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. 1:1/1 is a Continuous Mail system, available for
network mail 24 hours a day.
Copyright 1989 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. IFNA may also be contacted
at PO Box 41143, St. Louis, MO 63141.
Fido and FidoNet are registered trademarks of Tom Jennings of
Fido Software, 164 Shipley Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94107 and
are used with permission.
We don't necessarily agree with the contents of every article
published here. Most of these materials are unsolicited. No
article submitted by a FidoNet SysOp will be rejected if it is
properly attributed and legally acceptable. We will publish
every responsible submission received.
Table of Contents
1. EDITORIAL ................................................ 1
Having a good time, Glad I'm still here .................. 1
2. ARTICLES ................................................. 2
DeathNet Sparks Life in IFNA ............................. 2
IFNA: Do or Die .......................................... 8
NCLM Contest 2 ........................................... 12
New Nodes Starting In FidoNet ............................ 14
Elections in FidoNet ..................................... 15
An Apology of Sorts ...................................... 19
3. LATEST VERSIONS .......................................... 20
Latest Software Versions ................................. 20
And more!
FidoNews 6-36 Page 1 4 Sep 1989
A funny thing happened to me on the way to the retirement home.
You might say that I changed my mind, and leave it at that. But
actually, there was much more to it.
You see, I received some very touching mail from a lot of people
out there. Several friends also asked me to re-examine my
reasons for leaving the job of FidoNews Editor. And so I did.
What I discovered was that I actually liked the job. And that in
spite of some of the problems that I have had, it was worth it.
So when I was asked again at FidoCon whether I would be willing
to reconsider, my response was that if the IFNA board wanted me
to stay, I would do so.
They asked. I'm staying. Thank you all for your kind mail.
Thanks also to those of you who volunteered to take on the job.
It's good to know that there are so many of you out there who are
willing to do good things just for the sake of seeing them done.
Now, on to something much more interesting. There is a net-wide
plebiscite coming. I can't emphasize enough how important I feel
it is for everyone in FidoNet to vote in it. Whether your vote
is in the affirmative or negative is up to you (in fact I haven't
decided yet), but you really should vote, one way or the other.
The right to vote is just like a lot of other things: if you
don't use it, you may lose it. Don't take that chance. When the
time comes, cast your ballot.
DeathNet Sparks Life in IFNA
----------------------------
A funny thing happened on the way to FidoCon '89: members of the
Secret Sysop Society, a group from New Jersey's 'affectionately
named' DeathNet-107, hatched a careful and clever plot for a
dramatic palace revolution.
And while their plan blew up almost as spectacularly in its
failure as it would have in success, they achieved A Good Thing
for IFNA and, by implication, FidoNet<tm>.
Having watched the palace revolution unfold and fail, yet still
achieve something undeniably significant, I feel compelled to
share my observations. This "one man's viewpoint" of FidoCon is
my attempt -- as a participant in the most political event in my
sheltered life -- to share some of the background to a truly
amazing weekend.
If At First You Don't Succeed . . .
-----------------------------------
I remember DeathNet from Cincinnati. It was my first visit to
FidoCon, and they were there in the background in support of an
attempt to have IFNA appoint a VPTC (Vice-President Technical
Coordinator, who had also served as FidoNet International
Coordinator in the past) who would, in effect, "put David Dodell
in his place".
I couldn't help wondering what it was that bothered them so much.
My experience of FidoNet had been mostly good, especially after I
discovered my personal savior: it only hurts when you take it too
seriously.
They seemed to be taking it far too seriously.
But that was more a mild undercurrent of discontent than a palace
revolution. While there was no shortage of politics in Cincinnati
(at first I was silly enough to think I was there just to party),
it was more a game than a battle.
San Jose was a different story. Still unhappy with the FidoNet
coordinator structure, the Secret Sysops wanted to change the
world. This time, they had more than just an idea: they had a
detailed, timed-to-the-minute battle plan, the result of three
months of careful -- and one might even say furtive -- preparation.
FidoNews 6-36 Page 3 4 Sep 1989
There's no doubt the world of IFNA needed changing. It was
limping from fight to fight as it traversed the back alleys of
FidoNet, hauling itself from impotence to incapacity. Many of us
went to FidoCon hoping to find some way to revive the good in
IFNA, despite the increasing attractiveness of euthanasia.
Few of us, however, shared the apparent DeathNet view that
FidoNet needed saving from itself. Even fewer saw IFNA as the
vehicle.
Instant Takeover
----------------
The scheme to take control of IFNA was brilliant in conception,
masterful in execution, and 'politically perfect' in timing.
