Copyright 1991, Fido Software. All rights reserved. Duplication
and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only.
For use in other circumstances, please contact Fido Software.
FidoNews is published weekly by and for the Members of the
FidoNet (r) International Amateur Electronic Mail System. It is
a compilation of individual articles contributed by their authors
or authorized agents of the authors. The contribution of articles
to this compilation does not diminish the rights of the authors.
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.
Fido and FidoNet are registered trademarks of Tom Jennings of
Fido Software, Box 77731, San Francisco CA 94107, USA and are
used with permission.
Opinions expressed in FidoNews articles are those of the authors
and are not necessarily those of the Editor or of Fido Software.
Most articles are unsolicited. Our policy is to publish every
responsible submission received.
Table of Contents
1. EDITORIAL ................................................ 1
A Conversation with Pablo ................................ 1
2. ARTICLES ................................................. 17
Sell advertising in your User Group newsletter ........... 17
FidoCon '91 Update ....................................... 19
Online Perspectives ...................................... 26
Non-Standard (SCRIPT) System Usage Proposal .............. 37
Save up to 30% on long distance charges .................. 40
3. LATEST VERSIONS .......................................... 42
Latest Software Versions ................................. 42
4. NOTICES .................................................. 47
And more!
FidoNews 8-16 Page 1 22 Apr 1991
Subsequent to my editorial two weeks ago, Pablo Kleinman, the
principal author of the current "Worldpol" proposal, and I
exchanged some netmail in which we exchanged our views in an
open and frank manner.
By mutual agreement I publish the exchange here. I assume that
you have read the editorial which started this exchange.
From : Pablo Kleinman On: 4:900/101
To : Vince Perriello On: 132/491
Subject: A reply to the last Editorial
Dated : 14 Apr 91 13:11:20
Hola, Vince. How are you?
I feel a great respect for you and that is the main reason why I
reply to your editorial through netmail. I did write to you a
net-mail once I was annoyed by some comment you made on FidoNews
regarding the ex-Z2C, but never got an answer from you. This
time, I hope you do get back to me. I value your opinion, that's
on the other hand why I don't simply shut up and question it.
> For the past two weeks I have been trying to figure out just
> how to tell you what I think about the new Policy proposal. The
> exact method that would best serve my need to get it all off my
> chest, and your need to figure out whether my comments were
> best ignored or heeded.
The only thing I heard from you before was the idea of
establishing different domains. IMHO, it is even more radical
than establishing a basic umbrella policy. I don't necessarily
disagree with your idea at all, it looks to me even more fair to
those of us in other zones than Policy4.
> Before I push you to the point of making that decision
> regarding my words, please at least heed this advice: read the
> proposed Policy carefully, read the Policy it replaces, and do
> some "what if" scenarios. Consider some situations where
> someone was kept from doing something by present Policy;
> determine whether you feel that person should be able to do
> that thing; see if the new Policy addresses it. Consider the
> additional freedom of action offered by the new Policy. Good or
> Bad? Look at what effect the changes will have on the day-by-
> day operation of the net. Do they seem to be positive or
> negative? Discuss it with others. Pass on your advice to your
> NC. Be a part of this process.
> OK. Thanks. Now I'll cut to the chase.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 2 22 Apr 1991
We fully agree on this.
> Worldpol seems to me to be a well-intentioned effort to correct
> a few perceived flaws in Policy 4. For some reason, the
> resultant document seems to have basically started from a blank
> sheet of paper, without considering the reason for any of those
> sections of Policy 4 which demonstated those perceived flaws.
Now, let's stop for a moment here.
Policy4 was heavily opposed by Zones two and four (yes, we were
and still are small, but we don't count?) and still was pursued
by the Z1RCs and by David Dodell. In fact, there would have been
no questionings if they would have made it a Zone-1 policy, like
the Europeans did with Policy4e that is prior to the current,
American Policy4.
We not only can't live under Policy4, but we don't even want to!
It does not represent what we desire for our zone; it goes
against the principles we sustain as a group. We want our
coordinators to result from legitimate elections, and sincerely
the methods proposed by Policy4 are a tough blow to all of us
since it is precisely what we hardly reject.
And when I say "we", I'm not playing hypocrite. I had the
opportunity to begin FidoNet operations in Latin America almost
four years ago, and while I'm the zone coordinator, I must act
according to what the sysops here want. I was elected by them
and therefore, until I resign sometime in the coming weeks (or
they for some reason resolve to fire me), I am their
representative.
> Without going completely Luddite on you, let me still point out
> that Policy1-Policy4 seem to have been a fairly good set of
> rules. After all, they got us here. I don't see why all of a
> sudden the entire fabric needed to be torn out in favor of a
> new one. Perhaps I'm just not farsighted enough. Hell, some
> mornings I can't even remember the name of the kid who played
> Pugsley.
Vince: Policy4 is highly disregarded everywhere.
And I don't need to refer to the typical cases in Germany or
here. Even among those that oppose WorldPol there are
Policy4-violators.
Did you know that the Taiwanese have a Region policy
conveniently written in Chinese that says that among other
things, the sysop MUST PAY to be in FidoNet? And how the hell
did I know? Somebody downloaded the document from Honlin Lue's
board, and my NC, that speaks Chinese, translated it. Now: I'm
not at all surprised when I see that there is an important drift
from FidoNet to SigNet there.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 3 22 Apr 1991
So, is this the goal? To have a policy document to simply ignore
it? We could have done that, since everyone here was d'accord in
not accepting it. Instead, we went to try to change the world.
How naive we were. If I knew that in 1991 I would still have
been involved in this, I would have simply not started the whole
thing.
Imagine the effort that represented to get a MAJORITY of the
world's RCs to agree on a document that would drastically cut
their "power". Unfortunately, only 3 of the 20something votes
came from zone 1 and two of the three were Canadian. It wasn't a
vote to support WorldPol, it was just to setup a vote. But a
large number not only doesn't trust the sysops, they don't even
trust the NCs they appointed themselves.
> Right up front, let me tell you what the biggest problem with
> this document is. There are a lot of noises swirling around
> these days with words like "liability" and "punitive damages"
> in them. This document blows enough of the structure of FidoNet
> away to make a number of lawyers very rich and send a few
> coordinators to a new home in a cardboard box. The fact that it
> was written by a person for whom English is a second language
> (although his command of it is better than many Americans of my
> acquaintance) really doesn't hold a single drop of water in a
> court of law. To add to this problem, the disclaimer stating
> that fact is in a section that will be deleted should the vote
> be in favor of ratification. Sic transit NC's.
Thank you for the personal compliment.
I lived in the states for a while a few years back and yes I
know about this American custom of suing anyone for anything.
But maybe then a special statute of limitations should be added
by the zone 1 sysops for that matter. Things aren't like that
anywhere else in the world. I was told about some cases in the
U.S. that involved going to court that for me or any other
non-American sound simply like science fiction.
And with many Americans reading WorldPol on FidoNews, nobody
ever cared to propose such thing. What can I do? Even those from
zone 1 that got involved never mentioned such thing.
> Next problem: the concept of "areas" is diluted to the point of
> being meaningless. This works great in combination with another
> feature which I'll address in a minute. But for now, consider
> this: there is nothing in Worldpol to keep someone from being
> RC of every region in a Zone. All that person has to do is
> maintain a node in every region, which is perfectly allowable
> under the new Policy -- and that makes him/her part of the
> "area" which she/he would be coordinating, and eligible for
> election. Yeah, sure, that could never happen. And O-rings
> never burn through and the Libyans are only manufacturing
> pharmaceuticals.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 4 22 Apr 1991
There is one thing that will prevent this: SYSOPS CAN VOTE under
WorldPol! That should satisfy you and perfectly ensures that the
type of injustices you describe won't occur.
> How about the local net policies? Did anyone notice that local
> net policy is not subordinate to regional policy? But the RC
> has to deal with policy disputes. Now that's fair, isn't it?
When there is a dispute between members of two nets, there isn't
a single net policy to judge upon, so RC doesn't have to deal
with any of them. It is perfectly clear, Vince. You wrote
BinkleyTerm, you are a smart guy. :-)
> Harry has already mentioned a number of the things that bother
> me most about this one. I'll bet anyone five dollars that there
> will be at least one white-only net in North America by the end
> of the year if this policy passes.
That is your problem. Zone-1 policy must perfectly state this is
not possible. Or better, do what we plan to do: restrict nets to
geography on the Zone policy. That way, you simply eliminate
"geography" from the agenda. Do you think that the majority here
agree with the Germans or the Dutch on this point? No! We just
respect their behaviour. This was the philosophy behind WorldPol
and they made themselves be heard. The basic idea is "what is
not enforceable all over the world should be left to the zone
policies to deal with".
> I'll bet anyone ten dollars that Zone 4 will have communists-
> not-allowed nets and regions in less time than that.
Oh oh. Now you are making an ugly comment here. Of course I
accept the bet and double it.
Vince: the Zone-4 sysops elected Pablo Kleinman (a Jew) their
ZC, Charles Hirakawa de Miranda (a Japanese-Brazilian) RC80,
Billy Coen Aleandri (Italian Jew) RC90, and Sunchie Yang (a
Chinese immigrant) the zone's largest network's NC. Do you
simply think we can now discriminate under basis of ideology?
The new Editor of NotiFido is a socialist and gets along well
with all the rest, some of them, hardline conservatives.
Another local sysop, Tero Karkkainen, is the most popular among
the crowd to hold a position that a group is promoting here,
consisting on a form of an official Zone Public Database of
FidoNet files. Of course, I cite the example because Tero is
Finnish and has lived here only for two or three years.
> Would the Z4C care to comment on whether Cubans should be
> allowed in FidoNet? And how convenient it will be to have a
> policy that lets you tell them where to stick their modems?
