catharines ON,Hugh Mitche 1 6 13 Net 247,SchaWot Net Suedhessen,West Germany FRG,S no report Net 248,Ara Net Wiesbaden,West Gemany FRG,Hans Ko 0 0 84 Net 250,Southern Ontario Net,ON,Bruce Smith 2 0 3 Net 251,Southern Net,South Coast UK,Jon Dunster 22 0 27 Net 252,South Central,Reading UK,David Rance 22 1 51 Net 253,Central Net,Droitwich UK,Pete Franchi 27 0 46 Net 254,London Net,London UK,Grant Burch 7 0 12 Net 255,SouthWest Net ,Exeter UK,John Burden 1 0 10 Net 256,Brit Net North,Tyneside UK,John Rawson no report Net 257,The Home Counties Net,UK,Grant Burch 1 1 16 Net 258,Eastern Net [HST],Sandy UK,Alan Walker 4 0 6 Net 259,ScotNet,Barrhead UK,Donald Whannell 24 2 47 Net 260,EmpireStateNet,Syracuse NY,Mark Howard 32 2 49 Net 261,Chesapeake MetroNet,Baltimore Area,Bob Ru 3 0 6 Net 262,West Virginia Net,So Charleston WV,Mike H 4 1 21 Net 264,Mid Virginia Net,Richmond VA,Cabell Clark 0 1 11 Net 265,SOUTHERN NORTHERN VA NET,Woodbridge Va,Ri 1 11 22 Net 266,51st State,Burlington NJ,Bob Germer 7 0 7 Net 267,Adirondack Net,Glens Falls NY,Ross Callow 1 2 5 Net 268,Pocono Net,Hainesville NJ,Ed Crissey 2 4 15 Net 269,Garden State North,Caldwell NJ,Glen Johns 7 5 12 Net 270,Central PA Net,Middletown PA,Gary Rux 3 4 15 Net 271,Tidewater Va Net,Norfolk VA,Tom Cadorette 13 0 16 Net 272,South East NY Net,Poughkeepsie NY,Ray Hyd 5 10 35 Net 273,Philadelphia Metro,Bensalem PA,Thomas Lyn no report Net 280,DFF Host Holland Capital,Amsterdam Hollan 30 2 32 Net 280,KC Area Net,Kansas City MO,Fred Armantrou 5 0 25 Net 281,DFF Holland North-West,Voorschoten Hollan no report Net 282,DFF Holland-North/East,Heerenveen Holland 11 2 22 Net 282,Twin Cities Metronet,Mpls/St. Paul MN,Ste no report Net 283,DFF Host Holland-Mid/East,Ommen Holland,P 3 0 9 Net 283,IowaNetEast,Iowa City IA,Jim Stepp 3 0 15 Net 284,DFF Host Holland South-East,Casteren Holl 2 1 3 Net 284,Springfield Area Net,Springfield MO,Phil 3 0 15 Net 285,DFF Host Holland South-West,Roosendaal Ho 3 2 8 Net 285,Tri City Network,Omaha NE,Phil Root 3 0 33 Net 286,Dutch Independent Network,Monster Holland 2 1 3 Net 286,Ozark Net,Joplin MO,Tim Pearson 1 0 1 Net 287,Cape Girardeau,Cape Girardeau MO,Bob Mari 1 0 6 Net 288,ILL EAST OF MISS,Granite City IL,Mark Veh 3 0 5 Net 289,Mid Missouri Net,Mexico MO,Linda Glover 4 0 5 Net 290,CIA Central Iowa Net,Des Moines IA,Dan Bu no report Net 290,IBN 290,Brussels Belgium,Frank Verstraete FidoNews 7-01 Page 17 1 Jan 1990 0 2 2 Net 291,Istari-Belgium,Mechelen-Belgium,Julien Va 0 0 2 Net 291,Wichita MetNet,Wichita Kansas,Mike Holcom 5 1 19 Net 295,Belgian Independant Nodes,Mortsel Belgium 3 3 12 Net 300,Pueblo NET,Tucson AZ,Don Appleton no report Net 300,SwissNet,Titterten,Ernesto Hagmann 6 1 8 Net 301,High Mesa Net,Albuquerque NM,Jake Hargrov no report Net 302,CACHE VALLEY NET,Smithfield UT,Dave Bell no report Net 302,IVSS-Net [HST],Guntershausen,Nik Bombelli 4 0 4 Net 303,COWBOY NET,Wyoming,Casper WY 3 0 5 Net 304,Northern Arizona,Flagstaff Az,Linda Murph 3 0 5 Net 305,Whole Enchilada Net,Las Cruces NM,Scott H no report Net 306,Northern