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. ARTICLES ................................................. 1
Zone 2 Excommunicated! ................................... 1
A letter from a FidoNet Sysop ............................ 3
What needs to be done, and NOW! .......................... 6
It's Put Up or Shut Up Time for FidoNet .................. 8
NCLM Contest 6 ........................................... 12
America...WAKE UP! ....................................... 13
Proposal for IFNA Direction .............................. 15
Distribution has changed ................................. 18
Those who live in Glass Houses ........................... 20
The New, Improved OPCNLIST ............................... 24
And more!
FidoNews 6-37 Page 1 11 Sep 1989
Zone 3 excommunicated Zone 2 last week, and I have to tell you it
was a lot of fun. Those who met me at FidoCon know I've been
really itching to excommunicate someone, but even they will be
amazed at the grand scope of this effort . . .
It was _almost_ as good as the one I had planned at San Jose --
top of my list there was Tom Jennings. That's one way to make
people sit up and take notice of a new IC, huh?
Truth is, the Zone 2 'excommunication' was but a small teething
problem in an otherwise worthwhile plan. We instituted a new
method of nodelist update distribution between the Zone
Coordinators last week, and it seems likely that from this week
on all Zone nodelists will be 'in synch' for the first time in
several years.
Because of time differences from Zone to Zone, and with some
Zones afflicted by poor phone lines and high costs, it has been
particularly difficult to get all the Zone nodelist segments
shipped around the world quickly enough.
The new method relies on some fairly smart footwork by the ZCs
and the Zonegates, but it looks like it will work well. Next week
Zone 3 has even promised to reinstate Zone 2.
My thanks go to the ZCs and especially to the volunteer gate
operators, Randy Bush and Dick Gladden in Zone 1, Joop
Mellaart and Peter Janssens in Zone 2, and Luis Tombo (and now Pablo
Kleinman) in Zone 4. If they keep this up I think I'll double
their salaries . . .
I'm Excessively Annoying
------------------------
Boy, did we make a big mistake deciding to give the IC a listing
in each Zone. Hindsight is a wonderful thing -- it's now quite
clear to me what a disaster we inflicted on people.
What happened when someone in Zone 1 entered a message to
Matt Whelan? Their message editor dutifully plucked the 1:1/1000
address from FidoUser.Lst, and their packer dutifully sent the
message direct to my system in Sydney, Australia. Oh dear.
FidoNews 6-37 Page 2 11 Sep 1989
It may make some of you feel a little better to know the first
person who placed an IDD call was Steve Bonine, but it didn't
make Steve and I feel good.
Worse was to come, however. Bob Hartman sent me a simple message,
and his system made several calls without ever getting through the
transfer. So I decided to call him and 'collect' the message to
stop his system feeding the Telco.
Did I know which of my node numbers he was calling? Nah! So it
took about 10 calls including the failed connects before I
finally woke up to what was happening and dialed in as 1:1/1000.
Harry Lee was our next victim. Fortunately he had a cleaner line,
and got his message through first time. Others may have tried and
failed for all I know; if so, I must offer to them as sincere an
apology as I offer to Steve, Bob and Harry.
The out-of-zone entries for the IC have been pulled from the
nodelist this week. If you want to talk to me, send a message to
3:712/627 or 3:3/1000 and let the Zonegates do the talking . . .
[Tricking people into making international calls is pretty
annoying -- with any luck someone will complain and I'll get to
excommunicate the IC. Yeah!]
Dear colleague,
To start, I give you my apologies for choosing such an
"ordinary" topic for this letter.
We have all seen and sometimes participated (and still
see and sometimes still participate) on a big discussion that
involved (and still involves) a big (if not all) of FidoNet
during the last months.
POLICY4 was (is) the controversial matter, the very
center of that discussion.
I, myself, had some problems with the International
Coordinator regarding the new POLICY: I don't agree with a lot
of things, especially with the distribution of power along the *C
structure, to which I belong both as Regional and Zone
coordinator, and with the methods adopted for elections.
If I would be power-hungry, I could just sit down and say
nothing: I'm probably the most power-secure individual in the
net, as it is impossible to anyone (following the procedures
specified in POLICY4) to remove me.
But I'm obviously not (I'm writing this, right now). And
I expressed that from the beginning to David Dodell and others.
Before voting for POLICY4, we [Z4 sysops] protested
because we were not invited to participate on its writing, and
informed the IC that we wanted a chance to propose some changes
before it was finally approved. But David Dodell didn't give us
any answer at all, he simply ignored the text.
POLICY4 was unanimously rejected by the whole *C
structure of Zone 4, especially by myself. The reason: while
I'm not sure if "democracy" would be the best way to handle the
net, I'm positively against any kind of "aristocracy".
POLICY4 is definitely aristocratic, and that aristocracy
is made up by the RCs and ZCs.
That does not mean that the RCs and ZCs are the bad guys
on this story, or that they have bad intentions. I have treated
the ZCs for a while already, and sincerely trust on the ZCs good
intentions. I'm a Regional and Zone coordinator myself, and
trust on my good intentions :-).
But the legitimacy of the power structure at FidoNet is
questionable for many.
FidoNews 6-37 Page 4 11 Sep 1989
But with more discussions and x-large FidoNews we won't
change anything, or at least, we won't get any positive results.
In Zone 4, POLICY4 was approved only last week (by Z4's
*C structure), and if it was, it was done on a "preliminary
basis", which means that the decision could be reverted if the
same people vote against it anytime.
We [the representatives of Zone 4] voted for POLICY4 just
to avoid more trouble with the IC.
