FidoNews is published weekly by the International FidoNet
Association as its official newsletter. You are encouraged to
submit articles for publication in FidoNews. Article submission
standards are contained in the file ARTSPEC.DOC, available from
node 1:1/1.
Copyright 1987 by the International FidoNet Association. All
rights reserved. Duplication and/or distribution permitted for
noncommercial purposes only. For use in other circumstances,
please contact IFNA at (314) 576-4067.
The contents of the articles contained here are not our
responsibility, nor do we necessarily agree with them.
Everything here is subject to debate. We publish EVERYTHING
received.
Table of Contents
1. ARTICLES ................................................. 1
Fee Based Bulletin Board Systems ......................... 1
Benchmark Testing Of Archive Utilities ................... 3
GizLib - A Fine Improvement To Quick Basic ............... 5
StarSeed -- A New Age BBS ............................... 9
A New Kind of DUPE ....................................... 10
Softguard Strikes Out At Honest Pc-Users ................. 12
2. NOTICES .................................................. 15
The Interrupt Stack ...................................... 15
Region 18 Nodelist Changes ............................... 15
Latest Software Versions ................................. 15
FidoNews 4-46 Page 1 14 Dec 1987
Fee Based Bulletin Board Systems:
Bill Paul's FidoNews 4-37 Article and the Responses
Bill Paul, Sysop of The Think Tank, 123/7, Memphis, Tennessee,
authored an article which outlined his thoughts on BBS fee
charging practices and solicited feedback from others. What I
seek here is to provide a synopsis of the feedback he shared with
me and offer my own observations.
Bill queried the propriety of users financially supporting a
hobby, and equated fees received with obligations incurred by the
recipient. He did acknowledge echomail and netmail services were
legitimately chargeable to users of those services. Responses
were received from among others: 381/20, 107/16, 381/1, 148/1,
115/478, a PC-Board SysOp, a Miami SysOp and Don Daniels,
President of IFNA. Here, with apologies to the respondents for
any loss of context, are the major points made:
- Fee payers' are better and more committed users.
- User support, financial and otherwise, is conducive to
system excellence and longevity.
- Fees seperate users who want a system's services from
curiosity seekers and twits.
- Fees reduce system access gridlock problems.
- Fees can be mandatory for access, tied to special
priviledges only, or solicited analogous to the shareware
concept (eg your donation will be gratefully accepted).
- Fee supported systems do incur some obligations on the part
of the operators consistant with the fee basis.
- Users do derive benefits, systems are only as good as the
sysops AND their users - hence BBSs' are two way streets.
- System operation is expensive.
- Hobby activity and community service don't have to be
mutually exclusive.
- FidoNet shouldn't include any system designed and operated
exclusively to make money.
- Bulletin Board Systems and Electronic Mail Networks are
different; BBSs can be free, networks require management and
appropriate financial involvement.
- No one rule can be equally applied to every BBS.
Having been involved in a user group initiative to provide
funding to a Net to help defray costs, I know that responsible
users, concerned with both the benefits received from excellent
systems and the commensurate high costs of operating good systems
are not unwilling to donate their time or money unsolicited by
SysOps. Bill's issue, I believe, was on what basis should money
FidoNews 4-46 Page 2 14 Dec 1987
change hands. Is it a form of contract, with obligations on the
part of both parties? I think so. The terms "user" and
"operator" alone impart a sense of this relationship. I have no
tolerance for board "rapists" and twits who believe access to
systems are their god given right, nor SysOps who want monies up
front without providing a trial period to permit prospective
users to reasonably evaluate their fee-based systems. Let them
both be plagued with gridlock, line noise and faulty modems! I
believe that non-profit making fees are an acceptable option for
System Operators. But the option does incur obligations to
provide services commensurate with the fee charged. This is
rarely a problem as most fee structures are nominal, and I know
of no case of a system going fee-based only to shut down within
weeks without making appropriate refunds.
