F I D O N E W S -- Vol.11 No.30 (25-Jul-1994)
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| A newsletter of the | ISSN 1198-4589 Published by: |
| FidoNet BBS community | "FidoNews" BBS |
| _ | +1-519-570-4176 |
| / \ | |
| /|oo \ | Small animal psychology and |
| (_| /_) | Spiritual guidance Department: |
| _`@/_ \ _ | Rev. Richard Visage 1:163/150 |
| | | \ \\ | |
| | (*) | \ )) | Editors: |
| |__U__| / \// | Donald Tees 1:221/192 |
| _//|| _\ / | Sylvia Maxwell 1:221/194 |
| (_/(_|(____/ | Tim Pozar |
| (jm) | Newspapers should have no friends. |
| | -- JOSEPH PULITZER |
+----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Submission address: editors 1:1/23 |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Internet addresses: |
| |
| Sylvia --
[email protected] |
| Donald --
[email protected] |
| Tim (not-now and always will be IC) Pozar --
[email protected] |
| |
| submissions=>
[email protected] |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 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...................................................... 2
Subject: SCUMREP.ART........................................ 3
Going on Vacation and Putting A BBS on Autopilot............ 4
Access/Freedom for the People...Spread the word!............ 5
Grassroots Politics: Online and Organized................... 6
On Electronic Frontier Organizations........................ 8
Cryptography and Digital Signatures......................... 10
More thoughts on recent articles............................ 12
Dear mad Emilia............................................. 13
centrefold.................................................. 14
K-12 Student Records: Privacy at Risk....................... 15
Complaint about the language using in FidoNet............... 18
A reply to 'Politiking for politics sake'.................. 19
RC25, and recent submission to FidoNews..................... 21
Mail to you from Paul Dickie................................ 26
BBS-PR16.ZIP Released....................................... 28
Fido Crucifiction........................................... 28
Hi Sylvia,.................................................. 29
Hate Speech is not Free Speech.............................. 30
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 2 25 Jul 1994
Re: The Fido Crucifixion, FidoNews 11-29.................... 31
3. Fidonews Information.......................................... 32
========================================================================
Editorial
========================================================================
hi. it's _really_ hard to write this editorial this week because i
have to tell you all this stuff, while there's music downstairs the
moon is full and i went through this period last week blaaa so now all
i want to do is DANCE! i gotta go dance around the living room to some
music extremely soon.
Not that what there is to say seriously isn't important, it is
very important, but there's always more. More to do, more to hear,
more to think...
Consciousness twitting bomb-drop Eeek: the article published last
week under Steve Winter's name was not written by him. Sure, it came
in via net mail with path lines which made sense, but there was no
pgp sig on it etc., so there's acatually no "proof" either way if he
wrote it or he didn't. But i believe Steve Winters did not write the
article which was published last week under his name, although i did
not know this last week.
So there's major problems. The article begged criticism, and it
received some, but the criticism was directed at Steve Winter
rather than the author of the article. Will the real writer
please stand up?
Aplologies are heartfully intended towards readers, Steve, and
writers of intelligent criticism who spent their valuable time
responding to a scam.
Between starting to write this and now, something even more
important and joyful than danceing happened. Holly, who became 9
years old this month, loggged on to this BBS from this terminal for
the very first time! She liked it a lot, she told me.
========================================================================
Articles
========================================================================
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 3 25 Jul 1994
Subject: SCUMREP.ART
Steve Winter (1:18/98)
The recent article in the Snooze FIDO1129.NWS was not authored or
authorized by me. Attached please find the article that I DID
submit, but that you failed to publish.
I suggest that you check your logs to find out who is
impersonating me (and do publish your findings).
I have never advocated illegal behaviour in FidoNet.
For your information, there are BBS's who are members of
the PRIME who are in no way are "christian" or even claim
the title. As long as a BBS is simply willing to allow
the truth on their BBS and abide by the PRIME rules while
on the PRIME echos, they are accepted as members.
So, I really don't think I would advocate vandalism against
folks that were nice enough to join my network, eh?
You really blew it this time. You censored my real submission
and then published a counterfeit. I wonder if it's time
for a session password....
Steve
****************************************************************
Area Netmail, Msg#127, Jul-18-94 20:04:12
From: Donald Tees (1:221/192)
To: Steve Winter (1:18/98)
Subject: SCUMREP.ART
The article came in routed, from the same node as this one
(the prime network zonegate). It could have originated anywhere
in the prime network.
I will publish the note from you, denying authorship of the
article, in the next issue, along with an apology. It will be
the first article following the editorial.
As to Scumrep.art, I will publish any article by you
replying, that is pertainent to Fido. I will not publish 2
pages of biblical quotations.
********************************************************************
Area Netmail, Msg#136, Jul-19-94 09:21:42
From: Steve Winter (1:18/98)
To: Donald Tees (1:221/192)
Subject: SCUMREP.ART
On <Jul 18 20:04>, Donald Tees of 1:221/192 spake thusly to Steve Winter:
DT> The article came in routed, from the same node as this one
DT> (the prime network zonegate). It could have originated anywhere
DT> in the prime network.
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 4 25 Jul 1994
It did NOT originate within the PRIME network or it would have
been routed through here.
DT> I will publish the note from you, denying authorship of the
DT> article, in the next issue, along with an apology. It will be
DT> the first article following the editorial.
DT>
DT> As to Scumrep.art, I will publish any article by you replying,
DT> that is pertainent to Fido. I will not publish 2 pages of
DT> biblical quotations.
You sure are some kind of trash!! You'll publish all kinds of
non-FidoNet related sewage, but then censor Bible verses. You
are hypocritical, low life, SCUM!!!
Your hypocracy really stinks!
Should you censor my article because of Bible verses, I will do
my best to let as many people as I can know about your biased
censorship.
Regards,
Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Going on Vacation and Putting A BBS on Autopilot
By: Quentin Lewis
Going on Vacation and Putting the BBS on Autopilot
My family and I are now on vacation in Virgina and Pennsylvania,
and my BBS is going it alone back at home in NH. How could I leave
my almost two year old "baby" at home alone? No, no...not a child,
my BBS!
Well, some people have friends that come over to feed their animals,
and check on their BBS, but I had no one local to do that. It's not
that the BBS is unreliable...It generally runs without incident, but
lately, I have had modem lockup problems with other 28.8K modems and
although though this is infrequent, I was worried that it would bring
my BBS down while I was away. I had to find a way to put my mind at
ease.
My solution was an X-10 power controller, and an X-10 timer. I set my
controller to turn the power off to my BBS once a day in the early
morning hours, and turn it back on in after a minute. This effectively
gives it a power-on reset every morning, and should it have been
in a hung state, would clear that right up. (I also toggle power to
the modem)
If you are not familiar with X-10 devices, they are generally marketed
for what is called "home automation". They are most frequently used to
control lights, alarms, and other motors/appliences. The controllers
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 5 25 Jul 1994
range from the simple several channel timers up to very fancy two
way communicating CPU based computers that hook up to your PC and
can be programmed! You plug the device to be controlled into a
small power controller that plugs between the cord and the wall
outlet. The actual timer/controller can sit anywhere in the house
because it sends it's on/off/dim commands to the power contoller
through the powerlines in your house! There are NO external wires
as the X-10 devices communicate and get power from the power line!
These devices can be used for all sorts of control/projects, and
they can be purchased at a number of places. Radio Shack carries
them under a "house name", and they can be bought at varous hardware
stores and department stores under the Stanley or X-10 name. You can
also buy them mail order through several "home control" catalog
vendors. All these devices are actually made by the same company,
and will interoperate with each other.
So if you have to leave your BBS unattended and want to make sure
it doesn't hang, or if you have other "home control" projects,
you might want to read up on these controllers.