But I won't wait a second this time: something has to be
done, as soon as possible.
I personally don't trust in revolutions: they always
bring more problems than the ones they eradicate.
My proposal is to "go slowly but steadily": let's
propose some essential changes in POLICY4.
For example, I'd like the NCs to participate in the
elections; and think this could be a good start for bringing a
democratic form of administration for FidoNet.
I took the initiative and added a node named "Change
Policy4!" in the nodelist, with the number 4:4/5 (the Policy5
Project).
The Policy5 Project will write a Policy5 proposal, that
when finished, will be presented to the whole *C structure to be
voted.
But if we want a Policy representing the views of the
majority of FidoNet, we definitely need participation. Consider
yourself from now, invited to participate in the Policy5 Project.
We do need YOU! FidoNet needs YOU!
We will soon start an echomail conference to talk about
each matter, and to let everyone express his/her views and make
proposals for each topic. And we need desperately YOUR help, to
distribute the P5PROJECT echo in zones 1, 2 and 3.
Please, contact us right now: this is your best chance
to get involved.
I hope you got the basic idea. If you have further
questions, please don't hesitate to ask.
Thank you in advance for all your help in writing a
better policy for a better FidoNet, and for taking the time to
read this text.
FidoNews 6-37 Page 5 11 Sep 1989
My best regards,
Pablo Kleinman (4:1200/101)
FidoNet Coordinator for Zone 4
Buenos Aires, Argentina
For several months, you've been seeing articles written by yours
truly here which have been critical of the *C administration.
These articles began with my outrage over several RC's attempts
to wrest control of editorial privilege from the Editor of Fido-
News based on the idea that "they pay to have it distributed".
This incident was only one of a series of incidents involving the
*C structure which date back to the original creation and "pass-
ing" of Policy 4. Even before it was adopted, we had people like
Steve Bonine threatening an NC with removal because he hadn't
"jumped" fast enough, installing certain nodelist flags.
Then Policy 4 was 'voted in' in a secret ballot (ask Dave Dodell
to publish the FULL results, not just the vote count) in a two
week period (for a six thousand node network!?!). Zone 2 rejec-
ted it, Zone 4 rejected it, but it was shoved in place by the US
RC's anyway.
Then Jim Grubs was thrown out of the nodelist (by Steve Bonine,
no less) for defying the legitimacy of Policy 4.
Net 154 was thrown out in its entirety for having 3 nodes which
were "outside the traditional geographic boundaries" of its
network. It didn't matter that these nodes were nowhere near
being close to any other network. It was the failure of the NC
to cowtow to the RC that caused the networks removal "for the
good of FidoNet".
Net 170 had an NC appointed by the RC, and when a vote went
against the new NC, it was disallowed by the RC because it was
"against policy".
An NC/NEC admits to automatically 'echo chopping' someone's mail,
and gets away with it without so much as a "Boo!" from the *C's.
Now, certain NEC's talk about running the backbone as if the
systems belonged to them! At last year's FidoCon, Butch Walker
and Ray Gwinn both supported the idea that conferences belonged
to the moderators, not the *C's or FidoNet, or the backbone. Yet
people are now taking up 'network sides' about who can or can't
participate in a conference!
Is it just me, or does anyone else see a pattern here?
Listen, gang. I've gotta tell ya something...
All the *C's in the world may be a great bunch of guys, but when
a network policy in place makes it IMPOSSIBLE for the little guy,
the nodes, to have a say in things that affect him, its just
plain WRONG.
FidoNews 6-37 Page 7 11 Sep 1989
Now, a few weeks ago, Vince wrote an editorial telling people
that wanted democracy that they had missed their chance by not
supporting IFNA. I've come to the realization that he was right.
I suggest that you join IFNA. Make it strong, and make it a
voice that can be heard. Then, maybe you can make the following
proposals I have come true:
1) A self-perpetuating coordinator structure is wrong.
2) Network nodes should select their OWN NC, not have him ap-
pointed by some guy 3 states away who's never been in touch
anyway.
3) The IC should be appointed by the IFNA BoD. That's the way it
was done in the first place, and it was a good idea because...
4) Everyone in the nodelist should be an "At-Large" member of
IFNA, and get to vote for the "At-Large" BoD seats.
With that in mind, I have no problem with the IC appointing the
ZC's, and RC's being appointed by the ZC.
5) With all the hysterical jumping up and down and outright
propaganda about belonging to multiple networks, Policy should
contain a clause on discrimination. FidoNet should not discri-
minate on basis of race, creed, color, sexual orientation, OR
Network affiliation. This should be STRICTLY enforced.
This plan gives democracy a chance, while maintaining technical
integrity at the top of the organization. It also gives the
individual node TWO voices in the management of his network, one
in the direct election of his NC, and one in the election of the
IFNA BoD, which would appoint the IC.
People talk about the benefits of Top-down and Bottom-up manage-
ment. Well, this plan gives us all the advantages of both. It
puts the responsibility right back where it belongs, and doesn't
compromise the technical operation of the network. It also pro-
motes a strong IFNA, an idea for which I have to thank Vince
Perriello, and his editorials in FidoNews.
With all that's happened lately, don't you think its time the
*C's stopped stepping on the individual nodes, and started being
responsible TO them (read: YOU)?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FidoNews 6-37 Page 8 11 Sep 1989
Put up or Shut Up Time by Phil Buonomo, 1:107/583, 7:520/583
Rhetoric time's over, folks.
I'm on a plane flying back to Newark airport from FidoCon '89 as
I type this. There were a lot of things accomplished there, but
nothing compares to the actions of the IFNA Board of Directors.