My preference is that any fee-based system be willing to
extend to prospective new users a short "check it out" period.
Sure, downloads and to a lesser degree, message base access can
be limited, but no one likes to invest in anything sight unseen.
I find too many of the "new" fee-based systems want money before
you can see anything but the logon welcome, registration form,
and the logoff screen. Good systems have nothing to fear from
scrutiny and that is the basis upon which the appropriateness of
fees should be judged.
To set the record straight, I have been active in
telecommunications for number of years and, although having moved
from Tennessee to California in July 1986, I continue to be a
registered user of Bill's system. I have never been a SysOp,
although I have Sub-SysOped or SigOped for several systems. I am
an active user of electronic mail networks and message bases. I
am NOT speaking for Bill, although I publicly wish to thank him
for providing the Think Tank's great forum.
With the release of version 1.5 of the Zoo archive utility, I
decided to run my benchmark tests and report on the 3 major
archive utilities again.
For those of you that have read my past articles, you are
familiar with these tests. For new readers, I will explain the
tests now.
The test are run against a standard collection of 14 files I
have put aside for these types of tests. The total size of the 14
files together are 269118 bytes. Some are .COM, some are .EXE and
some are .OVL files. The times reported below are the average of
10 tests for each program I tested.
The equipment I run the test on has changed. I am now using a
QT/2-6 computer.
This is a PS/60 clone with twelve (12) Megabytes of Ram
installed on the motherboard. The clock speed is 20Mhz. An 80386
is the main processor. An 80387 NDP is installed as well. The
hard drive used for testing is a Seagate ST-251 with an access
time of 23 ms. The price of the QT/2-6 is $2450 as tested.
A seperate sub-directory was created for testing purposes.
The drive was optimized (Mace 4.10) between tests to provide
accurate results. OS/2 (Beta) was used as the operating system
for these tests.
Here are the time results of the tests.
NAME TYPE OF OPERATION % REDUCED MINS SECS HUDS
========================================================
PKARC35 Create An Archive 34 Percent 00 09 02
ZOO150 Create An Archive 33 Percent 00 17 06
ARC520 Create An Archive 33 Percent 00 56 13
PKXARC Extract An Archive N/A 00 05 14
ZOO150 Extract An Archive N/A 00 07 15
ARCE Extract An Archive N/A 00 07 21
ARC520 Extract An Archive N/A 00 42 14
KEY: N/A=Not Applicable In This Test
As you can see PKARC has come in again as the fastest utility
for creating an archive. PKXARC is the fastest extraction
utility. ARC520 still does not recognize other archive formats.
PKARC35 will produce either it's own ARC format file or you may
produce an ARC520 formatted file. ZOO150 creates it's own
formatted file.
As computer speeds get faster, I expect to see these times
remain relatively stable. The work these programs do is disk
FidoNews 4-46 Page 4 14 Dec 1987
intensive. I expect that in the future speed gains will be from
faster drives, and not from faster computers.
I hope this helps some of you who are new to computers.
GIZLIB is a set of routines that are callable from either QB3 or
QB4. Some, such as ERRMSG, more resemble sub-programs than sub-
routines. To say this is not to overstate their value, but to
point out that, in general, they perform or can perform multiple
functions or entire routines.
Most of the routines are assembler based, but where it makes more
sense, they are in QB. In terms of speed and such, assembler
based is undoubtedly faster (though I doubt that the amount by
which it is faster is always noticeable) QB routines on the other
hand can be a bit more useful, the most noticeable difference
being that QB subroutines can alter string lengths while
assembler cannot. The downside is that QB routines are a bit
bigger, but I still appreciate having them right on hand and not
having to type them in numerous times.
II. Calling Conventions
If you are not familiar with calling library routines from QB,
you are advised to STUDY this in the QB books, as it is an
important aspect of calling sub programs.