Send me a netmail at 1:132/202 asking for more info, and I can
probably tell you more and give you some other sources.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Access/Freedom for the People...Spread the word!
By: Quentin Lewis, SYSOP 1:132/202
Online: Equality and Freedom as well as Communication
As I sit here in my hotel room in Colonial Williamsburg, Va., I think
of some of the great people from the origional 13 colonies that shaped
our great country. I find it interesting to think of the slow and
steady course our great country (the United States of America) has
been steadily making toward the vision of freedom that is written in
our great Constitution and Bill of Rights.
As I have gone around Williamsburg this week, I have noted that
although people in Revolutionary times thought their success in
breaking away from England and creation of the USA was a great move
toward freedom (and it was) there were some pretty large "shackles"
holding many people back.
The first was of course slavery, and this is what people always think
of first...but there was also a great "class system" that we still have
today.
Oh yes, it certainly has gotten alot better than it was then, and if
you think about it, our society has gotten alot more free with regard
to sex, color, race, religion, and disability. It's not perfect....but
it has gotten ALOT better!
(Ok...well at this point I am probably losing you.....your wondering
what any of this has to do with the title)
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 6 25 Jul 1994
Quite simply, FidoNET, and all of the other online communicaitons
medium offer freedom and open comunications for most everyone....we
send our ideas out on the world and they are generally viewed without
the bias of color, race, religion, or wealth/class. Similar to a letter
to the editor, our ideas can be sent out to a more "global" audience
for comment or enlightenment. Just think, online communications is
just starting to be used.
Ok, so everyone understands and wants this freedom...both in Fidonet,
and in their lives. So, whats's the problem?
In a single word...access! Yes, because of its size it can be said
that "The sun never sets on Fidonet", there are still many people who
have no idea of where to even begin to get online.
Ok, Fidonet certainly isn't the ONLY place in the online world, but it
is probably the most distributed online village that is run by "an
average crossection" of the world. Given the "hobbiest" nature of the
network, it is generally low cost to access for the user and SYSOP
alike.
So what can we do about this....evangilize BBS systems, and Fidonet!
That's right....introduce not only your friends, but talk about it
to schools and librarys. Whip up some info on it and bring it to
them and try and get them "into" it. Don't forget to mention that
fidonet is the first step onto the "Information Superhighway".
If you belong to, or volunteer your time to a group, show them
how they can use a BBS for communications. If the group is widely
distributed (like across the state or country), show them how valuable
it might be to have email or an ECHO set-up.
Would it not be great to have a Fidonet BBS in every school in
America....perhaps pulling in the K-12 ECHOS, and connecting kids
from the biggest cities with those in the most remote farm areas.
This wo uld truely be "the great equalizer", bringing people from many
different geographic and socioeconomic areas of society together.
Spread the word.....the 21st century is almost here, and society
is ready to join us to "play" in our online sandbox.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Grassroots Politics: Online and Organized
By: Quentin Lewis, SYSOP: 1:132/202
BBS Systems are Grassroots....Let's do some good with them!
Have you ever heard people talking about "grassroots" politics?
Have you ever thought about that that might mean? Have you ever
thought about how Fidonet itself is a "grassroots" effort?
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 7 25 Jul 1994
Think about it...tens of thousands of BBS systems that get together
to form a sort of online society to pass information and further
communications among those in the hobby. It would seem that Fidonet
is the definition of grassroots.
So how does Politics come into this...well, because I added it to
the mix. The USA is supposed to be a country that is supposed to
be governed "By the People, For the People"....yet many believe
that alot of the legislation is forwared and paid for by well
funded special interests. How is the average citizen going to
have their say?
Well, we must first reolize that politicians really do respect our
vote...it is the ultimate power we have over them. Many of them
get away with not listening to the will of the people because many
people don't have a clue as to what they had done, and if they do,
they are probably not informed enough on some issues to know which
way they would have wanted their elected servant to have voted.
So how do average people "get involved"?
How about connecting people from all around the country with BBS
systems, and ECHOS? That's right, and ECHO is a great way to foster
the three types of communications....."Top-down", "bottom-up", and
"peer to peer".
Top-down communications come in the form of press release sort of
info. Perhaps facts about up and coming votes, or voting records
on just past votes. These are the facts that people can debate and
use to get better informed on the issues. The WHITEHOUSE Echo is an
example.
Bottom-up communications are those that come from the "grassroots"
up to any sort of leadership that might be organizing the effort.
If the organization is truely "grassroots", this communication
is vital to set direction for the effort.
Peer-to-peer communications is probably the most critical to a
grassroots effort. This consists of member-to-member discussion
and enlightenment on the issues. This can take the form of debate
and disagreement, but it is always vital because it brings together
thoughts ad discussion between people with differnent viewpoint...
indeed, often different geographic areas and conserns. This sort of
"peer-to-peer" discussion should help these people better understand
each others points because they can fully discuss them.
Does any of this work....well, there is the example of the UWSA ECHO
where a number of SYSOPS and USERS who may or may not be members
of United We Stand America got together and decided to try and
interconnect as many of the 50 state organizations together as could
be linked by BBS. The effort started out in the old PEROT ECHO,
and then when things got moving, the ECHO name was changed to UWSA.
This effort was not sponsored by the UWSA national HQ, but seems
to have it's blessing...and at this point, there are BBS systems
in about 35 states connected.
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 8 25 Jul 1994
It's true that there are only several of those states that have
actually involved the UWSA state organization in the effort, but
there certainly are a number of UWSA members "passing the info",
and isn't that the definition of "grassroots" anyways?!
So if your interested in our effort, take a look at the UWSA ECHO,
or that isn't your cup of tea, you can check out the ELIST, or
some of the other networks. There are Libertarian, Democrat,
Republican, Pro-Gun, Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, Pro-Limbaugh, and
anti-Limbaugh ECHO....in fact there are more more topics than
you can imagine.
Get your group online....whether politically driven or otherwise..
BBS systems and networks can be great tools for "grassroots"
organizations....so get online and organized!
Fidonet is the definition of grassroots anyway.....isn't it?
(If you are interested several of my other proposals/writings
on this subject, you can FREQ ORGANIZED.ZIP, PROPOSAL.ZIP,
and/or PROPOSA2.ZIP from 1:132/202)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On Electronic Frontier Organizations
Stanton McCandlish, EFF Online Activist/SysOp
[email protected] -- 1:109/1108
In FidoNews 11.24, the collective Editor says:
>What is the difference between "place" and "space"? It's wonderful
>to see EFF-type organizations sproinging up with enthusiasm. It
>bothers me a bit that they are arranged according to countries. I
>guess it makes sense to organize legal-aid stuff by country, because
>particular beaurocratic/political situations will have problems
>requiring local resources,
This is indeed the case. EFF would probably like nothing better than
to be able to be of direct legal assistance to non-US citizens, but we
cannot. It is difficult enough to do this job even for one country,
with 5 lawyers on staff, and a paralegal to boot. We'd need a team of
thousands to cover all countries' laws. And that doesn't even begin to
get into politics and legislation.
>but... I hope the limitations of
>boundaries are not imposed upon the net out of historical habits.
>
>Occasionally habits are useful, but if they are not continually
>reviewed and revised to jive with changing reality, they turn into
>rules, which is boring.
Agreed wholeheartedly. However, I think more often than not the problems,
besides legal/bureaucratic ones, stem mainly from national, cultural and
linguistic barriers, which though eroding in these days of international
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 9 25 Jul 1994
media and communication, are still strong, and important to many.
One can argue whether or not nationalism and cultural pride are strengths
to preserve, or weaknesses to avoid, but whatever the answer, they are
strong feelings for most people.