In case you didn't know it, YOU now have a vote on deciding
whether or not to "re-boot" FidoNet.
Here's a little background. Several months ago, when Policy 4
was adopted, I became concerned with some of its pieces, pri-
marily the sections dictating that nodes would not be able to
select their NC's. It seems to me that TJ had set up FidoNet
with the intention that each net would set its own local
policies, and POL4 overruled this. I felt this was wrong.
Then, I began to investigate and learn of several perceived
abuses of policy mainly by several RC's. I reported on these in
FidoNews, but only the ones for which I had documentation, as I
feel strongly that spreading rumors is poor journalism. In doing
so, however, I was forced to report on some actions that I don't
think I would normally have done. In doing so, I stepped on some
people that frankly didn't deserve it. I'll get to that later,
but the point is that for each story I wrote, I received reports
of worse abuses for which there was no documentation available.
But writing articles in FidoNews wasn't enough. I knew that if
we were to have any representation of the individual nodes in
FidoNet, that action was going have to come from outside the
current administration. That's when Vince Perriello published an
editorial in FidoNews stating that the supporters of democracy
had "missed the boat" when they failed to support IFNA. THAT
SAME DAY, someone close to the Board of Directors claimed that
the reason IFNA never did anything was because they had never
elected enough directors who had the "intestinal fortitude" to
stand up for what they thought was right and should be done.
It was at that point that I thought to myself, "we have an elec-
tion coming up, why not GET some people on the board who don't
care about the flames, are willing to get things done, and are
willing to work together selflessly to accomplish the goal of
bringing democratic representation back to FidoNet. After all,
if IFNA wasn't the representative of the "grunt sysop", what
good WAS it? It was at this point that I talked to several of
my acquaintences who were members of IFNA, and convinced them to
"bet it all" by being elected to the Board. I campaigned in net
mail, and was able to garner enough votes to capture 7 seats in
the latest election. Hardly enough for a majority, and nowhere
near a 2/3rds majority to get By-Laws amendments passed, but
enough to put together a block of votes that might lend us the
ability to cut through the apathy that has been prevalent in the
majority of the Directors in the recent past.
FidoNews 6-37 Page 9 11 Sep 1989
Let me just say for the moment, however, that I can hardly blame
past boards for being afraid to do anything. They were flamed
horribly just for setting up IFNA, and unfortunately it seems
these days that anyone who wants to do ANYTHING to improve the
quality of life in FidoNet gets perceived as the "son of satan".
I explained to our slate that all they could expect of our move-
ment were flames, insults, and general misery, but each one was
willing to put up with all the crap because frankly, they all
cared enough about the network to see it through.
Once I'd lined up a slate of members, I approached the problem of
democracy in FidoNet (AND the problems inherent with IFNA lately)
in two phases. Firstly, what HAD to (and could) be done NOW, and
secondly, what couldn't be done at FidoCon, but could be done
within about six months.
For the short range, I envisioned IFNA opening up its membership
to ALL nodes in FidoNet cost-free (an idea that Vince Perriello
had actually pushed thru in the special election of earlier this
year, but due to wording problems with the amendment, it was not
effective). I also saw a need for using electronic mail in the
election process, as much of the costs that were being incurred
by IFNA were costs of running the election, i.e., land-mailing
ballots to all the members, paper and reproduction costs, etc.
Thirdly, I felt that IFNA should return to its original intent of
appointing the Vice-president/Technical Coordinator to serve as
the International Coordinator. This would reinstate IFNA's con-
trol over the publication of the nodelist and the legitimization
of its control over the administrative branch of FidoNet, the *C
structure, on behalf of the sysops it was supposed to represent.
I also felt that since Policies 1 through 3 had been ratified by
the BoD, and that a previous version of Policy 4 had been rejec-
ted by that same governing body, that they had the right and the
duty to reject the current Policy 4 and send it back to the RC's.
That took care of the short-term, but was obviously not enough.
We needed a stable organization that could withstand the tests of
time to represent our present and future sysops. The screw-up
regarding the new At-Large membership was just an example of a
set of By-Laws that were self-contradicting, confusing, and to a
great extent, completely ineffective. For the long term, I de-
cided to push for a re-writing of both the By-Laws of IFNA and
the FidoNet policy, to be voted on by ALL the members of FidoNet,
by making all the sysops at-large members. In this way, I felt
we could give democratic representation back to the sysops.
Well, things didn't work out completely according to plan, but
the board DID accomplish the goal I set out to. With people
like Vince Perriello, Matt Whelan, Randy Bush, Bob Hartman, Tom
Jennings, Thom Henderson, Fabian Gordon, Tony Davis, John Knox,
Jim Cannell, Steve Jordan, Jim Dunmyer, Don Daniels, and many
others too numerous to mention individually, working together,
we have given the choice back to the sysops of FidoNet. I talk-
ed Thom Henderson into chairing the board because he knows Par-
FidoNews 6-37 Page 10 11 Sep 1989
liamentary procedure and I knew we'd need to run the Board meet-
ings civilly to keep them from degenerating into shouting matches.
Besides which, outside of the running the meeting, the Chairman
really has no power at all, that's held by the President who is
the public representative of IFNA. The Board elected Les Kooyman
as IFNA President, one of the leaders of the DEMOCRACY movement.