While most people shrugged their shoulders and muttered about
'another screw-up' when the IFNA Board of Directors crippled
Vince Perriello's Bylaw amendment intended to enfranchise all
sysops, the Secret Sysops exploited it to maximum advantage.
It was almost impossible for non-IFNA members to take advantage
of the new At-Large membership category, tied as it was to a 180-
day qualifying period. The key here is 'almost', as discussion at
the intense every-Tuesday-night DeathNet meetings clearly
discovered.
Armed with this realization, DeathNet prepared its attack.
Notarized papers were drawn up, applications for At-Large
membership completed, votes in the IFNA BoD elections filled out,
and membership fees of $5.77 collected.
A bare 10 minutes before the close of voting at FidoCon, the New
Jersey delegation declared its hand. The first victory was won,
and it seated no less than nine 'friendly' board members at the
first post-election BoD meeting.
IFNA's history of indecision and inaction was about to change,
and not even the F-37 Stealth Cookie could overshadow it.
Majority Rules, Okay?
---------------------
Key players Phil Buonomo and Fabian Gordon rolled out duly
notarized proxies from the newly elected BoD members. The pair
carried six votes between them.
With the commitment of Thom Henderson, Tony Davis, and one or two
others to the revolution, they almost had a majority without
making a move. By the time they counted the votes of sympathizers
who were easily convinced it was time for 'action at any cost',
they 'owned' the board as it stood that day.
FidoNews 6-36 Page 4 4 Sep 1989
Once this became clear, the rest of the agenda was rolled out.
Slowly and quietly and, at first, only in the proverbial smoke-
filled back rooms. My support was sought in one such meeting,
where it finally became clear to me how good their basic concept
was, and how disastrous their planned method of implementation.
With control of the BoD, they intended to:
1) Appoint Ben Baker VPTC.
2) Re-establish the original VPTC-is-the-FidoNet-IC relationship
and, effectively, take immediate control of FidoNet.
3) Reject Policy 4.
4) Implement Bylaw changes which would enfranchise all FidoNet
sysops as IFNA members (essentially a repeat of Vince Perriello's
amendment, without the limitations applied by the outgoing BoD).
[There were 'smaller' items on the agenda, like the clumsy
attempt to have the board accept New Jersey as the site of
FidoCon 1990 without the usual involvement of the Site Selection
Committee, while I also heard rumors (they wouldn't have told me
this one to my face!) they wanted to abolish Zones. Yet these
seem somehow incidental . . . ]
They believed the net would 'buy' this instant-democracy, even
though it could not vote on the validity of the upheaval (or the
further planned changes) for another full year. I believed the
net would say "screw you", IFNA would go out with a bang, and
there'd be more hate, more fighting, more unnecessary pain in
FidoNet while it happened.
Too many things have been done to FidoNet without its consent.
This plan, while perhaps admirable, was just another example of
someone else making up our minds for us.
I volunteered support for any scheme which made all these things
available for the net to choose *after* being consulted. I could
not support yet another example of "trust us, we're doing this
for your own good".
Vested Interests?
-----------------
Right now you might be wondering about the motives of the new IC,
sitting there watching his job go up in smoke.
Let me guarantee you I would gladly have given it to anyone
with believable plans to advance FidoNet. But I would not happily
hand it over to a scheme which I believed had less chance of
working -- and more chance of doing real damage -- than the
current system.
FidoNews 6-36 Page 5 4 Sep 1989
This is not the time for me to go into detail on my hopes for the
FidoNet of the future -- you'll hear about that soon enough --
but suffice to say I would not have taken the job if I didn't
firmly believe the current structure has the potential to satisfy
the desires of the vast majority of sysops.
And I believed this satisfaction could be achieved more smoothly,
more cleanly, and less painfully than by any sort of revolution,
now matter how noble.
Spanners In The Works
---------------------
Many other people whose opinions I respect deeply -- like Vince
Perriello, Bob Hartman, Randy Bush, and even 'grandfather' Tom
Jennings, to name just a few -- worried as much as I did about
the DeathNet takeover.
They've all been outspoken about IFNA's failure, and they've all
been outspoken about failings of the current structure. They have
no particular axe to grind, nor any 'position of power' to
protect.
They, too, feel strongly that good things should be done *by*
FidoNet, not 'for' or 'to' FidoNet.
These people are but a small-yet-prominent sampling of the larger
group which saw the palace revolution as a potential declaration
of war. And who did something about it.
