F I D O N E W S -- Vol.10 No.45 (07-Nov-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 Sysop Liability for Enroute (and/or Encrypted) Mail......... 3 Online Home Educator's Support Network...................... 8 TVNet is public/ALLFIX_REQ echo............................. 9 Consultants and Consulting Organizations Directory.......... 12 Hi!......................................................... 12 Reply to "The Spirit of Fidonet is Crying, Part 1".......... 13 The I95 (Interstate 95) and WHIRLYBIRDS Echoes.............. 14 Free Listings in the Encyclopedia of Associations........... 15 Glad to be of service....................................... 16 Just Say Yes to ",UUCP,".................................... 17 The Growth of Modern Trends in Organisational Control....... 17 A [for once brief] Response................................. 19 Articles of Faith........................................... 22 Reorganisation of UK Fido................................... 23 3. Fidonews Information.......................................... 25 FidoNews 10-45 Page: 2 07 Nov 1993 ======================================================================== Editorial ======================================================================== We have a large issue this week, with many interesting articles. The first article, written by Mike Riddle, was accompanied by the file BBSLAW.ZIP. That file contains much of interest to the average sysop, and is FREQable from our BBS. Many thanks to Mike for lending us his expertise. You may notice our snail mail address has changed. We're still in the downtown core of Kitchener, but now have more room for Bink and Squish [tiny fuzzies]. I hate moving. . And sorry about the delay in correspondance, i'm a week behind, due to moving and a fire at the gallery. All our paintings are smoke-dammaged but no-body was hurt, thank goddess. Accidental smoke colouring desn't bother me. Maybe i like images more when they're weathered, affected by random circumstance and fire. Fire is interesting as long as nothing sensitive gets badly burned. Recently we were reading "Small Fires Letters from the Soviet People to Ogonyok Magazine 1987-1990" and thinking about the net. Ogonyok was the name of a Soviet weekly magazine which published extremely varied letters from readers, pushing the limits of Perestroika and opening a forum for all kinds of previously suppressed opinions. Kinda reminds me of Tom Jennings. Even if issues of beurocratic/formal cencorship or social taste/mores were humanely and non-repressively managed by big wheels and little cogs, we would all still have to cope with what the letters department of Ogonyok magazine refered to in this book we were reading 'internal' cencorship. I love the idea that anything goes and i can press a page down key or whatever and be my own censor and not have to bully anyone into saying only what i want to hear. But i still have to wrestle with my own blindness and stupidity and tendency to think in familiar patterns. I might miss a lot if i don't try on a little bit various styles of judgement to see whether or not i like them. FidoNews 10-45 Page: 3 07 Nov 1993 ======================================================================== Articles ======================================================================== Sysop Liability for Enroute (and/or Encrypted) Mail Mike Riddle 1:285/27 [The following article is under submission. Reproduction on computer bulletin boards is permitted for informational purposes only, provid- ing that it remains intact with copy right notice and disclaimer. Copyright (c) 1993 by Michael H. Riddle All other rights reserved.] SYSOP LIABILITY FOR ENROUTE (AND/OR ENCRYPTED) MAIL Recently email systems in general, and Fidonet in particular, have seen a great deal of debate about the potential liability of sysops for material entered on or passing through their systems. This article attempts to discuss the laws, legal issues, and court deci- sions known to bear on the subject. While the law is unsettled on the liability of sysops for netmail on their systems, enroute or otherwise, any liability attaches regardless of enroute or encrypted status. Since liability, if any, increases with actual sysop knowledge of the contents, encryption will not increase any sysop liability and may, in fact, diminish it. FACTS Many individuals operate computer bulletin boards as a hobby. Many of those bulletin boards (BBSes) are members of one or more networks, passing messages in a store-and-forward manner using the public switched telecommunications network. Many of those sysops have their BBSes configured to allow private electronic mail to be routed through their systems, either as a service to their users or as a requirement of their membership and status in the network. Traditionally, such "private" mail was stored on the system in a form that is readable by the persons or entities operating the system. Depending on the configuration and software involved, such private mail might be easily read, or might be read only if a deliberate attempt to do so was made, but in any event was available in ASCII format at some point, and/or was stored using one of many compression schemes that could be read by anyone with the proper software. As a result of relatively recent technological developments, individu- als now have the capability to encrypt data using their personal computers, without using extraordinary amounts of time. Public key cryptography systems, such as PEM or PGP, have been publicly released and are seeing increasing use. The obvious result has been the use of encryption for the contents of routed mail packets. For perhaps the first time, sysops who route mail have started inquiring about their liability for such mail, since the perception of safety that came from a technical ability to read the mail is not present with encrypted mail. FidoNews 10-45 Page: 4 07 Nov 1993 CRIMINAL LAW Sysops providing "private" mail service operate under the terms and limitations of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA) (18 U.S.C. ss 2510 et seq.). This section will, of necessity, be somewhat "legalese." I've tried to make it as readable as possible and still discuss the technical (in a legal sense) points that ought to matter to sysops investigating their legal status. Whether or not the ECPA appears to allow providers of "electronic" (as opposed to "wire") communications the legal ability to monitor the messages on their systems is a matter of some dispute. The best answer is that the law on the subject is unclear. From the act: "'wire communication' means any aural transfer ...." 18 USC 2510 (1). On the other hand, "'electronic communication' means any transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligence of any nature...." 18 USC 2510 (12). "It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for an operator of a switchboard, or an officer, employee, or agent of a provider of wire *or electronic* [Note 1: see discussion below] communication service, whose facilities are used in the trans- mission of a wire [Note 2: see discussion below] communication, to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service, except that a provider of wire communication service to the public shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service quality control checks." 18 USC section 2510(2)(a)(i) (emphasis added). One of the drafters of the act has indicated that the exception limiting "wire," but not "electronic," communication stems from the drafters' knowledge of the state of the art at that time; however, the distinction is present in the law. From this two arguments can be (and have been) made. First, that by prohibiting only providers of "wire" communications from service observing or random monitoring, the drafters did not intend "elec- tronic" communications to be subject to the same restrictions and that service observing or random monitoring of electronic communications are not prohibited. But the counter-argument is that while the law exempts "providers of wire or electronic communication service, whose facilities are used in the transmission of a ... communication, the exemption does not specifically allow for "electronic" communications, only wire. There is an internal inconsistency caused by the failure either to omit the two words *or electronic* [Note 1] or to include them [Note 2] in section 2511(2)(a) at the points indicated by my insertion of [see discussion below]. One of the drafters of the ECPA recently commented that the legisla- tive history supports the position that electronic communications were exempted from the act's general prohibitions; that is, the drafters intended to place special protections on voice, normally telephone, communications while allowing real-time monitoring of electronic communications as defined by the act. It now seems clear to me that there is a glitch in ECPA with FidoNews 10-45 Page: 5 07 Nov 1993 regard to real time access for security purposes to elec- tronic messages. 