Anyway, back to business. We have made everyone an at-large
member of IFNA. We have removed the postal restrictions from
the By-Laws. We did NOT reject Policy 4, but we did not accept
it, either. Either way, its probably a moot point now. Either
a majority of the sysops of FidoNet are going to approve of IFNA
standing up for them, or IFNA is going to cease to exist and the
nodes will be left with what they have now. If that's good
enough for the sysops of FidoNet, so be it. I've accomplished
my goal. Now its up to YOU to let us know how you feel. This
may well be your last chance to vote yourselves a democratic
administration. By the way, that proposal needs a 50% majority
of the sysops in the nodelist, NOT just a majority of the votes.
A NON-VOTE IS A NO VOTE, FOLKS!
The bottom line is that if you want democracy in FidoNet, you
HAVE to speak up and let your vote be heard. Apathy will keep
Policy the way it is now, and your last chance for a voice in
your own network will be gone.
Right now, I feel exhausted. I was asked in the airport if I'd
"had fun" at FidoCon. Upon reflection, the answer was "No." It
was a LOT of hard work, mostly writing and talking to others,
trying to convince people that this was a worth while effort.
Many people had given up on IFNA long ago. Thom Henderson had
had enough aggravation, so I had to resort to dirty tactics. I
reminded him that he'd helped to start IFNA, and that deep down
he probably cared enough to give FidoNet one more try. I had to
convince 6 good people that it was worth the flames and aggrava-
vation they'd get just to provoke a reaction from others in the
net (in order to seat a full and active Board). Make no mistake
about it, at the friday night Board meeting (after the election
results were announced), we had enough votes due to absenteeism
to pretty much do anything we wanted. But we adjourned until
Saturday night, primarily so that other alternates for the Board
could be found. People's claims of our "taking over" are there-
fore just plain unfounded. There was a LOT of convincing to do
in order to prove to the rest of the Board of our true intent-
ions. I think we were able to do so, after all, my proposal was
passed unanimously. This year's Board Meetings were a prime
example of what people with opposing viewpoints can accomplish
when they decide to put their differences aside & work together.
Speaking of working together, Tom Jennings pointed out that every
thing we wanted to do was going to take a lot of trust. The
Board was going to have to trust the *C's to help carry out the
vote in a fair manner. The administrative nodes were going to
have to trust IFNA to come up with a fair way to produce a work-
ing policy document. Matt Whelan, the new IC, promised that the
*C structure would do everything in its power to get out the
FidoNews 6-37 Page 11 11 Sep 1989
vote. Based on that trust, IFNA put its corporate structure on
the line. If this referendum is not carried, IFNA will be dis-
solved. Even if it IS carried out the current Board will be out
of jobs. Obviously, I included this point in order to prove our
intent was founded with the right reasons.
We accomplished what I'd set out to do, give the sysops of Fido-
Net one more chance to have a say. In this light, I will be happy
to tender my resignation as a member of the Board, if the sysops
of FidoNet feel I should. This whole thing was my idea, and I
don't want to give even the slightest appearance of impropriety.
I have appointed Tony Davis from Division 19 as my alternate,
and he would be taking my seat on the Board. I've helped to
give the sysops of FidoNet a chance at a voice in the adminis-
tration of their own network.
Well, that's about it. This is all I have to say on the matter,
and will not be responding to flames. Polite requests for infor-
mation MAY be answered if they come via netmail. I can't prom-
ise anything, because I have a feeling I'm going to get swamped.
The fate of FidoNet is now literally in YOUR hands. Either make
your voice heard, or things wil go on the way they are now.
National Computer Learning Month
CONTESTS FOR GROUPS
Computer Learning Month 1989 Event Contest
4 Grand Prizes: Two grand prize winners in each category. Each
winner and his/her group or organization will recieve a computer
system.
16 Second Prizes: Eight second prize winners in each category.
Each event leader and his/her event or organization will be
awarded software programs.
48 Third Prizes: Honorable mention certificates for winning event
leaders.
Categories: School/college
Community/ Group organization
Description: As an activity for computer learning month, we
encourage schools, user groups, colleges, community groups, and
local organizations to sponsor a local computer learning month
event. This event should be a get-together for sharing computer
and software skills, knowledge and projects among educators,
faculty, parents, students and community members.
Rules: The event must take place between September 15, and
October 31, 1989. Write a report,(not to exceed 1,000 words)
describing the event. All entries must be typed or word processed
and include: the objective and theme of the event, a description
of the preparation of the event; who attended (eg. parents,
senior citizens, etc.); number of people who attended; and an
evaluation of the results of the event. Include a copy of any
announcements, take-home activities, etc. Entries will be judged
on the compreheniveness and innovativeness of the event,
thoroughness of preparation, nuber and variety of participants,
the type and appropriateness of the activities and the results of
the event. Any photos, slides, videotapes,(not ot exceed five
minutes), press coverage or testimonials from attendees should be
included.
For more information, join the National Computer Learning Month
Echo (NCLM) or write to NCLM Echo, P.O. Box 8045, Granite City,
IL 62040-8045. NetMail can be sent to Butch Witherspoon, Fido
1:288/525. Join the fun!
I sit here with seven months before retirement from the Armed
Forces of this great nation. Tweenty years for THIS!, something
the U.S. Supreme Court calls "A form of their artistic expression
or freedom of speech". I'm outraged at this freedom of
exspression. An expression a Texan would use is "CRAP!" cause
that's what it is. I'm talking about FLAG BURNING. The same flag
that I used to pledge allegance too. Does anyone even remember
those days. "One nation for which it stands"...etc.
I recall that around 1971 there was another law passed to
prohibit prayer in schools. What replaced prayer in the halls of
our school, drugs and drug users. Hey, "you've come a long way
baby". As Merl would put it, "Are we rollin down hill like a
snowball headed for Hell?" It sure looks that way to me. They
took my rights of personal expression away (prayer in school) and
gave flag burning back to us as a form of personal expression.