The Battle Begins
-----------------
While the revolutionaries sought to consolidate their voting
power, the rest of us sat and stared at the face of defeat. We
worried about the death of IFNA, which had done (and could still
do) some good for the net.
We talked about possible reactions from the sysops, the
developers, and the *C structure. We discovered ways of pulling
the rug from under IFNA's feet if it did attempt to take control.
And all the time we struggled with ways to make IFNA meaningful
without it having to be a choice between explosion and implosion.
The only way out was voting power, but even that we considered a
stalling tactic at best. We had no idea it would bring a
meaningful result, and were concerned it would merely help IFNA
sink further into lethargy.
FidoNews 6-36 Page 6 4 Sep 1989
Besides, to get our voting power we really needed to pull a
rabbit out of a hat. [Bob Hartman has a more graphic description
of where it was eventually extracted from, but that's another
story . . .]
Our first move was to make sure all votes were represented. BoD
members who hadn't made it to FidoCon were contacted, and proxy
or 'alternate' votes obtained. Outgoing IFNA President Bob
Rudolph flooded the San Jose Holiday Inn with faxes declaring the
validity of his alternate, Joe Keenan. Grandfather No. 2 Ken
Kaplan phoned his proxy confirmation into the Saturday night
board meeting, just seconds before the important voting started.
I carried Bill Bolton's vote from Division 12 after my own BoD
term expired the previous day.
And then there were the two vacancies. While the revolutionaries
believed they could place their own candidates here, sealing
their majority, we believed otherwise. One vacancy was for the
newly-created Division 3 (Australia), and I was the only Division
3 resident in sight.
As soon as I was voted into that position, I made a nomination
for the remaining at-large vacancy. Only a Curmudgeon could have
thought of it, and I thank him for it -- my nomination was Tom
Jennings.
Not even the palace revolutionaries would want to be seen denying
the 'founding father' a place in such important decision-making . . .
TJ is a forthright, honest, speak-from-the-heart kind of person
who has no time for political games. I think he'd prefer being
lost in a desert than sitting comfortably in a board meeting but,
thankfully, he felt strongly enough about the future of his
'baby' to take a seat on the BoD.
All of a sudden, the voting looked a lot more equal . . .
The Final Countdown
-------------------
Bill Bolton was re-elected VPTC. Wrong man for this particular
revolution. Les Kooyman, FidoCon organizer, political scientist,
voice of reason, presenter of the FidoCon Democracy session, was
voted into the President's position. Wrong man for a revolution
the people didn't know about.
DeathNet's proposed Bylaw changes had little chance of achieving
the two-thirds majority needed for success -- except for the one
enfranchising all sysops as no-charge IFNA members.
FidoNews 6-36 Page 7 4 Sep 1989
Further attempts at imposing control were going nowhere in an
arduous almost-all-night BoD meeting, until Phil Buonomo's
"Yellow Piece Of Paper" (standing out from the mass of white-
paper motions, it became known as the YPOP solution) was read to
the group in response to a request to lay *all* the cards on the
table.
It, too, was planned as a "we'll do it now, and let the people
judge us later". But it had potential, if only it could be
applied more reasonably.
Aggression receded. YPOP -- the skeleton of the IFNA plebiscite
motion announced in FidoNews 625 -- could become a real solution,
without the explosion.
It was a chance to start over on IFNA, a return to Colorado
Springs with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.
It was a chance for the net to decide its future -- with everyone
taking part, not just hearing about it afterwards.
It required compromise. Without the votes to force it through,
DeathNet had to accept less than instant revolution. It had to
accept a majority-of-the-net vote, not just the 'majority of the
vocal minority' support it had in mind. It had to be a net
decision, not a top-down edict.
Either group could have stalled IFNA into its grave by holding
firm. But if we could agree on the concept, and give it to the
net to decide, we would have something special.
We met on the middle ground. YPOP, considered only a part of the
revolutionary package, became THE package. Trimmed and tidied, it
became the high point of the political side of FidoCon.
It is a victory for DeathNet, a far better victory than it
sought. And it is your chance to join in the decision making, in
the molding of FidoNet for the future -- no matter what the
result, FidoNet will be a better place.
But it will only happen if you participate. It's time to stop
talking and start doing . . .
Thom Henderson
Chairman of the Board (?!?!)
