F I D O N E W S --       Volume 15, Number 28          13 July 1998
    +----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
    |  The newsletter of the     |   ISSN 1198-4589 Published by:          |
    |    FidoNet community       |   "FidoNews"                            |
    |          _                 |        1-209-251-7529    [1:1/23]       |
    |         /  \               |                                         |
    |        /|oo \              |                                         |
    |       (_|  /_)             |                                         |
    |        _`@/_ \    _        |                                         |
    |       |     | \   \\       |   Editor:                               |
    |       | (*) |  \   ))      |        Zorch Frezberg  1:205/1701       |
    |       |__U__| /  \//       |                                         |
    |        _//|| _\   /        |                                         |
    |       (_/(_|(____/         |                                         |
    |             (jm)           |     Newspapers should have no friends.  |
    |                            |                    -- JOSEPH PULITZER   |
    +----------------------------+-----------------------------------------+
    |               Submission address: FidoNews Editor 1:1/23             |
    +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
    |  MORE addresses:                                                     |
    |                                                                      |
    |    submissions=> [email protected]                                 |
    |                                                                      |
    +----------------------------------------------------------------------+
    |    For  information,   copyrights,   article   submissions,          |
    |    obtaining copies of FidoNews or the internet gateway FAQ          |
    |    please refer to the end of this file.                             |
    +----------------------------------------------------------------------+


                In the Kingdom of the Blind...

                       Table of Contents
    1. EDITORIAL  ................................................  1
    2. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR  ....................................  3
    3. ARTICLES  .................................................  6
       Z1C tries to bully Z1R10 refugees  ........................  6
       Region 25 Has a New REC  ..................................  7
       The Story of Statistics  ..................................  7
       Zone 1 Region 10 nodes speak out  .........................  9
    4. COLUMNS  .................................................. 14
       The rancid reek of Zorch's vendettas  ..................... 14
    5. NOTICES  .................................................. 29
       Future History  ........................................... 29
    6. FIDONEWS PUBLIC-KEY  ...................................... 30
       FidoNews PGP Public-Key Listing  .......................... 30
    7. FIDONET BY INTERNET  ...................................... 31
    8. FIDONEWS INFORMATION  ..................................... 34
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 1                   13 Jul 1998


    =================================================================
                                EDITORIAL
    =================================================================


    More of the same, just weirder.  A serious eye problem has kept me
    from doing much with computer screens for the past week, but it is
    slowly healing....enough for me to scan over the usual and see that
    the same continues...and perhaps a bit more keenly...

    This week, the same perceptions are brought forward, while more goes
    on in the background...perhaps it's time to bring some of it forward.

    After looking over Cindy Ingersoll's list published here last week,
    I find it interesting to note that nearly every Zone 1 node that
    offers Fidonet via Internet charges for access, but nearly every
    non-Zone 1 node does not.

    This at a time when Fidonet is shrinking in Zone 1, but growing in
    other countries, and despite the fact that Internet access is cheaper
    in Zone 1 than anywhere in the world.  For that matter, so is
    telephone service, computer equipment, and everything else involved
    in running a BBS.

    It's hard not to attribute a cause-and-effect relationship to this
    correlation but I suppose I can manage.

    After all, the Stars manage, no?

    Likewise, the consistent threat of at least one such provider to 'no
    longer carry FidoNews' if it contravenes that person's 'view' as to
    what the FidoNews should or should not publish, carry or cover has
    worn thin.  The less-than-veiled threat of censorship by not carrying
    FidoNews only makes the threat more visible for what it is...plain,
    simple censorship.

    Besides, without the FidoNews, that same provider would not have a
    own platform to spew forth a version of hate, innuendo and less than
    complete truth...as much an accusation as has been slung at this
    Editor by the same person.

    I suppose no one will truly be happy until the Snooze is controlled
    by a group devoted to their own agenda...or until their coalition of
    convenience breaks down.

    Likewise, the comments on vendettas and other alleged pogroms being
    carried out by this Editor pale compared to the same vendettas and
    pogroms being carried out by our long-time columnist, and in his own
    published column...but, then, I suppose it is acceptable until your
    own ox is gored, no?

    In the same vein, it is also interesting to see a pair of articles
    submitted by someone who has openly declared that FidoNet Policy is
    but merely a 'suggestion'...then acts to have that same Policy used
    to protect his own agenda.

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 2                   13 Jul 1998


    One note:  Didn't David Hallford publicly declare he would never
    return to FidoNet so long as Bob Kohl was in a coordinator post?

    How odd, as well, that the happy neighbors of the late Roy Rogers
    have pulled up stakes and moved to Canada from California...but, then
    again, the same persons behind the move also have distinct problems
    in following Policy as well, so perhaps it is a good thing to keep
    them all together.

    After all, trying and convicting people by the court of 'public
    opinion' is so much more convenient than getting both sides of a
    story.

    In brighter news, Damian Walker has published election results in
    from Zone 2's recent elections...and we've published the first page
    of available Fido-Over-IP listings, since the Falcon site went 'dark'
    in Region 50.

    And, with great appreciation and honor, I'd like to point out a new
    FidoNews site in Estonia, a former holding of the defunct Soviet
    Union, which is translating the FidoNews into the Estonian language.
    As well as the sister site in Sweden, we see two sysops willing to
    translate the FidoNews for their own members in their own languages.

    Translation is a time-consuming and tedious prospect, especially to
    those who are not truly fluent in the other language; the efforts of
    these sysops should not go unrecognized, either within their own Zone
    or by FidoNet itself.

    As with the other listed sites performing similar translations to
    present Fido information in native languages, it is an honor and
    privilege to see that those sites in the other Zones still observe
    the original mission of FidoNet...communication, at a lower cost and
    convenience to all.

    Perhaps Zone 1 can learn from this before it allows politics to tear
    it apart, hmmmmm?


    -zf-

    ### 30 ###

    -----------------------------------------------------------------

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 3                   13 Jul 1998


    =================================================================
                          LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
    =================================================================

    "MISDIRECTION -- TOO GOOD TO STOP NOW"

    by Ben Hamilton, FidoNet 1:124/7008

     bk> First point, the ZEC duties were written with input not only
     bk> from the RECs, but from the sysops of Z1 themselves. There was
     bk> no single author to the list.

    Bob Kohl was the lone original author of the list.  It was he who
    wrote the first draft and then submitted it to all for their
    comments.

    I have since changed the way I refer to the ZEC duties.  I now say:
    "The ZEC duties, as originally written by Bob Kohl, amended and
    approved by the RECC, and sanctioned by the ZC."  Hopefully that
    covers all of the bases.  :-)

     bk> More to the point is some of the RECs convenient use of the
     bk> list selectively without "remembering" that the list also
     bk> notes the use of an interim ZEC.

    So?

     bk> When I was elected, I started sending out netmail looking for
     bk> a replacement for the Elist keeper. In the end, there were two
     bk> individuals that were working on a replacement for the Elist:
     bk> Thom (the appointed replacement Elist keeper), and Marshall
     bk> Presnell.  Marshall is a professional software engineer and has
     bk> been for years.  Marshall was also a Fidonet sysop for many many
     bk> years. He offered to help and, as Thom was, in the process of
     bk> building an Elist replacement.  As things progressed, I
     bk> continued to give feedback on the issue to the ZC in an
     bk> impartial manner as I felt I was expected to.

    Without consulting or informing the RECs in any way.

    Yes, Bob Kohl chose to keep the information about Marshall's project
    a secret from the RECC.  The RECC could have made a more informed
    decision on the best replacement for the echolist if it had been
    properly informed of any and all projects that any *ECs knew of.

     bk> In the end, Thom was selected by Bob, and my congratulations
     bk> or condolences as the case maybe.

    Amen!

     BH> As I must continually remind you because the editor keeps
     BH> asking, Kohl's first act after winning the ZEC election was to
     BH> ask the RECC how he should go about removing an NEC from office.
     BH> He did remove the NEC.

     bk> Wrong, as noted both in the REC echo and in other echos the
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 4                   13 Jul 1998


     bk> question was one that was brought to me by the *C side and
     bk> possibly looking for an alternative to the normal means of
     bk> an RC dealing with the issue.

    What's wrong?  The NEC *was* removed from office.  That is a fact.

    If Bob Kohl was not also an RC, there would be no issue, since ZECs
    cannot remove NEC flags from the nodelist.

     bk> There is nothing wrong with looking for an alternative means
     bk> to deal with an issue except of course when it's turned around
     bk> to make it look like there's political motivation involved.

    Bob Kohl has said many times that he does not discuss his RC duties
    in the REC echo, yet above he says that he brought up the issue
    himself.  Both cannot be correct.

    If the motivation was not political, I invite Bob Kohl to explain
    what the reasons were for the removal of the NEC flag.

     BH> He soon removed an NC.

     bk> I'd like everyone to remember Ben's statement that what goes
     bk> on in Reg 10 is none of his business.  Sounded good at the
     bk> time, didn't it?