Where is the logic?...I think they all just sit up there and get
high.
I really get concerned when I think these people may be the same
people who think their artistic expression to burn my flag is
more important than my moral decision to defend it. Think about
it...America wake up! Are we really gonna stand by and let them
force this crap on us? What if someone says it's his personal
right by freedom of expression, to kick MORE dirt in the face of
a veteran. Isn't that exactly what their saying to us? Are they
gonna punish us for defending the flag on the streets of America?
We defended it all over the world only to come home to this kinda
mentality, train of thought (Ha!, that's a good one), etc.
It's just a shame that so many of our women and men have died on
foreign soil protecting that flag, only to have our government
allow it to be burned right here on American soil. I want my
RIGHT to kick the living CRAP outa some jerk that is burning my
flag. After all, it's my FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION. Sheesh...see how
silly that sounds.
The flag issue has been running hot and heavy on Capitol Hill,
but members of Congress say it's cooling off now. The chairman of
the House Judiciary Subcommittee, who conducted hearings on flag
burning, reports that more witnesses are leaning toward
legislation rather than a Constitutional amendment. Let's not
just sit by and watch this sillyness take place. If you want to
see a Constitutional amendment to prohibit desecration of the
flag, then write to your elected representatives. Now! before (as
usual), it's TOO LATE!...Ha...Ha...Ha...they'd just love you to
drag your feet on this one. Rape is next.
Peter Stern
65' North
1:17/38
IFNA and the Bigger Picture
Fidocon 89 was a very eye opening experience for someone living
on the "edge of the earth"( Fairbanks, Alaska), out of the
mainstream of FidoNet affairs. Thank you to Ivan Schaffel for
letting me carry his proxy at the IFNA BOD meetings.
I have been a member of IFNA since its' inception but like many
Sysops in Fidonet I began to wonder about the mutation IFNA began
undergoing. The publication and distribution of the nodelist
seemed to take a back seat to organizational problems in Zone 1.
At Fidocon, Randy Bush chaired a symposium on international
communications. Listening to the representatives from Zone 2 and
Zone 3 speak about their problems and hearing the letter Randy
read from Pablo Kleinman, Zone 4 ZC, started me thinking about
Fidonet and IFNA.
Zone 1 has become extremely enthno-centric in handling the
development of Fidonet "Policy". I think it is widely assumed
that whatever policy is agreed to in Zone 1 will fit very nicely
into the Zones serving the rest of the world. This could not be
farther from the truth.
The other Zones face problems ranging from $10/min connect
charges calling USA, to language barriers, to being charged for
local phone calls, to not having companies willing to underwrite
huge phone bills to move echomail. Netmail runs on the echomail
backbone in Australia to save money. Singapore and other parts
of SE Asia can't afford the phone bills to have their own
Zonegate.
Fidonet is indeed international in reach and growing more popular
in an exponential way. IFNA should be the body which fosters
this growth. To this end I would propose IFNA be organized to
accomplish the following tasks:
1: Membership in IFNA would be open to ALL Zones
operating FTSC compatible mailing systems. The ZC from
each member Zone would be on the governing board. In
addition each Zone shall elect one At-large
representative for a 1 year term on the BOD.
2: Protect the Fidonet copyright forwarded to it by Tom
Jennings.
3: Act as the clearing house for technical standards by
continuing the FTSC committees
FidoNews 6-37 Page 16 11 Sep 1989
4: Work to develop cost effect interzone (international)
telecommunication links so that high volume traffic such
as echomail can be moved at the lowest possible cost.
5: Act as the voice for Fidonet in lobbying for
legislation and standards acceptance with governments
around the world. Make sure modems get approval, that
data networks price themselves fairly. Work with
telephone companies to ensure BBS operators aren't
discriminated against due to a "few" highly publicized
"bad apples" causing trouble with their modems.
6: Develop a "model" operational policy for Zones to use
in there operation. This "model" would be a basic
structure to be modified by each Zone. In this manner,
differences in countries, telephone pricing systems, echo
mail distribution, languages, politics, geography could
be accounted for.
7: Arrange for interzone distribution of the Fidonet
nodelists. This would mean Zone 2 and Zone 3 nodelists
would arrive via IFNA channels to be forwarded to the
Zone 1 ZC and vice versa.
8: As much as possible the IFNA shall conduct its
business electronically so as not to cause members undue
cost in international travel for meetings.
9: Annual Dues shall be collected on a per-capita basis
from each member Zone at $1 per SysOp. It shall be the
responsibility of each Zone to figure out how to raise
membership dues from its member SysOps. Dues will be
used to support lobbying efforts, Zonegate operations and
nodelist distribution.
10: IFNA shall NOT be involved in the internal
operations of any of its member Zones.
11: Problems involving interzone communications shall be
within the purview of IFNA to affect resolution.
So basically IFNA would get out of Zone 1 affairs and begin
taking a look at the "bigger picture". Fidonet needs to be
thinking on a worldwide scale. A new Zone will be coming on line
soon in Africa and there is rumor that a node will begin
operations in Moscow. We cannot afford to cripple the future of
Fidonet simply because Zone 1 can't agree on how it should be
operated.
Tom Jennings' idea of linking BBSs showed incredible foresight.
Lets take it further and ensure it becomes worldwide in scope.
Fidonet needs to step beyond its Zone 1 origins and realize there
is a world out there with different problems and values yet the
same desires to be able to telecommunicate in a reliable and
inexpensive manner.