>Sure, people can think in terms of borders if they want to, but not
>everyone should *have* to. Also, borders, do not have to be based
>upon history. They could be based upon science fiction, or
>anything at all, if they have to exist.
Agreed again, and I think that networking is likely to play a large role
in redefining our boundaries. Right now, however, the only practical
way to go about online activism is regionally, and I've been working with
the founders of various local and national groups to help get them going
and to put them in touch with likeminded people. There's a strong feeling
of solidarity among the "EF-groups", and we look to the day when enough
critical mass is reached that the efforts can be more closely allied.
I liken this process to the genesis of the Internet - one idea, many
independent nodes in a non-heirachical network. It's the process of
forming a community, rather than a single organization. In time the
individual pieces may come together in a synergistic whole greater than the
sum of it's parts. But due to the number of differing jurisdiction, each
local organization needs to fill a role for the online community in it's
own area; these resources cannot be generated by a hierarchical single
-base group, but they can be pooled over time, to build a sort of
meta-organization.
To that end, I'll be making some alterations to the eff-activists mailing
list [NB: a "mailing list" is the Internet equivalent, roughly, of a BBS-
network echo, or a Usenet newsgroup], and it will become ef-activists,
with international participation between (I anticipate) members of EFF,
CPSR, SEA, EF-Canada, EFF-Austin, EF-Houston, EF-Norway, EF-Ireland,
CommUnity, EF-Australia, and more. To date the list has served as a good
place to pass on items of relevance to online activists (e.g. press
releases, legislative texts, action alerts, etc.), but has yet to become
all it can be.
In time I hope to cross-gate this to Fido and other BBS networks, along with
several other relevant conferences, such as comp.org.eff.news. As it is,
however, I've come up against problems like dupe loops and such which can
be caused by incautious cross-gating, and would like some advice on this
matter from someone(s) experienced with cross-gating between Usenet/Internet
and Fido, and between Fido and OtherNets, so all goes smoothly. Then we
can get all of these disparate and insular virtual communities together for
some serious activism.
For those unaware of what EFF does, the Electronic Frontier Foundation is
a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization devoted to civil liberties in cyberspace.
We offer legal information for sysops and users, have supported courtroom
cases (such as the by-now-legendary Steve Jackson Games v. US Secret Service
case), and engage in direct policywork with the Administration and Congress
to work toward open access to information infrastructure (the "data super-
highway"), to get wider and more affordable deployment of ISDN, to head off
privacy-threatening maneuvers like the FBI's draft Digital Telephony "Wire-
tap Bill", and the NSA Escrowed Encryption Standard (the Clipper Chip, as
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 10 25 Jul 1994
many of you may recall from previous articles.) These are all important
issues, and all of them will be affecting you (even those of you that live
in other countries - the FBI is already attempting to get Russia to deploy
it's own DigTel-style surveillance system, and the White House has been
pressuring many European and other governments to adopt the Clipper system.)
The time's come for all of us to get involved, and to get organized. The
opposition on these issues, ranging from telco monopolists to Executive
Branch agenices, have a headstart and vast resources. The wild and wooley
days when the online world was a well-kept secret are drawing to a close,
and if we wish to preserve it's better aspects, we'll need to cooperate,
and to present a strong, united voice.
For more info on EFF, our mission, membership in the organization, and
details about our mailing lists, you can send any message (e.g. via UUCP
gate) to
[email protected] in the Internet, or call our BBS, Outpost, at
+1 202 638 6120 (300-14000bps, V32b, V42b; 8N1) or +1 202 638 6119
(300-14400bps, V32b, V42b; 16800 ZyX; 8N1). The BBS is free and up
continuously except for mail hour.
>I still haven't heard any more about nodes disappearing in Italy,
>despite trying to find information. This makes me curious.
I'll forward what I have on it, and you might find some of it FidoNewsworthy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cryptography and Digital Signatures
A Short Clarification
Stanton McCandlish - Electronic Frontier Foundation Online Activist/SysOp
[email protected] - 1:109/1108 - Outpost +1 202 638 6119, +1 202 638 6120
In article "Fido Newsletter Content" in FNews 11.27, Neil Lauritsen
(1:3603/120), like many others, expresses opposition to the use of
encryption and digital signatures in FidoNet. I won't broach the subjects
of censorship (the main topic of Neil's article), or of legal liabilities
and why you should allow cryptography [the interested should read
the sci.crypt FAQ which is available from most BBSs including ours, then
read the ECPA law and associated commentary available from our BBS, and
mentally correlate these pieces of information with eachother. See also
legal articles by Mike Riddle in previous issues of FidoNews], as these are
very large topics which I probably cannot clarify adequately in so short a
space. I'll just focus on the common confusion about what digital
signatures are.
>Dear Ed..I agree
[about the perceived need to censor FidoNews]
>and I run an Adult Oriented BBS. I also strongly object to encripted
>passages or signatures as also appeared in this issue. I do have a right
>to refuse to forward to distribute materials which are encripted (and I
>am a Net Host) as you also have the right to refuse to accept articles
>with unacceptable language as part of your FIDO news. Freedom of speech
>cannot be used as an argument to condone these violations of our trust
>in the editor.
[...]
>Neil - NC3603
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 11 25 Jul 1994
[...]
>Dear Editor, Please do not forward for distribution to my net any
>articles which contain any form of encription either in the text or in
>the signature. Nor any articles containing language which you would
>not use in your own house of worship.
Ignoring for now the well-known fact that FNews editors exercise little
if any editorial control, and the issue of what is or is not appropriate
language, let's get to the heart of the matter. Neil appears to conflate
encryption and digital signatures, as if they were the same thing. They
are not.
1) Encryption is the protection of information from anyone other than
the intended recipient(s) by encoding it via a mathematical process
such that a "key" is required for decoding, a key possessed (unless
something has gone wrong) only by the intended recipient(s). In short,
for the purposes of FidoNet, encryption is the process of making the
content of a message private. [Note: Again, I'm not going to go into
any pro or con on this issue, and will not respond to flames on this
topic. It'll come up again eventually as it always does, but right
now let's stick to signatures.]
2) Digital signatures are a by-product of cryptography. They use
the mathematical processes of encryption - the application of
cryptographic algorithms to data - to produce an ideally unforgeable
"signature". Provided the algorithm is strong, the signature serves
as a unique and trustable identifier, and can be used to prove that,
yes, this person or that did in fact write and send this or that message.
The salient points here are: A) Digital signatures do something close to
the opposite of what many perceive cryptography (often wrongly) to be
designed for - rather than hide information or serve to protect someone,
they carve information in virtual stone, and securely identify someone
[Note: This is an oversimplification, as encryption can be used for many
purposes, including the protection of passwords, transactional security,
and confidentiality of records, while digisigs can be used to protect
persons and their assets in numerous ways, not least of which are making
it more difficult to perpetrate forgery, and ensuring that a recipient
of a message is certain that they are in communication with who they think
they are and do not reveal privileged information.] B) Digital signatures
are *NOT* "secret messages". They do not encode any human-readable text,
and are similar to CRCs and checksums. They consist of binary data used
by a program for verification purposes. Again, digital signatures are
not encrypted mail, in any way shape or form, and attempting to censor
the flow of mail on such a mistaken basis is no more logical than banning
all *.MSG mail because it does in fact contain encoded binary data in the
headers, such as the seen-by information. Or perhaps we should ban
the use of archiving, since ZIP, ARC, and other formats use checksums
to validate the integrity of the compressed files? The only difference is
the use of certain type of mathematical algorithm in digisigs, and they are
visible in the text of the message, and readily identified with their own
header.