    It still sounds good now!  I'd like to remind Bob Kohl of the entire
    statement about Region 10, as it was posted a few weeks ago in Fido-
    News:

     BH> Region 10 business, frankly, is none of our business.  However,
     BH> things that happen in Region 10 do make it easy to see what can
     BH> happen when the "multiple hats" suggestion in Policy 4 is
     BH> ignored.

    Translation:

    I am by no means interested in the internal workings of Region 10 so
    that I can change them.  I am only interested in them because it
    proves that if Bob Kohl acts this destructive in his own region, it
    is bound to overflow into his Zone duties.  That is when it is
    important to me.

     BH> His REC quit, saying that he could no longer stand working with
     BH> Kohl.

     bk> Ben's memory of the time line is a bit shakey.  The REC quit
     bk> before any action about this issue took place.

    Time is not the issue.  The REC did quit because he could not stand
    working under Bob Kohl's thumb.  That is a fact.

     BH> He disclosed some in-transit netmail.

     bk> Ben also likes to paint with a very broad brush. There were
     bk> two complaints brought up. One was dismissed, the other was
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 5                   13 Jul 1998


     bk> explained and apologized for.  Someone sent me netmail and I
     bk> cc'ed Bob Satti when I responded.

    The fact is that the netmail was not "to" Bob Kohl.  And:

     bk> While technically it is disclosing in-transit mail, ...

    Bob Kohl admits to disclosing in-transit netmail.  The sender and
    recipient probably do not care if it was "technical" or not, and
    I do not think that the writers of FidoNet's policy did either, else
    they might have written the section on in-transit mail differently,
    perhaps choosing to cover this exact situation.

    I suppose it just goes to show that Bob Kohl cannot be trusted with
    the confidentiality of any netmail passing through his system, so
    everyone would be wise to use other more private means of transport,
    as suggested in policy.

     BH> Are these the actions of a active, effective, responsible ZEC?
     BH> Can you honestly say "yes" in good conscience?

     bk> Is this the same Ben Hamilton that suggested to a sysop that
     bk> he should change his node number to poll someone?  Using an
     bk> unissued nodenumber?  Ben should spend a moment reading P4.

    I have read P4 many times.  I suggested to a sysop that he change his
    node number to something that a new sysop might use, like /9999, long
    enough to determine whether or not Bob Kohl had him passworded out of
    his system or not.  There is no harm in that, as no mail transfer
    would be taking place, and the rest of the sysop information (sysop
    name, location, etc.) would still be passed.

    It should also be noted that, if Bob Kohl did indeed password this
    sysop out of his system without his knowledge, this entire procedure
    would not be necessary.  Since Bob Kohl will not answer (or has not
    yet answered) whether or not he did password out this sysop, we may
    never know the truth.

    If the truth is that the problem was elsewhere, I would appreciate
    an explanation so that I can offer an apology.

     bk> I find it interesting that [Ben Hamilton is] now suggesting
     bk> behavior that is generally frowned upon or considered illegal
     bk> per P4.

    I encourage Bob Kohl to quote the section of policy that states that
    my suggestion is unacceptable.

    -Ben Hamilton
     FidoNet 1:124/7008
     Internet: [email protected]

    -----------------------------------------------------------------

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 6                   13 Jul 1998


    =================================================================
                                ARTICLES
    =================================================================


    Z1C tries to bully Z1R10 refugees

    by Dave Beach, 1:163/222

    An entire net in Zone 1 Region 10 recently voted unanimously that
    they had seen enough of their region and wanted to go somewhere they
    thought they'd be appreciated in Fidonet. Region 12 accepted them as
    net 1:2404.

    In a similar development, Region 12 accepted as a Regional
    Independent node the former Regional Echomail Coordinator of Z1R10,
    who had been hounded out of Fidonet by Bob Kohl, the present (and
    perpetual?) Z1R10C.

    Eager readers may wish to refer to another article submitted for this
    issue, which documents a survey in which 74.2% of respondants
    indicated that they were not satisfied with Bob Kohl representing
    them as their Regional Coordinator.

    These nodelist developments were reflected in nodelist.191. Welcome
    1:12/120 and net 1:2404, Region 12 is pleased you wanted to become
    part of our little corner of Fidonet.

    The Zone 1 Coordinator, Bob Satti, recently had this to say about
    the issue:

     BS> I notice you have 'adopted' an R10 node as an RI (independent),
     BS> and an R10 network in total. I was not consulted about either
     BS> of these items, and I doubt that RC10 was consulted.

     BS> I'll come straight to the point...

     BS> I want to see a segment arrive here from you before next
     BS> Thursday's (July 16th, 1998) nodelist production with the
     BS> aforementioned network AND the RI items deleted.

     BS> These nodes are not to stay (or reappear) in your segment
     BS> unless the RCC overrules me on this matter.

    I'm not sure why Bob Satti thinks that Fidonet sysops are his
    subjects, bound to accept his dictates, but he's surely forgotten
    that Fidonet is a loose collection of sysops and systems who share
    some common goals, and is not about forcing them into political
    subdivisions because you're a Coordinator-for-life and have
    decided that means you must Exercise Power Over Your People.

    Perhaps rather than use bullying tactics to force sysops to
    do something they've collectively and unanimously decided they
    don't want, Bob Satti's time would be better spent analyzing
    what's going so tragically wrong in Z1R10 that would prompt an
    entire network to thumb its nose at its regional nodelist clerk.
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 7                   13 Jul 1998


    Eager readers may wish to refer to another article submitted for this
    issue, which documents a survey in which a majority of respondants
    indicated that they were not satisfied with Bob Satti representing
    them as their Zone Coordinator.

    It's up to you, Bob. Will you acknowledge that the "command and
    control" philosophy that you and some of your colleagues on the
    Zone 1 RC Council have promoted and promulgated are running this
    Zone headlong into oblivion, or will you sit back while it happens,
    secure in the knowledge that when the last Zone 1 sysop calls it
    quits at least you'll still be "in charge"?

    ### 30 ###
    -----------------------------------------------------------------


    Region 25 Has a New REC
    Damian Walker, 2:2502/666

    Occasionally I see requests from international moderators for
    information on getting echomail to and from region 25, better known
    to some as the UK.  So I thought it might be appropriate to post in
    Fidonews the summarised results of our recent REC election.  The
    positions were:

        1st.    John Burden     41 votes
        2nd.    Steven Gare     14 votes

    Congratulations to John Burden and commiserations to Steven Gare.
    John Burden's address is 2:255/1, although shortly he should be
    contactable at the region's standard REC address, 2:25/10.  I hope
    someone finds this information useful.

    ### 30 ###

    -----------------------------------------------------------------


    The Story of Statistics
    by Bob Kohl, 1:102/861

    > Zone 1 Region 10 nodes speak out on the issue of the recent
    > "election" for Z1R10C

    > by Dave Beach, 1:163/222

    > On the subject of the recent Zone 1 R10C "election", the Z1C,
    > Bob Satti, made recent statements in the Z1C echo that indicated
    > that he had his finger on the pulse of Z1R10, and that anybody
    > who questioned him on the issues simply didn't have all the
    > information.

    Interesting to note that, unlike Dave Beach or Doc (Gossip Queen)
    Logger, the ZC does take the time to look at both sides of an
    issue and, of course, the facts. It would seem that the self-
    appointed Guardians Of Fidonet up in net 163 do not have those
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 8                   13 Jul 1998


    capabilities given their preference for "Trial by public
    opinion, hearsay and innuendo".

    > Bowing to growing public pressure to do something
    > about a system that has him maintained in office with the support
    > of unelected, appointed Regional Coordinators,

    Of course Dave and Doc forget that there are many elected RCs
    since it serves their purpose better to misrepresent this fact.

    > began. Only NCs in the region were eligible to vote, and Bob Kohl

    As is the favored way of many Fidonet sysops including several from
    their admin friends in southern regions.

    > had spent the last couple of months replacing NCs with which, as
    > Z1R10C, he had decided he "couldn't work".

    Ahh yes! The use of 'facts according to Dave'.  Got to hand it to
    him, since he seems to have no shame.  There was only 1 NC replaced
    for the mentioned reason.  In fact during the course of my term as RC
    there have only been two "active" NCs replaced.

    Both the NCs that were replaced could be counted on to vote against
    me in the RC 10 election due to the influence that the old NCs have
    in their respective nets.  One of the old NCs and the past NEC run
    their echomail feeds for free.  A healthy influence on the way that
    the sysops of the net think since bribery is an well established
    source of influence down through the ages.

    > Needless to say, Bob Satti's handpicked incumbent, Bob Kohl, was
    > the successful candidate.

    I'm sure that Dave couldn't possible accept the fact that there are
    many NCs in Reg 10 that seem to little if any problems in the way
    Reg 10 has worked these past years.

    > for each warm body in Region 10 minus the Network Coordinators.
    > The survey forms were all host-routed through the recipients'
    > respective NCs.

    > 36 replies were received, of which one was from an NC who had
    > mistakenly been sent a survey form (and whose reply was therefore

    36 replies! Wow, now there's a real representation of the region with
    many times that number in sysops.  It's interesting to note that Dave
    little submission to the Snooze and in the echos runs almost on a par
    with those of Spiro Agnew many years ago.