School has started again, I don't where the summer goes? I and
many of you are back to the "Old grind" of classes, teachers,
homework, etc... and this makes for some difficulties in
maintaining our summer activities through the school year. With
this in mind, I'd like to announce that KidsNews will slow its
distribution back down to ONCE PER MONTH.
This is necessary because a lot of you cannot make the time to
submit items for publication in KidsNews. I also don't think that
the teachers are really aware that KidsNews could be used as a
class project for students. If teachers do become aware of this
fact and I see some interest generated, then I can bring the
distribution back to once per week (Don't hold your breath on
that one).
I want to thank those that have contributed through the summer
months. You really had some interesting ideas and activities
going through the summer. I exspecially like the idea of getting
the KIDS echo linked into Russia. If you guys pull that off, you
will have really made some progress for FidoNet, America and the
world.
Thanks goes to my Dad for the link to the Computer Learning
Foundation and the activities occuring there. I got a feeling
this project will be one that will last for a long time to come.
Also, National Computer Learning Month (NCLM), which is starting
in October proves to be of great benefit to students, teachers,
parents, individuals, etc. I mean if you can win an entire
computer system just by answering a few questions, then why not
take that little bit of time there. Now that would be a great
school project for some really sharp teacher. Winning himself and
his school a name brand computer just by taking a SLIGHT
interest and talking with my Dad or writing to us at: NCLM Echo
Conference, P.O. Box 8045, Granite City, IL 62040-8045. Now I
have pointed the way, you just need to ACT!!!!!! and NOW!!!!
If there are a few out there that are not receiving KidsNews and
would like to get it on a regular basis, please have your Net
Coordinator (NC) contact us at 288/525 to pull it in for your
net. Dad said he would be happy to shoot it to the NC's if they
accept continuos mail (CM). Is that like opening the door to your
mail box and letters start flying out and you get snowed under
and can't get out? Interesting concept...
Well, I gotta go do homework (Yuck), ya'll write me sometime. I'm
in the book. I guess it's a book? actually it's not a book unless
you print it out. Then I could be wrong. At any rate, give me
some articles and I'll get them out. Hope your school days are
full of new friends and MORE COMPUTERS!
FidoNews 6-37 Page 19 11 Sep 1989
Dustin L. Witherspoon
KidsNews Editor, at school (is that kinda like "at large?")
"THOSE WHO LIVE IN GLASS HOUSES...."
(By Bob Moravsik 269/107)
Over the past few weeks you have had to endure certain articles
by Mr. Phil Buonomo (107/583.0) complaining about tactics of the
*C structure. Then the members of "DEATHNET" as Mr. Whelan so
artfully puts it, takes over the majority of the board seats
elects "the boys" as officiers and give the members its our way
or IFNA is DEAD choice.
What he has left out is the tactics HE and his NC, Fabian Gordon
IFNA VP and BOD tried to pull on me, just for participating in a
heated dispute over groupmail in a local net echo. There was no
warning, I did not get any chance to reply to the NET LEVEL
complain. It's a good thing we have an RC and a ZC that are
fair. Mr. Buonomo complains about the very tactics he himself
has no trouble using. I have stood by and read Buonomo's
articles which just attempts to discredit others.
I cannot standby any longer. Note Mr. Buonomo was given a
chance to reply well before this was published. I originally
wanted this article to be published in the earlier FIDONEWS but I
missed a few "specs". Here is the story, AND heed well. These
tactics will be repeated in my opinion in the future against
people who want FIDONET and IFNA to be the true representative of
this hobby instead of the control thereof. GUYS and GIRLS the
name of the game with the present "group" is control. Hopefully
the majority of us will change that. Maybe a new WORLD FIDONET
ASSOCIATION is NEEDED. Call it WFA or Woof !!!!
This is a public statement of a policy contoversy which has been
in existance since May 1989. Many nodes only have seen part of
the "facts". Here is the full story.
The information was sent to Mr. Buonomo on 7/15/89 for his
comment and to be sure any possible inaccuracies (in Mr.
Buonomo's opinion) are corrected.
Mr. Buonomo responds as follows: [No reponse]
By secret complaint POL91063 dated early in May Mr. Buonomo
attempted with Mr. Gordon to excommunicate Moravsik from
FIDONET. Mr. Buonomo did a bombing run on net 107 attempting to
get signatures on a "petition" (only a few were gotten and
Buonomo refused to supply the names for varification) Some of the
evidence submitted was dated AFTER the complaint and "tacked" on
to the decision which was already made. There was no opportunity
for Moravsik to respond to the complaint. In fact there was no
knowledge it was pending. A KANGAROO COURT IN IT BEST FORM
!!!!!!!
FidoNews 6-37 Page 21 11 Sep 1989
Mr. Gordon's decision found Moravsik to be excessivelly annoying
for participating in a debate in REGION 13 and METRONET.
Moravsik was to be excommunicated. At the time the nodes in net
107 HUB 800 were forming Net 269. !!!!
The matter was appealed to the RC by a brief submitted by Mr.
Moravsik. Mr Buonomo filed no response, other then a message
telling Moravsik that he never knew how stupid Moravsik was.
[text will be supplied if requested]
The decision of the RC, Mr. Peace was a follows:
"I have received POL91063 (complaint) and APP90163 (appeal). My
DECISION is in favor of Mr. Moravsik's APPEAL. The complaint is
reversed.
Inconsistencies and improprieties in the complaint were apparent
to me as soon as I began reviewing it...