Not only are digital signatures easily distinguised from encrypted messages
by their headers, it is trivial to scientifically prove that they are not
hidden messages by running them through a copy of the program that created
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 12 25 Jul 1994
them (in most cases PGP, though others, such as TISPEM and RIPEM are in
use.) Any copy of PGP will recognize any PGP signature mathematically as
a signature, not as an encrypted message. You can't lie to it, and it can't
lie to you. Not without breaking the mathematical laws of the universe,
at any rate, and I don't think any of us have seen [the] God[s] online
any time lately. If you are paranoid and suspect your PGP has been tampered
with, the source code, like the binaries, is available widely as freeware
for your examination.
Casting aside any misapprehensions then, it should be clear that if you
are obligated to pass on mail from other systems by FidoNet policy, this
includes mail bearing digital signatures (indeed you should feel safer
doing so than passing on messages without them, since in the event of
being held liable for this, that or the other, you'll have definitive proof
of the source), even if not required to carry encrypted messages.
The only other serious objection to digital signatures I've yet to see is
the issue of wasted bandwidth. Most of you can probably see through this
one, but just in case it sounds persuasive, consider that by this reasoning,
we'd also have to ban all use of taglines and origin lines, quoting, and
posting messages that are not of informative value to the majority of
readers, as "wasted bandwidth." The fact is, digital signatures are
small, and infrequently used, and do not contribute to any significant
degree to the amount of traffic. And to many they are in fact informative
and useful.
One final point to consider. The US government has, as a sidelight to it's
"Clipper" chip, proposed it's own Digital Signature Standard, and is already
making noises that its use may become mandatory for certain applications.
You may not use digisigs now, but in the very near future this technology
will be built into a great number of hard- and software applications.
The more senseless opposition there is to private-sector digital signatures
and encryption, the more likely it is that we'll be forced to use digital
signature, crypto, and communications technology devised by the NSA and FBI.
As anyone following the Clipper and Digital Telephony debates knows only too
well, these agencies are far less concerned about your security or privacy
that they are about protecting their own abilities to monitor you at their
convenience.
Note of course that the above applies to US law. The situation may or
may not be analogous in other countries. In any case this is not to
be construed as legal or professional advice or service of any sort.
If you have serious legal questions about this matter you should contact
an attorney in your area who is knowledgeable regarding the apropos privacy,
communications and computer law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
More thoughts on recent articles
by Shawn McMahon, 1:19/34
[email protected]
Thoughts on events in recent issues
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 13 25 Jul 1994
(This one is to Wing Kin Chan, but I'm sending it here because it's
time to remind everybody again.)
If you can't use Chinese in a local echo, there's a simple solution,
Chan. Start your own echo.
Give it an echotitle that is transliterated Chinese. Give it an
elisting with the header info in English, and the description in
transliterated Chinese. Give it a rule that all messages must be in
Chinese, or contain Chinese translation.
Write an advertisement for it, entirely in Chinese, and submit it to
Fidonews.
It's only a local echo, so you shouldn't have any trouble getting
distribution started, *IF* there are others who desire such an echo.
The echoes of which you complain belong to their respective
moderators; nobody's forcing you to carry them, and if they are then
you have a seperate issue about which to complain. Make your own
echoes if you don't want to play by their rules.
One last thought:
Is there any truth to the rumor that Steve Winter's therapist said he
had a messiah complex, but Steve forgave him?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6
iQCVAgUBLiuucObJC2KuabptAQHgCwP7B4ctrw92qG4gHm6poMMtJPKamQU/OLXO
SFqx5pqt3FXTtaDnUUTo2HwYQzSQRkb6tYQ5rws8tGM6fpPPaA3NMWzngb33i6w7
sGpv7V9tPjkK06vYdxPkavrXalVv8UELWCQRGyQ4C3DRooZlSJDA94JK/grKDLMJ
56T3cxDnUbM=
=xpMT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear mad Emilia
Q: Why are you mad?
A: Sometimes I'm not, sometimes i am. I spend so much reading and
writing electronically that to listen and speak with a screen and a
keyboard feels more natural than picking up a telephone or meeting
face-to-faces. Something has happened to the way I experience
misself and others because of this.
Q: What?
A: Everything is faster, less stable, at best more generative than
before. I do not feel comfortable defining what I think, as a
static statement. I can only state what i am thinking at this
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 14 25 Jul 1994
particular moment.
A: So what? This sounds like going to school.
Q: Yes, but in school, there are tests and grades and classes,
which are defined for me by others. Electronically, I have to
chose which information I want to know, and I have to look for it,
and I learn what I want to chose while looking, and...and...it's all
personalized and tangential and would never fit on a pre-written
curriculum. Everyone is at once a teacher and a student. Electronic
communication is mind-to-mind like paper letters, but really fast
and totally open. Statements making me think catch my interest.
Rather than evaluating statements by comparing them to what I
already know and deciding whether or not they "fit", I just feel
like adding to the image base in my head by considering them.
A: How can you have any definition of right or wrong or any system of
valueing if you consider rather than evaluate statements! You are
becoming monstrous!
Q: Attention is valuable. Statements which cause thought, which
is the process of giving attention, are valuable. Ideas about
right and wrong don't work any more.
A: Then you are prommoting shock value! What good is this? And
how can you BE or DO without a guiding sense of right and worng!
Q: Shock cannot be prommoted. Attention is granted when interest
is offered. Everyone decides for themselves how they will give
attention or not. And I did not say I had no "sense" of right and
wrong, I said I had no definition of those things. Without
eliminating huge chunks of my image base, it is impossible to
define "right" and "wrong"... so I rely on emotions instead of
logic when trying to figure out how to treat beings.
Q: I do not want to delete any part of my image base, because i'm
trying to make it bigger. why??
A: I do not want to delete any part of my image base, because i'm
trying to make it bigger. why??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
centrefold
By Madam Emelia
...................................................................
...................................................................
...................................................................
...................................................................
...................................................................
..........................||||||||||||||||||||||...................
......!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..|.........................................
.......... ....||..... /####\ ..........................
........ ___O___ ..||.. ##O#### ......................
......... ~~~~~~~~ ...||.... ____________ ........................
.........,,,,,,,,,,....||....."""""""""""..........................
....................||................................
...................||...............................
...................|||||.......................
................|O..O|......................
............/..\...../\................
........-/.......\/....\.........
.......\.... ...../_.....
.......\... ...../......
.......\...../......
.......\/.......
.....~......
........
..................o..................o.............................
...................o................o..............................
.....................o...........o.................................
........................o.....o............................ .......
...... ....................o............................... .......
...... ............................... ............. .......
...... ...... ................. ......... .......
...... .... * ........... * ....... .......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seattle CPSR Policy Fact Sheet
K-12 Student Records: Privacy at Risk
From:
[email protected] (Tom Jennings)
From: "D. V. Henkel-Wallace" <
[email protected]>
TOPIC
The U.S. education system is rapidly building a nationwide network of
electronic student records. This computer network will make possible the
exchange of information among various agencies and employers, and the
continuous tracking of individuals through the social service, education
and criminal justice systems, into higher education, the military and the
workplace.
WHAT IS THE ISSUE?
There is no adequate guarantee that the collection and sharing of personal
information will be done only with the knowledge and consent of students or
their parents.
Changes Are Coming to Student Records
National proposals being implemented today include:
- An electronic "portfolio" to be kept on each student, containing
personal essays and other completed work.
- Asking enrolling kindergartners for their Social Security Numbers,
which will be used to track each student's career after high school.
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 16 25 Jul 1994
- Sending High school students' transcripts and "teachers' confidential
ratings of a student's work-related behavior," to employers via an
electronic network called WORKLINK.
At the heart of these changes is a national electronic student records
network, coordinated by the federal government and adopted by states with
federal assistance.