    It would also due to note that the number of "dissatisfied" sysops
    runs roughly about this same number and the "infamous" list server
    had about just this many particpants.  What a coincidence! I'd have
    to say that Dave took this survey into net 2004 before they decided
    to "go north", chuckle...he needed those numbers.

    Yep, nice to know that Dave thinks that roughly 10% of a region is a
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 9                   13 Jul 1998


    true repesentation of that region's opinion.

    Besides Dave, please don't bother to tip-toe around that fact that
    Bob Satti is not on your list.  We've known that you have wanted him
    and at least two other RCs out for some time now along with some
    of the other misfits and gossip queens that are local to you.  Nor
    do we need Ben Hamilton's hypocrisy towards other region's affairs.

    Below is a rather typical response from a Reg 10 sysop towards
    Dave's little poll:

    Msg # 193   Kill/Sent
    Date: 27 Jun 98  10:19:38
    From: Joe Nicholson
      To: All
    Subj: Outside interference
    _____________________________________________________________________

     Did anyone other than NET202 receive netmail with a survey from
     Dave Beach in Canada?  We don't need interference in R10 from
     any other region, and I refuse to answer when the person who
     asked Beach to conduct the survey refuses to identify himself.

     I think he's a yellow-bellied, chicken-livered skunk to hide
     behind Beach.



    ... 9-1-1 makes firefighters come.
    ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
    --- GEcho 1.00
     * Origin: 9-1-1  San Diego's HOTTEST BBS  (619) 441-9679 (1:202/911)
    SEEN-BY: 10/2 3 102/2 125 861 103/328 125/5109 161/84 202/5 701 707
    SEEN-BY: 202/746 800 805 911 1100 1330 1401 1601 203/3333 205/1701
    SEEN-BY: 207/0 208/1 212/1002 213/213 218/907 219/300 345/0 2004/209
    3000sl/001347


                                        BK

    ### 30 ###


    -----------------------------------------------------------------


    Zone 1 Region 10 nodes speak out on the issue of the recent
    "election" for Z1R10C

    by Dave Beach, 1:163/222

    On the subject of the recent Zone 1 R10C "election", the Z1C,
    Bob Satti, made recent statements in the Z1C echo that indicated
    that he had his finger on the pulse of Z1R10, and that anybody
    who questioned him on the issues simply didn't have all the
    information. Bowing to growing public pressure to do something
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 10                  13 Jul 1998


    about a system that has him maintained in office with the support
    of unelected, appointed Regional Coordinators, he called an
    "election" for the position of Z1R10C and provided the sysops with
    a mere couple of days in which to nominate candidates before voting
    began. Only NCs in the region were eligible to vote, and Bob Kohl
    had spent the last couple of months replacing NCs with which, as
    Z1R10C, he had decided he "couldn't work". Needless to say, Bob
    Satti's handpicked incumbent, Bob Kohl, was the successful
    candidate.

    In order to try and verify the statements that Bob Satti made, a
    survey of Z1R10 nodes was commissioned.

    Some 339 survey forms were sent out, the intent being to account
    for each warm body in Region 10 minus the Network Coordinators.
    The survey forms were all host-routed through the recipients'
    respective NCs.

    36 replies were received, of which one was from an NC who had
    mistakenly been sent a survey form (and whose reply was therefore
    not counted), one was a completely blank netmail other than header
    info and kludge lines (a request for clarification was sent, no
    reply received), one was from a node who claimed utter and complete
    apathy, and two were demands to know what right I had to be asking
    Region 10 sysops for their opinions on anything. Despite persistent
    rumours that a Region 10 NC netmailed my NC and RC demanding to
    know what I was doing "butting into Region 10 business", I never
    did hear from her myself.

    The responses break down as follow:

    ----------------
    | Question (1) |
    ----------------

    Are you aware that it's common practice in other Regions to have
    direct sysop voting for the RC position?

       Yes   51.6%
       No    45.2%
       Other  0.03%

    ----------------
    | Question (2) |
    ----------------

    Do you feel that your Network Coordinator adequately consulted you
    for your views prior to casting his/her vote in the election?

       Yes 87.1%
       No  12.9%

    ----------------
    | Question (3) |
    ----------------

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 11                  13 Jul 1998


    Were you informed by your Network Coordinator as to how his/her
    vote was cast?

       Yes 90.3%
       No   9.7%

    ----------------
    | Question (4) |
    ----------------

    Are you in agreement with how your Network Coordinator cast his/her
    vote?

       Yes  83.9%
       No    9.7%
       Other 6.5%

        "Can't answer since he won't tell me which way he voted. It was
        top secret..."

        "don't know, [he] refuses to say how he voted."

    ----------------
    | Question (5) |
    ----------------

    The Zone 1 Coordinator, Bob Satti, has stated that he called the
    kind of election that he preferred. Are you in agreement with the
    way this election was conducted?

       Yes 12.9%
       No  87.1%

        "As all but two of the NC's of this region are all appointed or
        grandfathered in by the RC, a NC only vote only showed the
        support of those NC's who are afraid of or in cahoots with Bob
        Kohl."

       "There was little if any communication."

    ----------------
    | Question (6) |
    ----------------

    Would you have preferred to have the opportunity to directly cast
    your own vote in the RC election?

       Yes  87.1%
       No    9.7%
       Other 3.2%

    ----------------
    | Question (7) |
    ----------------

    Are you aware that there has been at least one policy complaint
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 12                  13 Jul 1998


    filed against Bob Kohl relating to his disclosure of in-transit
    netmail, and that the Zone 1 Regional Echomail Coordinator Council
    has voted overwhelmingly that they do not support Bob Kohl in one
    of his other capacities, that of Zone 1 Echomail Coordinator?

       Yes 80.6%
       No  19.4%

    ----------------
    | Question (8) |
    ----------------

    Are you satisfied with Bob Kohl representing you as Region 10
    Coordinator?

       Yes   12.9%
       No    74.2%
       Other 12.9%

        "Bob Kohl does NOT belong in any administration position within
        Fidonet."

        "He does his job (for the most part) but his people skills
        suck, he can never give a clear answer, and he holds personal
        grudges."

    ----------------
    | Question (9) |
    ----------------

    Are you satisfied with Bob Satti representing you as Zone 1
    Coordinator?

       Yes   32.3%
       No    51.6%
       Other 16.1%

        "I thought I was at first. The more I see, the less I believe
        he is what a ZC should be."

        "I feel he is (sic) been one sided in the RC10 mater (sic) and
        should now also step down."

    -----------------
    | Question (10) |
    -----------------

    May the commissioners of this survey match you with your responses
    as part of the compilation and publication processes (if you answer
    no, your identity will be kept confidential, provided you don't
    route your answer through someone who might divulge the contents of
    in-transit netmail)?

       Yes 80.6%
       No  19.4%

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 13                  13 Jul 1998


        "Just don't get me thrown out... He has done that to net xxx
        and without regard if it hurts Fido or a Network in general."

    ---------------------
    | General comments: |
    ---------------------

      "It would have been nice to have a more advanced noticed (sic) to
      the election. I believe several sysops may not have had an
      opportunity to voice their opinions with their Net coordinators."

      "I am leaving Fidonet as a direct result of this election. The
      way it was conducted shows the ZC cannot perform his duties. The
      results are not representative of the concerns of the members of
      this region.

      Also, the NC's acted as the sysops representatives; thier (sic)
      votes should have been published."

      "My BBS will go down on or before July 31st, because of the
      recent decisions of Satti, and the so-called election of Kohl."

      "I am glad to see that this is being done after the so-called
      election farce that was held in our Region."

      "Down with King Kohl, and Bob Satti is next on our list if he
      fails to recognize our backing him so far, and relying on him to
      impeach Kohl for malfeasance of office. I hear the grass roots
      growing!"

      "Have a great day!"


    -----------------------------------------------------------------

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 14                  13 Jul 1998


    =================================================================
                                 COLUMNS
    =================================================================



    Dear Editorbeing,

    This article is submitted by Doc Logger (163/110) who was
    busy drinking Absinthe on the slopes of Gornergraat. Across
    the valley, the Matterhorn rises in purple splendour and
    below, chubby gentlemen in leather training pants are
    blowing elongated horns which produce sounds akin to moose
    in full rut.

    Roll da flic, Zorch....

    Dear Reverend Visage,

    Being stuck in Switzerland in July has many drawbacks, not
    the least of which is that the charming international
    tourists who are busily photographing everything in sight.
    Even the bronze frog which spouts into a fountain in Zermatt
    has started to develop a squint from the incessant camera
    flash discharges.