CO,Ft. Collins CO,Rob Diehl no report Net 307,SE COLO NET,Pueblo CO,Bryan Hall 8 0 8 Net 308,5-N-UP NET,Alamogordo NM,Greg Ament 3 0 4 Net 309,SOUTHERN AZ NET,Sierra Vista AZ,Robin Moo no report Net 310,CHEYENNE ONLINE,Wyoming,Cheyenne WY 6 4 10 Net 310,ViennaNet,Vienna Austria,Werner Illsinger 5 0 5 Net 313,Lower Austria Net,Klosterneuburg Austria, 2 0 2 Net 316,StyriaNet,Graz Austria,Andreas Polz 2 4 21 Net 320,Marlboro Exchange,Marlboro CT,Joe Turner no report Net 320,Paris Net,Paris,Mic Ralle 4 8 17 Net 321,MassNet West,Amherst MA,Mort Sternheim no report Net 321,Tours Net,Tours,Pascal Brisset 1 10 21 Net 322,Lille Net,Halluin,Philippe Galle no report Net 322,MassNet Central,Marlborough MA,Kevin Port 0 1 1 Net 323,Avignon Net,Avignon,Jacques Martin no report Net 323,Rhode Island,Providence RI,Ray Vaughan 6 0 20 Net 324,MassNet NE,Danvers MA,Bob DeAlmeida 4 0 7 Net 325,Freedom of Choice,Vermont,James Pallack no report Net 331,NorthernC,Italy,Alberto Morosi no report Net 332,Italy88 Telnet,Italy,Claudio Boarino no report Net 333,Fri-Ve-Net,Italy,Adolfo Melilli no report Net 334,North-West Italy net,Italy,Franco Carcill no report Net 335,Italia Centro Sud,Italy,Giorgio Rutiglian 5 0 5 Net 340,Canada West Net,Victoria BC,Mike Davey 7 0 10 Net 341,CASTILLA CENTRO,Spain,Enrique Lopez 14 2 17 Net 342,Northern Alberta,Edmonton Alberta,Tom Hal 8 0 Net 343,Catalunya Net,Spain,Jaime Roca 0 14 33 Net 343,Lesser Seattle Opera,Washington,LeRoy DeV 5 1 10 Net 344,NW Washington State,Washington,Dan Hartma 5 0 Net 345,ANDALUCIA,Spain,Peter Kjoege 3 0 10 Net 345,Pacific Region Fido,Honolulu HI,Ron Skate 3 0 Net 346,Levante Net,Spain,Javier Cueto 0 0 8 Net 346,WA Inland Empire,Spokane WA,Susan & Rober 4 0 7 Net 347,CNW NET The Last Frontier ,Kenneick WA,Ga 0 0 31 Net 348,Manitoba Net,Winnipeg MB,Chris Davis 0 0 1 Net 349,SoNet,Southern Oregon,Jonathan Talon 5 1 7 Net 350,Olympic Gateway,Grapeview WA,Ralph Sims 2 3 10 Net 351,North Island Coord,Nanaimo BC,Helen Marti 0 0 4 Net 352,Olympia Net Lacey WA,Sue Coleman 4 0 Net 360,Augusta Net,North Augusta SC,Ed Meloan FidoNews 7-01 Page 18 1 Jan 1990 0 0 Net 361,Central Mississippi,Vicksburg MS,Vic Parr 0 0 Net 362,Chatta-NET METRO,Chattanooga TN,Shawn Sto 14 3 Net 363,ODIN-NC,Orlando FL,John Ervin 0 0 Net 365,North Central Fla Net,Ocala FL,Eric Carr 0 0 Net 366,NW Florida (HST),Ft. Walton Beach FL,Stev 0 0 Net 367,Puerto Rico Net,San Juan PR,Juan Davila 0 0 Net 369,Treasure Coast Net,Fort Lauderdale FL,W.C 0 0 Net 370,NE Georgia Network,Athens GA,Tracy Graves 9 0 Net 371,SW Florida Coast Net,Cape Coral FL,Steve 14 0 Net 372,Charleston Net,Charleston SC,Mike Ratledg 0 0 Net 373,Rocket City Net,Huntsville AL,John Emmert 0 0 Net 374,Space Coast Net,Titusville FL,Jerry Russe 3 0 Net 375,Central Alabama Net,Montgomery AL,Tom Jon 0 0 Net 376,Cola Net,Columbia SC,Shay Walters 0 0 Net 377,Tampa Bay Net,Tampa Fl,Brian Hart 10 0 Net 379,MetroLina Net,Charlotte NC,Cary Howell 8 0 17 Net 380,S'port/Bossier City,Shreveport La,Paul Br no report Net 381,West Texas Net,El Paso TX,Rick Petersen no report