Brief Rules:
A. The passed parameters shown do not need to be used
literally as is. That is, if a routine is documented as:
CALL myroutine(StringParm$, IntegerParm%)
The following convention will work just as well:
CALL myroutine(parm1$, parm2%)
The following will not (because the variable data
types are reversed):
CALL myroutine(StringParm%, IntegerParm$)
What this is saying is that called subroutine parameters
are only POSITIONAL, but they can have any name you choose
("IntegerParm%" vs "parm2%"), and as long as the TYPE is correct
(integer versus string variables, versus double precision etc),
and as long as the passed arguments are initialized correctly.
B. Unless otherwise noted, subroutines require non-string
arguments to be INTEGERS. This means that either a DEFINT a-z
statements is required early on in your program or numeric
arguments must be implicitly set to integers, ie; the "%" integer
declaration used.
C. Aside from the right TYPE of argument or parameter being
passed, and the use of integers, make sure you pass the right
FidoNews 4-46 Page 6 14 Dec 1987
NUMBER of arguments. If a program requires you to pass 7
arguments and either as a typo or because you only use 6, you
miss one within the parentheses, then as they say, unpredictable
results may occur.
D. In most cases, the examples shown will reference
parameters as variables.
ie: CALL subr(x%, y%, z$); where x, y and z$ are set to
certain values to get specific results from the routine. However
in many cases, you can pass arguments directly.
ie: CALL subr(1, 4, "String"). The times when you CANNOT do
such direct passing is when the subroutine is going to modify or
return one of the arguments passed. Some routines will change
one of the arguments to indicate an error or a level of success.
Those arguments that are altered or changed by the subroutine
MUST be passed as a variable. For example, if "subr" above uses
x, y and z$ to specify what you want it to do and y returns a
level of success or error situation, it would have to be passed
as a variable:
CALL subr(1, y%, "String")
E. Major QB 3.0 bug
There is a fairly well known bug in QB3 that creates non-
executing .EXE files when your program performs calls to
assembler routines. The work around is this:
DO NOT compile your source from INSIDE the editor to make a
.OBJ file.
DO exit to DOS and make the .OBJ file from DOS:
C>QB myprog /o;
Then when you link it, the EXE file will run.
By "fairly well known bug" I mean that most serious users
know about it. I have let MicroSoft know and provided 4 examples
and they now understand what the problem is, but DO NOT expect a
fix for it, because they are more intent on OS/2 and QB4 is now
out.
Here is a brief list of the available commands in GizLib and
a brief description of each one.
GizLib Quick Reference Guide
Version 1.3
Released: November 29, 1987
FidoNews 4-46 Page 7 14 Dec 1987
GIZLIB Index
-------------
BOXES ........... Outline one of 6 menu type boxes to
the screen.
* CHRP ............ Sound the speaker in a CHiRP
fashion.
CLOFF / CLON .... Disengage-engage keyboard Caps Lock.
** CLRKBD .......... Clear keyboard buffer of type-ahead
keys.
CMDLINE ......... Parse the command line into a string
array.
CPUINFO ......... Returns very low level system info,
cpu type etc.
DATE ............ Returns current day, month, year and
day of week as integers.
DFRMAT .......... Date Formatting.
+4 DIR.............. Returns DOS directory in a string
array.
DLRFRMAT ........ Numeric string formatting to Dollar
conventions.
DLY ............. Delay for x number of seconds.
DOSV............. Return DOS Version installed.
DRVSPACE ........ Return total and free drive space.
* ERRMSG .......... Display temporary message with
color, sound control.
EXIST ........... Determines if a file exists on disk
or not.
EXTMEM .......... Return the amount of Extended (AT)
memory installed.
FADE ............ Screen fade or dissolve routine,
maintains attributes.
FILCNT........... Returns the number of files in disk
matching a mask.
FED ............. BASIC text input routine.
** GETDSEG ......... Returns BASIC's DS (Data Segment)
** GETSTACK ........ Returns the state of BASIC's Stack.
** GET/SET DRV ..... Get or set the default drive.
** GET/SET VERFY ... Get or set the system VERIFY state.
GRAPH ........... Produce a Vertical or Horizontal
graph from an array.