2511(2)(a) was supposed to allow monitor- ing of electronic communications for security purposes by the sysop -- the legislative history makes that clear and distinguishes monitoring of voice which is more limited. But the amendments failed, for technical reasons, to add "and electronic communications" after the single reference to "wire" -- so that the literal text now appears to read to allow this type of security- based monitoring only with regard to wire communications. There are some other argu- ments [that would allow it]--but none is as bullet proof as the section would have been if it had been written as I think all intended. This ambiguity is what led to the Department of Justice recommendation that system administrators at government computer sites place explicit disclaimers at logon, warning that keystroke monitoring or service observation might be used, if they thought they would ever want to use this technique. The above discussion applies primarily to real-time monitoring. In the only known decision construing the ECPA, the distinction between "interception" (i.e., real-time monitoring) and "access to stored communications" was essential to the holding that no "interception" had taken place. Steve Jackson Games, Inc., v. U.S. Secret Service, 816 F. Supp. 432 (W.D. Tex. 1993). However, due to the nature of store-and-forward mail, the mail remains in storage for some period, and it is clear that the sysops legally have access to the material in storage. However, sysops are limited in what they can do with their knowledge, if any, of the mail in storage. With some limited excep- tions, they may only disclose it to the sender or to the intended recipient. They are required to disclose it pursuant to court orders and subpoenas, but the ECPA gives particular instructions on how such are to be obtained. And the sysops *may*, with respect to stored communications, disclose the contents to a law enforcement agency if the contents were *inadvertently* obtained *and* appear to involve the commission of a crime. 18 USC 2702 (b)(6). The sysop also may disclose the contents of a communication "as may be necessarily incident to the rendition of the service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service." 18 USC 2702(b)(5). Deleting any mail that does not comply with the sysop's ideas of propriety or appropriateness is *not* specifically autho- rized. CIVIL LAW The ECPA also provides for civil remedies by the person aggrieved by an illegal disclosure of the contents of a private message. 18 U.S.C. 2707 et seq. Over and above those limitations, the civil laws of forfeiture gener- ally allow the government (state or federal) to seize property for which probable cause exists to believe is the instrumentality of a crime, and the lawful owner may attempt to recover in a civil action. The burden of proof is upon the person claiming the interest in the FidoNews 10-45 Page: 6 07 Nov 1993 property to prove the property was *not* the instrumentality of a crime. ANALYSIS Many sysops post some kind of disclaimer, either as a bulletin or as part of a service contract, formal or implied, that no "private" mail exists on their system. A threshold question is "what is 'private mail' for the purpose of the ECPA or any other law or civil action?" Notwithstanding any bulletin or disclaimer, almost all mail software asks or treats some messages as "private." In the Fidonet protocols, there is a defined bit in the message which gives the privacy status, thus giving rise to an expectation of privacy. Also, netmail is generally readable only by the sender, intended recipient, and the sysops involved. Interestingly, the law does not protect "private" messages. It protects *any* message that is "not public," in the words of the law, any message not "readily accessible to the general public." "'Readily accessible to the general public' means...that such communication is not (A) scrambled or encrypted; [or] (B) transmitted using modulation techniques whose essential parameters have been withheld from the public with the intention of preserving the privacy of such communica- tion...." 18 U.S.C. 2510(16). This protection would, in my opinion, include all "netmail" or "email," notwithstanding any disclaimers that "we don't have private mail." The existence of areas for public discussion, using most of the "bandwidth" of hobby BBSes, obscures the fact that the basis of the system, be it Fidonet or Internet, is electronic mail. To refer again to the ECPA: "A person or entity providing electronic communi- cation service to the public may divulge the contents of any such communication... (i) as otherwise authorized in section 2511(2)(a) [readily accessible to the general public], (ii) with the lawful consent of the originator or any addressee or intended recipient of such communication; [or] (iii) to a person employed or authorized, or whose facilities are used, to forward such communication to its destination.... 18 U.S.C. 2511(3)(b). Thus, except for messages in public discussion areas, all communi- cations stored on a BBS (that is, netmail or email) are protected, the nature of the software raising an expectation of privacy and that privacy being protected by law. Note that exception (iii) covers forwarding routed mail to the next link in the process. A thorough reading of the ECPA reveals no requirement for a sysop to voluntarily disclose the contents of a message to anybody. The law does, as noted above, allow such disclosures under limited circum- stances. What then are the sources of liability for sysops for messages stored on their systems? In the area of criminal law, liability might attach as a conspirator, co-conspirator, accessory or accomplice. Note, however, that a "mens rea," a criminal intent, is generally required for criminal liability. FidoNews 10-45 Page: 7 07 Nov 1993 In the area of civil forfeitures, the mere fact that probable cause existed to believe the system was an instrumentality of a crime is all that is required for the seizure; however, as a practical matter, seizures seem almost always to occur when there is probable cause (as seen by the judicial system) to believe the owner is guilty of some- thing. How might a sysop protect themselves? First, note that disclosure to law enforcement requires that the contents be inadvertently obtained. An argument might exist that disclosure to law enforcement is also allowed by the language that the sysop may disclose the contents of a communication "as may be necessarily incident to the rendition of the service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provid- er of that service," 18 USC 2702(b)(5). The fact exists, however, that the statute in other places specifically says the contents must be inadvertently obtained to allow disclosure to law enforcement. As a practical matter it might not matter, but one argument might be that the sysop should *not* routinely monitor the contents, since disclo- sure to law enforcement is only specifically authorized when knowledge is inadvertent. The argument can be made that, with respect to netmail, routed, direct or crash, BBSes look most like common carriers, and therefore are, or should be, exempt from liability for their contents. This argument is strengthened when the BBS routinely gives access to routed netmail to all users, or to any user who asks for it. This is because a true common carrier has an obligation to handle traffic for anyone who meets the