FidoNews 8-16 Page 5 22 Apr 1991
I got a request now from Nicaragua. We are doing our best to
have them in FidoNet soon. Not meaning to prove anything, but
the example might well suit you. If the Cubans want to join us,
then great! I've been sending messages through packet-radio all
over South and Central America for a long while promoting
FidoNet. A lot of us instead of spending the money on personal
entertainment have been contributing in different manners to
spread the word across the continent.
Please, don't make this kind of accusations to us that operate
under the only fully democratic regime in the whole net.
I know of at least one sysop here that was kicked out of the
country some 18 years ago for being a "red". We couldn't
possibly adopt such authoritarian attitudes we actively reject.
Do you think he would support WorldPol (as he surely does) if
there was such danger?
> Has anyone heard from Russia recently, and will prospective
> members of FidoNet have to show a prison tattoo or a burned-up
> party card to join?
:-)
I remember once on the ZCC that Region 2:50 was referred to as
"the excommunication-Region, Siberia". I can't reply to your
question, Vince. The only thing I know is that inititally the RC
there used a fake name on the nodelist because he was scared.
> What is a Western-style democracy for the purposes of Worldpol?
One person, one voice, one vote. WorldPol also proposes a form
of federalism, which means that each zone and region and net is
given certain autonomy.
> The United States? Let's put that to the test. I'll send in a
> voter registration form to Duluth, Minnesota. I'll say that
> while I actually live and work in New Hampshire, I like
> Minnesota best and I want to vote and pay taxes there. I bet
> New Hampshire will go along with it, too.
This is not how non-geographic nets are used, Vince. The example
is right there in Zone-2. And no, you aren't forced to have that
too. A simple Zone-1 policy will solve all that.
> Here's another thing: There is a substantial body of legislation
> and judicial action which helps to dampen the "tyranny of the
> majority" in the United States. This takes the form of
> representation in local governments by the minority party,
> affirmative action quotas, and many other things which if just
> left to a popular vote would probably fail resoundingly. Ask the
> people of Boston or Yonkers if they favor busing. If the United
> States worked like Worldpol, there would be no such thing.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 6 22 Apr 1991
FidoNet is not the United States! The U.S. is huge within FidoNet
but we are an international network! Failing to understand this
principle has made of Policy4 unacceptable to most of the rest.
> If not the United States, then perhaps El Salvador? Haiti?
> Cuba? (Forget I said Cuba, I just remembered that Communists
> live there) This is an important point. You can't just say
> "Western standards" and expect that to suffice.
It is better than saying "democratic". That was the original idea
but someone suggested the word "western" to make things clearer.
I bet you would be complaining if it just said "democratic" and
referring to things like the ex-GDR to sustain your claims.
Please, Vince. Let's play fair.
> Worldpol says that FidoNews is the official newsletter. It says
> that members of an area (whatever that is) can vote not to
> receive it. Did anyone mention that since FidoNews is the
> official newsletter, the *C is liable in any case involving
> prior notice, if FidoNews was not provided? If the person who
> did not receive that prior notice (and because of the "official
> newsletter" clause, FidoNews is the only place that has any
> legal standing) in FidoNews wasn't in favor of dropping it, the
> *C loses and some lawyer gets rich.
I thought that important announcements (at least the official
stuff) were published on the nodediff. I personally love
FidoNews (check out my BBS' database) and read it always (see
how fast it got here?). But it is not fair to IMPOSE such an
expense (bringing it to, say, Greenland) on the sysops that
can't afford it and/or don't want it.
We've had tough times here, economically talking. And it is very
difficult to sustain such a compromise during those times.
> Why didn't the authors didn't put something in Worldpol saying
> that I didn't have to accept FidoNews submissions from an area
> that has voted not to receive it? After all, why should the
> rest of the net have to pay to move, or to read, something
> submitted by someone who never intends to read it her/himself?
:-)
> Most of my other objections have been voiced equally well or
> better by others. I'm glad to be able to say that. I'm not a
> lone voice in the wilderness. Perhaps I'm one of a few hundred
> such voices, but I suspect the real numbers are very different.
Could be. I don't deny it. But if FidoNet shall brake up, it
will be because the other zones will not be able to continue,
due to Zone 1-imposed rules like Policy4. Face it: Policy4 is
"Made in USA" and world standards aren't just that, if such
thing exists. The new proposal has at least input from all over
the world, including but not limited to the United States.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 7 22 Apr 1991
> Hello, Jack? Jack Decker? I have an answer to your question
> from last week. Why weren't people such as myself involved in
> the effort to pull Worldpol from the ashes of Policy4? Perhaps
> because unlike yourself, we saw no ashes.
Vince: I've been complaining ever since I can remember seeing
Policy4. Did you ever read ENET.SYSOP? If there was a
possibility of reaching this point (a policy change vote)
everybody should have collaborated to have a nice alternative.
Many Z1RCs did not do it because they trusted they could have
blocked any proposal from being voted, but Zone-2 grew in a way
they hadn't expected.
> There is some need for improvement in the document, but it
> neither needs nor deserves to be discarded just because you and
> a few dozen others don't understand why it is the way it is.
It's a lot more than that. And it was rejected since before it
was law. The mistake wasn't rejecting it (those like me who
did), but it was made by those that didn't give a sh_t and
IMPOSED it on the whole network.
> Discussions leading to corrective surgery would have garnered a
> great deal more interest from myself and others than what we
> observed to be the case: the proposition that the basis of
> FidoNet's "new world order" was the scrapping of previous
> documents and a fresh start with fresh minds, unencumbered by
> outmoded views. In other words, smart young turks at work, old
> fogies stay out!
I don't understand that.
> So many of us did (BTW, Harry asks me to note that he sent
> comments after each published revision to his NC, RC and ZC).
Never got any of them. Probably the respective *C(s) didn't care
to have a more acceptable (to them) WorldPol by sending in the
remarks as everything received was seriously considered.
> Since the net continued to work all the time you guys were
> plugging away at this, we figured there was no need to fix
> anything right away. I still feel that way. Almost. I think
> that Worldpol needs a LOT of fixing before it should be adopted
I agree that it will need to be brushed, but it is now far
better than Policy4 already. On the other hand, it does not
grant any type of bureaucracy (more specifically the RCs in this
case) any control on what can or cannot be voted. It will be
EXTREMELY difficult to replace Policy4 if this initiative fails.
> Democracy in FidoNet is a great idea. But just like every great
> thing, it's best in moderation. Worldpol proposes too much of
> that good thing. We'll all get tummy aches if we have it.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 8 22 Apr 1991
I totally disagree with this. If it's a good thing it's not too
much of it, otherwise you probably really feel it's not such a
good thing.
Like Tom Jennings once mentioned, the RCs were not meant to be
what they became. But suppressing that bureaucracy would have
made WPOL simply impossible to be voted because they actually
have total control on what can or cannot be voted. Totally
unfair!!!
WorldPol, I think, is not the end. It contains radical elements
but it doesn't make all the necessary changes yet. Those will
come later with time, and I will probably not be directly
involved.
> Worldpol is not a keeper. Throw it back and let it mature a bit
Many of us are sick of Policy4. I think we passed a point of no
return. So if it shall fail now, it will not in the future. But
I guess things will never be the same again.
I just hope that FidoNet survives as a whole if WorldPol fails.
Especially if it wins on the other zones and looses just in Zone
1.
I just think that the systematic opposition shown by many in the
U.S. and Australia (certainly most of them with "important"
coordinator positions) is not what the sysops in those places
would prefer.
I've seen all types of excuses. From the ones saying that it
would be imposible to carry on a net-wide election (lies, look
at the IFNA election and tell me where were the problems) to the
others saying that WorldPol is unacceptable because it has
grammar errors.
Vince: things did not go as I would have liked. I just proposed
a new document and thought that everybody would agree to submit
it to referendum to decide. But I found a whole new face of
FidoNet. A dirty face. I found people that for some reason do
not respect the average FidoNet sysop and are not willing to let
him vote.
Zone coordinators that say "I would never win in a popularity
contest" but assume that the fact refers to the others that
don't know what they want, and not to himself that is not what
the others want.
Unfortunately, I have lead this process all too far to let
somebody else replace me right now (I guess nobody would take
it), but it would be exactly what I'd do if I could. I admit
I've become for many a "difficult" character to deal with here,
and no, it was never what I wanted. But how are you suppossed to
act when you happen to "discover" that the seemingly hobbyist,
pluralist FidoNet is not at all what it seems?
FidoNews 8-16 Page 9 22 Apr 1991
I hope that in some way I have now explained why all this
WorldPol, why the flames, why I'm so persistent. I think that
if you succesfully see the things from a more objective
position, you will see them different from what you wrote that I
quoted.
If you think that publishing this message on FidoNews can help
the sysops in the network understand better the motivation of
this vote, I would appreciate that you do it. My opinion is that
you, like me, want a better future for FidoNet.
I want to believe that Jack Decker's last article is really
pessimistic and not the harsh reality of our network.
Warmest regards from the far south,
-Pablo
From : Vince Perriello On: 132/491
To : Pablo Kleinman On: 4:900/101
Subject: Re: 02/A reply to the last Editorial
Dated : 14 Apr 91 22:46:13
I have read your mail and I am appalled to hear some of the
things which you have discovered. I am also amazed at your
statements regarding overall evasion or lack of enforcement of
Policy 4.
I'm glad that we have agreed to disagree. The interesting part is
that we have similiar motivation, but strongly divergent views.
I'll publish your note and this response in FidoNews next week,
if you wish.
> I just hope that FidoNet survives as a whole if WorldPol fails.
Has it occurred to you that Worldpol in its present form might
result in the demise of FidoNet?
> Especially if it wins on the other zones and looses just in
> Zone 1.
Especially if it loses in Zone 1 and wins sufficient support
elsewhere to be ratified.
> ... WorldPol is unacceptable because it has grammar errors.
I am one of those people. Even if I agreed with everything in the
document, I would want the grammatical errors fixed. Since the
document itself declares the official language of FidoNet to be
English, it is in English that precise meaning must be defined.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 10 22 Apr 1991
> Vince: things did not go as I would have liked. I just proposed
> a new document and thought that everybody would agree to submit
> it to referendum to decide.