KBLOOP .......... Enter a blind loop until a key is
pressed.
-3 LCASE ........... Convert a string to lower case
** MDLY ............ Delay processing for a number of
milliseconds.
NFRMAT .......... Extensive Numeric string formatting.
NLOFF / NLON .... Disengage-engage Keyboard Num Lock
PCASE ........... Convert string to proper case.
PINIT ........... Initialize the printer.
** PFILE ........... Send a disk file to printer.
PRTSCRN ......... Print the current display on the
printer.
PSTAT ........... Return the printer status.
QUIKPRT ......... Another implementation of BYTE's
qprint routine.
RAMFREE ......... Returns memory installed in the
FidoNews 4-46 Page 8 14 Dec 1987
system.
** RSTSCRN / SVSCRN. Restores a screen previously saved
by SVSCRN
U-,D- SCROLL .... Scroll a portion of the screen up or
down.
** SCROLLER ........ Scroll the screen left or right.
SCRLOFF / SCRLON. Set Scroll Lock Off.
SCRNDUMP ........ Dump the current display to disk.
SETERR .......... Sets DOS "ERRORLEVEL" code upon
program termination.
* SINFO ........... Equipment info: RAM, parallel,
serial, EGA and VGA.
-3 STRIP ........... Strip Leading and trailing blanks
from a string.
-3 STRIPL .......... Strip trailing blanks and tabs from
string.
-3 STRIPR .......... Strip leading blanks and tabs from
string.
TFRMAT .......... Time formatting
-3 UCASE ........... Converts a string to upper case
** WDW ............. Windowing subroutine with sound,
color control.
* Minor improvement from previous version
** New or Major enhancement in this release
-3 Routine is in QB3 USERLIB ONLY.
+4 Has altered syntax or requirements in QB4 (QLB).
GizLib can be downloaded from the author's bulletin board
system at (316)-684-8744.
It may also be SEAdog requested from 107/246. Request the
file "GIZLIB" (without the quotes) to get the entire package. The
file is archived and is about 120k.
If you are interested in metaphysical topics, expanding and/or
opening your mind to new thoughts, or just curious then you
should drop by StarSeed -- A New Age BBS in Albuquerque, New
Mexico. It's Node 15/1001 or you can call direct (505) 822-8268
AFTER 10 p.m. Mountain Standard Time (10 pm - 10 am, daily).
A special discussion area called Stargate offers interesting
comments on a wide range of New Age topics. WHAT IS NEW AGE?
Well, Omni Magazine took a stab at defining it in their October
issue. It was described as a consciousness, a concept, an
alternative religion, a sub-culture, a new era, and a holistic
approach to life. I would say it's all of the above. It's an
open-minded search for answers to life's questions. It
encompasses such things as astrology, sciences of the mind and
body, herbal medicine, native american practices, eastern
religion and other alternative religions, earth magic, crystal
power, the supernatural and/or para-normal.
On the lighter side, there is also a great Science Fiction
Conference and "OddQuest" -- a silly adventure game (just
starting).
StarSeed has been in operation around 6 months (the same Fido
Node has been around for over four years). I would like to start
a New Age Echo Conference if the interest is out there. If you
are so inclined, drop by StarSeed. If any nodes are interested
in such an echo, please contact me at 15/1001.
If you are keeping track of the various echomail conferences
that are forming almost daily, you will have noticed a rather
distressing trend: DUPLICATION OF SUBJECT MATTER. An example:
For more than two years (since before echomail) there has
been a discussion area on my board called "Electric Images".
When I let it out into the rest of the matrix I shortened the
name to simply "IMAGES". The subject of the conference has been
movies, via both theatre and videocassette, and "regular" video
as in "TV". As of last month, it had made it's way across the
country and had many enthusiastic participants.