requirements of the tariffs. Conversely, the BBS looks less like a common carrier if relatively few users can access netmail. If routed mail is added into the equation, the BBS begins to look more like a relay point in a common carrier scheme when it grants relay privileges to more and more other systems. Note that in Cubby v. Compuserve, 776 F. Supp. 135 (S.D.N.Y. 1991), the court held Compuserve not liable for material on their system unless they were shown to have actual knowledge and did not take appropriate action. The court found them to be like booksellers, who are similarly immune unless actual knowledge is shown. If sysops make a practice, or state as their practice, the routine viewing of all material on their system, the qualified immunity they arguably have is destroyed. ENCRYPTION (finally) Note that whether or not the message was encrypted did not figure in any of the above analysis, except that there is a reasonable presump- tion that if it were encrypted it was not "readily accessible to the general public." As applied to PEM and PGP, this would, it seems, exclude "signed" mail as long as it was not "encrypted" as well. When considering the impact of encryption, we must note that normally for criminal law to attach, knowledge (intent) is a prerequisite. For seizure, there must at least be probable cause that the system was used in the planning or commission of a crime. In either of those cases, with respect to the sysop, encrypted messages tend to disprove the elements: you can't show knowledge if the sysop can't read the FidoNews 10-45 Page: 8 07 Nov 1993 traffic, and you can't prove the system was used in a crime if you can't read the traffic. Law enforcement might be able to show the encrypted contents were illegal if they could obtain the decrypted messages and trace back the route; however, if a system ran in "pass-through" mode there would at least be a question of proving the system was actually used. If the system ran in toss and rescan, and if the message hadn't deleted due to age or number of messages, then you could show the message was on the system. But you still couldn't show the sysops had knowledge, making it less likely they would be perceived as somehow "guilty" of something. This last point is enhanced if it can be shown that the system routinely routed mail for any and all parties. CONCLUSION The question of sysop liability for messages stored on or passing through their system is unsettled. Sysop liability might attach as part of a criminal act, but knowledge is required and the fact of encryption would, when the sysop could not read the message, tend to disprove knowledge. Liability might attach in the form of civil forfeiture, but again lack of knowledge makes the sysop appear less "blameworthy." While guilt is not an element of civil forfeiture, the conventional wisdom is that forfeiture is only used when guilt of some kind has attached, at least in the mind of law enforcement, to the owner of the property. The more a sysop and system look like a common carrier, handling traffic without knowledge of the contents, the less likely they are to be subject to some sort of liability for their actions. Finally, the use of public key encryption does not appear increase their liability, and might in some circumstances decrease it. For the reasons stated above, it is my conclusion that systems routing mail should use pass-through where available, and should specifically allow, and even encourage, the use of public key encryption as a measure to limit their liability in case they are used in some ques- tionable manner. [The author is an attorney licensed to practice in the state and federal courts of Nebraska. While he has studied the issues fairly extensively, the comments apply generally to persons within the United States and he is not giving legal advice to any particular person. Finally, this memorandum does not address International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR 120 ff) applicable to the export and/or import of cryptographic software. No one should rely upon the following without consulting their own attorney for advice on their particular question or problem.] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Online Home Educator's Support Network by Ronald J. Bowden FIDO 1:207/210 As Home Education grows, the needs and goals of those involved are changing. Imagine - a few years ago, one of the primary goals of FidoNews 10-45 Page: 9 07 Nov 1993 a support group was to locate another Home Educator in the same county, and what an astounding find if one were actually in the same city. Now several groups of Home Educators exists in most major cities and the need is one of learning how to assist one another and get along together in a relationship of support and understanding. Just a few years ago, most people in our communities had never heard of Home Education. Now it is difficult to find anyone that doesn't personally know at least one Home Schooling family. We are past the point of introducing Home Schooling to our communities; now we must become a viable part of them! As home education grows, so does the burden of those in leadership. Leaders have a special mission: constantly giving of ones self to guide others. This guidance may be in the form of counseling on how to home educate, working to develop a good image of home education in the community, organizing group events and setting policies and keeping track of legal issues, or just listening and encouraging a new home schooling parent. HomeNet - the Online Support Network - offers encouragement and help to Home Educators. Each leader has different needs, depending on his area of the world, type of group, leadership experience and how much help from within their own group is available. Our focus is to provide information and encouragement, and most of all, a connection to others that share your call to leadership. It is impossible for us to meet all the needs of each leader or home educator but by joining together we can meet those needs. HomeNet offers a variety of information to aid Home Educators. We are developing and maintaining a list of Home Education related BBSs across the world. If you are a Home Education focused BBS or if Home Education plays a part on your system please forward information so when we receive inquiries from your area they can be referred. We are attempting to gather the best in educational shareware and public domain programs to aid the Home Educator. We are constantly on the look out for programs and products that will benefit home schoolers. We offer several conferences from different networks on Home Education and are presently in the infant stages of establishing the Home Educators Network dedicated to the support of Home Schoolers. If you are interested in becoming a part of this new but soon to be viable source of information in the Home Education Community FREQ HOMENET.APP from 1:207/210 or mail a self-addressed stamped envelope to 14962 Bear Valley Road, Suite G-242, Victorville, CA 92392 for a hard copy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- TVNet is public/ALLFIX_REQ echo by Todd Vierling (1:371/46, 2001:2001/0) Of course you probably wonder what the 2001:2001/0 is. Zone 2001 is where "my own" private network lives. But due to a few sysops and FidoNews 10-45 Page: 10 07 Nov 1993 users here and there wanting these specialised echos, TVNet has gone public. TVNet is a Fido/QWK technology based network that is not meant to preempt FidoNet or any other network. Mainly, TVNet is just a smaller network to hold echos that "just aren't good enough yet" for the FidoNet backbone. Sysops in TVNet that do not have a FidoNet node number are seriously frowned upon; TVNet is meant as a supplement of FidoNet only. So why say this in the Snooze? (This is not a good term; Sylvia, Don, and Tim put together a VERY nice newsletter...) Mainly to publicize TVNet's ALLFIX_REQ echo. The moderator of the FILE_REQ echo has declared that Allfix search requests are not allowed in that echo. The ALLFIX_REQ echo has been in TVNet since before TVNet went public, but it seems that this echo may become popular. What is Allfix? Allfix handles mail and file networks like most tossers and Tick programs but the