International FidoNet Association
IFNA: Do or Die
I just got back from FidoCon'89 late last night (early this
morning), and right off the bat the very first thing I want to
say is that it was a great convention! Let's have a round of
applause for the gang in the Bay Area for doing such a wonderful
job! (clap, clap, cheers from the sidelines, whistles, et
cetera)
There were a lot of good seminars with good speakers, somewhat to
my surprise there was a very good after dinner speech by John
Dvorak after the banquet, and there were scads of interesting
people (i.e. sysops) to meet and talk with. One rather odd thing
did happen, though. Somehow I wound up as Chairman of the Board
of IFNA. I'm still not quite sure how/why that happened, but it
made for some interesting experiences (and I'm sure it'll keep a
couple of echomail conferences from getting too dull in the next
few months).
So what am I going to do as Chairman of the Board? Not much, and
mostly it's already done. A Chairman doesn't do much of anything
except chair the board meeting (just like the title says), and
that's over (more on that in a minute). The chairman doesn't
make motions and can't even vote (except to break a tie).
While I'm on this subject, let me mention a few things that I
most certainly WON'T do. There were a lot of rumors and a large
measure of loose talk and fairly brainless gum-flapping going on
in a couple of suites about What I'm Going To Do that ought to be
addressed.
* I'm not going to outlaw Wazoo.
* I'm not going to mandate that GroupMail replace echomail.
* I'm not going to charge people to be in the node list.
* I'm not going to "use my position to commercialize the net"
(whatever THAT means).
Let's get real, people. Even assuming I wanted to do any of that
(which I don't), none of it is anything that a chairman of the
board can do. For that matter, none of it is anything that
anyone could do if the sysops don't want it done. Anybody who
thinks they are going to make 4,000 sysops (or even one sysop) do
anything they don't want should have his head examined. The
FidoNet sysops are going to continue to do as they damned well
please.
FidoNews 6-36 Page 9 4 Sep 1989
So what *AM* I going to do? Like I said, chair the board
meeting, which is over. If you don't mind, I'd really rather
talk about that.
It was a heck of a board meeting! The best I've ever seen. I
guess an advantage of me being the chair is that it got a lot of
people involved. The first board meeting was Friday night, and
it was pretty much restricted to a few officer elections. Me as
chairman, Kris Veitch as secretary/treasurer, and John Knox as
acting secretary. Everything else was postponed until Saturday
night. Then all day Saturday right up to (and even into) the
board meeting phone calls went all over the place, locating every
board member who wasn't there and obtaining a proxy for someone
who WAS there. The only one who couldn't be reached was Henk
Wevers, who is on vacation. The two vacancies on the board were
both filled as soon as the board resumed session, so as a result
23 out of 24 board seats were represented during the session.
That's the highest percentage we've ever had!
And John Knox did a great job of keeping track of everything that
happened (I'll say he did an outstanding job if I get a copy of
the minutes later this week [*grin*]). Full minutes should be in
the next issue of FidoNews. (If they aren't, then my own somewhat
less complete notes will be in the following issue and I'll be on
a plane to Oklahoma to visit John [*wider grin*].) The full list
of everyone who served on the board will be in the minutes, but
here's my own slightly sketchy list:
Stephen Barnes
Bill Bird
Phil Buonomo
Randy Bush
Jim Cannell
Don Daniels
Tony Davis
Fabian Gordon
Bob Hartman
Thom Henderson
Tom Jennings
Steve Jordan
Joe Keenan
John Knox
John Lamb
Rob Lerman
Vince Perriello
Mort Sternheim
Matt Whelan
My apologies to anyone I left out. Lest I forget, the new
officers are:
FidoNews 6-36 Page 10 4 Sep 1989
President: Les Kooyman
Vice President Fabian Gordon
Vice President/TC: Bill Bolton
Secretary/Treasurer: Kris Veitch
As you can see, we had a pretty high-powered meeting.
Surprisingly, it went very smoothly (aside from the occasional
curmudgeon in need of sitting-on). There was a lot of serious
discussion, but it never got heated. We were never even close to
having a shouting match.
A lot of the attendees had very definite goals they wanted to
accomplish. Said goals weren't always compatible, but a plan of
action was hammered out that is going to make major changes in
what IFNA is and how it works. To sum it up in a nutshell, one
of two things is going to happen:
1) IFNA is going to become what it was meant to be, the
democratic voice of the sysops in network management.
2) Or, IFNA is going to be dissolved.
The choice, of course, is yours. You'll be hearing soon (if you
haven't heard already) that there is a referendum coming that
will be asking YOU which of the above you would like to see
happen.
By "you" I don't mean "you who paid $25 to join IFNA", I mean
"you the sysop of a public BBS in FidoNet". One of the things
that happened was that the IFNA bylaws were amended to make every
sysop in FidoNet a full voting member of IFNA -- no dues or fees
required. IFNA is now where it belongs, in your hands.