- a considerable portion of the evidence presented quotes only
one side of dialogues from the METRONET and REGION13
conferences. Having been a participant in one of those
conferences (REGION13) I found both Mr. Buonomo and Mr.
Moravsik to be engaged in a verbal battle in that conference
that was intense and sometimes annoying to me but not
excessively annoying. The Moravsik messages, when quoted out
of "thread" certainly do appear to justify Mr. Buonomo's
allegations. But what is quoted in the complaint is little
better than recording only one side of a conversation. As I
said, I was a participant in the REGION13 conference and
witnessed the full series of exchanges in that conference.
The situation is without fault.
- Mr. Gordon is moderator of METRONET. I am moderator of
REGION13. Neither R13EC nor I have seen a complaint filed by
the moderator of either conference asking for any action
against Mr. Moravsik. If a complaint had been filed by the
recognized moderator of either conference, the only remedy
would have been banishment of Mr. Moravsik from that
conference. If Mr. Moravsik had been banned from either
conference and continued to enter messages he would then (and
only then) be subject to an excessively annoying policy
complaint.
- Mr. Gordon's justifications included reference to a "straw
vote". He suggests that "most of the other members" of
FidoNet Net 107 were polled and that "96% of the vote" was in
favor of removal of Mr. Moravsik. Other evidence I received
FidoNews 6-37 Page 22 11 Sep 1989
suggests this "straw vote" aka "Bob Moravsik Petition"
occurred after May 2. This is the first time I have heard of
a vote being taken among FidoNet sysops for inclusion or
exclusion of another FidoNet sysop. The presence of this
vote as part of Mr. Gordon's justification suggests that
membership in FidoNet net 107 might be based on a popularity
contest. The practice is in my opinion Excessively Annoying
in and of itself.
- Mr. Buonomo's complaint was dated "May 1, 1989". It was
recorded as received by Mr. Gordon on "May 2, 1989". In
reading said complaint, I find it inexcusable that material
quoted in item 10 in support of the May 1 complaint is dated
"Fri 12 May 89 9:39".
To Messrs. Buonomo and Gordon:
Your actions in the filing and approval of complaint #91063 have
wasted a considerable amount of Mr. Moravsik's time in offering
his defense. I see the complaint as an attempt to railroad a
FidoNet sysop out of the network using methods I cannot condone.
Unfortunately, whether or not Mr. Moravsik has been annoying is
no longer an issue.
To: Mr. Gordon:
Mr. Moravsik's FidoNet node number (1:107/853) is *NOT* to be
removed from the Net 107 nodelist submission until such time as
all members of the newly formed net 269 are removed from net 107.
As agreed by telephone on May 12, that date will be four weeks
after net 269 appears in the FidoNet Nodelist.
If Mr. Buonomo chooses to appeal my decision to the ZC and if
the ZC overturns that decision you will retain Mr. Moravsik's
FidoNet node number in net 107 only until your first submission
following that decision (in Mr. Buonomo's favor).
George Peace
FidoNet Region 13 Coordinator
May 16, 1989 "
This action was then appealed to the ZC Mr Dodell by Mr. Buonomo
No brief was submitted by Mr. Moravsik as the appeal submitted
by Buonomo was "secret" ie no copy was provided to Moravsik to
answer. The decision of the ZC was:
"Phil, I see no reason to overturn the decision of George Peace,
RC13 in your appeal of a policy complaint against Bob Moscovich.
FidoNews 6-37 Page 23 11 Sep 1989
Since this appears to me as nothing more then a personality
conflict, I will trust the RC who is more familiar with the
personalities involved to make the right decision." [By David
Dodell]
Then Mr. Buonomo attempts to appeal again to the Zone
Coordinators by passing on message to the ZC BUT telling him he
cannot take part in the decision. Although Mr. Buonomo has gone
on record and stated that POLICY 4 is illegal HE NOW USES IT to
APPEAL !!!!!!! Mr. Moravsik would have filed a response and
would argue to reject the appeal, uphold the findings of the RC
that Buonomo was EXCESSIVELY ANNOYING and EXCOMUNICATE HIM.
The Official Public Computer Nodelist Concept Revisited
by Jim Grubs, Publisher
The original concept of the Official Public Computer Nodelist was
a good one. The idea, to refresh your memory, was that there
should be a simple, unified nodelist with everyone who wanted his
Fidonet compatible mailer listed without any of the political
bickering that seems to have become the favorite American indoor
sport for network sysops. (Well, next to favorite anyway.)
Well, a funny thing happened on the way to Utopia. The original
OPCNLIST managers grew impatient, apparently, and abandoned the
idea of waiting for sysops to ask to be unlisted. Instead, they
put EVERYONE in Fidonet and a couple others into OPCNLIST. This
forced people who did not want to be in it, for any reason or for
no reason, to insist on being removed. The resulting storm of
protest grew quite NASTY and even included all sorts of threats
of legal action and litigation.
George Kasica, who was producing the OPCNLIST for its originator,
decided he wanted no part of that nonsense and quit. He announced
he would no longer produce the OPCNLIST and asked for a volunteer
to take over. He listed a file for file requesting which
contained all sorts of fascinating programs, source files, batch
files, etc., for producing the OPCNLIST with Ben Baker's MakeNL.
I responded immediately by netmail stating that I would pick up
the flag he was dropping and and requested him to delete the
OPCN.ZIP which I had file requested. He did delete that file
without comment or reservation, which I consider to constitute
the legal offer tendered and accepted required to make a
contract.