Net 382,Capitol City,Lake Travis TX,Michael Maste 1 4 6 Net 383,San Angelo Net,San Angelo TX,Dori Peterso 9 0 9 Net 384,South Louisiana,Houma LA,Raymond Barnes no report Net 385,SW OklaNet,Lawton OK,John Roberts 3 1 4 Net 386,Galveston County Net,Texas City TX,Calvin 18 0 22 Net 387,San Antonio Net,San Antonio TX,Dieter Bel no report Net 388,HOT NET Waco,Waco TX,Bob Brown 6 1 11 Net 389,East Arkansas Net,Jonesboro AR,Kevin Watk no report Net 390,Southeast Louisiana Net,Slidell LA,Walt F no report Net 391,NoWe ARk Net,Fayetteville AR,Bob Underdow no report Net 392,Big Country Net,Abilene Tx,Cliff Capers no report Net 393,TX TriAngle,Denton TX,Van Holland 4 0 4 Net 394,Hammond Area Sysop Assoc,Hammond LA,Ray W 3 0 3 Net 395,Killeen Area,Killeen TX,Marc Wolf 12 4 16 Net 396,New Orleans Area,New Orleans LA,John Souv no report Net 397,Tip-O-Tex/Valley Net,Edinburg TX,Michael 4 0 14 Net 398,East Tex Net,Longview TX,David Miller no report Net 402,HollyNet (02),Jerusalem Israel,Uriel Sega no report Net 403,Tel Aviv (03),Tel Aviv Israel,Chaim Neuma no report Net 405,Network 052,Kfar-Saba Israel,Alon Gingold no report Net 480,Poland,PL,Jan Stozek no report Net 481,Botswana Net,Gaborone Botswana,John Case no report Net 491,Transvaal Net,Johannesburg RSA,Dave Pedle no report Net 492,Peninsula Net,Cape Town RSA,Peter Sheldon no report Net 494,Algoa Net,Port Elizabeth RSA,Bryan Haefel 19 0 77 Net 500,HCC net,Ede,Henk Wevers no report Net 501,First Net,Malmoe Sweden,Mats Knuts no report Net 502,Norway,Oslo Norway,Ola Garstad 16 2 51 Net 504,Finland 1st Net,Espoo Finland,Hannu Stran no report Net 505,DK,Denmark,Per Holm 10 14 43 Net 507,KRAUT'S INN MAIL-ONLY,FRG (Germany),Diete no report Net 508,Netherland1,Apeldoorn Holland,Ignaat Simo 1 0 4 Net 509,Tech Net,West Germany FRG,Michael Juergen FidoNews 7-01 Page 19 1 Jan 1990 3 1 54 Net 512,PCC Net,Venray Holland,Joop Mellaart 6 1 7 Net 513,HCC(B)-BELGIUM,Wijnegem Belgium,David Gev 3 2 27 Net 515,Midnight Sun,Espoo Finland,Werner Cappel no report Net 600,Singapore Area,SINGAPORE,Wing Lee no report Net 608,Thailand Net,Thailand,Phoom Sanguanhong no report Net 609,Malaysia Area,MALAYSIA,Jon Hiew no report Net 610,Indonesia Net,Jakarta INDONESIA,James Fil no report Net 620,Canberra Net,Canberra Australia,Scott Fur no report Net 632,Melbourne Central Net,Melbourne Victoria 9 0 13 Net 633,Network 3:633,Melbourne Victoria Australi 2 1 4 Net 634,Southern & Western Melbourne Net,Melbourn no report Net 635,Western & Northern Melbourne Net,Melbourn no report Net 636,FrontDoor Australia,Frankston Nth Vic Aus 8 3 40 Net 640,QLD NET,Cairns Qld AUSTRALIA,Ray Chalmers no report Net 670,Tasmania,Tasmania Australia,Alan Hughes no report Net 680,STH AUST NET,FLINDERS PARK SOUTH AUSTRALI no report Net 681,Southern Central Net,Inglewood Sth Austra 8 3 19 Net 690,The Golden State,Perth WA,Andrew Milner 12 0 52 Net 700,Hong Kong Net,Hong Kong,Louie Chan 5 4 31 Net 711,Coastal Opus,Springfield NSW,Kevin Mann 7 13 34 Net 712,SYDNEY NET,NSW AUSTRALIA,Colin Lean 8 1 13 Net 713,Sydney West,Penrith