feature mentioned above that many other Allfix-clone programs now have the ability to do is search filelists from requests posted in an echomail area and automatically reply back stating where the files are available for FREQ. This can seriously clutter an echo not designed for it and so ALLFIX_REQ was created, but was not originally intended to become public. But the availability of such a feature can also greatly increase communication (isn't it those Newton commercials that say all we need is more communication?). TVNet still has <10 nodes but is growing. Of course, TVNet has more than just the ALLFIX_REQ echo. Others available: [List updated 31-Oct-93] Current message echos (all currently low traffic, of course): ALLFIX_REQ Allfix and allfix-clone file requests CLASSIC_COMP Classic Computers (C64/128, TI, Atari XL, Apple II, etc) CLASSIC_SALE Classic computers for sale or trade COMPUTER_WAR Computer war! Let it all out, as long as it's CLEAN. ECHO_SUGGEST New echo suggestions and TVNet comments INTER_PLAT Inter-platform development/programming ODD_PROG_LANG Odd programming languages TVNET_SYSOPS TVNet sysops echo. For SYSOPS only; required reading 8^) (new echos, other announcements) Current file echos: CLASSIC_C64 C64/C128 file distribution network INTER_FILES Inter-platform development files For a more complete information package about TVNet, FReq magic-name TVNET from 1:371/46. I don't anticipate linkupos outside the U.S. until hubs become established, but if you want to hookup anyway I'd be glad to feed. Also until hubs are established nodes will have to distribute echos amongst themselves or by once a week polls to 1:371/46 (2001:2001/0). Hopefully in the near future some Usenet FidoNews 10-45 Page: 11 07 Nov 1993 newsgroups can be gated in for the Fido community to read, and maybe other ehos from different networks can be gated too. But whatever the case, TVNet has room for expansion. And, as a last note, TVNet's credo: "We will never forget Tom Jennings." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- +-----ADVERTISEMENT-----------ADVERTISEMENT-----------ADVERTISMENT-----+ | | | ICEA ECHO NOW AVAILABLE | | | | This echo is part of the communications network of the | | International Computer End-Users' Alliance | | and is to provide a means for all computer users, personal | | and corporate to voice concerns about unfair trade and marketing | | practices within the industry, standards and compatibilities, | | support issues and like subjects of interest to computers users. | | | | The International Computer End-Users' Alliance is a newly founded | | membership-driven organization, committed to establishing uniform | | standards, practices and policies to ensure fair treatment of the | | computer consumer, thus ensuring a marketplace that is fair for | | manufacuters/publishers and consumers alike. | | | | MEMBERSHIP IS NOT REQUIRED IN ICEA TO CARRY OR PARTICIPATE IN THE | | ICEA ECHO ON FIDONET. AS IS FIDONET, ICEA ECHO IS FREELY AVAILABLE. | | | | ICEA Echo is now available to interested sysops simply who wish to | | poll for it and it is hoped to have ICEA on the backbone within | | the next six months. An ICEA membership information pakage file | | is available for FREQ at 1:252/120 with the magic name ICEA | | should you wish to learn a bit more about ICEA before arranging | | to carry the echo. If you do, it is hoped you will also re-post | | this file for your users, but this posting is not necessary. | | | | To arrange a session password, contact me by Netmail at 1:252/120 | | and I will respond via DIRECT netmail with your session password. | | You will be polling for the echo at 1:252/100, a Hub in the | | Georgian Bay Net, located in Barrie, Ontario. | | | |Your interest and support is most appreciated. Thanks for considering| | the ICEA Echo! | | | | Don Kettle, Moderator | | ICEA | | | +----------------------A D V E R T I S E M E N T-----------------------+ FidoNews 10-45 Page: 12 07 Nov 1993 Consultants and Consulting Organizations Directory by Nigel Allen (1:250/438) Consultants and Consulting Organizations Directory If you run a consulting business in the United States or Canada, you may want to get it listed free of charge in the Consultants and Consulting Organizations Directory. To request a questionnaire for the directory, just write to the following address: Consultants and Consulting Organizations Directory Editorial Services Limited P.O. Box 6789 Silver Spring, Maryland 20916 telephone (301) 871-5280 fax (301) 871-9538 If you run a training business, contact the Training and Development Organizations Directory at the same address and request a questionnaire for that directory. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: andrzej bacinski (2:480/33.17) Hi! I am a young (ooops... I was young when I started to use my modem, now I am just 18) SysOp at 2:480/31. I would like to tell something to FIDONEWS' readers. I would like to tell you my recent story which has started not so long ago and it is still happening!!! I started OPEN THE SKY BBS about more than a year ago in one of the secendary schools in Warsaw. Note, I has never been a student of that school. I lent my own private modem 2400, installed required software, organised a line etc. (you know, what makeing a BBS is). I had one boy from that school to help me - Piotr Kaczorowski. He knew nothing about modeming and just a bit about computers. The BBS became a FIDO NODE. It was a great day, but that boy was really upset there was my, not his, name in NODELIST. I started to teach him about the idea of FidoNet, about using modem, mailer etc. We, it means Warsaw SysOps, organised even an examination for him for becaming a SysOp! He had to know that the most important thing (for me!) in FidoNet is - WE ARE TO HELP EACH OTHER. Now, I see how blind I was! His biggest wish was to have HIS name in NODELIST. Poor guy, thought (and thinks now!) everybody in FidoNet is looking at NODELIST thinking: "Oooo! There is a _Sir_ SysOp in Warsaw, his name is X.Y. He must be a wise man...". We know it is rubbish. For him it was not important that he had the same rank in Remote Access. One day, just a few days ago, I was given a note, that I am stupid, he (that boy) doesn't want me at all, he is much better in computers FidoNews 10-45 Page: 13 07 Nov 1993 than I am, and he wrote I am not a SysOp at 2:480/31 no more. I think it is called "rebellion" or "revolt" in English, isn't it?! The thing everybody of you would do is sending him out of BBS (Rank 0) forever... My problem is I have no phisical access to BBS computer now. (As I said I am not a student in that school). He changed every single password in the system and set my rank very low... What can I do? I informed all SysOp in Poland about that thing and asked them not to process UDRQ nor FREQ from that system. I would like to say SORRY to every FidoNet member. Sorry, I failed. I didn't teach him enough for him to understand the idea of FidoNet. Now, I feel like a small child. I was chetead because I trusted somebody!!! I hope all of you understand, that I am not upset because of loosing BBS I built myself but because of being useless to my own pupil! People who read this article/letter, please, HELP EACH OTHER!!! (P.S. For every single word in this article I have a proof.) Andrzej Bacinski 2:480/31 ??????? 2:480/33.17 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply to "The Spirit of Fidonet is Crying, Part 1" Curtis Jewell, 1:296/7 I don't see Tony Dunlap's reasoning (in Fidonews 10-44) about why public key cryptography programs should not be used to clear-sign echomail messages, and allow convienent verification, as suggested in Mike Riddle's proposal in FidoNews 10-42. His reasons seem to be three in number. 