Letters to the Editor

• Further responses to article
• Election issues: Candidate Answers
• Kohl Platform on the Internet
• Echomail questions
• Echomail answers
• Even more Echomail answers
• Goodbye? What about thanks for the fish?
• Zone 6 in deep trouble
• Zone 6 troubles

Further responses to article

--- Following message extracted from NETMAIL @ 1:18/14 ---
By Christopher Baker on Sun Feb 01 19:19:51 1998

From: Bob Kohl @ 1:102/861
To: Christopher Baker @ 1:18/14
Date: 01 Feb 98 13:29:08
Subj: Further response to article.

> * Forwarded from 1:102/861, Conniption BBS in Los Angeles CA
> * Originally Andrea Santos to ALL in the Z1_ELECTION echo.

> Would like to address comments made by Bob Kohl, as they appeared in
> Fidonews this week.

> ---------------->

> F I D O N E W S -- Volume 15, Number 4 26 January
> 1998

>>> From: Bob Kohl @ 1:102/861
>>> To: Christopher Baker @ 1:18/14
>>> Date: 25 Jan 98 14:12:53
>>> Subj: Re: Page Three, FidoNews

>>> Anytime a person takes on the responsibility of gathering data
>>> on an election, the data should be presented in a format to
>>> properly address the correct views of the candidates and not
>>> placed into a format To mislead the readers intentionally or
>>> otherwise.

> Agreed and every attempt was made via the Z1_ELECTION echo to
> provide all candidates the opportunity to answer something not
> previously answered, change a position, or further clarify any
> an all. Bob did with two questions and I'm at a complete loss
> as to why he didn't with the rest which follow.

I'm at a complete loss to understand how Andrea ignored my answers

If she'd been keeping up with the reading and the candidates posts in the echo, she would have noted my answers. Again, it is easily assumed that when someone decides to take the responsibility or collecting and reporting the date from the election, that the person that decides to do so will do so in an impartial manner. It would appear that Andrea cannot.

>>> If indeed there is a question of not receiving an answer
>>> given the occasional quirk of echomail. The person gathering
>>> the data should request the data either in the echo or via
>>> netmail.

> This also was done via the Z1_ELECTION echo when the first table
> was presented.

And yet Andrea still ignored the answers that were posted in the echo to either the individuals that posted the questions or all. She still limits the format so that any question that requires an explanation more then just the simple yes/no format does not receive proper representation.

deletions:

>> Answer Legend:

>> Y Yes/Agrees to question/Issue
>> N No/Disagrees to question/Issue
>> U Undecided, Yes/No wasn't provided
>> ? No answer was received

>> Candidate Abbreviation:

>> JB Jim Balcom
>> DC David Calafrancesco
>> WL Wayne DeLisle
>> JG John Glinski
>> BK Bob Kohl
>> ML Mike Luther
>> JS Jeff Smith

>> Election Issues Candidate Position Summary

>> +================================================================+
>> |Questions/Issues | JB | DC | WL | JG | BK | ML| JS
>> |
>> |===============================================================-|
>> |Prefer elections for echomail | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | ? | Y
>> |positions versus appointments? | | | | | | |
>> |

>>> My views are that I'd prefer to see the best person for the job
>>> in the job, be it by appointment or election. I've seen problems
>>> with both means.

> Bob's views were stated several times on this in the echo, and the
> answer still stands as No.

Which is incorrect. There are still no standards other then P4. Each region has it's own standards from RC down as to how they're handling this issue. This is up to the regions until such time as a standard is established or P4 is amended. I do not believe in micro-management.

> Had the question been asked, "Prefer appointments for
> echomail vs. elections," the correct answer, based on Bob's
> response, would still be No. Bob clearly indicates he has "NO"
> preference, and only wishes to see the "best person for the job, in
> the job". The question is one of "preference". There is NO
> preference in Bob's answer.

That is correct, and therefore you've invalidated your own format Andrea. I have no preference on this issue.

>> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+--
>> |
>> |Experience moving large | Y | Y | Y | N | ? | N | Y
>> |volumes of mail? | | | | | | |
>> |

>>> Yes I have experience as a mail mover.

> This was not answered previously, hence the ?

Again, if Andrea is going to take on the responsibility of collecting data for the sake of informing the sysops, she should also keep up with the reading in the echo.

>> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+--
>> |Have you ever been an REC? | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | N

>>> Somewhat misleading, one was a temp or interim REC.

> This comment is with reference to candidate David Calafrancesco.
> The question does not stipulate a timeframe for serving in this
> position. There is nothing misleading about it. David served in
> the position of REC. There was nothing in the original question
> regarding how long, permanent, temp, interim or anything else.

Misleading in the sense that the sysops are not clearly informed as to the experience levels. There is a large difference between an active, seated and functioning REC then just an interim REC. The sysops should be aware of this. There has only been two active REC's from Reg 13 since I have been an REC and they have been Jim Balcom and Rick Ashworth. Even David's participation in the effort to get this election going was minimal. To understand this better, any person that was an REC at any time has access to the RECC echo.