Australia,Ben Sharif no report Net 714,WARRINGAH,Sydney NSW Australia,Graeme Nic no report Net 720,TAIPEI Net,Taipei TAIWAN,Honlin Lue no report Net 721,TAINAN Net,Kaohsiung TAIWAN,Shin-Huei Duh no report Net 722,Mid TAIWAN Net,Changhua TAIWAN,Stronger S no report Net 723,North TAIWAN NET,ChungLi TAIWAN,LeeAn no report Net 724,Hsin Chu Net,HsinChu TAIWAN,Shean Yang Tz no report Net 725,Taichung Net,Taichung TAIWAN,Chaur-Shyam 0 1 2 Net 770,Christchurch NET,CHCH NEW ZEALAND,Tony Ha 0 0 3 Net 771,Wellington NET,WGTN NEW ZEALAND,Jeremy Sc 7 3 11 Net 772,Auckland NET,AUCK NEW ZEALAND,Terry Bowde 0 10 12 Net 1200,TangoNET,Buenos Aires RA,Gustavo Zacaria 0 3 3 Net 1201,Red Litoral,Litoral RA,Gonzalo Borracer 2 0 Net 3600,The Chain Gang,Lake City Fl,Joe Vinci 0 0 Net 3601,North Florida Net,Gainesville FL,Robert 0 0 Net 3602,BHAMnet,Birmingham AL,Howard Duck 0 0 Net 3603,PinellasNET,St Petersburg FL,Bill Staab 0 0 Net 3604,MS Gulf Coast Net,Gulfport MS,Rick Maddo 0 0 Net 3605,Tally-Net,Tallahassee FL,Troy Kaser 0 0 Net 3607,North Alabama Net,Decatur AL,Jeff Fuller 2 0 Net 3608,Panama City Net,Panama City FL,James You 0 0 Net 3609,Gator Net,Cloud Lake FL,Clay Vagnini 3 0 Net 3610,Palm Bay Net,Palm Bay FL,Gary Blydenburg 2 0 Net 3611,Mid Ga Net,Macon GA,Jerry Toler 0 0 Net 3612,Pensacola Net (HST),Pensacola FL,John Br 0 0 Net 3613,West Central Ga Net,Columbus GA,Roger Ha 5 1 12 Region 10,Calif Nevada,Tustin CA,David Garrett 2 1 8 Region 11,Central,IL IN KY MI OH WI,Pat Mulcahy 0 0 3 Region 12,EASTERN CANADA,ON PQ PEI NS NB NF,Tom K 0 1 2 Region 13,Mid Atlantic,DE DC MD NJ NY PA VA WV,Ge FidoNews 7-01 Page 20 1 Jan 1990 3 0 13 Region 14,Mid West,IA.KS.MN.MO.NE.ND.SD,Tim Pears 2 0 12 Region 15,Mountain,AZ CO NM UT WY,Marv Carson 0 1 2 Region 16,New England,CT ME MA NH RI VT,Pete Whit 0 1 6 Region 17,North West,AK ALB BC HI ID MAN MT OR SS 3 1 15 Region 18,SouthEast/Caribbean,AL FL GA MS NC SC T 3 2 25 Region 19,TexArkOkLa,AR.LA.OK.TX,Tony Davis 0 0 2 Region 20,Sweden,S,Mats Knuts no report 0 Region 21,Norway,N,Ola Garstad 0 0 4 Region 22,Finland,SF,Matti Lattu 0 0 1 Region 23,Denmark,DK,Per Holm 0 0 Region 24,West Germany,FRG,Michael Juergens 0 0 Region 25,British Isles,UK,Pete Franchi 0 0 1 Region 28,Holland,Oud-Beijerland,Hanno van.der.Ma 1 0 1 Region 29,Belgium,B,Staf Weyts no report Region 30,Switzerland,CH,Clement Studer 1 0 3 Region 31,Austria,A,Werner Illsinger no report Region 32,France,F,Pascal Brisset no report Region 33,Italy,I,Giorgio Rutigliano 5 0 8 Region 34,Coordinador,SPAIN,Raymond Richmond no report Region 40,Israel,IL,Ido Ophir 0 0 1 Region 48,BOTSWANA,Gaborone Botswana,John Case 2 2 4 Region 48,Poland,PL,Jan Stozek 18 1 19 Region 49,South Africa,RSA,Dave Pedler no report Region 50,AUSTRALIA,MELBOURNE VIC AUSTRALIA,Simon no report Region 51,ASEAN Region SINGAPORE,Wing Lee no report Region 52,INDONESIA NET,Jakarta Indonesia,Jim Fil 0 0 1 Region 53,HONG KONG,Kowloon HK,Cordy Chan 0 0 1 Region 54,WESTERN PACIFIC OPUS,Cairns Qld AUSTRAL no report Region 55,The Million Sq Mile Region Perth Wester no report Region 