Then I started seeing an area available on some of the large
echo hubs called "FILM", as well as another called "REVIEWS".
Both were supposed to have the same subject matter as IMAGES.
I started out by entering messages into these echoes, asking
who the coordinator was. I got no response (well, almost no
response; one person replied saying "coordinator? what's a
coordinator? why do we need one?") I tried again, this time
asking "if there is no coordinator, could someone at least tell
me who started this thing?" No response. Finally, after I
arranged to actually receive both echoes on my board, I decided
to concede to the greater distribution of FILM (which actually
had some messages in it) and merge my own conference into it by
renaming it to FILM. Meanwhile, after several more tries, still
no one answers to the title of coordinator in REVIEWS.
I am also seeing three different but similar "MUSIC" echoes,
and many more along those lines. The point is, I thought that we
had an "official keeper of the echolist" (Thomas Kenny) who puts
out an excellent list of echoes, along with their coordinators
and hub numbers. Heck, it was even included inside this very
newsletter! I guess not everyone reads it.
I don't have any particular solution to this problem, except
to say that I hope in the future that sysops, echomail
coordinators and all others involved in distribution will keep a
closer watch on what is actually going around, subject-wise.
I should also point out that experience has shown that an echo
with no coordinator doesn't last very long, and at best will
degenerate into random discussion and flames.
I would also like to take this opportunity to plug some of
the echoes that I coordinate here at NEVERBOARD:
SHORTWAVE - discussion of radio listening, including long-
distance reception on HF bands, as well as broadcast band,
scanners, satellites, and "PIRATE" radio. No ham radio.
FidoNews 4-46 Page 11 14 Dec 1987
AUDIO - discussion of stereo equipment and accessories,
sound reinforcement, tips for improved sound, and the recordings
that provide the best examples of Hi Fi.
FILM - discussion of movies, including those in theatres, on
videocassette and broadcast. Also video hardware such as HDTV,
Hi Fi VCRs, and satellite TV.
DR_DEBUG - The one and only! He's a little eccentric and yes,
he has been known to spill a little Gin on his magnetic media.
But you won't find a better authority on software for a variety
of computers, including IBM, COMMODORE, APPLE and ATARI. Ask
here, if he can't answer it then you don't need to know. The
Doctor is IN!
We also carry MUSIC, SF, HUMOR and many other conferences.
Come and get it!
From: The SysOp BBS Quantico, VA (703)640-2603
To: All Sysops
Subj: TROJAN ALERT
It seems SOFTGUARD may be distributing a TROJAN "unprotect"
program to erase disks and bolster their "shrinking" copy
protection business.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The following message was found on the Morningstar Keep node of
the Citadel BBS system (609)268-9597. What makes this message
especially alarming is the fact that, as far as can be
ascertained, so-called "shrink-wrap" license agreements have
never been shown to be enforceable in a court of law. Thus, not
only is it probably legal for you to make a backup copy of so-
called "licensed software", but if the publisher omits to
register the work with the Copyright office and submit two copies
of the software to the Library of Congress, he may not even be
entitled to attorney's fees and punitive damages even if he sues
you for real dishonest copyright infringement. (If the publisher
does register the work with the copyright office, it becomes a
published work and it becomes impossible for the publisher to get
any kind of trade secret protection, or enforce a prohibition
against reverse-engineering. (There goes the software protection
scheme!! -- A delightful dilemma for the software publisher.)
Consult your attorney for specific legal advice, but make sure he
doesn't consult for a software company. R.DHESI
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
From Ted Mozer @ Brick
**** DANGER !!!! Data Destroying Program !!!
The file called SUG.ARC (or SUG.COM) is purported to be an
unprotect for Softguard. It is, in reality, a real WORM of the
worst magnitude! This little gem will ask you to put your
ORIGINAL Softguard protected disk in the drive, and then BAM, it
displays this message:
"You have violated the license agreement under which you received
the software. All your data has been destroyed. This
destruction constitutes prima facia evidence of your criminal
violation. If you attempt to challenge Softguard Systems, Inc. or
the software vendor in court, you will be vigorously counter-sued
for infringement and theft of services; we believe that our case
will have more merit to it than yours. If you have any questions
concerning this matter, you are invited to contact our lawyers at
the following address:
Softguard Systems Incorporated
address and telephone number given -.
