Subj : Echo Rules
To : Dan Clough
From : Lee Lofaso
Date : Fri Sep 20 2024 05:16 pm
Hello Dan,
[..]
WD>> And know you desire me to deal with an echomail-issue based on my
WD>> P4-status? Really?
DC> Let's look at this from a different angle.
We all know P4 has no status as any kind of official document
in Fidonet. After all, not a single soul (living or dead) has
ever signed it. Not that anybody cares.
DC> Is it really an echomail-issue?
Why should it be? By your own admission, echomail is just
another flavor of netmail. Whatever that means.
DC> Or is it a Sysop/NC/RC issue where a Sysop is allowing access to an area
DC> designated for Sysops only, to a non-Sysop?
Oh, come now. We are all sysops, of one kind or another. Some are
more permanent rather than probationary, but all are sysops.
DC> Section 9.9 of P4 states that "echomail is simply a different flavor of
DC> netmail, and is therefore covered by Policy."
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. But that does not
make echomail (or netmail) any kind of rose.
DC> So maybe this is a case of a Sysop having his system mis-configured
DC> *knowingly*, and allowing behavior that annoys other FidoNet Sysops. See
DC> P4 section 1.2.1.1 and section 2.1.3.
There are two parts to that silly little "rule" in P4 -
* Thou shalt not be too easily annoyed.
Oops. I guess you forgot about that part.
DC> Also please re-read section 1.3.5, with particular attention to the word
DC> "persists".
Oh, relax. I find your rants quite amusing. Please continue ...
[..]
DC> The real question here is whether what I'm talking about is an echomail
DC> issue, or a policy/procedural issue. A Sysop is allowing unauthorized
DC> access to a Sysop-only area.
Participants own the echo. As a participant of this echo, you have
the same rights and privileges as all other participants. That is how
things work, at least in this part of the Fidoverse.
WD>> Also I'm a firm believer in freedom of speech, that doesn't mean
WD>> insulting someone is OK. Bjorn is not a wanker, and neither are you. So
WD>> pls cut the vocabulary.
DC> I give as good as I get.
We are all waiting, with bated breath, for you to start showing it.
WD>> The person "Lee Lofaso", whether real or fake, does not bother me, does
WD>> not impress me, does not interest me, does not annoy me ... because I
WD>> figured out in order to be annoyed, you need to want to be annoyed.
WD>> There are a lot more important things to deal with than a self-declared
WD>> ghost spreading AI-khrap.
DC> Not everyone is annoyed by the same things.
And yet there are some who are always bothered by the same things.
WD>> Really, you need to sit down and carefully consider what freedom of
WD>> speech really is, because if someone cannot go beyond your self-imposed
WD>> borders, then you are no advocate of it.
WD>> There's no reason to deal with Bjorn, I'm certain he is a nice human
WD>> being trying to deal with the kind of miseries of life that some here
WD>> cannot even begin to grasp.
DC> Maybe he is a nice human in Real Life. In FidoNet he is not.
It all depends on which version of me you are talking about.
Sometimes I even wonder myself which version of myself I might be.
There used to be a site online that I could find out which version
of me existed at any given time (howmanyofme.com) but that site
is no longer up and running. So now I have no way of knowing which
version of me is real and which version is not.
WD>> I hope in a few weeks or months I'll be able to hop to Sweden, have a
WD>> few drinks with Bjorn and publish a long overdue photo of him and I
WD>> sharing a beer. Just like I went to eat pizza with Janis. breakfasted
WD>> with Pablo Kleinman, dined with Ron Dwight, shared beers with Basilis
WD>> Tsapas (I think), went to see Bob Bashe who all figured at some time I
WD>> was an incompetent demon ...
DC> I hope you get a chance to do that, too. I'd probably get along with
DC> him too, over a beer and non-Fido conversation. Not really relevant to
DC> the discussion though.
Freedom of speech is all-inclusive, not pick and choose.
WD>> Freedom of speech, Dan, and friendships. There are people who can't
WD>> mutually stand each other's guts, but I like 'm all. Some Russian
WD>> sysops I'd love to meet (and teach m how to drink beer), also go to
WD>> Ukraine, go to the Crimea and drink some of their wines (and the
WD>> destilates, so I'm told)...
DC> Freedom of speech is also pretty much not relevant here.
Then move to Russia, and sign up for Putin's brigade. I hear
Steven Seagal is training new recruits ...
DC> That has to do with the powers of a Government over a country's citizens.
Fidonet sysops are not a government, and never will be.
Steven Seagal is not a Fidonet sysop, although I could be
mistaken. But he is a friend of Vladimir Putin.
DC> Not really what we're talking about.
Yes, it is.
WD>> Some advice: why not try to learn from Bjorn, he has stuff to give and
WD>> is very generous. I'm sure you are too...
DC> I'm always willing to learn. The problem in this case is that the
DC> person in question cannot put aside his biases and talk in a civil
DC> manner, without politics, innuendo and "witty" barbs.
Everything we do in life is political. It is a part of who
and what we are. A social and political creature.
For Life,
Lee
--
GOP thinks banning guns won't elminate guns.
GOP thinks banning abortion will elininate abortions.
--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
* Origin:
news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)