>> |Any axes to grind? | Y | N | Y | N | ? | N | N
>> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+--

>>> No. My answer to this was approached on a humorous basis.

> Actually, Bob's "response" could have been marked as Y, N, U, or ?

It would appear that in Andrea's opinion, the world is black and white as all answers should be.

> The original response was "only as the person that had the wet
> stone". Bob went on to say, closely paraphrasing, that no matter
> what the exchange, if a net matter came up, the nonsense would be
> dropped. Still doesn't address the specific question...do you have
> any axes to grind, and not if this, then that.

> It was a tough question and darn near impossible to mark based on
> Bob's answer.

This is correct, ergo the format Andrea has used is invalid.

> It could not be marked as a NO, because he didn't say NO. Couldn't
> mark it as a YES for the same reason. Couldn't mark as U because
> something was offered, though it was so widely open to
> interpretation, I felt the only fair way to go was to mark it as a ?
> and allow him to come back and clarify. He didn't.

This was clear from the day I answered it. If Andrea chose to ignore this, then she again misrepresents the answers.

>> |Elimination of *EC chain? | N | N | N | N | ? | N | N

>>> No.

> This was not answered previously, hence the ?

Yes it was.

>> |Do you want an Assistant? | Y | U | U | N | ? | Y | ?

>>> No, I do not.

> This was not answered previously, hence the ?

Please keep up with the posts in the echo, or check your links Andrea.

>> |Support CRP BAN of Software? | Y | Y | ? | N | ? | N | N
>> |

> No, we've worked through all the problems we've seen with software
> without a "Ban", excom's, PC's, or whatever.

> This was not answered previously, hence the ?

This is fair enough, this one I hadn't answered.

> With this submission to Fidonews, Bob has now answered several more
> questions which had previously been unanswered. A few unanswered
> questions still remain. I will note these answers on my personal
> table, however, it would have been great to get those answers while
> I was making revisions, where everyone had the opportunity to do
> this, and not after the fact. Bob did specifically clarify two
> previous answers, and I made the change/notes available with the
> revised table. He has not questioned those notes in this message.

He hasn't? ;)

> So we're left with a question Bob feels is misleading with reference
> to another candidate. The way the question is posed, the answer
> indicated is 100% factual.

The question was posed to mislead. Intentional or not.

> The candidate in question served as an REC. Makes not
> one bit of difference if it was for 1 month or 5 years. He served
> in that capacity.

It makes quite a difference and the sysops should be aware of it.

> And we're also left with the "preference" issue regarding elections
> or appointments. Bob has clearly indicated NO preference on this
> matter. I'll take this further, based on actions. Bob is currently
> the acting RC and REC of Region 10 for a few years.

Poor use of the language. I am not the "acting" RC, I am the RC.

> There have been no elections for
> either post since he took on those positions. Bob's own actions
> clearly indicate he holds no preference for elections vs.
> appointments.

Andrea also ignores the posts originating in late Dec where I once again state the disposition of the REC 10 position which will be passed at the end of the election.

She's ignored my statement that I felt I had something to accomplish in "ramrodding" the effort this get this election done (Jim Balcoms' word). I got the election going and can retire the R10EC hat on a high note.

She further ignores the posts in the echo that noted my commitment made to the position of the RC. I honor those commitments even those made to someone I don't care for. I've revived Reg 10 with the help of several good people and have a commitment to it.

Andrea has clearly shown that she was not impartial in the collecting of this date nor the way she presented it. As Ken Tuley notes:

Date: 25 Jan 98 09:26:00
From: Ken Tuley
To: Andrea Santos
Subj: Validity

* Originally to ANDREA SANTOS in the Z1_ELECTION echo.

Quoting ANDREA SANTOS to GARY GILMORE on 23 Jan 98 11:36:50...

> Why don't we call a spade a spade? No matter how I would have
> proceeded with this table, you would have objected solely on the
> grounds that _I_ produced it.

That may be true for some people, but as far as I'm concerned, the only thing that ought to be made clear is that the table consists of =your= interpretation of candidates' statements and positions and not a compilation of direct candidate input. Then people would be able to read it for what it as: =your= opinion.

-=ken=-

-30-

Election issues: Candidate Answers

--- Following message extracted from NETMAIL @ 1:18/14 ---
By Christopher Baker on Sun Feb 01 19:20:11 1998

From: Bob Kohl @ 1:102/861
To: Christopher Baker @ 1:18/14
Date: 01 Feb 98 13:48:02
Subj: Re: Election issues: Candidate Answers

> * Forwarded from 1:102/861, Conniption BBS in Los Angeles CA
> * Originally to ALL in the Z1_ELECTION echo.

> The following revised and final table is a summary of the election
> issues and the pro and con positions candidates have toward the
> issues or questions presented in the Z1_ELECTION echo. The
> revisions are incorporated as requested by candidates who
> missed questions the first time around, or wished to change their
> positions. One additional question has also been added to the
> original list. There are also several brief notes from the
> candidates, following the table, to clarify why no answer, or
> definitive yes/no response, was provided.

> The issues and questions were selected by going through the message
> base questions posted to the candidates by various participants in
> the Z1_ELECTION echo. A sampling of 20 key issues or questions were
> selected.