Furthermore, if the majority of *ALL* FidoNet sysops don't vote
in favor of rebuilding IFNA, then IFNA will be dissolved. No
hanky panky, no hedging, no waffling about what the lack of a
vote means. If IFNA does not receive a solid "YES" vote from the
majority of all sysops, it's history. If a sysop cares so little
that he does not bother to cast a vote, then that will be exactly
the same as voting against IFNA.
Furthermore, the referendum is mandated to be completed no later
than 1 December 1989. As far as I'm concerned, that means that
if it isn't, then IFNA will be dissolved. Granted that a net-
wide referendum is a fairly major undertaking involving a lot of
cooperation from a lot of people (including, I'm sure, the
existing *C structure). But if IFNA is unable to garner the
support or the manpower to coordinate the vote, then in my
opinion it is not worthy to be trusted with network management.
It goes even beyond that. If passed, the referendum mandates
that IFNA must submit a new set of bylaws and a new network
policy document to the sysops for approval no later than 1
February 1990. This means that before the February board meeting
IFNA must:
FidoNews 6-36 Page 11 4 Sep 1989
1) Run a net-wide vote of all sysops asking if IFNA should
manage FidoNet.
2) Win the vote by a clear majority of all sysops.
3) Draft new bylaws and a new policy document.
4) Run another vote for approval/disapproval of the proposed
bylaws and policy.
5) Have the proposed bylaws and policy approved by the
membership (i.e. the sysops).
Anything less than 100% and IFNA will be history. If it can't
get the support and/or can't do the work, then it's high time we
quit wasting time on it.
We'll soon know if IFNA can handle the job. Even sooner we'll
know if YOU want it to try.
Closing notes:
* My thanks to Randy Bush, who was instrumental in developing
the wording of the referendum. I'm looking forward to seeing
him again at the February board meeting.
* My special thanks to Phil Buonomo, who through months of
seemingly endless devotion, persuasion, legwork, and sheer
drive is the man who really made all this happen.
Butch Witherspoon
Fido 1:288/525
National Computer Learning Month
1989 CONTESTS FOR STUDENTS
Video/Storyboards on Using Computers and Software as Tools
6 Grand Prizes: One grand prize winner in each category. The
winner and his/her school or organization will both recieve a
computer system.
24 Second Prizes: Four second prize winners in each category.
Each winner and his/her school or organization will recieve
software programs.
48 Third Prizes: Honorable mention certificates for winning
students.
Description: Computers and software are wonderful tools for
creating video presentations. To produce exciting video
presentations, students can develop thier own scripts and
graphics, animate pictures and words, sequence computer screens,
connect a computer to a video camera or add captions or computer
generated art to videotapes they have made.
Rules: To enter this contest, submit your original video
presentation with the theme of using computers and software as
tools. The video presentation may not exceed 30 minutes. The
presentation might be a fictional or cartoon story that
introduces people to the value of computers and software as tools
or a serious presentation of how to use a computer and software
as a tool in a specific way. You do not have to use a computer or
video equipment to produce the presentation; however, the theme
must be using computers and software as tools. If you produce a
video tape, submit it as your entry. If you use a computer, do
not send a disk; either send a videotape of your presentation
being presented on the screen or send a printout of each screen
(storyboard) in the correct order. If you do not use a computer,
submit storyboards of your video presentation using any materials
you have available. Storyboards are pictures of what each screen
in a video looks like, put in the correct order. Entries will be
judged on originality, content, quality of script or story,
design, illustration and overall attention to detail.
Join the National Computer Learning Month Echo and get in on the
excitement! For more information send NetMail to Butch
Witherspoon, SEGUARO BBS, Fido 1:288/525 or write to NCLM Echo,
P.O. Box 8045, Granite City, IL 62040-8045.
I've been part of FidoNet for approximately 3 years now. I've
been a user for the most part, and recently became a sysop of
my own board around 6 months ago. I'm sure most of you probably
agree that I am still a baby in the life of FidoNet, although,
I feel I should express my views on a subject. I would like to
make it clear though, that I am in no way trying to blame
anybody, and even the party's involved are at no immediate fault
of their own.