1: Clear-signing would not be useful to many echomail users. Answer: This is the one point I can see being correct. The use of clear-signing is not appropriate for all users or on all echos. This is why the proposal as drafted allows the moderator to state if he allows or requires clear-signing of messages, or does not want clear-signed messages in his echo. 2: Clear-signing would increase long-distance fees by an inordinate amount because of the additional clear-signing information. Answer: If you had a large amount of traffic in an echo where clear- signing is required, it probably would, but then, a sysop can vote with the feet and not carry the echo. The most common case, however, would be an echo that allowed clear-signing, but didn't require it. I am going to assume Tony Dunlap's example of a 300 message packet, but with 10% (a guess) of the messages being clear-signed. In this case, only 9,450 FidoNews 10-45 Page: 14 07 Nov 1993 bytes would be added to his message packet. A good compressor should decrease this to less than 5,000 bytes, which shouldn't be a real problem unless a sysop was calling long-distance at 2400 baud, and then it would only add one minute to the long-distance bill every so often. 2: Clear-signing would increase long-distance fees by an inordinate amount because of the neccessity for transmission of public-keys. Answer: Public keys can also be made available through file-request or through echos (file or message) that are dedicated for the purpose. A sysop would not be required to carry these echos, so long-distance fees would be increased by this method only if a system operator wanted to get a public keys echo or request public keys. This is my humble opinion. Send messages of support or (nice) disagreements to 1:296/7. If you have a SecureMail hub in your net, send it via him, as I support the SecureMail concept, and am a SecureMail hub myself. Send flames to a:\dev\nul, 1:18/98, 2:2/0, 2:24/0, or 2:25/0. Those last four addresses deserve whatever flames they get for their previous actions, IMHO. (I was kidding about sending them mine.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The I95 (Interstate 95) and WHIRLYBIRDS Echoes By Rick Lembree (1:326/209.0) I95 (Short for Interstate 95) is a "chat" echo that was initially conceived by some Maine and Massachusettes SysOps to attempt a link of the Eastern states along I-95 for informal discussion. Good idea, I think, but the only problem was the SysOps who started all this either dropped out of Fido or disappeared off the face of the Earth, essentially leaving the echo abandoned and in sorry shape. The links between Massachusettes and New Hampshire/Maine were broken for a long time, and I was trying to figure out why. When that problem was solved and I got the links restored, I took it upon myself to enter it into the Elist and try to get some activity going again. The good news is, it worked! Maine, New Hampshire and Massachusettes are now enjoying a flame free chat echo with pleasing, friendly conversation about anything under the sun (Within reason, of course... flames are 'nipped in the bud' and no vulgarities are allowed.). Because I have operated Harbour Lights since 1984, you can rest assured that this is not a fly-by-night echo, or that I will abandon this anytime soon. I am as serious about this as one can be about getting an echo on the backbone and maintaining it. The bad news is, I'm having trouble linking the rest of the states along "The Big Road" without attempting to go backbone. We want to try to keep this as exclusive to the BBS's along Interstate 95 as possible (for what may or may not be obvious reasons). Nevertheless, I have requested backbone status (I think - my feed's hard drive went `South' and I'm not sure if even my areafix went through before I sent in the request via ZEC. If that's the case, I'll do it again...) FidoNews 10-45 Page: 15 07 Nov 1993 Please feel free to contact me if you are interested in this echo and would like to participate until we are able to get this backboned. It is available now via NET101 and NET326. If you are interested, in helping us get this on the backbone,please contact your NEC to forward your request to the REC. While I am at it and hopefully have your attention, I am also making an attempt to get WHIRLYBIRDS on the backbone. This is an echo for helicopter enthusiasts, from the full size "war birds", to the radio controlled variety and everything in between. We currently have about fifteen BBS's linked up and the major players here are mostly pilots and Vietnam Veterans who either rode or flew in the war. Again, you are all cordially invited to pick up this echo from either NET 101 or NET 326. We have many other BBS's linked throughout the U.S. so contact me via NetMail and I will try to find a BBS closer to you, that is already linked up. As with I95, this hopefully will be a temporary link, until you are able to obtain this through the backbone. Thanks. Rick Lembree, Harbour Lights BBS - Oldest BBS in the State of Maine - Est. 1984 (207) 967-3719 16.8K DHST - 1:326/209.0@FidoNet.org Moderator of: GEOWORKS, I95, BOS_AMIGA, NE_AMIGA, NEAMY_SYSOP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Free Listings in the Encyclopedia of Associations by Nigel Allen (1:250/438) Free Listings in the Encyclopedia of Associations People who start new new non-profit associations (including othernets, lobbying groups and associations having nothing to do with BBSes) should get their group listed, free of charge, in the Encyclopedia of Associations, so that prospective members, journalists and researchers can get in touch with them. Groups based in the U.S. should write to the following address and ask to be listed: Editor Encyclopedia of Associations Gale Research Inc. 835 Penobscot Building Detroit, MI 48226-4094 Telephone (313) 961-2242 Fax (313) 961-6815 Groups based outside the United States should instead get listed in International Organizations, a directory published by the same company. Its address is: Editor International Organizations FidoNews 10-45 Page: 16 07 Nov 1993 Gale Research Inc. 835 Penobscot Building Detroit, MI 48226-4094 U.S.A. Telephone +1 313 961-2242 Fax +1 313 961-6815 As well, groups based outside the United States may also want to get listed in single-country association directories published in their own country, such as the Directory of Associations in Canada. Any librarian should be able to tell you how to get in touch with your country's national association directory, if one exists. Most large libraries have a copy of the Encyclopedia of Associations in hard copy or CD-ROM, but it is probably too expensive for someone to buy for home use. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Glad to be of service This is kind of funny. David Cupp (1:2215/150.2) suddenly finds himself in the wrong forum, whines rather pendantically about it, and then acts dismayed when the Moderator fixes his problems for him. If I said that it's kind of cute, it wouldn't be so badly incorrect. dc> It appears that this echo is nothing more than an excuse for dc> foul mouthed teens and children, who want to use FidoNet as dc> an Adult Equivalent Echo for Minors.. dc> I for one can't understand how this has happened and why it dc> has been permitted to continue.. Relax, David. Moderator merely provided the service of delinking you from a forum you didn't want to be linked to in the first place. The Moderator is to be commended for helping people who find themselves in the wrong echo to quickly find the exit. "Glad to be of service" is the phrase, I believe. dc> However, there is an issue that needs to be dealt with by dc> FidoNet Officials.. These "FidoNet Officials" wouldn't be of the "Corrupt" variety, by any chance? I merely ask. I'm also curious why you couldn't just file a policy complaint somewhere. Hopefully the point has not been lost in the rhetoric. For someone who wanted out and was shown the door, you sure do complain greatly about getting exactly what you asked for. The Skeptic Tank. 1:102/890.0 Rev Fredric L. Rice, RCSG. "The use of pepper is the only blasphemy." - Robert Curry FidoNews 10-45 Page: 17 07 Nov 1993 Just Say Yes to ",UUCP," Stanton McCandlish, 1:109/1103, NitV-DC I'd like to say I am fully supportive of the use of UUCP in the "sysop name" field. Without this, gating mail to Internet through the UUCP gates is a major hassle. I don't think anyone really cares if the sysop's real name is in that field. *I* for one could care less who J. Random Sysop is when I am using the UUCP gates; they are not their for socializing, but, like anonymous remailers and Internet email --> Usenet conference gateways, are there for a specific, utilitarian purpose. It strikes me as odd that in this week's nodelist, Jim Northrup's name appears as "Jim Northr up"; this is certainly not his real name, yet I don't see anyone having fits about it. :) To sum up, use of UUCP as a name field will save many people a lot of time, and I'd like to point out that a precedent has already been set by Editor (1:1/23) and some other "alias" nodes that are well established and quite useful. FidoNet "names" should be functional first, and "policy correct" last, IMNERHO. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Growth of Modern Trends in Organisational Control OR My bitch about fanatics, censorship and the hole FIDO's currently falling into russell cook 3:713/801@fidonet Well people this is the first note I've ever written here. Being a generally apathetic person I've never bothered to have my 2 cents worth at the crap that goes on in here. But ...... FIDO is falling apart.... Everyone seems more interested in telling others what to do than running their own system. In the US in particular it seems everyone is more concerned about having a nice set of rules so that they can tell everyone else what to do. You poor guys have too many intolerants like Steve Winters and too many intefering do-gooders like David Cupp for your own good. To Steve I have nothing to say - I hate fanatics end of story. To David. Wake up man.. I've never seen or want to see the Flame echo but I don't condemn it. What happened to it's a free country/world ? If you don't like what is going on there go home. But don't become the big brother that has to decide what's ok for others and tell them how to run their shop. I hate censorship next to fanaticsm (;-). What one person believes is immoral, bad or destructive another may love. Just because YOU don't like doesn't make it bad. FidoNews 10-45 Page: 18 07 Nov 1993 And, David as for a veiled threat to suit someone because you don't like the content of an echo - that's pathetic. Can't anyone in the US [and yes I'm pickin on you guys cos' you lead the word in this - and the rest of stupid world is following you - us included :-(] live your life without calling for a lawyer every 5 minutes. I thought the best "democracy" in the world was supposed to be the land of the free. Free to do what ? Cower in behind your screens because you can't do what you want in you own home without some stupid bastard wanting to suit ya ? David excercise some common sense turn the echo off. Raise your children to be *reasonable* and responisble people who'll have their little flings/experiments with life as they're growing up but turn out all right with decent guidance. Don't expect everyone else to assume responsibility for your kids though. They didn't have them :-). But please don't resort to forcing YOUR views on others. If you believe swearing/pornography/religon or whatever is not suitable teach your kids that and why. But don't expect everyone else to agree or to want to help you teach them. That's part of what being an individual in a free country's about - free to have your own views hobbies etc. And free to be responsible for yourself but not everyone else. Now to Zone 2. What a croc of shit. I think the best thing for FIDO is to fragment into an internet style network but with NO control. That'll remove the need for either the Classic versus Wrestlemania FIDOs from Europe and maybe do away with half the calls for rules coming out of the US. It'll even allow breaking of the hallowed geographic rule. Interpretation and application of this rule has caused more upset and debate in Z3 and now Z2 than anything else. At least we didn't have the struggles Z2 is having though. Our Z3C may be a lawyer but he ain't half bad (well Trev we have actually agreed on a couple of things this year :-). What's wrong with people? FIDO itself does very little. It doesn't control echoes - the moderators do. It doesn't control where you get echoes from - not in policy 4 anyway - that's your choice for who you ring. FIDO doesn't exist on netmail as all the echos far outstrip it. So why do we actually need FIDO ? Well I can't see that we do really. As long as someone maintains the nodelists, and I can get my echo mail then I wouldn't really know what happened to FIDO. Hang on isn't that waht FIDO is supposed to be anyway ? Why all this drama within Z2 ? A few control freaks and egos and a mass rebellion - sad isn't it when all it's about is half a FidoNews 10-45 Page: 19 07 Nov 1993 dozen numbers and who can supply e-mail to someone else. Back to the US, for a country that fought a revolution to be free of outside control you guys seem to have spent the last few hundred years trying to re-impose worse control on yourselves - are you lot masochistic or what ? Can't people work together on what they can agree on and agree to disagree on the rest ? But generally leave each other the hell alone. If you don't like what Fred is doing then don't have anything to do with him. Why is this such a big thing with me ? Well I don't care what anyone else does as long as it doesn't injure me. Consequently I don't want anyone else interfering in my right of free speech and expression either. Well this is my bitch for the last decade. I've got it out of my system and it may not have made sense but *I* feel better :-). I just hope there's a few other anarchists/free thinkers out there that also agree - censorship is BAD in any form period! Because once it starts it never stops - look at the debate re: the US Federal Gov't and data encryption. Once it was Reds under the beds now it's anything that moves. Final point - Why did I pick on the US so bad ? Well much to *my* concern it seems that rest of the world is copying all the mistakes you guys have already made :-(. All the stupid lawsuits about nothing are starting to appear here. The increase in crime, street violence you name it. It's not bad here but it's not getting better or staying the same and I think FIDO is suffering the same symptoms as society in general. I just hope it all hangs together till I'm outta here 'cos I can't see it getting fixed in a hurry :-(. Why won't I fix it? Hell I know that you can't get 3 people in the same room to agree on anything and you expect a country to ? :-) Final final point :-). Matt Whelan has resigned as IC - apparently as he felt he'd done his bit (no argument there we in OZ have been lucky to have Matt's input to FIDO). But did he also see the writing on the wall for the current FIDO structure ? regards russell cook 3:713/801@FIDOnet ---------------------------------------------------------------------- A [for once brief] Response to A Few Articles from FidoNews 10.44 Stanton McCandlish, EFF Online Activist, mech@eff.org NitV-DC BBS SysOp, 1:109/1103 Says David Cupp <1:2215/150.2> in "For the Record", in reference to the FLAME echo: FidoNews 10-45 Page: 20 07 Nov 1993 "I would like to see measures taken to insure that only Adults and those with Parental or Guardian Consent are found on this 'R' rated Flame echo!", and "Sorry John [Clifton], I just don't see it that way. The children I teach are my own and they will learn and respect the English Language rather than Slang! (Street)" First off, why do people presume that the use of puerile scatological talk is somehow "adult" in nature? If anything, it's rather juvenile. Secondly, what is "Street"? That is not a language I've ever heard of. Slang is as much a part of the English language as anything else. Slang is simply a modern term for "new words that aren't in the dictionary yet, and which are not confined to a technical or professional subculture, and thus do not qualify as jargon". Using or not using what you term "slang" has nothing to do with respect for a language. Learning slang is in fact one of the most difficult and important parts of learning any language, since slang is the way people, rather than text books, use language. I strongly recommend some anthropology and linguistics courses if you find the time. Secondly "R ratings" are an artifact of the Motion Picture Industry Association of America, and apply only to movies. Such ratings have nothing to do with online communication. At any rate, I can attest the utter veracity of FLAME moderator [isn't that a bit of an oxymoron?] Mr. Clifton's