I immediately, as an effort to put out the fire storm of
protests, created OPCNLIST.251 and OPCNDIFF.251 in such a fashion
as to erase EVERYONE from it except Fidonet 234, whose NC had
earlier told me it was OK for me to submit the net roster to the
original OPCNLIST, and Alternet 448, which I am in the process of
organizing. In the future only those nets and nodes who agree
in advance will be listed, which was the original intention.
OPCNLIST.251 includes the following prologue:
"This is the OPCNLIST, copyright 1989. It is a
compilation of copyrighted information supplied to it by
the original copyright owners. To the best off our
knowledge, this information is accurate and is used with
the full knowledge and consent of the person or persons
authorized to give that consent. If this turns out not
to be the case, we apologize and will correct the
FidoNews 6-37 Page 25 11 Sep 1989
mistake as soon as it is called to our attention. We are
not trying to pull any flimflam, so if there IS a
mistake, it is NOT necessary to scream and yell and
carry on like a nut. Contrary to the policy of previous
managers of the OPCNLIST, we don't want anyone in it who
does not ask to be in it. On the other hand, anyone who
asks to be in it WILL be in it without regard to what
anyone else may say about it.
"This compiled OPCNLIST is itself copyrighted, but it
may be used freely by anyone. It is copyrighted only so
that we may reserve the right to forbid its commercial
sale or use. This a hobby not a business and I hope
therefore nobody is going to get disproportionately
litigious about it.
"All data flags are as supplied to us. If it breaks your
machine, don't yell at us; yell at those who sent it to
us. I respectfully request everyone to stick to the IFNA
nodelist flag standards at least for the present.
"The OPCNLIST is produced as the nodelist of 'Zone 11'.
This is done for reasons of technical convenience and no
other significance should be attached to it."
Well, troops, that's the scoop. If you want your net or
independent node listed in OPCNLIST, send a copy of your regular
MakeNL submission file, including a prologue and/or copyright
notice containing explicit, specific permission for us to use it
to the OPCNLIST Distribution Hub, Donn Bly, 1:236/7, 77:1011/7,
11:11/7.
You have my word. This is going to stick to the original,
apolitical concept. Think of it as a "generic" nodelist, similar
to the Darwin list except it's for Fidonet compatible mailers. We
don't care what you say to one another. We don't care who gets
echomail from whom. We don't care how mean, nasty, and annoying
you are to one another. All we cre about is pubishing the
nodelist to do it with every Friday at 6:00 AM, ET. The rest is
your business, not ours.
Wish me luck, and don't forget to vote in the IFNA Referendum.
Date: 20 Aug 89 21:51:15
From: Pablo Kleinman of 4:1200/101
A Message from Pablo Kleinman, FidoNet Zone Coordinator in Latin
America to FidoCon:
It would have been very nice and interesting, to be here with you
today and get to know all of you in person. But it could not be
possible for me to leave the country right now. I was
tremendously interested in coming to FidoCon, but my obligations
didn't allow it. And with the terrible economic situation we are
experiencing, it is far too expensive to go anywhere across the
border.
Would it be possible to organize FidoCon for July instead of
August? Being August one of the busiest months in the year in
South America, we are usually unable to suspend our obligations
to travel overseas.
Through this brief passages, I would like to tell you about our
existance in the net, and what is currently FidoNet Zone 4.
FidoNet Latin America was established on May of 1987, and
officially incorporated on September of that same year.
At the beginning we were given a net (I remember it was net
number 368) on Region 18, whose RC at that time was Christopher
Baker.
But nodes added up, and I had to start "making wonders". No
doubt it was kind of strange to assign a Hub number for each
Country!
It took us almost two years to have our own Zone up and
running... We were so glad when David Dodell offered us to be
Zone 4 back in April!
We grew many times, yes, but I'm sure there is no place with more
problems to set up FidoNet nodes than in Latin America.
To start, we have in most of the countries, State-owned
monopolies that run the whole telephonic system, "as worst as
possible", and many times "as more expensive as possible".
Just to give you an idea, before the Argentinean phone company
started an expansion project a few years ago, you could request a
phone line and wait as much as THIRTY years to get it installed!
Of course, with the new expansion program, you must pay around
two thousand dollars and wait maybe three years to get it.
As a result of the shortage of phone lines, we don't have nodes
running 24 hours a day in Zone 4; most of the nodes are
installed in the sysops offices and houses' phone lines.
FidoNews 6-37 Page 27 11 Sep 1989
In this two years of FidoNetting, we were not able to get any
help from any public or private enterprise; we are still somehow
isolated from the rest of the net. A minute of IDD to the United
States can cost the same as dining out, no wonder it is
expensive!
Looking to solve our financial disabilities, we are trying to
develop a way to transfer the mail packets to other zones through
Packet radio.
Fortunately, some people out there that care for us, and while
the zonegate is financed by Dick Gladden of El Paso (Texas) and
Randy Bush of Portland (Oregon), our two only international
echomail conferences: RedLatina and Twger.link are financed by
Juan Davila of Puerto Rico, and Bor-Long Lin of Taiwan.
We faced, are facing and still will face many difficulties to
keep running and expand FidoNet on the Southwestern hemisphere.
We need your care, your help, your assistance.
We established some months ago, the Latin American FidoNet
Association, and on August 4, NotiFido, the Spanish-language
FidoNews, was edited for the first time.
Some local programmers have developed some utilities, that we
intend to make available to all of you in short.
Please, try to keep in touch with us, we need your help to keep
this project running.
My best regards to all of you, today reunited in FidoCon, and in
the name of all the Zone 4 sysops, thank you for sharing with us
this huge network of enthusiasts and hobbyists. Of people around
the world with a great desire for communicating.
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.