    The Snooz was rather chunky last week including two articles
    by Kohl whose ghostwriter made their presence obvious by the
    lack of spelling mistakes and mangled grammar. Even His
    Zorchness' editorial was a monument of disingenuousness. It
    would probably be unkind to mention that His Zorchness has
    been in high dungeon lately over a supposed "second" elist
    robot program. What makes Zorch's editorial bellowing more
    amusing is that he forgot to disclose his personal interest
    in the other elist proposal. Mercifully, any newspaper
    writer who has a conflict of interest takes pains to make
    disclosures and we can look forward to seeing Zorch
    correcting his inadvertent omission of that relevant fact.

    I note that Kohl's ghostwriter had this cheesy excuse for
    his disclosure of in transit netmail. "There were two
    complaints brought up. One was dismissed, the other the was
    explained and apologized for. Someone sent me netmail and I
    cc'd Bob Satti." Actually, they did not send netmail *to*
    Kohl, they sent it to another system which passed through
    Kohl's system. Kohl extracted the contents on the way
    through, responded to it, revealed its contents, and then
    made the fatuous claim that it was a technical glitch
    resulting from the way his system is set up. If Kohl is to
    be believed ( a dubious proposition) then he must have been
    disclosing *all* intransit netmail to Bob Satti. Satti,
    being a man of few words, has studiously avoided confirming
    whether Kohl's version of reality is correct. Kohl cites the
    other instance where he was caught disclosing in transit
    netmail as being "dismissed" which is not to say that the
    act didn't happen.
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 15                  13 Jul 1998


    In Kohl's second alleged article wherein he uses the word
    "diatribes" which is well beyond his actual vocabulary
    grasp, Kohl winds his way through a cloud of smoke without
    bothering to deny that his vendetta against Ruth Argust
    results from a pathetic incident over a horse. I am quite
    willing to post a retraction if Kohl can send me a
    correction as to the facts.

    At the risk of writing a tautological article that
    references past Snoozs, I was disappointed by Andrea Santos'
    article which advocates the equivalent of designing a camel
    by striking a committee charged with designing a horse. The
    issue is not the dispersion of titles and responsibilities
    for the Snooz, but the simple need for people to submit
    content. Creating nine new admin Snooz positions will do no
    good at all unless those individuals are actually writing
    copy. If there is a criticism to be made of His Zorchness,
    it is the fact that unlike previous editors of the Snooz, he
    does not appear to be actively soliciting articles. As an
    example, I'd dearly love to see an article from some of our
    Russian brethren describing the changes over the last decade
    that have fostered the incredible growth of fidonet. I'd
    also like to see an articulate discussion of the Zone2
    policy debate which seems to be surfacing in the ZCC echo.

    On the matter of his Zorchness' policy complaints against
    Ruth Argust, it is simply amazing that he was joined by
    three other cretins who filed identical complaints. Knowles,
    George Kuhl, and Dan Sherman should have a deserved place in
    the Fidonet Hall of Shame for lending their names to the
    venal actions of Frezberg in this matter. There is something
    truly rotten in the state of Denmark if these idiots are the
    NCs of which anyone in Fidonet could be proud. It is small
    wonder that the stench of Kohl's presence pervades Region10
    considering the low quality of the NCs that he has
    appointed. If ever there was a case to be made for the fact
    that Peefour only arms socially maladroit morons, a reading
    of Frezberg's policy complaint would suffice to settle the
    argument.

    Yo Zorch, did you vote twice in the ZEC election?

    I have some interesting quotes for this week's column. The
    first is taken from a message that Bob Kohl sent out to his
    loyal fartcatchers in Region 10:


    "You'll note that not every NC and NEC in Reg 10 is getting
    this note. I'm sending it mainly to the key group of Admin
    folks in Reg 10 that I've worked with these past years to
    rebuild and revive Reg 10 or that have shown concern for the
    smooth operation of the Region and their own nets. It is
    also this group that I expect to keep this note within the
    group.
    ...

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 16                  13 Jul 1998


    We are Reg 10, let's make sure that everyone is aware of
    this, including Bob Satti. And as a statement from the NC's
    of Reg 10, I sincerely hope you'll support and sign a PC
    against Ruth when it gets put into motion. While I could
    have easily done it myself, I sincerely  think it sets a bad
    precident for my to do so or to be involved in it
    directly."

    That gem was written by Kohl in an effort to garner support
    for a Policy Complaint campaign organized by His Zorchness.
    The following quote is very long, but well worth including
    because it contains the entire text of Bob Duckworth's
    ruling on Zorch's policy complaint. (For those concerned
    about the niceties, I have received Bob Duckworth's
    permission to quote his ruling in full)  Read and weep...

      * * * * *

    "Thu 25 Jun 98 22:21
    By: Bob Duckworth, * *Bob's Duck Pond (2004/209)
    Re: Policy Complaint filed by you against Ruth Argust
    Original to: Zorch Frezberg (1:205/1701)


    Zorch Frezberg,

    It is extremely disturbing that I have to send this message
    at all. With your being a Network Coordinator I am sure you
    understood the action you were taking when you filed a
    Policy Complaint against Ms. Argust. Per Policy 4.07 a
    Policy Complaint is not an action to be taken lightly.

    Your Policy Complaint against Ms. Argust is rejected in
    total.

    The opening portion of your Policy Complaint against Ms.
    Argust is a very disjointed mish-mash and very hard to
    follow. However, Ms. Argust did rebut your statements, and
    also pointed out that some of the submitted documents have
    also been tampered with (ie. missing subject lines and
    appended orgin lines.)

    A single netmail tittled "official inquiry" does not
    constitute an earnest effort to resolve a problem. Ms.
    Argust submitted a copy of a message in which she replied to
    you in the hopes of resolving the problem between the two of
    you. She claims that you never responded to the questions
    she raised in netmail in reponse to your "offical inquiry"
    netmail, and you failed to provide any proof that you did in
    fact respond. You did include the netmail that she replied
    to your "offical inquiry" netmail with so by all
    indications, you in fact were the one who failed to resolve
    the problems. In hopes that you did indeed follow policy and
    continue your attempt to resolve the problem, I did read all
    the echomail which you enclosed, and did not see her
    questions to you answered via that medium either, although
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 17                  13 Jul 1998


    she did in fact provide evidence of why her name was
    presented during the EMSI portion of mailer handshaking.
    Reading through Policy 4.07 it does not say that the
    informal attempts to resolve a problem prior to the filing
    of a policy complaint must be made in private. That you
    failed to try complete a resolution informally can not be
    blamed on the fact that she posted anything in the echoes
    when in fact you could have netmailed her and asked that she
    work with you only via netmail on what you considered to be
    problems.

    I reject this policy complaint from you in total because of
    your failure to continue your attempts to resolve the
    problems. I am also presenting my findings on each of your
    separate charges.


    zf>   = CHARGE 1
    zf>   = Violation of Netmail confidentiality under section
    2.1.6.2; specifically, the release of netmail for the
    purpose of annoying others, and in this case, involving
    others not in the chain of appeal, as defined in Section
    9.1, last para of Policy 4.07; further, that such release
    was done in order to make improper accusations and undue
    disruption of FidoNetconstitutes EXCESSIVELY ANNOYING
    BEHAVIOR.
    zf>

    I find in favor of Ms. Argust on charge 1.

    The netmail which you sent to her with the subject line of
    "offical inquiry" was not marked as confidential. Since you
    failed to mark this message as confidential, Polcy 4.07
    Section 2.1.6.2 shall apply here, specifically where it
    states

    "The issue of private mail which is addressed to you is more
    difficult than the in-transit question treated in the
    previous section.  A common legal opinion holds that when
    you receive a message it becomes your property and you have
    a legal right to do with it what you wish.  Your legal right
    does not excuse you from annoying others.

    In general, sensitive material should not be sent using
    FidoNet.  This ideal is often compromised, as FidoNet is our
    primary mode of communication.  In general, if the sender of
    a message specifically requests in the text of the message
    that the contents be kept confidential, release of the
    message into a public forum may be considered annoying."


    It is clear in policy that the message in question was hers
    to do with what she wished. If the public release of your
    netmail was annoying to you, it is not covered by policy
    since you did not take the proper measure to prevent her
    from posting your message in a public echo by clearly
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 18                  13 Jul 1998


    marking the message as confidential.

    Even more important, I did not see any proof that Ruth
    Argust disclosed the netmail in question. All I saw in her
    post was the header and the cc:'s of the messages. There was
    no disclosure at all of the body text.


    zf>   = CHARGE 2
    = 'As indicated in the logs submitted by the various NCs of
    Region 10, it is clear that the system Ruth Argust used to
    mail out from was representing itself as 1:2004/0. Ruth has
    offered several clarifications in an effort to explain this,
    but has not explained the one most significant problem;
    whyshe felt it necessary to register the software *as*
    1:2004/0, since she and Gerry claim that their net has
    elections (See CHARGE2.001).The fact that the clarifications
    are specious is obvious...thenode in question will
    consistently display itself as 1:2004/0 regardless of who
    the NC is, and will interfere in mail routing and
    distribution upon their removal/departure from the posts
    that they hold.

    This failure, along with the fact that numerous mailer
    programs cannot distinguish between a multi-line and a
    single-line node, as seen in the attached logs, clearly
    shows the connecting mailer as being 1:2004/0.  There is no
    specific mailer in place which lists Gerry Calhoun as
    NC2004, operating 1:2004/0 as the nodelist defines.