Publication 93-03 of the National Education Goals Panel, a federally
appointed group recently empowered by the Goals 2000 bill to oversee
education restructuring nationally, recommends as "essential" that school
districts and/or states collect expanded information on individual
students, including:
- month and extent of first prenatal care,
- birthweight,
- name, type, and number of years in a preschool program,
- poverty status,
- physical, emotional and other development at ages 5 and 6,
- date of last routine health and dental care,
- extracurricular activities,
- type and hours per week of community service,
- name of post-secondary institution attended,
- post-secondary degree or credential,
- employment status,
- type of employment and employer name,
- whether registered to vote.
It also notes other "data elements useful for research and school
management purposes":
- names of persons living in student household,
- relationship of those persons to student,
- highest level of education for "primary care-givers,"
- total family income,
- public assistance status and years of benefits,
- number of moves in the last five years,
- nature and ownership of dwelling.
Many of these information categories also were included in the public draft
of the 'Student Data Handbook for Elementary and Secondary Schools',
developed by the Council of Chief State School Officers to standardize
student record terminology across the nation. State and local agencies
theoretically design their own information systems, but the handbook
encourages them to collect information for policymakers at all levels.
Among the data elements are:
- evidence verifying date of birth,
- social security number,
- attitudinal test,
- personality test,
- military service experience,
- description of employment permit (including permit number,)
- type of dwelling,
- telephone number of employer.
WHO CAN ACCESS THIS COMPREHENSIVE INFORMATION?
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 17 25 Jul 1994
Officers, employees and agents of local, state and federal educational
agencies and private education researchers may be given access to
individual student records without student or parent consent, according to
the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974 (20 USC
1232g) and related federal regulations (34 CFR 99.3). Washington state law
echoes this federal law.
WHAT IS COMING NEXT?
Recent Washington state legislation (SB 6428, HB 1209, HB 2319) directly
links each public school district with a self-governing group of social
service and community agencies that will provide services for families.
This type of program is described in detail in the book, Together We Can,
published jointly by the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services. The book speaks of "overcoming
the confidentiality barrier," and suggests creating centralized data banks
that gather information about individuals from various government agencies -
or in other ways ensuring agencies, "ready access to each other's records."
The book calls for a federal role in coordinating policies, regulations and
data collection. A group in St. Louis, MO, called Wallbridge Caring
Communities, is cited as a model for seeking agreements to allow computer
linkups with schools and the social service and criminal justice systems to
track school progress, referrals and criminal activity.
WHAT HAPPENED TO ONE COMMUNITY
In Kennewick, WA, over 4,000 kindergarten through fourth graders were rated
by their teachers on how often they lie, cheat, sneak, steal, exhibit a
negative attitude, act aggressively, and whether they are rejected by their
peers. The scores, with names attached, were sent to a private psychiatric
center under contract to screen for "at-risk" students who might benefit
from its programs. All of this was done without the knowledge and consent
of the children or their parents.
CPSR's POSITION
CPSR Seattle believes that schools other agencies should minimize the
collection, distribution and retention of personal data. Students and/or
their parents should decide who has access to detailed personal
information.
CPSR ACTIONS
Representatives of CPSR Seattle have gone to Olympia to:
- oppose the use of the Social Security Number as the standard student
identifier,
- urge legislators to set educational goals that can be measured without
invading privacy,
- oppose turning over individual student records to law enforcement
officials apart from a court order or official investigation.
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 18 25 Jul 1994
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility - Seattle Chapter
P.O. Box 85481, Seattle, WA 98145-1481 (206) 365-4528
[email protected]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Complaint about the language using in FidoNet
From: Fredric Rice (1:102/890)
> From: Wing Kin Chan <
[email protected]>
Greetings, honorable Sir.
> I am a doctor and living in Macau (a city near Hong Kong).
> Over 90% of citizens is using Chinese as their motherlanguage
> here. And I like to access the local BBS, some of them
> are the nodes of FidoNet. We wrote the local messages with
> Chinese since long long ago. But recently, some of these
> SysOps created some rules which inhibited us for using Chinese
> in some local echos.
To hades with their rules then, Sir. In your local forums, the
language should be the domestic language. I can see some people
advancing a requirement for a common language in an international
forum yet in local forums, you should be asking the people who
imposed these rules what their motivations are.
Quite simply, were I in your and your fellow's position, I would
refuse to follow the silly rule. In other words, launch a
rebellion against it. If you and your friends are defeated,
then you should start your own local forums.
When a forum is created, the moderator should, in my humble
opinion, dictate the language(s) used. Were an international forum
on the backbone set aside to discuss Chinese art, and were it
created by yourself and moderated by yourself, you should demand
that the language(s) of your choice be used. No one should tell
you that you must use Australian in the forum.
If you import the SCIENCE forum, for instance, which was created
by an English-speaking individual, or the SKEPTIC forum which is
moderated by an Australian-speaking individual <laugh> you should
expect to use English.
> For what reason to force us to use English only? Why we
> cannot use our motherlanguage to talk with each others?
These are questions you must ask of those who created the rules.
> Do these SysOps have rights to build up these kind of rules?
The SysOps who carry the forum are able to do anything they wish.
The moderator of the forums, however, may choose to drop the
various SysOps from the forums if they don't comply with _their_
wishes. The moderator holds absolute authority over what the
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 19 25 Jul 1994
rules are. You need to ask the moderator why these silly rules
were instigated.
> If someone who don't know English, doesn't he cannot access
> these echos to ask for assistance?
You are correct, he or she can not. And that's a shame.
Demand otherwise, Sir. As a doctor, your word should carry some
weight. Seek those who are being isolated from participating and
ask them to complain mildly. Ultimatly, the solution is to
create your own forum and impose your own rules.
> Best Regards,
> Wing Kin Chan
And bright blessings upon you and yours. Please keep FidoNews
informed about what happens. This issue of imposing foreign
languages upon a _local_ forum is distressing.
Fredric L. Rice.
The Skeptic Tank (1:102/890.0)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A reply to 'Politiking for politics sake'.
Martin
2:2500/167.0
Hi All,
Further to Keith Wassells piece in last weeks snooze,
'Politicking for politics sake!', you know, the one where he
made himself sound half reasonable.
Let's put things back into perspective just a little shall we.
Geonets in thier own right are fine. The major problem occurs
when the *C structure is corrupt, or the net itself becomes a
social net. With rigidly enforced nets, the initial freedom that
FidoNet<tm> offered is put at risk. The freedom of the
individual to join whichever net they choose should be
paramount. If parallels are taken with other aspects of free
society, you begin to see how stupid rigidly enforced networks
become.
Now let me change tack slightly, as I stated in my header, there
are certain times when Keith can appear reasonable, as a
contributor to the regions echos, Keith has been responsible for
a vast increase in traffic, ussually offensive, but I digress.
Let me quote you a piece from a message in Region25..
==========
Hello Bob!
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 20 25 Jul 1994
Sunday July 10 1994 15:09, Bob Henson wrote to Keith Wassell:
BH> In a message to Bob Henson <07 Jul 94 17:07> Keith Wassell wrote:
KW>> Still, your self declared excommunication can only be good news.
KW>> I look forward to the first of August, when we can be shot of
KW>> you!
BH> I am not leaving FidoNet, I am staying as 255/385. If YOU cut me out
BH> for no reason, you will be XAB'd and removed.
Well we will see about that when the time comes. On the 1st
August you will become 2:25/200!. And, that is the end of the
matter !!!
Regards,
Keith
=========
Now, it would seem are glorious RC is in breech of the sad, but
unfortunately still in force, P4. For it is the RC's
responsability to ensure all regional nodes are placed in thier
correct net. Now, having been a member of the musical net club
myself (I managed to have my address changed 3 times in one
weekend ! ), Bob had been pushed backwards and forwards several
times by the RC, and why ?, because he argues with the RC.