56,TAIWAN NET,Taipei TAIWAN,Honlin Lue no report Region 57,NEW ZEALAND,Christchurch NZ,Tony Hall no report Region 60,Republica Argentina,Rosario SF/RA,Luis 0 0 3 Region 61,Red Venezolana,Caracas VZ,John Griffing ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 7-01 Page 21 1 Jan 1990 ================================================================= WANTED ================================================================= Justin Norman Norm's Hideaway Sherwood, Oregon 1:105/205 W A N T E D The Senior Advanced Placement History class at Sherwood High School is putting together a book about the Korean War which will include tales of veterans. We are looking for any vets who would be willing to set a side a small part of time for an interview, we will work to your schedule and pay all costs involved. This project promises to be one of the best in many years and your story would be of incredible help to our book. Please consider our offer and let us know if you would like to help. Please contact Justin Norman at one of the following locations: Sherwood High School 503/625-8110 Post Office Box 41 Sherwood, Oregon 97140 503/692-5976 voice, message 503/692-9660 voice Norm's Hideaway FidoNet 1:105/205 503/692-0725 24 hours, 300/1200/2400 baud, #CM Please contact us before January 3, 1990. You time and effort is much appreciated. Call collect at 503/692-9660 if you need to. ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 7-01 Page 22 1 Jan 1990 Wanted: Users and sysops to participate in a skydiving echo. This echo might also include slope-soaring, para-sailing, and hang-gliding in order to obtain a large enough group of participants. Please send netmail to Dave Appel @ 1:231/30. ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 7-01 Page 23 1 Jan 1990 ================================================================= LATEST VERSIONS ================================================================= Latest Software Versions MS-DOS Systems -------------- Bulletin Board Software Name Version Name Version Name Version Fido 12q+ Phoenix 1.3 TBBS 2.1 Lynx 1.30 QuickBBS 2.61* TComm/TCommNet 3.4 Kitten 2.16 RBBS 17.2B TPBoard 6.0 Opus 1.03b+ RBBSmail 17.2 Wildcat! 2.10* Network Node List Other Mailers Version Utilities Version Utilities Version BinkleyTerm 2.30 EditNL 4.00 ARC 6.02 D'Bridge 1.30* MakeNL 2.20 ARCA06 2.20* Dutchie 2.90C ParseList 1.30 ARCmail 2.0 FrontDoor 1.99b* Prune 1.40 ConfMail 4.00 PRENM 1.47 SysNL 3.01* EMM 2.02 SEAdog 4.51b XlatList 2.90 Gmail 2.01 XlaxDiff 2.32 GROUP 2.16 XlaxNode 2.32 GUS 1.30* LHARC 1.13 MSG 4.0 MSGED 1.99 PK[UN]ZIP 1.02* QM 1.0 QSORT 4.03 StarLink 1.01 TCOMMail 2.2 TMail 1.12 TPBNetEd 3.2 UFGATE 1.03 XRS 3.10 ZmailQ 1.10* Macintosh --------- Bulletin Board Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version Red Ryder Host v2.1b3 Macpoint 0.91* MacArc 0.04 Mansion 7.12 Tabby 2.1 ArcMac 1.3 WWIV (Mac) 3.0 StuffIt 1.51 FidoNews 7-01 Page 24 1 Jan 1990 TImport 1.331 TExport 1.32 Timestamp 1.6 Tset 1.3 Timestart 1.1 Tally 1.1 Mehitabel 1.2 Archie 1.60 Jennifer 0.25b2g Numberizer 