    This is indicated in the various logs included in the
    evidence file (See CHARGE2.004, CHARGE2.005, CHARGE2.006 and
    CHARGE2.007).

    This would be no significant matter, and likely to be
    dismissed, per Ruth's numerous claims that "this is just the
    way that the software is set up", save for _one_ salient
    point:

    In the recent Z1 EchoMail Coordinator election, Ruth Argust
    had submitted her vote, presenting herself as "1:2004/0",
    and Gerry Calhoun had submitted his vote, presenting himself
    as "1:2004/205" (See CHARGE2.002 and CHARGE2.003; note that
    CHARGE2.003 is the roster of voting nodes from the Election
    Coordinator).

    Likewise, as can be noted in the log files, it does not
    matter to which phone number/node that one is connected
    to...*all* nodes on the connection present themselves as
    "1:2004/0" and with Ruth Argust as the sysop of the node
    reserved for the N2004C, without regard for the reality of
    the situation.  This can be seen in the log files, as the
    "home node", "Node #2" and "Node #3" all present as
    "1:2004/0" on connection, and all as "Ruth Argust".

    Under Sections 1.2.3 and 1.2.4, the NC is normally
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 19                  13 Jul 1998


    responsible for the exactness of the network nodelist
    segment, and also may not delegate the responsibility to
    mediate disputes.  Given the nature of the identity problem
    with the /0 node, and with regard to who the system is
    operated by, as well as the chaos which such a system
    identification can cause, is clearly disruptive now, and
    will be disruptive to the smooth operation of FidoNet, the
    Region and their own network in the near future.  Such
    disruption is in  violation of Policy 4.07, Sections 1.2.1.1
    (identifying users), section 2.1.3 (identifying who is
    responsible for entering traffic), and Section 1.2.8, second
    para (smooth operation).

    Since the system in question was co-operated by the then-NC
    of Net 2004, the above should have been well known and
    familiar as a part of the knowledge of Policy 4.07 that all
    Network Coordinators are to be familiar with.  However, as
    the actual software is registered by someone who is not nor
    has ever been the Network Coordinator, as well as co-opting
    the reserved address for the Net Coordinator of Network
    2004, the action is  now the responsibility of the node
    operator...which is listed  as being Ruth Argust.

    Such actions and efforts by Ruth Argust do constitute
    EXCESSIVELY ANNOYING BEHAVIOR.'
    zf>


    Zorch Frezberg, you have not provided proof that Ruth Argust
    sent mail out from the Fido address of 1:2004/0. During
    handshaking in the emsi portion, the line SYSOP: Ruth Argust
    was presented.

    Note that Policy 4.07 is very clear in sections;
    1        Overview
    1.2.1    Individual Systems and System Operators
    1.2.1.1  Users
    2.1.3    Responsible for All Traffic Entering FidoNet Via
    the Node
    1.2.8  (second paragraph)
    1.3.4    Nodelist
    that the system operator is defined by the nodelist.

    Your statement that the system software is registered to
    1:2004/0 is not backed up by the included file CHARGE2.001.
    What I see in CHARGE2.001 are statments by Ms. Argust that
    the mailer software is registered in her name. She further
    states the the system the software operates on is
    co-operated by Gerry Calhoun and presents the addresses of
    1:2004/0, 1:2004/200 and 1:2004/201. Nowhere does she state
    the software is registered as 1:2004/0. In Ms. Argust's
    reply to the Policy Complaint, she included a message from
    the software author with what must be placed in the sysop
    name field for the software to operate in the registered
    mode.

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 20                  13 Jul 1998


    You further claim that the software will always present
    itself as 1:2004/0 without any proof to this fact. The
    addresses for the system which Ms. Argust and Mr. Calhoun
    co-operate can be changed at will. This claim is based
    solely upon your conjecture and is not backed by any
    evidence you have submitted. Policy 4.07 is very clear the
    charges must be supported by evidence. For a NC to make such
    a claim and provide no evidence, displays an obvious lack of
    understanding of Policy 4.07.

    After Zorch Frezberg's netmail message with the subject line
    of "offical inquiry" was received, a change was made to the
    system which had the address of 1:2004/0 to present SYSOP:
    Gerry Calhoun NODE X (where X is the node connected to) in
    addiction to SYSOP: Ruth Argust. This shows that Ms. Argust
    did attempt to rectify what Zorch Frezberg had a problem
    with, although Frezberg did not specify what portion of
    Policy 4.07 mandates what must be presented during emsi
    handshaking.

    Ms. Argust claims the system in question had been
    functioning in the same manner well over two years. During
    that time, she says she had never received any other
    comments as to the way the system presented itself. That she
    reconfigured the system after your concerns were voiced
    shows that she made an earnest and honest attempt at
    resolving the issue. The fact that Zorch Frezberg never
    responded back after Ms. Argust changed the manner her
    software was setup shows that Zorch Frezberg did not attempt
    to resolve the issue. Zorch Frezberg also failed to state
    what section of Policy 4.07 was being violated by presenting
    SYSOP: Ruth Argust during the emsi handshake.

    Zorch Frezberg's "salient point" is based upon the fact that
    Mr. Belcke recorded the vote as orginating from the wrong
    system. Mr. Belcke was in error in recording the vote and
    Ms. Argust attempted through netmail to correct the way the
    vote was recorded. The blame for Mr. Belcke to not correct
    the vote after he was in fact informed of his error does not
    reflect on Ms. Argust. Ms. Argust did include copies of her
    exchange with Mr. Belcke with only the candidate names and
    her password blocked out and Mr. Belcke's replies.

    Zorch Frezberg, you should read the Policy 4.07 in its
    entirity and not just read it so that you can file a Policy
    Complaint. Policy 4.07 clearly states that the system
    operator is defined by the nodelist. Zorch Frezberg, you
    have failed to show where Policy 4.07 or any approved FTS
    document mandates what MUST be shown during emsi handshaking
    or in a mailers logs.

    Zorch Frezberg, you claim that there was an "identity" with
    the /0 node in net 2004. However, Policy is quite clear as
    to who the /0 node belongs to as Policy 4.07 clearly states
    that the nodelist defines who operate what nodes. You
    further state "Such disruption is in violation of Policy
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 21                  13 Jul 1998


    4.07, Sections 1.2.1.1 (identifying users), section 2.1.3
    (identifying who is responsible for entering traffic), and
    Section 1.2.8, second para (smooth operation)." Yet, those
    same sections clearly state that the nodelist defines the
    operator of a node.

    The system in question was and is co-operated by the then
    NC. This was in fact the system the then NC used to perform
    his NC duties. Being the system that did such duties, it
    rightly used the /0 node number. The node operator of the
    system that presented the /0 address has never been Ruth
    Argust, since the node operator per Policy 4.07 is defined
    by the nodelist issued by the I.C. and had always been
    listed to Gerry Calhoun until his removal from that
    position.

    You are correct in one small statement in this CHARGE 2.
    That is that the NC is to be familiar with Policy 4.07.
    However, your lack of knowledge in regards to this charge
    inparts a great deal of questioning in regards to your
    knowledge of Policy 4.07.

    I totally reject and dismiss CHARGE 2 and clear Ms. Argust
    of any wrong doing in regards to CHARGE 2 and Policy 4.07
    for the following reasons.

        1. The netmail with the subject "official inquiry" does
    not appear to be an attempt to resolve a problem, rather it
    appears to be an investigation. After Ms. Argust changed
    what her system presented upon emsi handshaking and
    contacted Zorch Frezberg back, Zorch Frezberg did not
    continue to attempt to resolve his "perceived" problem.
    Therefore, I can not find that an attempt was made to
    resolve this in an informal manner. In fact, I find that
    Zorch Frezberg has not made any comment on what was
    presented after Ms. Argust changed what was presented during
    the emsi handshake after Zorch Frezberg expressed his
    concerns. Therefore, I can only conclude that the problem
    was resolved. If a problem is resolved between two sysops,
    there is therefore no need for a policy complaint.

        2. Zorch Frezberg failed to state what section of Policy
    4.07 or what part of any FTS document was violated by the
    presentation of SYSOP: Ruth Argust during emsi handshaking.
    It being that Zorch Frezberg is a member of the standing
    FTSC, he should be familiar with the FTS documents and been
    able to provide such evidence.

        3. Zorch Frezberg has failed to provide what section of
    Policy 4.07 states what must be present in a mailers
    logfile, therefore the mailer logfiles are not relevent in
    this issue.

        4. Zorch Frezberg as a Network Coordinator should be
    familiar enough with Policy 4.07 to know that the nodelist
    as issued by the I.C. defines who a system operator is.
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 22                  13 Jul 1998


        5. Zorch Frezberg has failed to present a single message
    signed by Ruth Argust as Network 2004 Coordinator.


    zf>  ' = CHARGE 3
    In addition to the above, the constant posting of mail
    intended for the discussion of administrative functions in
    Region 10 has been consistently cross-posted out of netmail
    and Region 10 administrative conferences, in an effort to
    "expose" matters in Region 10.