When I started as a sysop of my own OPUS CBCS, I received a lot
of help from fellow sysops helping me get set up properly, and
I thank them for it, but the reason I am submitting this
article, is my concern that other new sysops might have to go
through the same ordeal as I did. It all started once I
received my NEW long awaited node number, as a new sysop and
member of FidoNet, there was still lots of information that I
wasn't aware of at the time, one of which was that it was left
up to me to tell all the sysops involved up the track who I was
polling off of, so that they can adjust their routing files
accordingly. I admit it should be up to me to tell the people
involved, after all, I'm the new kid on the block. What
concerns me though, is how all these people expect a
'New Kid On The Block' to know who in fact is supposed to know
this information. An example, As a 'New Kid On The Block' I
decide to poll off of Joe Bloggs of 640/999. I am expected to
know all the boards that would be part of the routing so that I
can tell them that I now poll off of 640/999. As you may guess
this can sometimes be a little difficult, as I found out when I
started to poll from a node in Brisbane and then tried about 3
months later with another node in Sydney. Both times It took
countless messages all over the place, a lot of angry people and
of course a few voice calls interstate. It was getting to the
point where I was starting to think it wasn't worth the trouble.
Well, I'm happy to say, I am now properly set up in everyone's
routing files, but only after a lot of headache's. What I'm
suggesting here is just a simple clause in a message to let
him/her know which sysops need to know of your existance.
It's only common courtesy to let him/her know anyway, so how
about it fellow sysops, us new nodes are the reason FidoNet
exists, if it wasn't for us, there would be no need for
such a network. I would really like to hear some people's
views on this subject, so feel free to send me netmail on
3:640/200.
Selection of FidoNet coordinators by election is becoming quite
common in FidoNet. Unfortunately, the experience gained in
conducting those elections has not been shared as widely as it
should have been. Thus, we have each net or region re-inventing
the wheel for each election. This takes extra time, and does not
provide a consistent process throughout the network. I hope that
this article will serve as a step towards sharing what we have
learned, as it is only through learning from the experience of
conducting elections that the best policy can be formulated.
Not all election procedures should be exactly the same, since not
all election environments in FidoNet are the same. An election
in a Net with five members is not the same as one conducted in a
large Region. However, there are aspects which are common, and a
set of election guidelines is a valuable tool for introducing
democracy into FidoNet.
Software
--------
How important is specialized software for conducting elections in
FidoNet? When the issue was first raised, I believed that an
election would not be possible without such software. I no
longer hold that opinion, although I do see how such utilities
could save time for the person(s) conducting the election. For a
small election on a local net level, such software would probably
be more trouble than it was worth, unless votes are common.
Such software could perform several valuable functions. It could
make voting easy, thus encouraging a high turnout. It could
prepare confirmations and lists of votes, removing the burden
from the vote conductor. Finally, it could improve the security
of the election, and perhaps even provide a completely secret
ballot.
There are, however, several disadvantages to using specialized
voting software. It must be installed on each voter's system, so
the design must emphasize ease of installation and ease of use.
It must be available for many different platforms, as we have
many different hardware configurations in FidoNet, ranging from
vanilla MS-DOS to almost-compatibles to non-IBM and non-MS-DOS.
Designing an easy-to-install, easy-to-use, foolproof system for
this environment is quite a challenge. Finally, the introduction
of voting software may in fact REDUCE confidence in the election;
"black boxes" and "magic" are generally distrusted, whereas
sending a netmail message is something that is easy and
comfortable.
FidoNews 6-36 Page 16 4 Sep 1989
The bottom line is that successful elections have been conducted
without the use of specialized voting software. If such systems
become available in the future they may enhance the election
process, but they are not a prerequisite.
The Tradeoff
--- --------
There is a basic conflict in FidoNet voting between secrecy of
ballot and ability to verify the vote. I feel that a secret
ballot is entirely as important as the vote process itself. In
an election for the local NC, I don't want my friend to know that
I didn't vote for him. It's none of his business, or anyone
else's business, who I voted for.
The closest we can come to a true secret ballot in FidoNet, short
of using voting software, is to choose an individual to conduct
the election. This individual must have certain qualifications:
not be a candidate for the office, be honest, and be trusted by
all parties. However, no matter how noble the individual is who
conducts the election, safeguards should be put in place to
insure that there is no question as to the conduct and count.
Such safeguards are as much for the benefit of the vote conductor
as for the protection of all candidates.
The Safeguard
--- ---------
There are ways to provide a public check on the vote count
without compromising the principle of a secret ballot. These
ideas are not my own, but have been set forward in various
echomail conferences, including the pol5_dem development effort.
At first, I thought that this was a lot of trouble for the poor
snook conducting the election, with little actual benefit. As
the discussion progressed, it became clear that there is extra
effort, but significant benefit. Not only does this scheme
prevent deliberate fraud, but it catches honest mistakes. Even
saints have been known to make an occasional clerical error.