There were others also working on P4 replacements. In fact, at
least one of them was published before the first Worldpol. I
still don't know why you and the other gentleman wound up not
working together. I think that for some folk, the lingering
doubts about that one have worked against you.
> But I found a whole new face of FidoNet. A dirty face.
I see that in NET_DEV every day. Some people think I'm part of
the problem too. Join the club :-{
> I found people that for some reason do not respect the average
> FidoNet sysop and are not willing to let him vote.
I personally don't agree with that attitude. I don't believe in
direct elections above NC, however. The Electoral College
approach seems useful above NC, and for such things as Policy
ratification. This requires a local vote, and for NC's, RC's,
etc to vote according to the expressed wishes of their majority.
That helps to dampen the effect of one large net throwing its
weight around. Perhaps too far -- and tuning it to allow a net or
region to cast some arbitrary number of votes based on its size
might apply.
> Zone coordinators that say "I would never win in a popularity
> contest" but assume that the fact refers to the others that
> don't know what they want, and not to himself that is not what
> the others want.
I'm uncertain of exactly what you are trying to say here, but in
a system where NC's are elected by sysops, RC's by NC's and ZC's
by RC's, you have less of a popularity contest and more of a
technical merit contest.
Personally, I think that the ability of an average FidoNet sysop
to distinguish between technical merit and noisy rhetoric is at
best suspect. On that basis, I would rather separate the
technical management of the net and judicial action totally --
and elect technical management by indirect means (as mentioned
above), while judicial elections are more direct. Add to that
some kind of checks and balances so that neither side gets too
powerful, and you have all that a World Policy should have to
concern itself with.
> But how are you suppossed to act when you happen to "discover"
> that the seemingly hobbyist, pluralist FidoNet is not at all
> what it seems?
FidoNews 8-16 Page 11 22 Apr 1991
You can start with enforcing present Policy. I see no reason why
creating a Policy that lets a net do almost anything it wants
somehow makes things better than before (like in the case of the
Chinese pay-to-join net).
That's like suggesting that we deal with arsonists by legalizing
arson.
> I think that if you succesfully see the things from a more
> objective position, you will see them different from what you
> wrote that I quoted.
I see things exactly the same:
1) Regardless of what the current existing Policy happens to be,
we must enforce it.
2) We must replace Policy4
3) Worldpol needs work before we make it our governing Policy.
> I want to believe that Jack Decker's last article is really
> pessimistic and not the harsh reality of our network.
It's sort of redundant to call Jack a pessimist.
Can you see this?
Jack goes hunting with you. You shoot a duck. Your dog goes after
the duck. When it reaches the water, your dog walks on top of
the water, never even leaving a ripple. The dog gets the duck
and brings it back to you. Jack says nothing. This happens twice
more. You finally ask Jack if he has noticed anything unusual.
Jack says, "Yeah. Your dog can't swim."
> Warmest regards from the far south,
Far regards from the not-yet-warm-enough north,
Vince
From : Pablo Kleinman On: 4:900/101
To : Vince Perriello On: 132/491
Subject: Re: Re: 02/A reply to the last Editorial
Dated : 15 Apr 91 16:54:55
Hola, Vince.
Thank you for replying.
> I have read your mail and I am appalled to hear some of the
> things which you have discovered. I am also amazed at your
> statements regarding overall evasion or lack of enforcement of
> Policy 4.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 12 22 Apr 1991
Well, there was always an important reason to promote a policy
change. Most of this is news to you and most of FidoNet is not
yet aware, but isn't to the International Coordinator as well as
most of the FidoNet RCs.
> I'm glad that we have agreed to disagree. The interesting part
> is that we have similiar motivation, but strongly divergent
> views.
Yes, I thought that too and I am glad to see it now confirmed.
> I'll publish your note and this response in FidoNews next
> week, if you wish.
Sure, go ahead.
> > I just hope that FidoNet survives as a whole if WorldPol
> > fails.
>
> Has it occurred to you that Worldpol in its present form might
> result in the demise of FidoNet?
To be sincere, no. In fact, I think WorldPol is perfectly viable
everywhere in the world, while Policy4 is not and this is a
proven fact.
>> Especially if it wins on the other zones and looses just in
>> Zone 1.
>
> Especially if it loses in Zone 1 and wins sufficient support
> elsewhere to be ratified.
I don't agree with this. While Policy4 is a comprehensive
policy, it fails on its purpose because it does not consider the
fact that needs and customs around the world vary. It leaves a
great portion of the network in a situation where it daily
violates Policy4 just to survive.
WorldPol instead, proposes a simple worldwide enforceable policy
doc that should be accompanied in every zone with a zone-
formulated policy.
Zone-1 could perfectly recreate most of the current Policy4
conditions if she wished, with certain limitations like the
prohibition of recreating the current anti-democratic election
procedures.
>> ... WorldPol is unacceptable because it has grammar errors.
>
> I am one of those people. Even if I agreed with everything in
> the document, I would want the grammatical errors fixed. Since
> the document itself declares the official language of FidoNet
> to be English, it is in English that precise meaning must be
> defined.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 13 22 Apr 1991
WorldPol was at one stage revised and corrected by a British
FidoNet sysop. He found some errors and modified the text to get
it right. I can't imagine him leaving many things wrong. I
would accept this position (rejecting the doc because of
grammar) if there was a risk of it being misinterpreted due to
those errors. But I believe that this is not the case.
>> Vince: things did not go as I would have liked. I just
>> proposed a new document and thought that everybody would
>> agree to submit it to referendum to decide.
>
> There were others also working on P4 replacements. In fact, at
> least one of them was published before the first Worldpol. I
> still don't know why you and the other gentleman wound up not
> working together. I think that for some folk, the lingering
> doubts about that one have worked against you.
Yes: Jason Steck in Colorado,USA and Ron Dwight in Helsinki,
Finland were promoting other two different docs. I got in touch
with both of them.
With Jason: we had several voice conversations and he agreed
that while WorldPol would be left as worldwide-policy proposal,
he would draft a Zone-1 policy proposal. I kept him informed
during the whole WorldPol evolution, but I think that other
things (he got married, I think he moved to another city, etc.)
got him too busy to take care of it.
With Ron Dwight, former Zone-2 Coordinator: he dropped his
policy proposal and was very active on WorldPol development. Not
only by himself, but thanks to his continuous feedback to his
zone's sysops, many of them got involved and that is why Europe
had the most important impact on the current document being
voted.
>> But I found a whole new face of FidoNet. A dirty face.
>
> I see that in NET_DEV every day. Some people think I'm part of
> the problem too. Join the club :-{
Well... I was talking about my personal experience. I never got
to see the conference you mention.
>> I found people that for some reason do not respect the
>> average FidoNet sysop and are not willing to let him vote.
>
> I personally don't agree with that attitude.
I not only don't agree, but I think it should be condemned by
us all.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 14 22 Apr 1991
> I don't believe in direct elections above NC, however. The
> Electoral College approach seems useful above NC, and for
> such things as Policy ratification. This requires a local
> vote, and for NC's, RC's, etc to vote according to the
> expressed wishes of their majority. That helps to dampen the
> effect of one large net throwing its weight around. Perhaps
> too far -- and tuning it to allow a net or region to cast some
> arbitrary number of votes based on its size might apply.
What you say you like is exactly the default mechanism proposed
by WorldPol.
In fact (and this is an answer to those that say that WorldPol
is "Zone4pol"), what WorldPol proposes as "default" is not what
we actually use in Zone-4. Here all elections are direct. But
maybe that is because we are small enough to "afford" such
thing or consider it positive.
I agree that maybe in North America the WorldPol default is the
best. Though the Policy4 standards are for me unacceptable no
matter which zone we talk about.
>> Zone coordinators that say "I would never win in a
>> popularity contest" but assume that the fact refers to the
>> others that don't know what they want, and not to himself
>> that is not what the others want.
>
> I'm uncertain of exactly what you are trying to say here, but
> in a system where NC's are elected by sysops, RC's by NC's and
> ZC's by RC's, you have less of a popularity contest and more
> of a technical merit contest.
Well... I was referring to what the previous and the current
Australian ZCs said. I believe that the sysops in Australia and
New Zealand are not stupid and would know very well how to
choose a ZC. In fact, I speak because a couple of sysops in
Tasmania and South Australia I am in touch with, always complain
that they are completely ignored and not considered (among
several things).
> Personally, I think that the ability of an average FidoNet
> sysop to distinguish between technical merit and noisy
> rhetoric is at best suspect.
It is acceptable, though I do not agree. Experience here has
shown that not always the most "popular" wins the election and
that sysops know what they do and what they elect.
> On that basis, I would rather separate the technical
> management of the net and judicial action totally --
> and elect technical management by indirect means (as mentioned
> above), while judicial elections are more direct. Add to that
> some kind of checks and balances so that neither side gets too
> powerful, and you have all that a World Policy should have to
> concern itself with.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 15 22 Apr 1991
That is clever. See? I told you that I think that no policy
document is final in such an organization like ours, in constant
development. But finding new things is no basis to say that what
is being proposed is not okay. Nobody is saying that after this,
Policy can't be modified again. In fact, WorldPol makes a policy
change more possible than Policy4.
>> But how are you suppossed to act when you happen to
>> "discover" that the seemingly hobbyist, pluralist FidoNet
>> is not at all what it seems?
>
> You can start with enforcing present Policy. I see no reason
> why creating a Policy that lets a net do almost anything it
> wants somehow makes things better than before (like in the
> case of the Chinese pay-to-join net).
It is the present policy that grants unfair privileges to
certain individuals and therefore allows all these injustices to
exist. If the sysops could replace a coordinator that does not
perform correctly, he would be much more careful.