    However, the messages posted to national and international
    echoes are also with respect to questions of character and
    ability for other posts and actions, with the use of Region
    10 as no more than a cover for harrassment and calls for
    interference.

    The sheer volume of mail, both in echomail and netmail, has
    started a self-regenerative loop with rumor feeding rumor,
    and rumor then becoming "fact" in the minds of many.
      For example, there has been a consistently posted comment
    that a "netmail smear campaign" was begun by Bob Kohl; yet
    no evidence of such a message has been made available, and
    all inquiries for a copy of it have been fruitless.
    Everyone seemed to have "heard of it", but not one
    individual or group of individuals has been able to
    demonstrate a copy of such messages.

    Likewise, as the message is supposedly between other
    individuals and sent to Argust and Calhoun, the disclosure
    of such contents is in violation of Policy 4.07, Section
    2.1.6.1, as no Policy  Complaint has been attached to such a
    message, and by their own  description, the message was sent
    as NetMail, and not as EchoMail.

    This portion of the Policy Complaint will be conceded and
    withdrawn, provided proper evidence is shown that the
    so-called "netmail smear" message was posted as EchoMail or
    as 'private mail' intended to keep a 'sysop-only' echo
    restricted.

    However, as to the portion in which excessive echomail and
    netmail is being generated for no other purpose than to
    interfere in the ability of the Region Coordinator to
    perform duties properly, I will not withdraw that portion of
    the Policy Complaint, and will carry it forward regardless.
    The specific harm, per Section 1.3.5, is that the efforts of
    Argust and others have caused Region 10 to be unable to
    locate and obtain an acceptable and qualified Regional
    EchoMail Coordinator.  The annoyance is now excessive in
    that the failure to appoint a new REC has become a
    'rallying point' in use by Argust and others in a new wave
    of harrassment, despite being caused by the efforts of
    Argust and  others (See CHARGE3.ZIP, please note summation
    in CHARGE3.000).

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 23                  13 Jul 1998


       Further, that Ruth Argust has made the effort and
    succeeded in posting to a Regional administrative echomail
    conference that she had been specifically removed is a more
    clear indication that her interests are specifically for the
    purpose of disruption of  Region administration;
    significantly, since this requires the Regional Coordinator
    take additional actions to prevent any further incursions,
    and thus adding to his duties and efforts. Inteference on
    the Network, Regional and Zone levels indicates EXCESSIVELY
    ANNOYING BEHAVIOR (See CHARGE3.042).'
    zf>

    CHARGE 3 deals with echomail. While some points dealing with
    echomail are mentioned in Policy 4.07, the points you, Zorch
    Frezberg, bring up in CHARGE 3 are not applicable here.

    2.1.6.1 deals with IN-TRANSIT netmail. In reading your
    evidence for CHARGE 3, I do not see that Ms. Argust posted
    any netmail at all, let alone any IN-TRANSIT netmail. If she
    had posted netmail addressed to her and sent to her, it was,
    therefore, her personal property to do with what she
    pleased.

    1.3.5 Deals with excessively annoying behavior. Zorch
    Frezberg, you claim that Ms. Argusts posts are excessively
    annoying because they are preventing Bob Kohl, the R10C,
    from performing his duties. Yet, you have not presented a
    single message from Bob Kohl that states such. You also
    state that talking about regional issues creates
    controversy. If such actions create controversy, then
    perhaps it is time to look at the issues.

    You further state that Ms. Argust posted to a regional
    Administrative echo from which she was specifically removed,
    yet you have not provided any proof for the claim that she
    was removed from this echo.

    I hereby reject and dismiss the claims against Ms. Argust in
    regards to CHARGE 3 and do not find her guilty of any wrong
    doing in respect to Policy 4.07 and CHARGE 3 for the
    following reasons.

        1. You, Zorch Frezberg, have not provided any proof of
    any attempts to resolve this problem before filing this
    policy complaint as spelled out in Section 9.1 of Policy
    4.07

        2. You, Zorch Frezberg, have provided no proof that Ms.
    Argust was guilty of disclosing IN-TRANSIT netmail per your
    charge of violation of section 2.1.6.1. I see no netmail
    disclosed in any of the many posts you have presented.

        3. You, Zorch Frezberg, seem to have this CHARGE 3
    confused with CHARGE 1 where you claim she disclosed private
    and confidential mail and offer as evidence CHARGE1.002.  I
    state again that she did not in fact disclose anything other
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 24                  13 Jul 1998


    than who received the mail since she quoted only the message
    header and the cc: list. Her quote stopped right after the
    private and confidential per Policy 4.07 line and she did
    not quote any of the message text.

        4. You, Zorch Frezberg, have failed to prove that the
    behavior of Ms. Argust in any of the echomail had anything
    to do with preventing the RC from fulfilling his duties.


    zf>  ' = CHARGE 4
    = The fact that a number of public posts have been made by
    both Argust and Calhoun that they have no access to the
    Region 10 administrative echoes, and are thus locked out of
    any forum to present their case is proven false, based on a
    NetMail sent to the RHub Sysop, M Hernandez, at 1:10/2, in
    which Calhoun asked for all passwords to be removed from
    that system which allowed connection to his own (See
    CHARGE4.001).

    That Calhoun would ask is a clear indication that he is
    indeed aware of the other sources for the administrative
    echoes to be available; that he still denies his ability to
    access shows a contradiction that he has not been able to
    clarify adequately. Clearly, in EchoMail, Argust and Calhoun
    are claiming that they have no access to administrative
    echomail in Region 10.

    Yet in the NetMail shown in CHARGE4.001, Calhoun declares he
    wants an already available connection to remove all
    passwords, making it impossible for him to connect to an
    available source for those same administrative echomail
    areas for Region 10.

    The obvious problem is that Calhoun as well as Argust are
    maintaining a public image that is in direct opposition to
    what they know to be true...that a connection exists.

    Please note; the point is not that no connection exists, but
    that one was available to Net 2004, but was deliberately
    turned off and refused, at the same time as claims were made
    that no such connection was available to Net 2004.

    As with Charge #3, this seeming contradiction serves little
    purpose than to bring about unwarranted traffic for no other
    purpose than to harrass and interfere with the smooth
    operation of Region 10, by interfering with the duties of
    the Regional Coordinator, both directly and indirectly.

    By lying over the issue of connectivity, a deliberate action
    as opposed to an honest mistake, the fabrication becomes an
    intentional one, and thus excessively annoying behavior in
    that the action affects not one or two nodes but an entire
    Region of sysops, and thus affecting the smooth operation of
    Region 10.

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 25                  13 Jul 1998


    While the specifics against Gerry Calhoun are best addressed
    by  the Regional Coordinator, that such actions were both
    condoned and carried out by Ruth Argust in an effort to both
    diminish and harrass the administration and function of
    Region 10 necessitates that a Policy Complaint is in order.

    By affecting the RC in the performance of duties, it is the
    responsibility of the RC to take action against an offending
    node; when the node is a Network Coordinator under the
    Regional Coordinator, it is clear that the Network
    Coordinator is no longer able to hold that position.  As
    Gerry Calhoun has been replaced as the N2004C, that avenue
    is already dealt with and now moot.

    However, when it is a sysop that pushes the envelope in a
    manner to take action to disrupt the administration of the
    Region, it is the duty of a Network Coordinator to take
    actions necessary to insure that a clear 'line of
    communication' exists between the Network and the Regional
    Coordinators, and it is necessary to adopt a stand of "zero
    tolerance" towards behavior designed and taken for no less a
    purpose than to disrupt the function of the Region; thus
    Ruth Argust is charged within the confines of Policy 4.07,
    Sections 1.3.5, for what is EXCESSIVELY ANNOYING BEHAVIOR.'
    zf>

    Charge 4 also deals with echo mail content. I fail to see
    where you, Zorch Frezberg, have included a single message
    from Ms. Argust to in your documents submitted for this
    charge backup this claim of excessively annoying behavior.
    In fact the only thing you submitted to backup this charge
    was a single netmail from Gerry Calhoun, asking that all
    passwords be removed from a system that presents the address
    of 1:10/2. This is not a policy complaint against Mr.
    Calhoun, rather, it is one against Ms. Argust. The sole
    evidence you have submitted with this charge has also been
    tampered with since Mr. Calhoun does not append an orgin
    line with the address of 1:205/0 to his netmail messages.
    You also make the claim that the actions of Ms. Argust have
    prevented the R10C from fullfilling his duties as a Regional
    Coordinator. You have failed to present any evidence to
    backup this claim. You have not submitted a single message
    from Bob Kohl, R10C, that states this fact. I only have to
    rely upon your statements that the R10C can not fullfill his
    duties because of the actions of Ms. Argust in echomail. You
    have once again neglected in CHARGE 4 to provide any proof
    that simple basic communication between yourself and Ms.
    Argust took place in regards to CHARGE 4 before your action
    of filing this complaint.

