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 --). 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\*.* . 7-11-93 22:24 .. 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... >> 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 ----------------------------------------------------------------------