This I'm afraid now goes back to my original statement that
Geonets are fine unless the *C structure is corrupt. This I'm
afraid is what has happened in R25. No amount of complaints to
the ZC will help, as the ZC and R25C are buddies. Here then we
have the problem of GeoNets & social nets and *C corruption all
rolled into one.
Unless an IC is quickly put in position, ( and I suggest an IC
who is _NOT_ selected from the realms of current or ex ZC's,
that's a glorious little club they have isn't it ), and sorts
out the petty dictatorial flea's who have infested the dog,
Fidonet's decline (as cheaper Internet access for all becomes
available to all) will continue.
In closing, can I remind all the *C structure the the C stands
for co-ordinator, and _NOT_ controller.
We do not need controlling, we need communication.
Ciao,
Martin
2:2500/167.0
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 21 25 Jul 1994
RC25, and recent submission to FidoNews
From: Paul C Dickie <
[email protected]>
Greetings!
With reference to my comment/submission to FidoNews, concerning
the excessive protestations of the Regional "Coordinator" of
Region25 :
First, something of the background :
I was, until this week, excommunicated from FidoNet on Keith
Wassell's dictat, simply because he didn't like the messages
that I'd been posting about a friend of his; he invoked part of
Policy_4 which was intended to be used on Regional, independent
nodes and, by dint of twisting and exploitation of the
ambiguities in that version of Policy (but which weren't in
previous versions, of which he professes to know nothing) he
summarily removed my node. There were, I hasten to add, no
technical reasons for his action nor, for that matter, did he
even care to inform me of the nature of the trumped-up charges
that he'd laid against me which is, as I'm sure you'll agree, a
denial of `natural justice' and, hence, a denial of my human
rights.
It was only when, about a month later --through the assistance
of a friend, who forwarded some echomail to me -- I saw the
nature of the "charges" that I was able to respond at all; the
"charges" consisted of tittle-tattle, gossip and rumour,
combined with the invented "offence" of "echo-hopping" and the
allegation that I'd published confidential netmails.
As regards "echo-hopping", that refers to the practice of
cross-posting a message to a number of echoes, so that it
receives the widest possible readership; as such, it is a matter
for the attention of the moderators of the respective echoes,
and not of the Regional "Coordinator" who is, btw, a leading
proponent of that practice! As for the matter of the
publication of "confidential" netmails, they simply *weren't*
confidential; although they bore the "privileged" flag, there
was nothing in the text of the messages -- which were personally
abusive towards myself -- to indicate that the sender required
the contents to remain unpublished. Hence, under FidoNet Policy,
I was quite eligible to do with them as I might.
Now, to more recent events :
Be that as it might, Keith Wassell is known to twist Policy to
suit his own ends and, after the term of my excommunication was
over -- yes, he imagines that he can use excomunication as a
form of punishment -- he refused to replace my node in the
correct place in the nodelist, but insisted that it should be a
regional, independent node even though such will cause myself
and/or other sysops to incur additional expense thereby, as the
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 22 25 Jul 1994
routing of netmail won't work properly for independent nodes,
and even though such is a gross dereliction of his role of
Regional Coordinator.
I sent him a netmail insisting that he follow FidoNet Policy.
This is his reply; please note not only his arrogant tone, but
also the threats with which he lards his text:
====================== Cut here ===============================
>Sun 10 Jul 94 23:12
>By: Keith Wassell (2:25/0)
>To: Paul Dickie, Bozzimaccoo!! (2:25/201)
>Re: Compliance with FidoNet Policy
>St: Pvt Local Direct
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Hello Paul!
>
>Sunday July 10 1994 16:30, Paul Dickie wrote to Keith Wassell:
> PD> * Original to: Keith Wassell
> PD>
> PD> cc: Paul Heywood
> PD> Greetings!
> PD>
> PD> I see that, in accordance with your latest tricks,
> PD you have made my
> PD> node entry into that of a regional, independent node.
> Correct
> PD> I now require you either to reinstate my node entry as
> PD> 2:250/234, or render an adequate explanation -- including
> PD> reference to the specific part(s) of Policy_4 which you imagine
> PD> gives you the right to do as you have done.
> Certainly ! ....... You behaviour, and that of a certain Hub in
> collusion, at the time of your explaination caused serious
> grief. Speaking to the Nodes in that network, you are clearly
> regarded as a seriously disruptive person, and, they don't
> really want you back.
>
> Taking this into account, it will aid the smooth running of 250
> by keeping you outside. In effect you have the 'Kennel' flag.
> Its the only way *I*m can Implement it.
>
> PD> Please note that your current actions are in direct contravention of
> PD> sections 5.1.2, 5.2 and 5.7 of Policy_4 :
>
> Please let me point out the relevant words.
> PD> ============================== Cut here
> PD> ================================
> PD>
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 23 25 Jul 1994
> PD> 5 Regional Coordinator Procedures
> PD> 5.1 Responsibilities
> PD> A Regional Coordinator has the following responsibilities:
> PD> 1) To assign node numbers to independent nodes in the region.
> PD> 2) To encourage independent nodes in the region to join existing
> PD> networks, or to form new networks.
> Encourage ..... is the operative word here.
> PD> 3) To assign network numbers to networks in the region and
> PD> define their boundaries.
> PD>
> PD> 4) To compile a nodelist of all of the networks and
> PD> independents in the region, and to send a copy of it to the Zone
> PD> Coordinator whenever it changes.
> PD>
> PD> 5) To ensure the smooth operation of networks within the region.
> Putting you back in 250 would hinder the 'smooth operation'
> of the net. Period!
> PD> 6) To make new nodelist difference files, Policies, and issues of
> PD> FidoNews available to the Network Coordinators in the region as
> PD> soon as is practical.
> PD>
> PD> 5.2 Assigning Node Numbers
> PD>
> PD> It is your responsibility to assign node numbers to independent
> PD> nodes in your region. You may also change the numbers of
> PD> existing nodes in your region, though you should check with the
> PD> respective nodes before doing so. You may assign any numbers
> PD> you wish, so long as each node has a unique number within your
> PD> region.
> PD>
> PD> You should not assign a node number to any system until you have
> PD> received a formal request from that system by FidoNet mail.
> PD> This will ensure that the system is minimally operational. The
> PD> strict maintenance of this policy has been one of the great
> PD> strengths of FidoNet.
> PD>
> PD> It is also recommended, though not required, that you call a
> PD> board which is applying for a node number before assigning it a
> PD> node number.
> PD>
> PD> You should use network mail to inform a new sysop of the node
> PD> number, as this helps to insure that the system is capable of
> PD> receiving network mail.
> PD>
> PD> If a node in your region is acting in a sufficiently annoying
> PD> manner, then you can take whatever action you deem fit,
> PD> according to the circumstances of the case.
> PD>
> PD> If you receive a node number request from outside your region,
> PD> you must forward it to the most local coordinator for the
> PD> requestor as you can deter- mine. If you receive a node number
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 24 25 Jul 1994
> PD> request from a new node
> You are not a new node, you are a reinstated 'confirmed' troublemaker.
> The very ethos of this netmail shows this to be the case.
> PD> that is in an area covered by an existing network, then you must
> PD> forward the request to the Coordinator of that network instead
> PD> of assigning a number yourself.
> PD>
> PD> If a network forms in an area for which you have independent
> PD> nodes, those nodes will be transferred to the local network as
> PD> soon as is practical.
> It will 'practical' for you to move back in six months, provided
> you are not out on your arse again for making more trouble.