    CHARGE 4 is hereby dismissed in total for any and all of the
    following reasons:

        1. You, Zorch Frezberg, have failed to submit any proof
    that you attempted to resolve this matter with Ms. Argust
    before filing this policy complaint.
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 26                  13 Jul 1998


        2. You, Zorch Frezberg, have failed to provide any
    verifiable evidence per Policy 4.07, section 9.1 that states
    in part "Complaints must be accompanied with verifiable
    evidence, generally copies of messages; a simple
    word-of-mouth complaint will be dismissed out of hand." You
    sole item of evidence to back up your claim against Ms.
    Argust, was a netmail writen by Gerry Calhoun which had been
    tampered with. Nothing was submitted that was written by Ms.
    Argust or that even mentions Ms. Argust.

        3. You, Zorch Frezberg, have even failed to show that
    Ms. Argust was NOT denied access to any regional echoes as
    she claimed. As the accuser it is up to you to provide the
    proof of any crime. In this charge the crime that you claim
    is that she said she did not have access to regional admin
    echoes. A simple netmail from her uplink to remove passwords
    with an unrelated node does not provide such proof. Ms.
    Argust had indeed questioned Bob Kohl, the R10C, in echoes
    about her access and feed to regional echoes but in
    particular the regional SYSOP echo. Had Mr. Kohl responded
    in the echoes that she did indeed have access and you could
    have provided that message, then that could have been
    admitted to evidence to her having access to the echoes. Mr.
    Kohl however did not respond to her questions that I ever
    saw though. In fact, Mr. Kohl has sent netmail to me as
    N2004C stating that Ms. Argust and Mr. Calhoun can not in
    fact have access to the regional echoes, and has stated in
    the R10 admin echoes themselves that Ms. Argust and Mr.
    Calhoun are not allowed access. When I asked Ms. Argust if
    she did in fact ever get a notice from Mr. Kohl himself on
    the matter, she stated she never has in respect to the
    regional sysop echo which is the echo that she was
    questioning as I saw it in the national echoes. I could in
    fact send you copies of the messages I have seen by Mr. Kohl
    regarding this if you require them, but since this policy
    action is not against myself, I can see no reason to furnish
    you with them.


    zf>' These charges do not rest lightly, nor is this document
    posted frivolously; it is posted in the sincere effort that
    Ruth Argust understand the consequences of her actions and
    the affect that they have on others who care not for her
    polarization of attitudes in FidoNet.

    Zorch Frezberg, I fail to agree with you in regards to the
    action of your filing this policy complaint not being
    frivolous. In fact I find it quite trivial, especially in
    regards to your CHARGE 2. As a member of the FTSC, I would
    have expected you to be able to provide proof of what was
    violated during the EMSI handshake if in fact anything was
    violated. One of the people that you in fact sent the policy
    complaint to for them to file for themselves in fact is even
    more guilty of any perceived violation than Ms. Argust.
    Please note the segment of my FD log below:

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 27                  13 Jul 1998


    Log of Bob Duckworth, 1:2004/209 and 1:2004/0

    ----------  Tue 23 Jun 98, FD 2.12.SW
    + 19:42:16  Event 0-@
    + 21:14:54  Calling Region 10 Echomail Coordinato, 1:10/1,
    1-510-841-9481
    = 21:15:18  CONNECT 14400/ARQ
    + 21:15:22  Sci-Fido II, World's Oldest SF BBS, Berkeley,
    CA, 1:161/84
    ~ 21:15:22  SysOp: Richard Knowles  Ja
    ~ 21:15:22  Using: Opus 1.73
      21:15:22  sType: FTS-6/ZedZap
    * 21:15:24  Sent I:\FD212\PACKETS\000A0001.REQ; 7b, 3 CPS
    + 21:15:31  Mail transfer completed
    $ 21:15:31  To 1:10/1,  0:13, 0.

    I do have full logging turned on but the system that answers
    the phone at 1-510-841-9481, which is listed in the current
    nodelist.170 as the phone number of the system operated by
    Jan Murphy, 1:10/1, Region 10 Echomail Coordinator does not
    present the AKA of 1:10/1. It also does not present Jan
    Murphy as being the system operator, rather it lists Richard
    Knowles   Ja as shown above.

    The policy complaint in total shows one thing very clearly.
    That is that you, Zorch, did not undertake this policy
    action with the intent of making sure policy was enforced
    but you filed it because you had disagreements with another
    sysop and are merely attempting to use policy to silence her
    for the sake of your own agenda.

    With this response to you, I am also sending a message to
    Bob Satti, requesting that he grant a change of venue should
    Ms. Argust request one if you take this complaint to appeal
    since the Regional Coordinator is clearly involved in at
    least two of the four charges.

    Bob Duckworth, 1:2004/0
    Network 2004 Coordinator"

     *  *  * * *

    Visage, I don't think I would want to bet long odds on
    whether Bob Duckworth's courage in writing that decision
    will go "unrewarded" by Kohl and his legion of trolls. It
    does much to explain why syncophants like Knowles are so
    desparate to keep Region10 nonsense "in the family" because
    the reek of their actions doesn't look too appealling when
    exposed to daylight.

    I must go Visage, the cable car operator has announced the
    last run down to Zermatt and I can only hope that another
    U.S. jet doesn't clip the cables on the way down. Your
    secretary is in fine fettle and has left a wake of broken
    arms on the Italians who have mistakenly tried to pinch her
    ass.
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 28                  13 Jul 1998


    Regards,
    Doc Logger
    stuck in Switzerland


    -----------------------------------------------------------------

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 29                  13 Jul 1998


    =================================================================
                                 NOTICES
    =================================================================

                               Future History


    25 Jul 1998
       SUPCon, Swedish FidoNet Convention at Sannabaden,
       Jankaping, Sweden.

    14 Sep 1998
       Start of International BBS Week [thru 20 Sep 98].

    22 Sep 1998
       First anniversary of the FidoNews domain of www.fidonews.org.

     1 Dec 1998
       Fifteenth Anniversary of release of Fido version 1 by
       Tom Jennings.

    24 Jul 1999
       XIII Pan American Games [through 8 Aug 99].

     9 Jun 1999
       Tenth Anniversary of the adoption of FidoNet Policy 4.07.

    31 Dec 1999
       Hogmanay, Scotland. The New Year that can't be missed.

     1 Jan 2000
       The 20th Century, C.E., is still taking place thru 31 Dec.

     1 Jun 2000
       EXPO 2000 World Exposition in Hannover (Germany) opens.

    15 Sep 2000
       Sydney (Australia) Summer Olympiad opens.

     1 Jan 2001
       This is the actual start of the new millennium, C.E.

    -- If YOU have something which you would like to see in this
       Future History, please send a note to the FidoNews Editor.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 30                  13 Jul 1998


    =================================================================
                           FIDONEWS PUBLIC-KEY
    =================================================================


    FidoNews PGP Public-Key Listing

    [this must be copied out to a file starting at column 1 or
     it won't process under PGP as a valid public-key]

    -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
    Version: 2.6.2
    Comment: Democracy Requires A Free And Uncensored Press.

    mQENAzUDQfgAAAEH/2cZjrzKxinfyk1NRYy2D78JEU8jFx6fvGyisnN2SX+QwRrA
    AxBbsMuseM3x60SFhHV7r93CxKWJylPCBJKvDazmWwy+vgBr+ZJvl7Ypj/IB4pWS
    Apngg8cmDH1h5d0VeYNORsuJ2udHZYRezkZ0eeJlaOsJCj5Xu0QImSp++VU/0oB1
    6XRoNPy548xq8Qles1pLC8Kw7HU7Vff1WeaU3mPPQeaGZqn2qSAu5t6Z0Bhm27Pq
    zNaJ+JWNHaLCHlwrRHV+p9bCdfl3u303OxKPne0cSpxfe+gQBTlVta7B14ssgnzQ
    mnBFhvKWgM7LT105YD3EcWW9IJE1ByNHwo25a3EABRG0D0ZpZG9OZXdzIEVkaXRv
    cokAlQMFEDUKMDDrSgiY3KJNQQEB16YD/2tYVRC+dxghA/OwIWNH20GvQXw1zgfv
    cB6r8gYHcczTCqGu5qbjDOTftoBXY9vI3/CZNsSbvp0ibQinpN6zSgyy2+4wwPbu
    db/VnjXwBByq7ygTpNwQBMsYjs+iyndwTnR90dH3FewsveBCzeqjmP0Y/PJliElw
    zEmGKxoFr1SM
    =G82W
    -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

    File-request FNEWSKEY from 1:1/23 [1:205/1701] or download it from
    IKVHFoT! BBS at 1-209-251-7529 anytime Zone 1 ZMH at 300-9600+ V34.
    The FidoNews key is also available on the FidoNews homepage listed
    in the Masthead information.



    -----------------------------------------------------------------

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 31                  13 Jul 1998


    =================================================================
                           FIDONET BY INTERNET
    =================================================================


         This is a list of all FidoNet-related sites reported to the
         FidoNews Editor as of this issue; see the notice at the end.