1.5c MessageEdit 1.0 Mantissa 1.0 PreStamp 2.01 R.PreStamp 2.01 Saphire 2.1t Epistle II 1.01 Import 2.52 Export 2.54 Sundial 2.1 AreaFix 1.1 Probe 0.052 Terminator 1.1 TMM 4.0b UNZIP 1.01* Amiga ----- Bulletin Board Software Network Mailers Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version Paragon 2.00+* BinkleyTerm 1.00 AmigArc 0.23 TrapDoor 1.11 booz 1.01 WelMat 0.35* ConfMail 1.10 ChameleonEdit 0.10 Lharc 1.00* ParseLst 1.30 PkAX 1.00 RMB 1.30 UNzip 0.86 Zoo 2.00 Atari ST -------- Bulletin Board Software Network Mailer Other Utilities Name Version Name Version Name Version FIDOdoor/ST 1.5c* BinkleyTerm 1.03g3 ConfMail 1.00 Pandora BBS 2.41c The BOX 1.20 ParseList 1.30 QuickBBS/ST 0.40 ARC 6.02* GS Point 0.61 LHARC 0.51 FidoNews 7-01 Page 25 1 Jan 1990 PKUNZIP 1.10 MSGED 1.96S SRENUM 6.2 Trenum 0.10 OMMM 1.40 + Netmail capable (does not require additional mailer software) * Recently changed Utility authors: Please help keep this list up to date by reporting new versions to 1:1/1. It is not our intent to list all utilities here, only those which verge on necessity. ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 7-01 Page 26 1 Jan 1990 ================================================================= NOTICES ================================================================= Mario Diaz,M.D. 135/8 New Anesthesia Echo A new echomail conference for the discussion of Anesthesia related subjects has been created. The purpose of this echo is to discuss different aspects of Anesthesiology, not only between Anesthesia personnel, but also to answer any questions and clear up any doubts about anesthesia to anyone in general. Most people that are going to have surgery openly state that they are not afraid of the surgery, but they are terrified of the Anesthesia. Maybe this echo will help to allay some of these fears. The echo is currently on the backbone for general distribution. For any further information regarding this echo please contact Mario Diaz, M.D.,moderator, at 135/8. Area Tag: ANESTHESIA Area Name: Anesthesiology Discussion Forum ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Interrupt Stack 1 Feb 1990 Deadline for IFNA Policy and Bylaws election 5 Jun 1990 David Dodell's 33rd Birthday 5 Oct 1990 21st Anniversary of "Monty Python's Flying Circus" If you have something which you would like to see on this calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1:1/1. ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 7-01 Page 27 1 Jan 1990 OFFICERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL FIDONET ASSOCIATION Thom Henderson 1:107/528 Chairman of the Board Les Kooyman 1:204/501 President Fabian Gordon 1:107/323 Vice President Bill Bolton 3:3/0 Vice President-Technical Coordinator Kris Veitch 1:147/30 Secretary Kris Veitch 1:147/30 Treasurer IFNA COMMITTEE AND BOARD CHAIRS Administration and Finance * By-laws and Rules John Roberts 1:385/49 Executive Committee (Pres) Les Kooyman 1:204/501 International Affairs * Membership Services Jim Vaughan 1:226/300 Nominations and