statement: "I teach school and I can assure you that what a student hears in the hallways EVERY DAY makes this echo look like Disneyland." Next, Tony Dunlap <1:2220/30>, in "The Spirit of Fidonet is crying: Part 1, Public Key Cryptography", treats us to his ideas of why FidoNet should remain in the networking paleolithic by banning cryptographic mail. "Public Key Cryptography? Why? Anything so sensitive or important as to require this type of security has no buisness in echomail, even clear signed messages." This is one of the most common fallacies about the use of cryptography: "If you encrypt, you must have something to hide". By this logic, the use of envelopes rather than postcards should be outlawed, all houses should have see-thru walls, non-transparent clothing should be banned, and all phones should be connected to loudspeakers that blare your conversations to any and all listeners in your neighborhood. The second possible error is that as far as I can remember, no one is advocating the use of encrypted mail in echos, only in routed netmail, plus the use of clearsigning or at very least digital signatures in echomail. Digital signatures are probably the only tool that can come close to ensuring that an electronic message actually originated from the person it appears to originate from. This may not sound like a big deal, but please refer to previous issues of FidoNews, in which incidents of impersonation that have caused great difficulties have been reported. If you have access to internet, you may with to join the crypto-privacy conference (send mail to cypherpunks-request@toad.com), and participate in the serious discussions ongoing in that forum concerning FidoNews 10-45 Page: 21 07 Nov 1993 the potential problems of a network in which no identity can be verified. "Why not? It serves no purpose for 99.99% of the readers of an echo." This again presumes that the encrypted traffic will be passed through echomail, which is unlikely, since almost all online conferences in any network have rules (implicit or explicit) against posting anything that is not of relevance to at least a few of the participants, and to keep private mail private. This is taken as a given by the entire online world. This "Why not" point also presumes an echo with a readership of about 20,000 (if I've done my math right), since it takes 2 to converse via encrypted mail. (20,000 - 2 = 19,998, or 99.99%) I find that to be rather extreme exaggeration. "And just how much would this cost us, who pay long distance charges to transfer the echoes around the world? " Not much. And the phrasing of this is extremely misleading. With few exceptions, we ALL pay such charges, in one way or another, even BBS users, who typically pay a fee for use of the BBS. Those that pay for echomail are not some downtrodden minority in need of relief. "Using the example provided by Mr. Riddle, (Fnews 1042) I came up with 315 bytes extra per message. Using my rather modest average of 300 messages per day that comes to 94,500 bytes extra per day (That would be an increase in my packet sizes of over 25%. How many Sysops would like that?). And that's not including extra messages produced by people posting their public keys." This assumes that all messages will be encrypted, which is an entirely unrealistic guesstimation. And I for one would not mind; I would rather my users encrypted (in netmail I route for them, not in echomail, unless an echo is set aside specifically for that purpose), and have them cover the cost, than have no one encrypt. As for the oh-so-terrible waste of bandwidth taken up by the rather rare posting of public keys, I suppose you are right, since gosh that does take away all the time and money we could spend yelling at eachother about the proper way to pronounce ".GIF", bickering over the virtues of Windows vs Geoworks, and kvetching about how much we hate Rush Limbaugh. How dare anyone suggest that privacy is more important that the truckload of worthless flames people post evertime they turn on their PC? "We live with an occasional grunged message. We live with spurious dupes. Why can't we live with less than 100% guarantee of authenticity?" WHY SHOULD WE HAVE TO? 'We live with AIDS and cancer, so blah why don't we just quit funding of medical research altogether? What a waste of time and money.' That's about what that statement would appear to amount to, IMNERHO. "Eventually the software will evolve to handle all three problems to a very high degree." FidoNews 10-45 Page: 22 07 Nov 1993 Precisely. It is doing that now. It's called encryption [to handle the 3rd problem of course, not the first 2], and you are fighting it tooth and nail for no apparent reason, as are a frightening number of people who do not understand what privacy and encryption really are, and why they might want them. "I, personally, can wait..." Fine, you are free to do so. The rest of us can't, and won't. Those of you who might disagree with censorship and the banning of cryptography, please support the efforts of the FidoNet SecureMail system, and the EFF for that matter. You can get more info on SecureMail by contacting G.K. Pace <1:374/26>, and on the Electronic Frontier Foundation by FREQing magicname EFF from 1:109/1103, or sending a query to ask@eff.org. SecureMail is an alternative netmail-routing hub backbone working to bring crypto to FidoNet. EFF is a non-profit civil-rights-in-cyberspace advocacy organization, working on many issues from sysop liability to removing government restrictions on the use and export/import of cryptography. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Articles of Faith From: Bill Birrell (2:257/900) We have heard that Europe is in turmoil again, so what's new about that? Yugoslavia came unglued months ago, and it looks as if somebody is actually going to try to answer the Irish question. However, the even tenor of everyday life continues, and the recent economic disasters are dwindling away to mere calamities. The scary stories can't be true, can they? Absolutely right! Europe is slowly recovering from the worst idiocies of its agricultural policies and is beginning to put its house in order. So what are these disquieting tales we hear about the rape of Zone 2 of FidoNet? Are they a storm in a teacup, or are they a symptom of some malaise within FidoNet? A virus which will spread like aids and destroy our cosy little electronic community? FidoNet Europe, like FidoNet in the rest of the world relies on a document not produced by Tom Jennings, but devised by clever well-meaning people to specify the way that the net works. That document is Policy4. It was envisaged as a set of guidelines for sysops and coordinators to help them through the difficulties encountered in the day-to-day running of a network, and assumes that sysops are fundamentally good-natured and cooperative. It specifies a top-down organisation and creates checks and balances to prevent abuses by those in the top echelons of the hierarchy. It refers to technical standards which have to be observed, and is in general an all-round good-egg. Or is it? The real malaise is the document itself. It has allowed the top echelon of FidoNet Europe to be hijacked by people that are neither good-natured nor cooperative and who do not operate in a spirit of consensus, so the checks and balances have become FidoNews 10-45 Page: 23 07 Nov 1993 laughable since they allow the "packed parliament" syndrome, and provide no redress if those whose duty it is to settle disputes abuse their position to reinforce their appointees. In a word, it has become Tom's smelly crock and a charter for connivers. When no power is wielded, or when men of good will are appointed the checks and balances are fine. But, given that not all men are angels, should policy not be a little bit tougher on people who abuse their ability to compile the nodelist in order to assert a totally spurious authority not accorded them by our policy? I now ask you all to consider that the checks and balances may be totally inadequate. Take the example of a regional coordinator who makes a bad decision. It can be overturned only by appeal to a zone coordinator. If that zone coordinator, for reasons of his own, chooses to interpret our