On the other hand, I don't think that I can force the Chinese or
whoever to properly enforce Policy4 from far away. But if we
grant rights to the sysops there, they will probably take care
of getting the things straight. In fact, I don't dare to say
that "pay-to-join" is worst than "free-to-join" in the specific
Zone-6 case. I do confidently say that it is NOT the best for
Zone-4.
> That's like suggesting that we deal with arsonists by
> legalizing arson.
Not quite. I know what you mean, but what I mean to say is that
the U.S. Supreme Court cannot succeed in attempting to enforce
the law in, say Paris, France. We must allow the people in
France to do it, and they will. But Policy4 tells the people
that they are under a dictatorship with no voice or vote.
> I see things exactly the same:
>
> 1) Regardless of what the current existing Policy happens to
> be, we must enforce it.
I understand your point. But again, the mistake was to declare
worldwide Policy a document that in practice is not enforceable
worldwide.
> 2) We must replace Policy4
Oh, you know we totally agree on this.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 16 22 Apr 1991
> 3) Worldpol needs work before we make it our governing Policy.
I think that WorldPol needs more work, but it is perfectly
viable as it is today. On the other hand, if WorldPol is not
passed, then again the RCs will have veto power on what can or
cannot be voted and next time the group we all know might be
succesful in blocking a policy vote.
I've been the advertising manager for our user group's
monthly magazine for about 4 months. The INDY PC NEWS is the
monthly magazine of the Indianapolis Computer Society.
Several months ago we switched from a "newsletter" format
to a "magazine" format and received many positive responses.
Our magazine goes to our 950 members plus libraries,
schools, and other user groups around the country. We print a
total of 1600 copies monthly.
I have a list of contacts, phone numbers, and fax numbers
for about 30 national computer related companies. Not all of
these advertise with us. These are mainly "user group
coordinators." I would be willing to share these with
newsletter editors of other user groups.
I am trying to get a good mix of local and national
advertising accounts.
I would also like to hear from other user group newsletter
editors who have been successful in supporting their newsletters
or magazines with advertising. I would be interested in how you
do prospecting, how you present your newsletter, how you go
about getting the big companies, and what your rates are.
I can be reached at:
Indianapolis Computer Society
P.O. Box 2532
Indianapolis, IN 46206 Phone: 317-297-8192
We charge $150 for a full page, $90 for 1/2 page, $65 for
1/3 page, $50 for 1/4 page, $25 for a business card size, $245
for the back cover, $195 for the page inside the front cover,
and $175 for the page inside the back cover. Those may seem
high, but those are in line for a magazine of our circulation.
We also give discounts for multiple months paid in *advance*.
10% for 2 months, 15% for 3 months, 20% for 4 months, 30% for 6
months, and 40% for 12 months. So, for $1080 a company gets a
full page for a year.
Some groups may not want to sell advertising in their
newsletter in order not to appear to be sponsored by anyone.
That is understandable. Our group had concerns along those
lines, but strict policies about not playing favorites with
advertisers can avoid problems.
One good rule is to always require cash payment for ads,
and not offer them in exchange for freebies, door prizes,
donated software and equipment, etc. Accurate records of ad
sales and payments are important. Issue an invoice for every ad
you sell, and issue a receipt for every payment you receive.
Donated items sometimes have a habit of ending up in someone's
personal possession instead of being used for user group
business. If you make a sweetheart deal with one business,
FidoNews 8-16 Page 18 22 Apr 1991
others will get wind of it and expect the same, and you just end
up tee-ing people off.
Advertisers are business people and need to be dealt with
in a business-like way. Unfortunately, volunteer-run user
groups sometimes have a problem with this. Suggestion: always
put everything in writing.
When a magazine or newsletter can be supported through
advertising it helps keep dues LOW. It also frees up membership
dues for things like renting a meeting location, partially
paying the expenses of an out-of-town speaker to make a
presentation, bulletin board equipment (yeah!), phone lines,
educational seminars, and even advertising your own group in
other publications.
You might even be able to afford renting office space for
your bulletin board instead of imposing on one full-time sysop
and risking sysop burn-out. (Yeah, we all know about sysop
burnout.) It's easier to change sysops that way, and it keeps
your bbs equipment from being held hostage by one person.
Office space serves as a neutral location for work parties,
storing your club's records and property, and as a semi-
permanent delivery location for shipments that can't be made to
your group's P.O. box. How many of you still have things being
sent to your EX-president's home address?
Back to advertising. There's nothing wrong with selling
advertising to the companies who make money selling software and
hardware to your members.
I'd like to hear from you, "let's do lunch."
FidoCon '91 VIP Membership: $104 US* Rate Changes July 15th
Banquet 25 US
===
$129 US
* Membership After July 15, and at the door
* $169
* Banquet 25
* ====
* $194
*NEW*
A "No Frills", good from 9am to 6pm, for Seminar and
Dealers Rooms ONLY membership (no Convention Hospitality
Suite access or ticket for the SuperSystem Drawing) is
available for $45 US for the three days or $20 US per
day. Full credit can be applied to a VIP membership if
you elect to upgrade.
*NEW*
A "Supporting Membership" for those unable to attend, is
available for $25 US. Supporting members Will receive
the progress reports and program book.
Hotel: Sheraton Lakewood
690 Union Blvd
Lakewood, CO
(303) 987-2000
Rooms:
Single/Double $59 US per night
Adjoining Rooms (Pseudo-Suite) 118 US
Triple/Quad 78 US
Adjoining Rooms (Pseudo-Suite) 156 US
Suites from 450 US
Guests of Honor:
Tom Jennings -- FidoCon '91 Guest of Honor
Tim Pozar -- Gateway Guru
Ray Gwinn -- The Fossil master his self
Vince Perriello -- President of Bit Bucket Software &
FidoNews 8-16 Page 20 22 Apr 1991
publisher of FidoNews.
Alan Applegate -- VICE-President {president in charge of
vice?} of Bit Bucket, Writer of the
infamous
Binkley Docs & Technical Support for eSoft.
Bob Hartman -- Author of ConfMail, ReMapper. Co-Author of
Binkley and TIMS. Major asset of eSoft's
program development team.
Phil Becker -- CEO of eSoft .. publisher of TBBS/TDBS/TIMS
Steve Jackson -- CEO of Steve Jackson Games .. Publisher of
GURPS CYBERPUNK and center of Secret
Service attention for over 8 months.
John Perry Barlow -- Internet Guru and one of the founders of
the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Guests of Dishonor:
Terry Travis -- Vince and Alan's prime target in the
SYSOP Mud pie Fight
Those indicating they will be attending:
Tom Tcimpids
Several notable writers of computer columns
Several popular Science fiction authors
Mitch Kapor Founder of the Electronic Frontier
Foundation.
Invited and not yet committed:
Steve Wozniak The WOZ, one of the founders of Apple
Convention Hospitality Suite by:
Kevin "DOC" McNeil and the FidoNet COOKING echo.
Featuring: Seadog Casserole, Zip-Tarts, Pak-Man Cookies,
Roast Opus
Paid Memberships:
Marshall Barry & Daniel L. Bonner &
Michelle Weisblat Linda L. Bonner
James H. Dunmyer & Michael Kanavy &
Janice L. Dunmyer Elizabeth Kanavy
Thomas Pat Nefos & George Peace &
Judy Nefos Christine Keefer
Terry N. Rune' & Steven G. See &
Wayne A. Rune' Pam See
Peter Stewart & William M. Van Glahn &
Michele Hamilton Janet Van Glahn
FidoNews 8-16 Page 21 22 Apr 1991
Peter N. White & Rodney A. Aloia
Chris Anderson Alan Applegate
Brian P. Bartee Charlie Bass
Jeff P. Brothers George R. Cornell
Don Daniels Joe Dehn
Emmitt W. A. Dove Mike Eckles
Fabian R. Gordon Ray Gwinn
Norman B. Henke Stanley A. Hirschman
Steve Jackson Tom Jennings
Bruce H. Kirschner Mark K. Kreutzian
Don Marquart Andrew Milner
Tim Pozar Michael Pratt
Steve Raymond John P. Roberts Jr.
Sam Saulys Daniel D. Segard
John R. Souvestre Zhahai Stewart
Terry L Travis Girard Westerberg
Vincent E. Perriello Roy Timberman
Jack Winslade Steven Sherwick
Jim Burt & Ben Cunningham
Karen Burt Brenda Donovan
Scott Munhollon & Tony Goggin
Tammy Munhollon Bob Hartman
Mike Ratledge & Joaquim Homrighausen
Donna Ratledge John Johnson
Eric L. Smith & Thomas Lange
Diane B. Smith Ed Moore
Bob Whiston & Chris Rand
Cheryl Whiston Steven L. Rusboldt
Russell Anderson James F. Smith
Bill Bacon Jeff Tensly
Phil Becker Ken Zen
Brian Godette
Attending Banquet
Daniel L. Bonner & Rodney A. Aloia
Linda L. Bonner Russell Anderson
Jim Burt & Chris Anderson
Karen Burt Brian P. Bartee
James H. Dunmyer & Charlie Bass
Janice L. Dunmyer Phil Becker
Michael Kanavy & Jeff P. Brothers
Elizabeth Kanavy Ben Cunningham
Mike Ratledge & Don Daniels
Donna Ratledge Brenda Donovan
Steven G. See & Fabian R. Gordon
Pam See Ray Gwinn
William M. Van Glahn & Bob Hartman
Janet Van Glahn Norman B. Henke
Peter N. White & Joaquim Homrighausen
Cheryl Gordon Tom Jennings
FidoNews 8-16 Page 22 22 Apr 1991
John Johnson Daniel D. Segard
Mark K. Kreutzian James F. Smith
Don Marquart John R. Souvestre
Andrew Milner Terry Travis
Ed Moore Girard Westerberg
Tim Pozar Roy Timberman
John P. Roberts Jr. Brian Godette
Steven Sherwick
Seminars:
Surviving Government Scrutiny The Ultimate BBS/BBSing
in the future
TBBS\TDBS\TIMS Getting the most from
BinkleyTerm
AMAX made easy Gateways - the
internetwork connection
Dealing with SYSOP burnout BBSing in the 90's and
beyond
The Ethical Software Hacker For this I gave up my
Love Life?