> PD> 5.7 Overseeing Network Operations
> PD>
> PD> You are responsible for appointing network coordinators for the
> PD> nets in your region. If the outgoing Network Coordinator
> PD> suggests a successor, you are not obligated to accept that
> PD> individual, although you normally will. Simi- larly, you are
> PD> not obligated to accept the individual selected by the members
> PD> of the network in an election, although you normally will.
> PD>
> PD> It is your responsibility as Regional Coordinator to ensure that
> PD> the networks within your region are operating in an acceptable
> PD> manner. This does not mean that you are required to operate
> PD> those networks; that is the responsibility of the Network
> PD> Coordinators. It means that you are responsible for assuring
> PD> that the Network Coordinators within your region are acting
> PD> responsibly.
> PD>
> PD> If you find that a Network Coordinator within your region is not
> PD> properly performing the duties outlined in Section 4, you should
> PD> take whatever action you deem necessary to correct the situation.
> PD>
> PD> If a network grows so large that it cannot reasonably
> PD> accommodate traffic flow during the Zone Mail Hour, the Regional
> PD> Coordinator can direct the creation of one or more new networks
> PD> from that network. These new networks, although they may be
> PD> within a single local-calling area, must still conform to a
> PD> geographical basis for determining membership.
> PD>
> PD> It is your obligation as Regional Coordinator to maintain direct
> PD> and reason- ably frequent contact with the networks in your
> PD> region. The exact method of accomplishing this is left to your
> PD> discretion.
> PD>
> PD> Note especially :
> PD>
> PD> ( from 5.2 )
> PD>
> PD> If a network forms in an area for which you have independent
> PD> nodes, those nodes will be transferred to the local network as
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 25 25 Jul 1994
> PD> soon as is practical.
> I said how I saw 'Practical'.
> PD> ( From 5.7 )
> PD> If you receive a node number request from a new node that is in
> PD> an area covered by an existing network, then you must forward
> PD> the request to the Coordinator of that network instead of
> PD> assigning a number yourself.
> You are not a new node..... you are a returning troublemaker!
>
> May I also point out
>
> 9.8 Return to Original Network
>
> Once a policy dispute is resolved, any nodes reinstated on appeal are
> re-turned to the local network or region to which they geographically
> or technically belong.
>
> OR REGION..... You belong to region 25 !!!
> PD> If you feel that you are unable or unwilling to follow these
> PD> procedures, then it follows that you are unable or unwilling to
> PD> perform the role, post or function of Regional Coordinator as
> PD> detailed in Policy_4, and you must resign or be replaced at once
> PD> by someone who *will* follow Policy_4.
> I suggest you cease to make trouble forthwith ! Or face a Six month
> excommunication. This is a promise, not a threat!!!
>
> PD> You have two days in which to answer this message before it is
> PD> forwarded to FidoNews -- and that's not a threat, lest you
> PD> imagine that it is. It's merely an indication of the nature of
> PD> the deadlines under which the Snooze is prepared...
>
> Please feel free to crosspost this message or forward it to snooze.
> My reply will be equally enlightening !
>
>Regards,
> Keith
==================================================================
Please also note that there is no truth whatever to his
suggestion that the Network Coordinator of net 250, Region 25,
refused to have me listed in that net; I've checked with that
NC, and have no reason to doubt his word.
I consider Keith Wassell's final threat to be especially
noteworthy, as he seems to have indicated that, were I to send
his netmail to FidoNews and/or were it to be published therein,
he would excommunicate my node once more for that alone!
I regard such as a gross interference with my rights to
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 26 25 Jul 1994
communicate with whom I please and how I might please; I would,
therefore, appreciate any help, advice or guidance on how best
to deal with the bully and braggart that is presently
masquerading as the RC25.
I certainly feel that his threats *ought* to be published -- the
only question remains of how that would best be done.
More than merely publishing the fellow's threats, though, I feel
that more ought to be done to limit the ability of such as he to
rule FidoNet. I have, in the past, wondered if Tom Jennings
could be prevailed upon to withdraw the right of such putative
"coordinators" to call their fiefdom "FidoNet" but, as you know,
Tom won't get involved in such matters. As the sole effective
holder of the copyrights under which FidoNet exists, though, it
is only Tom Jennings who *can* take such action and, were
another network to be set up, it would merely be "another net"
which would, in due course, dwindle and die for lack of support.
Were Tom to require the power freaks and the nodelisting
martinets to cease to use the trademark or style of FidoNet,
though, it would be the networks of the dictators that would
dwindle, for they would effectively be excommunicated from the
rest of FidoNet -- especially if he indicated that, instead, he
would recognise the various FidoClassic movements, in the UK and
elsewhere in Europe, as being the only acceptable manifestation
of FidoNet.
Without such action, I cannot see any other way that the antics
of the dictators can be countered for, with such folk
controlling the nodelist, and thus able to exercise such power
as they please, there is no effective counter to their nonsense.
Keith Wassell, even whilst he was denying me access to the
FidoNet sysop echoes, continued to post comments about me in
those echoes -- including the untruth that my internet feed was
in the imminent propinquity of termination. Needless to say, his
tale didn't even contain a trace of veracity.
I've since invited him to withdraw those remarks or back them
up, but he hasn't yet replied. I expect that his reply will come
in a few days, when he'll declare that I was "causing trouble"
and is, therefore, removing my node from the nodelist once more
-- for such is the way that the fellow works. He means to rule
FidoNet by terror and seems not only to lack the sense to
realise the damage he's doing thereby, but also to lack the
ability to work in any other manner.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mail to you from Paul Dickie
From: Jackie Surtees <
[email protected]>
2:256/405 // +44-91-388-3078
Hi Max
I'll not repeat Paul's messages to you and Donald but I would
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 27 25 Jul 1994
like to add my own little bit - less eruditely, but from the
heart.
Forwarded message follows:
> From
[email protected] Wed, 13 Jul 94 19:59:15
> X-Envelope-To: <
[email protected]>
> To:
[email protected]
> Subject: Latest submission to FidoNews
I run a BBS which specialises in family history, not a lot of
users but the ones that use it seem to be very happy. I've been
in FidoNet for 4-5 years. I've never taken an active part in
"FidoNet politics" but during the last 18 months or so have
become increasingly disillusioned by the "co-ordinators" of
Region 25 who seem to have come to believe that they are
"controllers" of the Region.
I believe there are about 600 nodes in Region 25. I don't know
if you've heard of the Midnight Line system in the UK, but in
case you haven't, it's a system run by British Telecom whereby a
line can be rented for approximately 400 UK pounds a quarter,
and all calls using that line between midnight and 6am are free
within the UK. An ideal system for amateur comms, and used for
such. ML operators rent the line from BT and nodes can
contribute towards the cost of the line, and receive EchoMail,
NetMail and files via the line. I pay 30 UK pounds a quarter.
Until last year there were no restrictions on which net a new
node should join. Then the RC at that time (with others backing
him) decided that the Region should be "geonetted". This was
forced through, making many nodes that had set up links,
registered software etc very unhappy - myself included. Since
then Keith Wassell has become RC (he was one of the backers).
Several NCs have since resigned - NCs of long standing in
FidoNet who are sadly missed. NCs who ran their Nets without
hassle, quietly, in the background. They have been replaced by
people who appear to approve of KW and his methods. You may
know of Pete and Sandie Franchi? They have virtually given up
on FidoNet, as have others.
The NC of the Net I was forced into by geonetting was removed
from the position by KW because he disagreed with KW's
interpretation of Policy 4. A vote was held to select another
NC. Apathy ruled as usual, but we who did vote voted the NC
back in. Our vote was overruled by KW again on his
interpretation of Policy 4 and invoking the so-called
"Grandfather Clause".
