Subj : Re: What happened?
To : Nick Andre
From : Charles Pierson
Date : Mon Nov 16 2020 06:27 pm
Hello, Nick Andre.
On 11/16/20 4:27 PM you wrote:
NA> Its really rubbing some Sysops the wrong way, having them find out
NA> that their messages are crossing over to some Internet platform
NA> they've never heard of nor feel comfortable with. This to me is
NA> no different than a Sysop who just decides to makes everything
NA> available on a Web BBS.
Any sort of change, or something new, is always going to have people that don't like it. It's a natural part of the cycle.
Telegram-Fido is as far as I can tell, following Fidonet Policy. It has a distinct Node, and is receiving Moderator permission before linking to any Echo.
Could it have been handled differently? Of course. Either the Echo Moderators, or August, who is the primary person promoting this effort, could have made announcements explaining what it is and answering questions before turning the echo on.
NA> I do not understand why all of this wasn't done either in seperate
NA> dedicated echoes for this purpose or an entire Othernet. It
NA> appears no thought at all was given as to how the Sysop would
NA> feel about it.
In this instance, yes, Telegram is a web based interface. But according to their own privacy policy, only people that are in the chat group have access to the contents of that group.
The groups, and the bot that acts as a gateway/mailer/tosser, act in the same manner as a NODE or POINT.
As I said above, it has done everything according to Policy as far as I am aware.
As far as I am aware, Sysop's are free to carry or not carry any echo they wish. I haven't seen anything stating otherwise. Nor have I seen anything about Echo Areas requiring Sysops to approve anything that Echo's moderator does within Policy.
I'm not trying to be belligerent nor argumentative, I'm simply trying to explain things to the best of my understanding.
I don't stand to benefit either way with this thing. It's something that I saw people putting together, and I think it has potential.
NA> This is not the "future" for Fido and I hope it stops soon. This
NA> is a perfect example of how not to do something and why new ideas
NA> are most often rejected.
I have said before, I agree the introduction of new echos could have been done differently.
People have questions, and I'm trying to answer them to the best of my ability, as I am made aware of them.
I'm by no means an expert on Fidonet nor Telegram, but I'm trying hard to get the best understanding I can of it all to hopefully get a general understanding of things all around.
I'm happy to try and answer any questions anyone has.
I wouldn't suggest contacting me by Netmail on my point to Your system Nick, as I still haven't figured out why it's going to my user account on your BBS instead of my point address. But I'll answer from there as well, it just might be a little slower replying.
NA> Nick --- Renegade vY2Ka2 * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about
NA> gladiators? (1:229/426)
--
Best regards!
Posted using Hotdoged on Android
--- Hotdoged/2.13.5/Android
* Origin: Houston, TX (1:229/426.67)