How to moderate an Echo Copyrights demystified
Software Development Roundtable DOS 4/5, Windows
Developers Roundtable Modem Roundtable
File your own copyrights for $10 XRS/RAX/QMX/SeX/XOR/
OREO/MORE
Association of Shareware XRS (the Universal
Professionals Offline Reader Editor
BBS Role Playing Gaming Forum Promoting your BBS
BBS Business Sense MASS Storage/CD ROM's
BBS Users Groups Activities:
TBBS Users Group will be convening as FidoTUG '91 during the
convention.
AlterCon will be sharing the facilities.
AlterNet Costume Banquet Royal Court
Meeting of the Dukes
Fun Activities:
FidoNews 8-16 Page 23 22 Apr 1991
Traditional Hard Diskus Throw Floppy Fling
The Big Three Brewery Bash National SYSOP Mud Pie
Fight
Air Force Academy Tour Garden of the Gods
Psychic and Physical Tours Golfing Tours of
of Colorful Colorado Colorado
We are scheduling additional seminars and social activities.
Fire off a message letting us know what you'd like to see and
do. If you would like to see someone special, let us know as
well.
*** FidoCon '91 Dealers Room will be open from 9:00 am to
*** 6:00 pm Friday and Saturday, 9:00 am to 3:00 pm Sunday
Manufacturers Invited:
AAC Telecomm Adaptec, Inc.
Alloy Computer Products, Inc. American MiTAC
Corporation
Anchor Automation Artisoft
AST Research, Inc. ATI Technologies Inc.
Bit Bucket Software BIX
Borland Chesterfield
Financial Corp.
Clark Development Company, Inc Coconut Computing,
Inc.
Compucom Connect Tech, Inc
DigiBoard Everex Systems, Inc.
Fujitsu Galacticomm, Inc.
Gates Distributing GVC Technologies Inc.
GW Associates Hayes Microcomputer
Products
Hitachi Microcom, Inc.
Microsoft Motorola Computer
Group
Multi-Tech Systems, Inc. Online Communications
Inc.
Practical Peripherals Prodigy Services
Quarterdeck Office Systems Searchlight Software
Supra Corporation Surf Computer Services
System Enhancement Associates Telebit Corporation
U.S. Robotics, Inc. VSI Telecommunications
Inc.
Western Digital Zoom Telephonics, Inc.
Confirmed dealers
Bit Bucket Software CDB Systems eSoft
Mustang Software, Inc.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 24 22 Apr 1991
Drawings & Prizes
Including:
16 Line TBBS/TDBS/TIMS Sysop Dream SYSTEM CPU with a 486 or
a 386 at least 3/4 Gig disk, 16 ports and several modems
.. depending on number of attendees. A portion of the
memberships go to purchasing this system.
Autographed copies of the books that made Steve Jackson a
household name, GURPS CYBERPUNK.
For the SYSOP that has everything
300 baud acoustic Sysop Nightmare System
All kinds of donated equipment and software, some even
working.
Hospitality Suites
eSoft Bit Bucket Software
More as it comes to being. Subscribe to the FIDOCON_91 Echo.
This will be THE BBSing Event of '91, BE THERE.
================== FidoCon '91 Registration Form ===============
I've often wondered what might be the best way to explain
what being online is all about. How you approach it depends in
part on to whom you're speaking. It also depends on your own
perspective. I find the cultural perspective the most
interesting. And perhaps the most neglected, save for a few
get-over theses written by people from outside the community, as
it were.
That in mind, I've put together some basics on what it's
like to be online, and the online culture. I'm trying for a
broadband perspective, for newcomers and old hands. Whether
you're online or not, I hope you'll find this a bit
horizon-expanding. I offer some new facts, new facts, and a bit
of speculation ... a different perspective.
#
So, I've finished writing this intro to the online world,
and I'm still asking myself, how can I introduce the topic?
Give you a reading list? A step-by- step walkthrough? Blast out
with descriptions spiked with provocative metaphors? Hm ...
nope, none of the above. Let's try this:
"There's a place ... in my mind ...." So go the lines of an
old Beatles' tune. It's a tune that many modem users (aka
computer "networkers") might sing as they sign on to their
favorite online services, because they are indeed going to a
place in their mind--albeit a place that exists in part because
of and in/on computers. A place that exists as a true multi-
human/multi-machine interface.
Right. The human-machine interface is here. Now. It's not
waiting for scalp connects and nerve or brainwave inductance
devices, nor is it waiting for drug-enhancement. And it's not
waiting for you. While many people are imagining the virtual
world that the uninformed think cyberpunk writers "created," a
million or so people are doing it, living it--living online lives
that mirror or are distortions of their real-world existences (or
lives that are what they would like to be). As you read this,
gigabytes of information are quietly moving at near-lightspeed
via telephone lines and satellite downlinks. With the movement
of that information, worlds and personas are created and die by
the nano-second.
And the virtual world is virtually nothing like the seers
and science fiction writers and cultural predictionists tried to
tell you it would be. While public- or self-appointed gurus in
the aforementioned categories were carefully laying out the
online world, the people they thought they were writing about
picked up the tools and parts lying about and created real online
worlds, linking themselves in a global network that transcends
whatever you thought cyberpunk was, along with most of science
fiction.
To be sure, the media with which those of us online deal
with on a day-to-day basis are far less exotic than those
marvelous mind-links brought to you in fiction. Screw all that
intense poking around in single-vision futures, anyway, for what
is fiction but polished reality, pre-shaped to fit the needs of
plot and character and theme?
FidoNews 8-16 Page 27 22 Apr 1991
I'm talking clacking keyboards and computers and modems and
online services like GEnie, CompuServe, DELPHI, BIX, etc., and
computer BBSs that reside in someone's unused basement or bedroom
or den. I'm talking reality.
Besides, the destination is the point, and is Nepal any
less exotic if you fly there aboard a DC-3 rather than a 747?
Think about it.
It's real. It's here. It's now. And it's what this
article is about.
What I'm Doing Here
I'm here to talk about the worlds online--worlds to which
some of your, or your friends, are denied access. Which is too
bad, because most of you would enjoy being online, where you can
be and do virtually anything you wish. You can cruise for
software and data of all sorts, meet old friends and make new
ones, and the proverbial "much, much more."
Why me, rather than some famous "name" cultural hero or
whatever? Because I am literally and in all modesty the only
person who can write about this subject from this perspective.
I'm the only fiction and non-fiction writer I know of who is uses
as many online services as I do (hell, I'm the only person I know
of who is online in as many places as I am). I like this stuff.
I write books and columns and articles about it, and those works
are published in the U.S., Japan, Argentina, and the U.K. (In
Japan, I'm a "famous American networker and SF author" to Yomiuri
Shimbun's 9 million readers, and to readers of various
magazines.) I include it in my fiction. And all else like that.
(If this indicates something of an ego, well, having an ego is a
pre-requisite for getting published. Not that you need an
overinflated, abrasive ego like some writers of my acquaintance.
But you gotta have an ego, to be able to present youself, and
this is the only one I have. What you see is what you get.)
Where is this going? In the direction of strangeness and
facts and oddities and whatever else comes to mind, ever-mindful
that you are reading this, so I'll work to avoid overindulging in
games of style and technique, hewing to my subject as much as I
can. Be warned, though: I'll drop in random blocks of commentary
and facts at times, because when I'm writing about this stuff my
viewpoint tends to change shape from moment to moment, just
because online worlds are that way. Which is no less than
appropriate, so pardon my skewed-ness.
Since this is the first time out, I'm going to try to give
you an introduction to and a "feel" for what's online and what's
done with it. First, for those of you who aren't online, or who
have limited online experience, here's a taste of the
strangeness:
#
My modem brings strange people and events into my home.
No, I mean really strange, like you could write a million
genre-fiction stories about it. Better than The Naked City
FidoNews 8-16 Page 28 22 Apr 1991
and The Twilight Zone and Vernor Vinge's True Names all
rolled into one. (Oh, add True Names to the reading list
I'm not giving you.) Far better, because my modem links me
to my choice of a bizarro group of worlds beyond the world
we physically inhabit--and the access is under my control.
I flick through them with almost the same ease as I flick
through cable-TV channels, running realtime and multi-level
interactive.
These worlds are created almost without limitations by
those who inhabit them. Created on computer bulletin boards
and online services (networks, to some of you).
Consider ... in a given week, I might communicate
online with pleasant Japanese editors and irate British
writers and journalists seeking quotes and avowed
transsexuals and rock singers and 60s TV sitcom stars and a
West German computer consultant who's willing to spend
twenty minutes of international telecom money figuring out
what a palindrome is, and a Japanese translator who's
equally willing, but never does figure it out (he did come
back to get the lowdown on puns); or horny people cruising
live-prose accompaniment for masturbation; or Dead-heads and
wigged-out role-playing gamers and microcosmic power-
trippers and general jerks; or jokers and hackers and voices
of reason and maybe even you.
Via electronic mail and realtime chatting, on sixteen
online services with twenty-odd IDs, I daily flow in and out
of virtual worlds created by people who have one thing in
common: they have access to something you don't. Endless
virtual worlds offering endless information resources. And
some of them have discovered that the power to create worlds
in metaphor and sometimes fact is real.
It's interesting, it's fun, it's entertaining, it's
absurd, and sometimes it's profitable--as is the case with
anything put together by people with almost no guidelines.
#
Some might be tempted to say being online is participating
in a work of art, but that would be bulls*** (and it will
continue to be bulls*** when being online is "discovered" by the
next Andy Warhol crowd); being online is grabbing and giving and
sharing hard information and idle chatter and gossip and intense
ideas.