FidoNews 4-46 Page 13 14 Dec 1987
We'll be happy to explain to you the precarious legal position
you're in. We wish you good luck in restoring your software from
backups and we hope that in the future you'll act more like an
honest user and less like a thief.
Happy Computing."
... AND IT IS SERIOUS!!
It will look for drives A: & B: and, get this, a drive C: or
better!! In other words, it will wipe out the FAT on your hard
disk too, just to "teach you a lesson". Attorneys are presently
looking into what can be done to stick this up the lower
abdominal region of the person or persons responsible for it's
existence.
.. IF YOU HAVE IT, GET RID OF IT !!!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Interesting? Here's one from the Atlanta PC User's Group BBS,
home of the Lone Victor:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Date: 09-03-86 (17:14) Number: 3265
To: LONE VICTOR Refer#: NONE
From: BILL MOSS Recv'd: YES
Subj: SUG.ARC Sec'ty: PUBLIC
MESSAGE
Please take a look at SUG.ARC which purports to unprotect
Softguard, but destroys the diskette by erasing all files but not
the FAT. It appears to be in retaliation for your work. More
than ever we need your help with SOFTGUARD 3.00. The lecture
that goes along with SUG.ARC is too much!!!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Assuming that Softguard really did create this file, we have the
following comments.
First, Softguard's battle (battle? You might prefer to call it
terrorism) against protection busters is almost moot, for most
major software publishers have dropped the idea of copy-
protection altogether in favor of registered customer support.
Perhaps this very fact has put Softguard's management in a mood
bad enough to lash out thus.
Second, Softguard's legal position seems quite shaky to me. Last
year Vault corporation announced a software protection scheme
that would, if it detected a fraudulent effort to copy the
software, make "Vietnam look like a birthday party" (or some such
thing) by planting a worm that would slowly but surely destroy
the user's files. When Vault announced it's worm-based copy-
protection scheme, many knowledgeable people expressed the
FidoNews 4-46 Page 14 14 Dec 1987
opinion that Vault was likely to be liable for damages if people
lost valuable data because of the scheme. What Softguard seems
to be doing is definitely more vicious. Add together a probably
unenforceable license agreement (to which Softguard isn't even a
party as for as the user is concerned) and clear evidence of
vicious attempt to destroy the user's data, and you have a pretty
good case against SUG.ARC's creator. In fact, you could very
easily create a test case by (a) taking a legally-purchased copy
of Softguard-protected software; (b) unpacking it without ever
reading the "license agreement" in a state other than the handful
(such as Louisiana and Illinois) that attempt to make such
agreements enforceable; (c) having some valuable software on your
hard disk; (d) "accidentally" destroying any backup copy already
provided; and (e) trying to make a backup copy of the original
with the help of SUG.ARC. It would be interesting to see what
would happen if you then sued Softguard for damages.
Interesting, but not very surprising.
We think therefore that the Softguard folks (if SUG.ARC did
indeed originate from them) are relying on the individual not
having the financial resources to sue them or to withstand a long
legal battle if they sue him. It's therefore a strategy of
intimidation.
(As an aside: That such a strategy of intimidation could be a
viable one demonstrates a major flaw in this legal system.
Justice costs a lot, sometimes so much that one can't afford it.
There are several reasons for this, all avoidable, but none
appropriate for discussion in the message or under this topic.)
How do users fight back?
Perhaps we won't have to. It may be enough that the presence of
this dangerous file be made widely known.
Possibly as a result of the public outcry that followed it's
announcement of the worm scheme, Vault went into Chapter 11
bankruptcy -- poetic justice, I think. This left Softguard with
a near-monopoly on the software protection business in the IBM PC
world.