    ============

    FidoNet:

     Homepage    http://www.fidonet.org
     FidoNews    http://www.fidonews.org             [HTML]
                 http://209.77.228.66/fidonews.html  [ASCII]
     WWW sources http://www.scms.rgu.ac.uk/students/cs_yr94/lk/fido.html
     FTSC page   http://www.goldware.dk/ftsc
     Echomail    [pending]
     WebRing     http://ddi.digital.net/~cbaker84/fnetring.html  [TFN]
     General     http://owls.com/~jerrys/fidonet.html

    ============

    Zone 1:       http://www.z1.fidonet.org

      Region 10:  http://www.psnw.com/~net205/region10.html

      Region 11:  http://oeonline.com/~garyg/region11/

      Region 13:  none

      Region 14:  none

      Region 15:  none

      Region 16:  none

      Region 17:  none

      Region 18:  http://techstop.pdn.net/fido/

      Region 19:  http://www.compconn.net

    ============

    Zone 2:       http://www.z2.fidonet.org

    ZEC2:
    Zone 2 Elist: http://www.fbone.ch/z2_elist/

      Region 20:  http://www.fidonet.pp.se (in Swedish)

      Region 23:  http://www.fido.dk (in Danish)

      Region 24:  http://www.swb.de/personal/flop/gatebau.html (German)
        Fido-IP:  http://home.nrh.de/~lbehet/fido (English/German)
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 32                  13 Jul 1998


      Region 25:
                  http://www.bsnet.co.uk/net2502/net/

      Region 26: http://www.nemesis.ie
         REC 26: http://www.nrgsys.com/orb


      Region 27:  http://telematique.org/ft/r27.htm

      Region 29:  http://www.rtfm.be/fidonet/  (French)

      Region 30:  http://www.fidonet.ch  (Swiss?)

      Region 33:  http://www.fidoitalia.net (Italian)

      Region 34:  http://www.pobox.com/cnb/r34.htm  (Spanish)
          REC34:  http://pobox.com/~chr

      Region 36:  http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/7207/

      Region 38:  http://public.st.carnet.hr/~blagi/bbs/adriam.html

      Region 41:  http://www.fidonet.gr (Greek/English)

      Region 48:  http://www.fidonet.org.pl

    ============

    Zone 3:       http://www.z3.fidonet.org

    ============

    Zone 4:       http://www.altern.org/zone4

      Region 90:  http://visitweb.com/fidonet
        Net 903:  http://www.playagrande.com/refugio
        Net 904:  http://members.tripod.com/~net904 (Spanish)

    ============

    Zone 5:       http://w3.eastcape.co.za/fidonet/index.htm

    ============

    Zone 6:       http://www.z6.fidonet.org

      Region 65:  http://www.cfido.com/fidonet/cfidochina.html (Chinese)

    ============

         Pages listed above are as submitted to the FidoNews Editor,
         and generally reflect Zone and Regional Web Page sites.  If
         no Regional site is submitted, the first Network page from
         that Region is used in its place.  Generally, Regional pages
         should list access points to all Networks within the Region.

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 33                  13 Jul 1998


         TCP/IP accessible node access information should be submitted
         to the FidoNews Editor for inclusion in their Region or Zone.


    -----------------------------------------------------------------

    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 34                  13 Jul 1998


    =================================================================
                          FIDONEWS INFORMATION
    =================================================================

    ------- FIDONEWS MASTHEAD AND CONTACT INFORMATION -------

    Editor: Zorch Frezberg

    Editors Emeritii: Tom Jennings, Thom Henderson, Dale Lovell,
                      Vince Perriello, Tim Pozar, Sylvia Maxwell,
                      Donald Tees, Christopher Baker

    "FidoNews Editor"
        FidoNet  1:1/23
        BBS  1-209-251-7529,  300/1200/2400/9600/V.34/V.90

     more addresses:
        Zorch Frezberg -- 1:205/1701, [email protected]
                                      [email protected]
                                      [email protected]

    (Postal Service mailing address)
        FidoNews Editor
        P.O. Box 642
        Fresno, CA 93709-0642
        U.S.A.


    voice:  1-209-446-9038 [voice mail = 'blind' numbers not returned]

    ------------------------------------------------------

    FidoNews is published weekly by and for the members of the FIDONET
    INTERNATIONAL AMATEUR ELECTRONIC MAIL system.  It is a compilation
    of individual articles contributed by their authors or their
    authorized agents.  The contribution of articles to this compilation
    does not diminish the rights of the authors.  OPINIONS EXPRESSED in
    these articles ARE THOSE OF THE AUTHORS and not necessarily those of
    FidoNews.

    Authors retain copyright on individual works; otherwise FidoNews is
    Copyright 1998 Zorch Frezberg.  All rights reserved.  Duplication
    and/or distribution permitted for noncommercial purposes only.  For
    use in other circumstances, please contact the original authors, or
    the Editor.

                           =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

    OBTAINING COPIES: The most recent issue of FidoNews in electronic
    form may be obtained from the FidoNews Editor via manual download or
    file-request, or from various sites in the FidoNet and Internet.
    PRINTED COPIES may be obtained by sending SASE to the above postal
    address.  File-request FIDONEWS for the current Issue.  File-request
    FNEWS for the current month in one archive.  Or file-request specific
    back Issue filenames in distribution format [FNEWSFnn.ZIP] for a
    particular Issue.  Monthly Volumes are available as FNWSmmmy.ZIP
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 35                  13 Jul 1998


    where mmm = three letter month [JAN - DEC] and y = last digit of the
    current year [8], i.e., FNWSJAN8.ZIP for all the Issues from Jan 98.

    Annual volumes are available as FNEWSn.ZIP where n = the Volume number
    1 - 15 for 1984 - 1998, respectively. Annual Volume archives range in
    size from 48K to 1.4M.


    INTERNET USERS: FidoNews is available via:

                         http://www.fidonews.org
                         http://www.fidonet.org/fidonews.htm
                         ftp://ftp.fidonet.org/pub/fidonet/fidonews/
                         ftp://ftp.aminet.org/pub/aminet/comm/fido/
                         ftp://ftp.irvbbs.com/fidonews/
                         ftp://ftp.nwstar.com/Fidonet/Fidonews

    And in non-English formats via:

                         http://www.hvc.ee/pats/fidonews (Estonian)
                         http://www.fidonet.pp.se/sfnews (Swedish)

                                     *=*=*

    You may obtain an email subscription to FidoNews by sending email to:

                         [email protected]

    with a Subject line of: subscribe fnews-edist

    and no message in the message body. To remove your name from the email
    distribution use a Subject line of: unsubscribe fnews-edist with no
    message to the same address above.

                                       *

    You may retrieve current and previous Issues of FidoNews via FTPMail
    by sending email to:

                         [email protected]

    with a Subject line of: help

    and FTPMail will immediately send a reply containing details and
    instructions. When you actually make a file request, FTPMail will
    respond in three stages. You find a link for this process on
    www.fidonews.org.

                                     *=*=*

    You can read the current FidoNews Issue in HTML format at:

                         http://www.fidonews.org

    STAR SOURCE for ALL Past Issues via FTP and file-request -
    Available for FReq from 1:396/1 or by anonymous FTP from:
    FIDONEWS 15-28               Page 36                  13 Jul 1998


                         ftp://ftp.sstar.com/fidonet/fnews/

    Each yearly archive also contains a listing of the Table-of-Contents
    for that year's issues.  The total set is currently about 13 Megs.

                                =*=*=*=

    The current week's FidoNews and the FidoNews public-key are now also
    available almost immediately after publication on the FidoNews Editor
    homepage on the World Wide Web at:

                 http://209.77.228.66/fidonews.html

    There are also links there to jim barchuk's HTML FidoNews source and
    to John Souvestre's FTP site for the archives.  There is also an
    email link for sending in an article as message text.  Drop on over.

                           =*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=

    A PGP generated public-key is available for the FidoNews Editor from
    1:1/23 [1:205/1701] by file-request for FNEWSKEY or by download from
    IKVHFoT! BBS at 1-209-251-7529 as FIDONEWS.ASC in File Area X.  It
    is also posted twice a month into the PKEY_DROP Echo available on the
    Zone 1 Echomail Backbone.

                               *=*=*=*=*

    SUBMISSIONS: You are encouraged to submit articles for publication in
    FidoNews. Article submission requirements are contained in the file
    ARTSPEC.DOC, available from the FidoNews Editor, or file-requestable
    from 1:1/23 [1:205/1701] as file "ARTSPEC.DOC".  ALL Zone
    Coordinators also have copies of ARTSPEC.DOC. Please read it.

    "Fido", "FidoNet" and the dog-with-diskette are U.S. registered
    trademarks of Tom Jennings, P.O. Box 410923, San Francisco, CA 94141,
    and are used with permission.

            "Disagreement is actually necessary,
             or we'd all have to get in fights
             or something to amuse ourselves
             and create the requisite chaos."
                               -Tom Jennings

                           ### -30- ###

    -----------------------------------------------------------------