There are similes and metaphors galore for "the online
experience," but I'll skip those for now, because the none of
them are right on. Skip all the flash-hip glitz cyberpunk that's
been zoomed at you, too, and all that silly Frankenstein stuff
from the old-line science fiction writers. None of that's going
to happen.
(A note for intense science fiction readers: most modem the
users don't read a lot of SF, so if you're an SF reader don't
look for people talking about "jacking in," and don't look for
them to recognize the reference if you sign on to a system and
tag the realtime conferences "anarchy parks," however appropriate
that may be.)
FidoNews 8-16 Page 29 22 Apr 1991
Likewise, skip the "information utility" and "communications
medium" and "data resource" stuff laid out in the promo for
commercial online services. Despite the fact that someone else
owns the hardware and software that make online worlds possible,
and have laid out careful designs for those worlds, it is the
users who shape those worlds. Why and how? Because those worlds
exist in and depend on the interaction of the minds of thousands
of modem users. (No--don't hand me any "group mind" concepts;
put that stuff over in the corner, in the pile with channeling
and crystals. Or, get a modem and find someone who wants to play
the game.)
In sum, being online is a 48-hour day communications and
information freak out and pig out and party, depending on who you
are. And you're invited. (If you want to find out how to
R.S.V.P. that invitation and get online, see the accompanying
sidebar. And the time dimension really does include a 48-hour
day; consider Tokyo, 12 hours or more in your future ....)
What are They Doing There? (Or, Why are They Online?)
Beyond the strangeness I rolled out a few paragraphs back,
you may well wonder exactly what are people are doing online, or
why. Or maybe not. But I'll tell you anyway; anything that
people pay lots of money to do begs explaining. (But it's all
strange, depending on the context.)
Modem users find all sorts of applications for being online.
Friends separated by hundreds or thousands of physical miles can
communicate faster and at less cost than via conventional
communications media. Agorophobics can mingle and be vivacious.
Nervous investors can check and recheck and calculate and have
decisions made for them.
What else? You can play formal games, alone or with others.
You can play informal games (like adopting a persona and seeing
how many people you can fool with it, as a substitute for not
being the person you want to be in real life). You can stumble
into some of the most amazing conversations (14 gay males
comparing length, for instance, or half a dozen role-
players bellying up to a virtual bar in a neo-Medieval inn, or an
anonymous male teenager chatting about sex with a self-labeled
feminist female schoolteacher who invariably terminates such
chats by typing "Ohgodohgodohgod ..." until the screen is full.
You may imagine the reason for this.
So much for the sensationalistic. Modem users also use the
online services and BBSs to get software (pirated or not),
conduct business (buy, sell, or deliver products), get news and
do research. And, for some of us, being online constitutes a big
slice of our social life.
The networks provide a venue for experimentation, too. For
instance, I'm collecting a lot of interesting data with a
simulacrum I created. It signs on to an online service, finds a
realtime conference, and talks. And yes, it's interactive.
Artificial Intelligence? I don't know; perhaps it would be
better tagged as Intelligence Implementation. Chat with me
online some night, and see if you can tell whether it's me or the
simulacrum ....
FidoNews 8-16 Page 30 22 Apr 1991
A Few Words Concerning Elitism
As you've probably figured out, being online can be as
useful as being able to read or drive a car, depending on your
lifestyle, profession, and interests. Until recently, the
majority of people who could benefit from being online were
barred from access, because online worlds were largely restricted
to the techno-elite. But now all you have to be is techno-aware;
hardware and software have become less user-belligerent, and
basically if you are aware that the resources are there, you can
use them. Still, the majority of the world cannot relate to
being online the way they can relate to, say, VCRs or pizzas.
Thus the techno-elite who used to make up most of the online
population have been diluted with an influx of what you might
call a sort of "plug-n-go" elite. You no longer have to know a
lot to access online worlds; just get the equipment, introduce
yourself to those aspects of the world you want to use, and
that's it.
(To borrow an overused simile, it's as if the explorers and
frontier-expanding types have finished marking the trails and
identifying and clearing out the dangers, and now the settlers,
who have intentions other than exploring--like shaping the land
and bending it to their will--have moved in.)
There's another group of elitists that separates the public
at large from those online, and is the main reason that computer
communication is not fully "legitimized" (like, say VCRs or
pizzas). That group consists of the economically elite--and let
me hasten to add that they are not an elite group by choice, in
case that's not obvious. Those who cannot afford the money for
the equipment to get online (anywhere from five hundred bucks for
used equipment, to three grand or more for an upscale computer
system and V.42/MNP error-checking 9600-bps modem with online
help, power steering, A/C, 21 jewels and all the other options),
and/or cannot afford the time to become aware of all this stuff
and learn about it, well, those people are cut out.
Thus, while the online worlds are no longer restricted to
the techno-elite, they are restricted to another kind of elite,
in terms of financial resources and/or personal background.
Note that, in aggregate, this is true only in the U.S. In
Japan and Europe and third-world countries, they're either living
in the past (like in Japan or the U.K., where it's still 1985
online) or clamping on to American culture (as is the case in
certain South American countries). So elsewhere, it costs even
more to be online, and there's a higher techno-awareness
required. In some cases, the techies still rule, and in others
being online is almost a covert operation (consider the Soviet
Union, or African nations).
Who's Out There?
Hopefully, I've not given you too distorted a picture of who
is online. After all not everyone online (nor even a majority)
assumes alternate personas. You'll find people like the woman up
the street from you, who you didn't even know owned a computer,
online. You'll find writers online, in need of an excuse not to
write or carrying on business with editors. Writers who don't
mind talking with their fans are online, too--like Tom Clancy,
who hangs out on GEnie, or Jerry Pournelle, or George Alec
FidoNews 8-16 Page 31 22 Apr 1991
Effinger (who writes about this stuff anyway), or Douglas Adams.
Bored night-shift workers dialing out of factories, grocery
stores, and warehouses are not uncommon. (People who are flat-
out bored for any reason are not uncommon.)
Singers and performers and actors are online, too. Who?
Lots of names you'd recognize, but many traveling incognito.
Let's see ... B.J. Thomas, called realtime conferencing "the
interview wave of the future"; several soap opera stars, who log
on between rehearsals and takes; Martha Quinn of MTV fame (though
she's kinda busy now); someone who may or may not be Peter Falk;
maybe Carlos Santana or Patti Scialfia or Pete Townshend or John
Poindexter; maybe lots of other people you'd never expect to meet
anywhere outside of the world's "hip" cities.
Lots of computer techies, of course; they've made room for
the plug-n-go crowd, but they haven't given up their turf. Lots
of special-interest people, too--people who share hobby or
professional or personal interests.
All of which not only tells you a bit of who's online
(pretty much a cross-section of the American middle and upper
class), but also a bit more about why they're online. 'Nuff
said.
#
So much for the basic intro. Between the foregoing and the
sidebar, and what's coming up, you'll know your way around the
online world fairly well soon enough.
#
"And Now, the News"
What the Wall Street Journal Didn't Tell You About the
'Quake of 89
Perhaps I should have used this header: "How the News Media
Prevented Black Tuesday on Wall Street without Even Trying (or
Knowing)." Put it up there yourself if you like; either header
applies.
Anyway, if you're into conspiracies and paranoia, you'll
probably enjoy this. Picture this: It's October 19, 1989, and I
get a call from guy named Tom Curry at Time magazine; he'd been
online asking for info on the central California earthquake that
involved computer networks and I agreed to give him some info.
The same day, I get a call from the Associated Press to be
interviewed on the same subject. On October 20, I'm asked by a
writer friend to phone Mr. So-and-so at the Wall Street Journal
about the subject.
So I tell Time and the AP and the Wall Street Journal about
how the San Francisco area is data-relay central between the
Pacific Rim and the U.S. mainland and points between. I further
explain how RCA, the record carrier that moves data to and from
the Pacific Rim for major American packet-switching networks,
lost its satellite link, and how the domestic networks' equipment
went down anyway (thanks to equipment that was vulnerable because
of poor power-backup and lack of alternate link provisions). A
little more about how the technicians engineers at the packet-
switching networks had a particularly interesting priority: get
the financial data-links up first thing. I also tell them that
this meant money-heads throughout the U.S. (and elsewhere) were
FidoNews 8-16 Page 32 22 Apr 1991
trading their pieces of paper based on totally outdated
information.
So, what happened? Why didn't you hear about all this?
Well, the Time story was killed. The AP never called back to
complete their "interview," and the Wall Street Journal staffers
with whom I spoke carefully explained that I wasn't a writer (as
if I hadn't published three million words, and edited a few
hundred thousand more), and therefore couldn't provide them with
any useful information.
The sum total of information having to do with computer
communications and the San Francisco earthquake provided to the
public was:
* A front-page article in the Wall Street Journal concerning
mainly local emergency communications on a relatively tiny
multi-user system in the area hit by the 'quake (written
by a guy who was on retainer by WSJ).
* A few mentions of same in the computer press.
* A few bits here and there about the emergency
communications network that sprung up, controlled by the
people who could, for reasons involving which online
services' private packet-switching networks had reliable
power backups and immediate microwave links rather than
landlines. (Imagine that--for the first time, emergency
communications in a disaster area the hands of mostly
average people. Lots of amateur radio operators' stations
were "down," and voice telephone was all but impossible,
but those with telecom capability could get out--many
relying on battery-powered computers and modems.) Most of
these were the results of fast-acting network publicity
people.
That was almost it. There were a few stories about
automatic teller machines (ATMs) being turned off, since they
were updating with out-of-date information, and about a couple of
relatively brave banks turning theirs back on and trusting the
honesty of the people who needed to get cash from ATMs.
Having been involved in relaying messages and information
among several networks on behalf of the Science Fiction Writers
of America (and, less formally, for the SF community in general),
I was online quite a bit in the hours and days following the
earthquake, and I learned quite a bit, formally and informally,
publicly and privately, some of it being information of the "you
didn't hear it here" variety. So I wrote an article about the
combination telephone/computer communications emergency network
that got word into and out of the disaster area and about the
financial crash for Japan's largest telecom magazine Networking.