If the SUG.ARC file is indeed Softguard's creation, then it seems
to me they are following Vault down the Yellow Brick Road (or is
it the garden path?) -- and we look forward to more poetic
justice when the public outcry occurs again.
(As an additional aside: Don't rule out the possibility that an
outside party has created this file. There are a number of
people out there that do not like BBS's and do not like free
exchange of information. These people have defined their goal in
life to destroy all means of public information interchange,
including and especially, the BBS environment!)
9 Jan 1988
The next net 104 FidoNet Sysop Meeting. Contact Oscar Barlow
at 104/0 for information.
25 Aug 1988
(pending BoD approval) Start of the Fifth International
FidoNet Conference, to be held at the Drawbridge Inn in
Cincinnatti, OH. Contact Tim Sullivan at 108/62 for more
information. This is FidoNet's big annual get-together, and
is your chance to meet all the people you've been talking with
all this time. We're hoping to see you there!
24 Aug 1989
Voyager 2 passes Neptune.
If you have something which you would like to see on this
calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1:1/1.
There have been many changes and additions to the Nodelist in
Region 18. Nets have been added, Net Coordinators have changed,
Independent Nodes added and dropped, numbers changed, etc.
If you haven't updated your Nodelist lately (and why haven't
you?), please get NODELIST.345 and recompile your Nodelist. It
may save you a few needless calls to non-BBS numbers.
Nets 116 and 362 have NEW Coordinators and Host numbers.
Utility authors: Please help keep this list up to date by
reporting new versions to 1:1/1. It is not our intent to list
all utilities here, only those which verge on necessity.
Membership for the International FidoNet Association
Membership in IFNA is open to any individual or organization that
pays a specified annual membership fee. IFNA serves the
international FidoNet-compatible electronic mail community to
increase worldwide communications.
Member Name _______________________________ Date _______________
Address _________________________________________________________
City ____________________________________________________________
State ________________________________ Zip _____________________
Country _________________________________________________________
Home Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________
Work Phone (Voice) ______________________________________________
Zone:Net/Node Number ____________________________________________
BBS Name ________________________________________________________
BBS Phone Number ________________________________________________
Baud Rates Supported ____________________________________________
Board Restrictions ______________________________________________
Your Special Interests __________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
In what areas would you be willing to help in FidoNet? __________
_________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
Send this membership form and a check or money order for $25 in
US Funds to:
International FidoNet Association
c/o Leonard Mednick, MBA, CPA
700 Bishop Street, #1014
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813-4112
USA
Thank you for your membership! Your participation will help to
insure the future of FidoNet.
Please NOTE that IFNA is a general not-for-profit organization
and Articles of Association and By-Laws were adopted by the
membership in January 1987. The first elected Board of Directors
was filled in August 1987. The IFNA Echomail Conference has been
established on FidoNet to assist the Board. We welcome your
input to this Conference.
The IFNA publications can be obtained by downloading from Fido
1:1/10 or other FidoNet compatible systems, or by purchasing
them directly from IFNA. We ask that all our IFNA Committee
Chairmen provide us with the latest versions of each
publication, but we can make no written guarantees.
System Enhancement Associates SEAdog $60.00 _____
SEAdog price as of March 1, 1987
ONLY 1 copy SEAdog per IFNA Member
Fido Software's Fido/FidoNet $100.00 _____
Fido/FidoNet price as of November 1, 1987
ONLY 1 copy Fido/FidoNet per IFNA Member
International orders include $10.00 for
surface shipping or $20.00 for air shipping _____
SUBTOTAL _____
HI. Residents add 4.0 % Sales tax _____
TOTAL _____
SEND CHECK OR MONEY ORDER IN US FUNDS:
International FidoNet Association
c/o Leonard Mednick, MBA, CPA
700 Bishop Street, #1014
Honolulu, HI. 96813-4112
USA