The idea is simple. Each voter is assigned a password, known
only to that voter. (Or the voter picks a password when casting
the vote.) Then individual votes are posted, using these
passwords. Each voter can verify their individual vote, but
cannot deduce others' votes.
One more piece of information is necessary -- a list of the nodes
who voted. Without that cross-check, the vote conductor could
"stuff the ballot box" to the extent that people did not vote,
making up passwords and assigning votes to them. If there is a
list posted of who voted, and someone who did not vote sees their
name in the list, they can point out the problem.
FidoNews 6-36 Page 17 4 Sep 1989
A quick example. In an election for NC, the two candidates are
Joe and Sue. The vote runs like this:
Node Sysop Vote Password
115/123 Elmer Fudd Joe ABC
115/456 Donald Duck Sue DEF
115/789 Joe Smith Joe GHI
115/987 Sue Jones Sue JKL
115/654 Deputy Dawg Joe MNO
115/321 Tweety Bird does not vote N/A
The person conducting the election would post the following:
The following nodes voted: 123, 456, 789, 987, 654
ABC Joe
DEF Sue
GHI Joe
JKL Sue
MNO Joe Results: Joe, 3
Sue, 2
In a real election, the passwords would be more imaginative, and
the results would not be posted in node-number order. You can
see how this method allows each voter to verify that their vote
was correctly tallied. If Tweety Bird sees her node number
listed in the list of voting nodes, she can point out the
problem.
What Has Been Learned
---- --- ---- -------
I have recently been associated with two elections in FidoNet,
and several aspects have been interesting. Both of these
elections were conducted by Rick Moore (115/333), who was
impeccably qualified using the criteria mentioned above.
The first election was to pick a Regional Coordinator for region
11. Candidates (sysop or NC) were nominated by Network
Coordinators. No "screening" was done of nominations beyond
requiring that each candidate be nominated by an NC. The slate
of eight candidates was then presented to the NC's for a vote.
(There are 21 NC's in region 11.) It was decided before the
election was held to not post the individual vote totals; only
the winner was announced. This step was taken because it was
felt that candidates might be unwilling to risk being embarrassed
by a poor showing.
With 20/20 hindsight, it would have been better to post the
individual vote counts, or to use a method like the one outlined
above. Since the winner is from the Chicago area, and the ZC is
from the Chicago area, and the conductor of the vote is also from
the Chicago area, it was obvious to the casual observer that
massive vote fraud had occurred. Actually, I say this only as an
illustration of how the public posting of the votes is a
protection to the person conducting the election as well as to
the candidates.
FidoNews 6-36 Page 18 4 Sep 1989
As I write this article, we are in the final phase of an election
to pick a new Network Coordinator for net 115 in Chicago. Again,
Rick Moore is conducting the election. Based upon experience
from the first election, changes were made in the rules for the
NC election. First, the individual vote totals will be posted.
Second, the winner will be chosen by MAJORITY (as opposed to
plurality). Since no one candidate received a majority of the
votes cast in the election, a runoff is being held between the
top two candidates.
The learning experience continues with an election for RC in
region 12, again to be conducted by Rick Moore. This election
will differ from the previous one in several important respects.
The nomination process is the same, but votes will be posted
using a password method as described above. Instead of NC's
voting for the RC, individual sysops will vote. Again, the
winner will be selected by majority, with a runoff if necessary.
(Or runoffS. We came within one vote of having a three-way
runoff in the net-115 election, as the top three candidates
received 9, 9, and 8 votes each. If three candidates had been in
the runoff, it is probable that no one would have received a
majority in that election either, requiring yet another runoff
between the top two candidates. This is an example of the type
of unexpected event which can always show up to illustrate that
the rules which were so carefully prepared do not cover all
contingencies.)
What Next?
---- ----
We are still learning. More experience is needed with the voter-
password method, which has not yet been used in a region-level
election. Another aspect is sysops voting for an RC; the turnout
in the election will be an indicator of whether RC's should be
elected by vote of sysops or by vote of NC's.
As more elections are held in FidoNet, and as we share the
experience, it will not be necessary for each election to "re-
invent the wheel". Our hobby is, after all, communication. We
must communicate what we learn, or we'll each have the honor of
climbing the same learning curve.
Over the past few months, I have become aware of a previously un-
known character flaw I possess. It seems that I have a bad ten-
dency to group people together. I want to make it clear here
and now that I do NOT feel that the majority of members of the
*C structure are bad. Some may have shown poor judgement lately
in the implementation of Policy 4, but I do not believe that
there has been any malicious intent behind that implementation.