And I mentioned a bit of this (though not the part about the
financial network being down and out) in a column I do for a
magazine called Computer Shopper.
The Japanese recognized the importance of the story, of the
facts concerning the financial networks (of course, the Japanese
were acutely aware of the lack of data communications). Asahi
Shimbun, Japan's second-largest daily newspaper, picked up the
story, and I'm still getting fan letters.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 33 22 Apr 1991
On this side of the Pacific, though, the facts were
suppressed or ignored.
Why? Was there a conspiracy? Hm. Well, I have my own
ideas on that, which I'll get to presently. But first, some
background ...
You may well wonder why San Francisco is so important to
East-West finance. It's like this: you got your Bank of Hong
Kong and Bank of America and Bank of this and that there, and a
heavy concentration of Japanese and Japanese-Americans there (in
Tokyo alone, KDD phone company was going nuts trying to handle
60,000 attempted calls to San Francisco per hour, for hours after
the 'quake). But, rather than leave it to you to infer what's
what, here's a basic fact: San Francisco is the financial gateway
to the Pacific Rim, physically, on paper, literally, and, in the
computer sense of the word, virtually.
The bottom line: almost all commercial telecommunications
with the entire Pacific Rim were lost due to the knockout punch
the earthquake delivered to satellite ground stations, telephone
switching stations, power lines. (All of this information is
straight from those who were in the trenches; from the techs
working to get things up and running again, among others.)
So the money-heads went on trading and making and losing
ghost money, blissfully unaware that they were cut off from the
right now! information they needed. And <smirk>, the economic
advisors and analyst types were likewise cut off--and didn't know
it. (For the economic advisors and economists, being cut off
from information is not unusual; take look at how they justify
their predictions sometime. Too many of 'em are regarded as such
bona-fide seers that their predictions become self-fulfilling,
which more often than not screws up the economy royally. The
predictions are bulls**t: for the majority plying that trade, the
"bottom line" is making a name and money by making those self-
fulfilling predictions.
(But this is a topic for elsewhere. Still, it's worth
noting that we now have a little hard evidence about the economic
predictions; they come out the same with or without accurate
information. Bottom line--since we're talking money I'll over-
use that cliched phrase: these people don't know what they're
doing.
(There. I've taken my shots. Now, back to the main track.)
"So what?" you say. "So these business types didn't have
up-to-the minute info on Asian corporate activities, stock
prices, money values, and the like. So what?"
Okay, look at this: the money-heads were trading as if
nothing had happened but an earthquake with mainly regional
effects. But what if they had known that the info wasn't coming
in from the Pacific Rim? What if they had known that what they
were doing was based on the wrong information?
The answer's not obvious until you think about it: they
would have, as a Wall Street acquaintance put it, freaked. They
would have absolutely freaked out! And how many points would the
Dow-Jones Average have dropped? 100? 300? 500? It would have
been interesting to find out. But it didn't happen. Why?
Because the news of the data-link loss didn't get out.
FidoNews 8-16 Page 34 22 Apr 1991
And why didn't it get out? Well, it would be nice to
imagine that it was intentionally suppressed because someone "in
power" was aware of the damage that the fictions of stocks and
commodities and money markets do to our society. Conspiracy fans
will, of course, believe that the information was suppressed
because "behind the scenes" types wanted it suppressed, for
whatever reasons. But it wasn't suppressed as a part of some
power group's hidden agenda. (Blame it on the Illuminati or the
Rockefellers if you wish; I don't take stock in such
speculations.)
No, it was none of that. This potentially panic-generating
information was suppressed by simple air-headedness and ego-
tripping, because it came from the "wrong" sources, and because
the news types couldn't understand it. And I'll note that I
wasn't the only such "wrong" source.
In other words, the facts didn't get out because the people
who decide what's news didn't hear them via their legitimate
sources, and being unable to comprehend the facts, ignored them.
(Normally, each news decision-maker uses her or his own power
trip or personal political agenda or sensationalism rating to
determine what's news, but if they don't understand it, it takes
too long to figure it out, and there's no blood, it ain't news.
No conspiracies here, either; just a lot of small- and big-time
would-be conspiracies. End of shot.)
Side note: all of this says a lot and implies more about the
importance of data communications to the existence of our
society.
Final note: if you doubt the importance of the financial
information flow just cited, remember the fact that the number
one priority of the data carrier networks was to bring the
financial elements of the Pacific Rim data net back online.
Everything else was ignored until financial data communication
was back in place. Hell, the packet-switching networks didn't
even bother to bring Hawaii back up until 22 hours after the
'quake hit.
So What Else is New?
Speaking of significant items that didn't make "the news,"
the first-ever computer BBS in the Soviet Union went online at
the end of 1989. This is a landmark event, because BBSs were all
but unheard of in the Soviet Union until this BBS opened.
The board, called Eesti BBS #1, is in Tallinn, Estonia.
International links are via Helsinki. The multi-user system is
set up for messaging and file transfer, and is intended to
function as a open communications channel to Soviet and non-
Soviet countries.
The system is set up on a PC with 40 megs of storage and a
300/1200-bps modem that recognizes both international (CCITT) and
American (Bell) standards. If you want to give it a try, the
number is +7 0142 422 583 ("+7" is Finland's country code from
the U.S.). You may have to wait up to two minutes for a carrier,
depending on the phone routing from the U.S. to Finland. You may
also have to delay the dialing speed, to compensate for delays
caused by the number of phone exchanges through which the call is
routed. Evening hours are the best time to dial up the system--
try for a time slot when you're hitting evening/nighttime hours
FidoNews 8-16 Page 35 22 Apr 1991
in your corner of the world as well as in Estonia.
#
Michael A. Banks is the author of 21 published non-fiction
books and science fiction novels (including the definitive work
on personal computer communications, The Modem Reference,
published by Brady Books/Simon & Schuster). He's also published
more than 1,000 magazine articles and short stories, lively
technical documents, and "... a few catchy slogans."
He can be found online "almost anywhere," but if you want to
reach him fast, try E-mail to KZIN on DELPHI, to MIKE.BANKS on
GEnie, to BANKS2 on AOL, or to mike_banks on BIX.
#
BOOKS BY MICHAEL A. BANKS
"If a technical thing is troubling you, just wait a bit.
Michael Banks is probably writing a book that will make it
clear." --The Associated Press
Do you use DeskMate 3? Are you getting the most out of the
program? To find out, get a copy of GETTING THE MOST OUT OF
DESKMATE 3, by Michael A. Banks, published by
Brady Books/Simon & Schuster, and available in your local
Tandy/Radio Shack or Waldenbooks store now. Or, phone 800-624-
0023 to order direct. (The all-new 2nd edition is now
available!)
"GETTING THE MOST OUT OF DESKMATE 3 is more than a guide to
DeskMate; it's an enhancement..."--Waldenbooks Computer
NewsLink
Interested in modem communications? Check out THE MODEM
REFERENCE, also by Michael A. Banks and published by Brady
Books/Simon & Schuster. Recommended by Jerry Pournelle in Byte,
The New York times, The Smithsonian Magazine, various computer
magazines, etc. (Excerpts from this book accompany this file.)
THE MODEM REFERENCE is available at your local B. Dalton's,
Waldenbooks, or other bookstore, either in stock or by order.
Or, phone 800-624-0023 to order direct. (1st edition currently
available; all-new 2nd edition available in January, 1991!)
"I definitely recommend it." --Jerry Pournelle, BYTE Magazine
Want the lowdown on getting more out of your word processor?
Read the only book on word processing written by writers, for
writers: WORD PROCESSING SECRETS FOR WRITERS, by Michael A. Banks
& Ansen Dibel (Writer's Digest Books). WORD PROCESSING SECRETS
FOR WRITERS is available at your local B. Dalton's, Waldenbooks,
or other bookstore, either in stock or by order. Or, phone 800-
543-4644 (800-551-0884 in Ohio) to order direct.
Other books by Michael A. Banks
UNDERSTANDING FAX & E-MAIL (Howard W. Sams & Co.) THE ODYSSEUS
SOLUTION (w/Dean Lambe; SF novel; Baen Books) JOE MAUSER: MERCENARY
FROM TOMORROW (w/Mack Reynolds; SF novel; Baen Books) SWEET DREAMS,
SWEET PRICES (w/Mack Reynolds; SF novel; Baen Books) COUNTDOWN: THE
COMPLETE GUIDE TO MODEL ROCKETRY (TAB Books) THE ROCKET BOOK
(w/Robert Cannon; Prentice Hall Press) SECOND STAGE: ADVANCED MODEL
FidoNews 8-16 Page 36 22 Apr 1991
ROCKETRY (Kalmbach Books)
For more information, contact:
Michael A. Banks
P.O. Box 312
Milford, OH 45150
Submitted in entirety with permission from the author by
Dennis McClain-Furmanski, 1:275/42, UMOD, Apple, Writing
David C. Lee - at Virginia Tech (shameless plug)
FidoNet 1:264/715.0 (HUB ROUTE MAIL)
Telnet VTCBX.CC.VT.EDU (128.173.5.4), 'C 21873' at prompt
Non-Standard (SCRIPT) System Usage Proposal
We here at Virginia Tech run systems on a computerized data
exchange network (in essence a digital phone line) in which AT
commands do not work and connections must be established by
determining a 'character connect code' for each baud rate. This,
in itself, stops running FidoNet mailers since all (that I have
seen, at any rate) use the AT command set. Sure, you could
probably get away with a script (for outbound dialing through an
outbound modem pool), but you could not answer the 'phone', so
calls made to you (even by an on-campus system) won't get
through!
However, this has been now accomplished by two means. First, by
a TSR that runs on top of a FOSSIL and intercepts calls,
providing AT emulation and call answering. Secondly, by a
modification of the BinkleyTerm source code for direct use by the
points under me. The former source is available, providing that
you agree to a distribution and source non-disclosure agreement
(no fees, noncommercial use only), for use if you have a similar
situation. The BinkleyTerm source ('ported') is also available
for distribution.