Elections Steve Bonine 1:1/0 Public Affairs David Drexler 1:147/30.20 Publications Irene Henderson 1:107/9 Technical Standards Rick Moore 1:115/333 Ethics * Security and Privacy * Grievances * * Position in abeyance pending reorganization IFNA BOARD OF DIRECTORS DIVISION AT-LARGE 10 Courtney Harris 1:102/732 Don Daniels 1:107/210 11 John Rafuse 1:12/900 Phil Buonomo 1:107/583 12 Bill Bolton 3:711/403 Mark Hawthorne 1:107/238 13 Fabian Gordon 1:107/323 Tom Jennings 1:125/111 14 Ken Kaplan 1:100/22 Irene Henderson 1:107/509 15 Kevin McNeil 1:128/45 Steve Jordan 1:206/2871 16 Ivan Schaffel 1:141/390 Robert Rudolph 1:261/628 17 Kathi Crockett 1:134/30 Dave Melnik 1:107/233 18 Andrew Adler 1:135/47 Jim Hruby 1:107/536 19 Kris Veitch 1:147/30 Burt Juda 1:107/528 2 Henk Wevers 2:500/1 Karl Schinke 1:107/516 3 Matt Whelan 3:54/99 John Roberts 1:147/14 ----------------------------------------------------------------- FidoNews 7-01 Page 28 1 Jan 1990 __ The World's First / \ BBS Network /|oo \ * FidoNet * (_| /_) _`@/_ \ _ | | \ \\ | (*) | \ )) ______ |__U__| / \// / Fido \ _//|| _\ / (________) (_/(_|(____/ (tm) Membership for the International FidoNet Association Membership in IFNA is open to any individual or organization that pays a specified annual membership fee. IFNA serves the international FidoNet-compatible electronic mail community to increase worldwide communications. Member Name _______________________________ Date _______________ Address _________________________________________________________ City ____________________________________________________________ State ________________________________ Zip _____________________ Country _________________________________________________________ Home Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________ Work Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________ Zone:Net/Node Number ____________________________________________ BBS Name ________________________________________________________ BBS Phone Number ________________________________________________ Baud Rates Supported ____________________________________________ Board Restrictions ______________________________________________ Your Special Interests __________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ In what areas would you be willing to help in FidoNet? __________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Send this membership form and a check or money order for $25 in US Funds to: International FidoNet Association PO Box 41143 St Louis, Missouri 63141 USA Thank you for your membership! Your participation will help to insure the future of FidoNet. Please NOTE that IFNA is a general not-for-profit organization and Articles of Association and By-Laws were adopted by the membership in January 1987. The second elected Board of Directors was filled in August 1988. The IFNA Echomail Conference has been established on FidoNet to assist the Board. We welcome your input to this Conference. FidoNews 7-01 Page 29 1 Jan 1990 -----------------------------------------------------------------