I have seen some of the most foul and obscene language I've ever
seen coming forth from KW's messages to others. He threatens
people with excommunication if they upset him - and in Paul's
case did excommunicate him, and you've seen his threats to do it
again. In another node's case (Bob Henson) he excommunicated
him then reinstated him after a few days - but has threatened
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 28 25 Jul 1994
regional node status, the same as with Paul. Whether he carries
that out is yet to be seen. Threats and blackmail appear to be
his trademark.
The Region before KW functioned efficiently and quietly and
happily to a great extent. The Region now appears to be living
under a shadow. We have no recourse to the ZC as he appears to
back up KW in whatever he does. KW constantly quotes Policy 4 -
but seems to interpret it as it suits the occasion.
My apologies if I've gone on a bit.
Take care
Jackie
--
[ Jackie's Place - A Genealogy BBS in NE England ]
[ FidoNet 2:256/405 // +44-91-388-3078 ]
[ 0615 - 2350 BBS // 24 hours mail ]
[
[email protected] ]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BBS-PR16.ZIP Released
Robert Parson 1:3822/1
[email protected]
BBS Guide to Public Relations Updated
The updated version of the Computer Bulletin Board Guide to Public
Relations has been released. The most significant change in Version
1.6 is a new section on market research.
The Guide is a primer for Sysops wishing to conduct Public Relations
campaigns outside of the BBS Community. It includes sections on News
Releases, the Media and Community Affairs.
BBS-PR16.ZIP is available as a File Request from Paradox of Arkansas
BBS at 501 484 0944 (Fido 1:3822/1) and Jackalope Junction BBS at 501
785 5381 (Fido 1:3822/8)
BBS-PR is written by Robert Parson, a Broadcast Journalist with over
15 years experience, and an active participant in his local BBS
Community.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fido Crucifiction
Mark Bassett 1:141/394
I do not believe that Steve Winter (1:18/98) wrote the article
entitled FIDO Crucifixion in FNEWSB29. Does it concern you that
some may use fidonews for something worse than Winter does, that
is, gross deception? Who fraudulently applied Winter's name to
this article hoping to bring a reproach on all Christians?
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 29 25 Jul 1994
If per some slim chance you aren't chuckling, please do
something to verify for me that this was indeed the notorious
Steve Winter who authored the aforementioned article.
Those of us who know Steve, KNOW that this was not written by
him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Sylvia,
From: Doug Neeson (3:640/705)
After reading Steve's little paranoia in this weeks Fidonews I
thought I would meniton my dealings with this highly irrational
man.
I was netmailed by him to join his network as I am already a
member of a number of Christian networks. As there was not a
link to Australia I thought I may as well join to see what his
network was like as it claimed to be a true Christian network.
After about 6 days I realised that I was not in agreement with
his doctrine so I decided that I would send him a netmail
stating my reasons for disagreement and withdrawing from his
Network.
I sent this to him at about 8pm Australian time. Imagine my
surpise when at about 12:30am I recieved this phone call the sum
total of which was:-
SW> Doug
DN> Yes
SW> I curse you in the name of Jesus Christ you false Christian scum.
At this point I decided to terminate the call.
He also crashmailed me a message stating exactly the same thing.
He then crashmailed a good friend of mine who had also joined at
the same time as myself, telling him that I was "False Christian
Scum" and asking for him to take over the network feed to
Australia.
As a Christian and a deacon in my church I was taken aback by
his attitude as well as his method of dealing with people who
disagree with him. His cursing of people is unscriptural and is
actually more like a form of witchcraft which is again not
Christian.
In all reality he should be sending himself viruses etc as he
states to do in his tirade as he is himself an unchristian
character.
Currently Steve does not have an Australian feed and I doubt if
he will for some time to come.
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 30 25 Jul 1994
You may publish this in fidonews if you wish as I do not fear
Steve or his threats of reprisals at all.
God Bless
Doug Neeson
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hate Speech is not Free Speech
Hate Speech is not Free Speech
by Randy Edwards, 1:325/805
After reading Steve Winter's classic "Christian"[sic] piece in
FidoNews 1129, I just had to write this article in rebuttal. Not
only in rebuttal to Steve -- a person who many find an embarassment
to "love thy neighbor" Christianity and to the true meaning of
Christ's teachings -- but also to the editors of FidoNews for running
that piece of hate-filled filth.
Now, as someone who's been in the FidoNet since 1985, I've usually
liked the FidoNews' open admission policy. It's nice to think that
someone can write an article about a hot FidoNet topic and be sure
that it's going to be run. But articles like Steve's clearly shows
the limitations of an open admission policy in a most brutal way.
Policy 4 describes FidoNews this way: "It is an important medium by
which FidoNet sysops communicate with each other. FidoNews provides
a sense of being a community of people with common interests."
Forgive me, but I think that urging a "war" and advocating crashing
people's BBSs is not helping "communication" nor does it helps us in
"being a community." Now, this shouldn't imply that all FidoNews
articles need to meet that objective, but there's clearly a wide gap
between helping us communicate as a community and urging others to
break the law and to murder people!
And I think that one can make a case for the argument that Steve Winter
was urging violence against a group of people by urging that members
of a certain religion be "given over to the Lord for disposal" and
that they should be "swinging from lamp posts." Maybe I'm reading
too much into this, but that sounds like a call to murder people to
me -- I don't know of any other way to give people over to the "Lord."
With our televisions filled with horror-filled scenes of people dying
in Bosnia and Rwanda, and with the Third Reich in our past, haven't we
learned enough about hate-mongers yet? Or should we endure that this
hate-filled material fill the newsletter of our "community" in the
name of free speech?
Now, I'm sure that some people will surely see my article as an attack
on the holy grail of free speech. Sorry, I don't see it that way.
Speech which urges violence against a group of people is not covered
under the U.S. 1st Amendment and many court decisions have upheld that
FidoNews 11-30 Page: 31 25 Jul 1994
view. Hate speech is not free speech, plain and simple. And I don't
care if you're attacking Chicanos, Jews, people of African origin, or
even people of a minority religion.
Of course, I haven't even gone into the fact that this type of speech
may very well violate the U.S. Civil Liberties of members of the
religion being attacked. And I don't even want to ponder what the
FidoNews' legal role might be if someone took this hateful article to
heart and went to see an attorney about it. To me, that's a dark,
murky area of the law that I'd rather not even deal with.
A much clearer area of law and, more importantly for our purposes, of
FidoNet tradition is the area of crashing BBSs. We're in the hobby
of communicating with people. Everything about the FidoNet says that
being able to communicate is a "good thing" and that we should
encourage it.
But tell me FidoNews editors, how does urging that people's Bulletin
Board Systems be crashed and the urging of uploading of viruses to
BBSs advance the FidoNet's -- and *FidoNews'* -- goal of
communciation?!
Tell me FidoNews editors, how would you feel if tomorrow's headline of
your local newspaper contained a picture of someone "swinging from a
lamp post" with the murderer muttering nonsense about a group of human
beings being nothing more than "vermin?"
Now, you can sit behind your monitor typing away at your keyboard and
pretend that this is simply "cyberspace" and that no one takes this
seriously. But I hope you don't. I hope you've had enough life
experience to realize that there are hate-filled people out there
who take many things seriously. And I certainly hope that you start
taking your role as FidoNews editors seriously!
On that note, I'll wrap this up. I'm hoping this gets into the next
issue of FidoNews, but I know I'll have some stiff competition. After
all, people with the mindset that "torturing kids" is humor will
certainly be at their keyboards typing away trying to out-do Steve
Winter's hate-filled article to show us all what a REALLY hate-filled
article that advocates murder and breaking the law should REALLY look
like. Ahh, I can't wait... :-(
Nunca mas,