That said, let me get to the primary reason why I am writing
this! On campus, we have been running a network (a Fidonet
Technology Network, of course) since the fall semester. We have
been in FidoNet for roughly three or more months, first few
months of its existence was for testing. Since we are 'non-
standard' nodes, not reachable by other systems except by script
files, the coordinator structure is loath to have a bunch of
private nodes and only assigned us one. I can agree with the
line of reasoning here. However, most of those under me (if not
all) would like to have full node status for reasons of software
development contact site, beta status, SysOp conferences, etc.
They are full systems providing services to the campus. This
situation may (have) develop in other areas as well!
So, what to do? I came up with a way that should not take any
major modification to current software. What I propose is to use
the phone number field in the nodelist to identify where to get a
script to dial in from -- the field would be filled with the
following ,SCRIPT_XXX, where XXX is the node(s) (in the network
that the node in question is listed in) that you should file
request 'SCRIPT.TXT' (magic filename 'SCRIPT') from -- it will
contain scripts for whatever software and a capture file of a
sample log-in for users to develop (with ample discussion on use,
of course ;). And, in the case of different script necessities
for different nodes, ALL the different script varieties would be
provided in one file. So, for example, my listing would go:
The listing above, with the usage of SCRIPT_700_0 means that
nodes 700 and 0 (in Net 264) would be the places to file request
SCRIPT from. The node (XXX) portion is really unnecessary since
it should be understood that mail should either be hub or host
routed and by default you should contact the host at least! So,
a plain 'SCRIPT' is all that should be necessary!
And, a nodelist processor should not need to be updated to handle
the proposed addition -- when the SysOp attempts to dial with
SCRIPT as the phone number, it cannot or will not! And, it is
fairly simple to figure out even if a node is not up to date on
FidoNet Technical Standards for the nodelist. And, to also
insure that the mailer will not dial, the system can be marked as
private. In other words, no complete over-haul of existing
standards need to occur and all current software should be able
to handle it.
This would circumstance the wrong idea that since we are non-
standard full service systems (in the way to get to us), we
should be points -- and (from the previous issues of FidoNews)
should know how points are treated!
I feel that it is a viable kludge that will serve FidoNet by
providing a basis for expansion into more new and exciting
technology, like the system we run on, which is also a Telnetable
address. It is an efficient use of existing standards that does
not require special software to use (unlike an 'user defined
flag').
Please comment and route mail through 264/700!
Or, Telnet to VTCBX.CC.VT.EDU, type 'CALL 21873' at the CALL,
DISPLAY OR MODIFY prompt and hit carriage return until FrontDoor
comes on-line. Directly reachable through the same method
through 703-232-9100 or 703-232-2020 (2400 Max), suggested with
MNP/ARQ off (due to possible flow control problems). For a
campus BBS listing, try 'C VTCOSY' (VTCOSY.CNS.VT.EDU
128.173.5.10) and use 'bbs' as the user id. You may also contact
me at that system, user id 'dlee' (YOU CANNOT MAIL (INTERNET) TO
ME AT THIS SITE).
However, since there is only two weeks left this term, I would
suggest routing mail through 264/700, since I have shifted to
mail only for finals :-(. However, scripts should be available
from 264/0 (BinkleyTerm) and 264/700 (FrontDoor), if need be. I
would note, though, there's a good chance that you will need to
ask for them!
Jack Decker
1:154/8 Fidonet
SAVE UP TO 30% ON LONG DISTANCE CHARGES
Disclaimer: I believe the information in the following article
is correct, but you should verify any information you read in
an article like this with the appropriate long distance company
before switching carriers!
In the past I have tried to let you know when new programs come
through that can lower your long distance bills, and here's
just a couple more that I've recently found out about that may
be useful to some of you.
First of all, if you are a member of Sam's Wholesale Club (also
known as The Wholesale Club or just Sam's Club), you can join
the SAM'S/MCI program, which gives you a discount on either
regular MCI Dial "1" Service (if you spend under $100 per month
in long distance) or MCI PRISM PLUS (primarily a business
service intended for those with over $100/month usage). The ad
says "Call 1-800-444-4486 and tell the operator you saw the
SAM'S/MCI ad in Buyline" (Buyline is a tabloid publication put
out by Sam's Club).
Sam's Club is a "members only" wholesale store, but virtually
anyone can become a member. If you are employed at certain
places, or are a member of certain groups or credit unions, or
are a Wal-Mart stockholder, you may be entitled to a free
membership; otherwise you can get a membership for $25 annually
(the $25 membership allows you to buy at lower prices anyway).
They have over 200 locations, mostly in the Eastern half of the
U.S. (but they do have locations in Texas, Colorado, and
Nevada). For the nearest location, you could call the
corporate offices at (501) 277-7041.
I was told that the SAM'S/MCI discount for Dial "1" Service is
10%, so that's a 10% savings right there.
The other program that may be useful to some of you is MCI's
new "Friends and Family". They've been heavily advertising
this one, and you can make it work for you if:
1) You are an MCI residential customer,
2) One or more of the people you call is an MCI residential
customer.
In other words, if your BBS is on a residential line and your
echomail feed is on a residential line and you are both MCI
customers, you can sign up for "friends and family", put your
echo feed on your list (presumably the sysop who gives you your
echomail is a friend!), and get an additional 20% savings OVER
AND ABOVE any other discounts you may be entitled to (e.g. the
SAM'S/MCI discount, or any volume discounts).
A couple other notes: If you're not currently an MCI customer,
your telephone company will charge you $5.00 to switch
carriers. MCI will reimburse you for this changeover charge,
BUT ONLY IF YOU REQUEST IT. So if you're not currently an MCI
customer and you sign up for one or both of these plans, be
sure to ask about a credit for the telephone company charge.
Now, suppose your echo feed is happily using some other carrier
and doesn't particularly want to switch carriers? Well, there
may be a way around that, too, if your feed is cooperative.
All he has to do is call up MCI and ask to have a
"Ten-Triple-X" account. This will make him an MCI customer,
FidoNews 8-16 Page 41 22 Apr 1991
but he will have to dial the 10222 access code (see Dave
Appel's article in Fidonews 8-15 for an explanation of the
"10XXX" access codes) to actually make any calls on MCI,
meaning that any calls made WITHOUT dialing the "10222" will go
by his usual carrier. Or, if he wants to also use "Friends and
Family" but gets a better rate on some calls through another
carrier, he can get his "dial 1" service switched to MCI but
use the proper "10XXX" code to access another carrier whenever
necessary.
Remember: Just because you get an account with a new long
distance carrier does NOT mean that your previous accounts are
automatically inactivated. For example, you could have AT&T's
"Reach Out World" program for international calls and an MCI or
Sprint plan for domestic calls, and use the appropriate
"Ten-Triple-X" code to access whichever of the two carriers
that's not your default carrier. That's just an example, I
don't know too many cases where you'd actually want to do this
because all major carriers offer discount international calling
plans, but you could do it.
So, for those lucky enough to be entitled to both the
"SAM'S/MCI" discount AND the "Friends and Family" discount,
you'd save approximately 30% on calls that fall under both
discounts (assuming the information I received from the MCI rep
was correct).
If you are signing up for MCI service, be sure to also ask
about MCI's PrimeTime and SuperSaver programs, since one of
these in combination with the "SAM'S/MCI" and/or "Friends and
Family" plans could cut your bill even further. However,
PrimeTime and SuperSaver both have a minimum usage requirement
(albeit a very small one) while the "SAM'S/MCI" and "Friends
and Family" plans have no minimum usage requirement. And yes,
you can combine plans for greater savings in some cases.
I've always had the best luck in getting correct MCI rate
information by calling their customer service department at
1-800-444-6240, rather than one of their sales offices. The
customer service people seem to be better informed.
One caveat: The long distance market is highly competitive and
when one carrier comes out with a new plan, the other carriers
sometimes copy it. So if you are reading this information six
months after the date of publication, you may wish to check
with the other carriers to see what new plans they've come up
with.
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.
12 May 1991
Fourth anniversary of FidoNet operations in Latin America and
second anniversary of the creation of Zone-4.
15 Aug 1991
5th annual Z1 Fido Convention - FidoCon '91 "A New Beginning"
Sheraton Denver West August 15 through August 18 1991.
8 Sep 1991
25th anniversary of first airing of Star Trek on NBC!
7 Oct 1991
Area code 415 fragments. Alameda and Contra Costa Counties
will begin using area code 510. This includes Oakland,
Concord, Berkeley and Hayward. San Francisco, San Mateo,
Marin, parts of Santa Clara County, and the San Francisco Bay
Islands will retain area code 415.
1 Nov 1991
Area code 301 will split. Area code 410 will consist of the
northeastern part of Maryland, as well as the eastern shore.
This will include Baltimore and the surrounding area. Area 301
will include southern and western parts of the state,
including the areas around Washington DC. Area 410 phones will
answer to calls to area 301 until November, 1992.
1 Feb 1992
Area code 213 fragments. Western, coastal, southern and
eastern portions of Los Angeles County will begin using area
code 310. This includes Los Angeles International Airport,
West Los Angeles, San Pedro and Whittier. Downtown Los
Angeles and surrounding communities (such as Hollywood and
Montebello) will retain area code 213.
1 Dec 1993
Tenth anniversary of Fido Version 1 release.
5 Jun 1997
David Dodell's 40th Birthday
If you have something which you would like to see on this
calendar, please send a message to FidoNet node 1:1/1.
Greylock Software is currently beta testing a message editor
and is interested in your feedback. If you'd like a look at
it, it can be file requested from JonesNose, 321/202 under
the name EMEdt009.Lzh with the password FidoNews.
This editor is primarily designed for point utilization, in
conjunction with BinkleyTerm or Igor (which can also be
requested from JonesNose.)