policy woodenly the regional coordinator's bad decision will be enforced despite the howling protests of the sysops in the region. I am not actually saying this has happened, but it seems likely to happen almost immediately. We need to be able to impeach any level of coordinator from the ground level of sysop by a simple majority vote. We need to remove the ability of regional coordinators to appoint unsuitable network coordinators to do their bidding. We need coordinators at all levels to be compelled to accept the results of free elections. We need maximum terms of office for even the highest levels of coordinators. There may be other things we need, but these revisions to policy are required urgently, and none of them is unreasonable. It hasn't happened to you yet, but there is nothing in our policy to prevent it. To preseve the network, I propose that we put it there forthwith. I so move. Bill Birrell FTN: 2:257/9000@fidonet internet: bill@escan.demon.co.uk UUCP: demon!escan!bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reorganisation of UK Fido ========================= Pat Winstanley 2:250/113 peewee@f113.n250.z2.fidonet.org peewee@friend.demon.co.uk Perhaps it's time someone gave a summary of events of recent months in R25 which have led to the two articles published last week. I'm sure my bias will show through, however hard I try to stop it, and I'm sure I will miss point others think I should have included.... still, here it is, as I see it: Within the past year, as far as I know, there has been no formal vote at all as to whether nodes in the region wish the region to be FidoNews 10-45 Page: 24 07 Nov 1993 curently organised in geo-nets or not, or whether or not they feel there should be a reorganisation to bring the region into compliance with Policy4. There has been one regionwide vote which asked whether the region wanted to send a proposal for the relaxation of the geo-net rule for the future. That was carried, and the proposal duly sent. As far as I know the IC asked for further details; reasons why he should grant a regional exception. I don't know if such was ever sent, but the net result is that no response has been received one way or the other, and rumour now is that the IC in question has resigned. Meanwhile, while the proposal was under consideration by the IC, the RC with the help of some others produced a plan intended to put R25 back into geo-compliance, from which it had drifted over several years. This was to be implemented if the IC did not grant the exception (which, to date, several months later, he has not). In the absence of any response either way from the IC, the plan for re-organising the region so that it will in future comply with policy4 is now going into effect, notice having been given several months ago to all involved as to timetables, detailed changes to be made and so on. Several people were unhappy with their net allocation (and there were a few hilarious mistakes in the initial net definitions, it has to be said! :-)) and these have mainly been sorted out, and borders adjusted where required. There are still a few ongoing disputes as to borders, though these seem mainly to be between adjoining NCs over territory rather than disputes with the RC. There is still some acrimony in the region, with some nodes flatly refusing to change their addresses, though it must be said that on the whole the majority of nodes are content enough with the idea of geo- nets, and are mainly protesting about being *forced* to change numbers. It is the element of force which is the central point now, not whether or not geo-nets or non-geo nets are the "better" option. This has led to the inevitable accusations and counter-accusations being flung round in the regional echo and also the arguments spilling over into other, unrelated echoes. Policy4 is being used by both sides to back up their points, often using the same para to make two opposite points! (This, by the way, resulted in the ill-judged outburst from the RC, published in here recently. What you didn't see was the equally ill-judged provocation which led to his reaction, or the just as ill-judged manner in which the "plan" was presented, nor the events which led to the formulation of the plan.....etc.) Meanwhile calls for compromise are made. This compromise basically says that those already in a "wrong" net should not have to change unless they either do so voluntarily, or leave Fido altogether. "Natural Wastage". Some nodes believe in a limited form of that - a cut-off date some months hence to allow for things like changes of stationary which might carry the current address, or perhaps shareware authors whose current address is widely circulated. Some nodes believe that every node should always and forever have the choice of which net to join, as long as the NC will accept them. Some believe that everyone should be placed in their "correct" net right now! As you can see, there is quite a range of feelings on the matter, from one FidoNews 10-45 Page: 25 07 Nov 1993 extreme, through the centre, and out to the other extreme. Everyone changing will be dual-listed for a few weeks in the nodelist and be able to keep their "old" number as an AKA for some considerable time to allow delayed mail etc to be delivered correctly, and those "old" numbers won't be reallocated in the forseeable future. At the same time, most hosts are making flexible arrangements where possible to enable net-moving nodes to receive their routed netmail from their existing and continuing chosen echomail feed. (We don't have anything much in the way of formal cost-sharing in the UK, though some people believe this reorganisation is intended to enable such by the NCs). The "split" mentioned in other articles is the creation of (so far) two completely new networks, both based on Fido initially, but in different ways and for different reasons. Basically they are intended as lists which will allow nodes to retain their old number as a primary address if they have to change in the Fido list or leave Fido altogether by refusing to change. Or so I understand.... there isn't a great deal of detail on either at the time of writing. Another recent even which should be noted (and this happened just before the RC's outburst) was that one of the nets which is to be virtually disbanded and recreated in the reorganisation held a ballot for NC amongst it's then members (some ex-members had already moved on to other nets in anticipation of the "plan" over previous weeks so did not vote). The RC refused (both before and after the vote) to appoint as NC the particular person subsequently elected, on the grounds that he would not be a member of the net in a few weeks time after reorganisation. Other events co-inciding with (or possibly caused by the) re- organisation are that the REC is resigning, and two Midnight Lines (bulk subscription based mail/file distribution phone lines) have withdrawn from Fido. Hope that helps to cover the picture. I've tried to lay out various sides, rather than my own judgements, and only the facts I'm fairly sure of having seen both sides of incidents, but no doubt I've left out something that someone feels is important, and they will no doubt come back with that next week! :-) Pat Winstanley 2:250/113 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ======================================================================== Fidonews Information ======================================================================== ------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION ---------------- Editors: Sylvia Maxwell, Donald Tees, Tim Pozar Editors Emeritii: Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell, Vince Perriello, Tom Jennings FidoNews 10-45 Page: 26 07 Nov 1993 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 128 Church St. Kitchener, Ontario Canada N2H 2S4 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.) INTERNET USERS: FidoNews is available via FTP from ftp.fidonet.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. FidoNews 10-45 Page: 27 07 Nov 1993 Asked what he thought of Western civilization, M.K. Gandhi said, "I think it would be an excellent idea". -- END ----------------------------------------------------------------------