Additionally, some people have been embarrassed and hurt by some
of the articles I have written. I hereby render my apologies to
Jim Dunmyer and JJ Marquez. Jim is a good example of what a *C
should strive to be, and if there were more like him, perhaps
FidoNet would not be in the mess that it is. As for JJ, while I
do not agree with his interpretations concerning conferences, I
feel that he was caught in a situation that was not of his mak-
ing, and therefore also did not deserve the chastizement I gave
him in a recent article. Fellows, no-one's perfect, and I'm not
even close. I'm sorry, and hope that you'll realize that my
intentions were not malevolent in nature, either.
As for Steven Bonine, I do believe that he's trying to improve
things, and that he bears no malevolence towards the nodes of
FidoNet, nor a desire for power over others. Considering my own
flaws, and the extraordinary measures I was forced to undertake
to bring a chance at democracy back to FidoNet, I don't feel
comfortable faulting the man any more. I urge Steve to take a
little more time in making decisions of policy, as they have
such serious ramifications for the network.
At FidoCon, several RC's have expressed an intent to bring demo-
cratic representation to FidoNet, and claimed to be moving in
that direction already. Since TJ's mention of trust, I have
decided to take them at face value unil proven otherwise. I
also hereby resolve not to let a few bad apples spoil the bunch,
provided the rest of the bunch is willing to help weed out the
bad apples. I urge others to do so as well.
I'm sorry if I offended anyone else. I'm not a diplomat, and I
sometimes step on toes trying to accomplish a goal. I believe
in getting the job DONE, no matter what the cost. I am proud of
of that reputation, but it does tend to cause grief for myself
and others. For that, I apologize.
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.
5 Oct 1989
20th Anniversary of "Monty Python's Flying Circus"
11 Oct 1989
First International Modula-2 Conference at Bled, Yugoslavia
hosting Niklaus Wirth and the British Standards Institution.
Contact 1:106/8422 for more information.
11 Nov 1989
A new area code forms in northern Illinois at 12:01 am.
Chicago proper will remain area code 312; suburban areas
formerly served with that code will become area code 708.
23 Nov 1989
26th Anniversary of "Dr. Who" - and still going strong
30 Dec 1989
Telephone area codes (5, 3 and 0) are abolished in Hong Kong
If you have something which you would like to see on this
calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1:1/1.
Mort Sternheim 1:321/109 Chairman of the Board
Bob Rudolph 1:261/628 President
Matt Whelan 3:3/1 Vice President
Bill Bolton 3:711/403 Vice President-Technical Coordinator
Linda Grennan 1:147/1 Secretary
Kris Veitch 1:147/30 Treasurer
IFNA COMMITTEE AND BOARD CHAIRS
Administration and Finance Mark Grennan 1:147/1
Board of Directors Mort Sternheim 1:321/109
Bylaws Don Daniels 1:107/210
Ethics Vic Hill 1:147/4
Executive Committee Bob Rudolph 1:261/628
International Affairs Rob Gonsalves 2:500/1
Membership Services David Drexler 1:147/47
Nominations & Elections David Melnick 1:107/233
Public Affairs David Drexler 1:147/47
Publications Rick Siegel 1:107/27
Security & Individual Rights Jim Cannell 1:143/21
Technical Standards Rick Moore 1:115/333
IFNA BOARD OF DIRECTORS
DIVISION AT-LARGE
10 Courtney Harris 1:102/732 Don Daniels 1:107/210
11 Bill Allbritten 1:11/301 Mort Sternheim 1:321/109
12 Bill Bolton 3:711/403 Mark Grennan 1:147/1
13 Irene Henderson 1:107/9 (vacant)
14 Ken Kaplan 1:100/22 Ted Polczyinski 1:154/5
15 Scott Miller 1:128/12 Matt Whelan 3:3/1
16 Ivan Schaffel 1:141/390 Robert Rudolph 1:261/628
17 Neal Curtin 1:343/1 Steve Jordan 1:206/2871
18 Andrew Adler 1:135/47 Kris Veitch 1:147/30
19 David Drexler 1:147/47 (vacant)
2 Henk Wevers 2:500/1 David Melnik 1:107/233
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
PO Box 41143
St Louis, Missouri 63141
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 second elected Board of Directors
was filled in August 1988. The IFNA Echomail Conference has been
established on FidoNet to assist the Board. We welcome your
input to this Conference.