> I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all the candidates for
> their participation in this election and for their time in answering
> the many questions posed throughout the campaign period.

> And to all other Fidonet members in Zone 1, get out there and vote!

> Answer Legend:

> Y Yes/Agrees to question/Issue
> N No/Disagrees to question/Issue
> U Undecided, Yes/No wasn't provided
> ? No answer was received

> Candidate Abbreviation:

> JB Jim Balcom
> DC David Calafrancesco
> WL Wayne DeLisle
> JG John Glinski
> BK Bob Kohl
> ML Mike Luther
> JS Jeff Smith

> Election Issues Candidate Position Summary

> +===================================================================+
> |Questions/Issues | JB | DC | WL | JG | BK | ML | JS |
> |===================================================================|
> |How long have you been a | | | | | | | |
> |Fidonet Sysop (answer in years) | 8+ | 8+ | ? | 3 | 10+| 10+| 6 |
> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+----|
> |Would you continue with other | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N |
> |FTN positions if elected ZEC? | | | | | | | |
> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+----|
> |Support an echomail policy? | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y |
> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+----|
> |Support a Z1 Ombudsman? | N | N | U | N | N | N | N |
> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+----|
> |Echo Appeal Court for users | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
> |abused by Moderators? | | | | | | | |
> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+----|
> |Prefer elections for echomail | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y |
> |positions versus appointments? | | | | | | | |

Once again, misleading.

I have no clear preference on this issue. I feel that sysop level input is crucial as noted in the way we set up this election. However until such time as there is a standard or P4 is amended the regions deal with this in their own way. I do not believe in micro-management.

> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+---- |
> |Experience moving large | Y | Y | Y | N | ? | N | Y |
> |volumes of mail? | | | | | | | |

Again: yes. I do note she spotting my response in the news and yet decided not to incorporate it. She did not spot the answer in the echo and I answered this at least twice.

> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+---- |
> |Any axes to grind? | Y | N | Y | N | ? | N | N |
> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+-- --|

Again misleading.

> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+---- |
> |Do you want an Assistant? | N | U | U | N | ? | Y | U |
> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+-- --|

As noted, no.

> |Support CRP BAN of Software? | Y | Y | ? | N | ? | N | N |
> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+-- --|

As noted, no. We've worked through our problems out here in reg 10 without bans, without EXCOM's or PC's.

> |Support CRP BAN of Sysops? | Y | Y | ? | N | ? | N | N |
> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+-- --|

As noted, absolutely NOT per the above.

> |Mail Tampering before export? | Y | U | ? | N | ? | N | N
> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+----

As noted, I support and will actively seek to end this. There should be a hub standard that puts an end to mail tampering based on moods, agenda's, etc.

> |Conflict of interest for *C, | N | U | N | Y | N | N | Y |
> |*EC to create, operate | | | | | | |
> |distribution system? | | | | | | |

Again.. misleading. As I've noted in the election echo, I think it is a conflict of interest for the ZEC to run a distribution system. The ZEC should NOT be affiliated in any way, shape or form with a distribution system. I also think at this time it's impractical to enforce this on a REC level since we have or had three REC's running distribution systems.

In the future this is something that could stand to be resolved, since up until recently is was considered a conflict of interest for an REC to do so.

> |--------------------------------+----+----+----+----+----+----+---- |
> |Should *C's be involved with | ? | Y | Y | Y | U | Y | ?
> |file distribution?

Misleading. The filebone, filegate, etc is not an issue for the ZEC in my opinion.

> |Does REC/ZEC have control over | Y | N | U | Y | ? | Y | N
> |NEC/REC? | | | | | | |
> +------------------------------------------------------------------

The ZEC works with the REC's who work with the NEC's. The ZEC should be able to work with the REC's who should be able to work with the NEC's.

> D. Calafrancesco: Supports echomail policy which guards against
> excommunication.

Incorrect. David has noted he opposes an echomail policy.

> B. Kohl: Stated it would be a conflict of interest for a
> ZEC to create/operate distribution system, but
> would not be a conflict for other *C, *EC
> positions.

> Did not provide an answer on *C's being involved
> with file distribution as he states it's not a
> ZEC issue.

It would have been so much easier had Andrea re-formatted her "data". It would have been far more beneficial to the sysops had she imparted this date impartially.

BK

Kohl Platform on the Internet

--- Following message extracted from NETMAIL @ 1:18/14 ---
By Christopher Baker on Sun Feb 01 19:20:25 1998

From: Bob Kohl @ 1:102/861
To: Christopher Baker @ 1:18/14
Date: 01 Feb 98 13:51:21
Subj: assorted

If anyone is interested, my platform is at:

OEONLINE.COM/~GARYG/KOHL

BK

-30-

Echomail questions

--- Following message extracted from FIDONEWS @ 1:18/14 ---
By Christopher Baker on Thu Jan 29 02:15:32 1998

From: Maurice Kinal
To: Ron Bemis
Date: 27 Jan 98 10:49:16
Subj: Re: kiss it goodbye

27 Jan 98 06:49, Ron Bemis wrote to Vincent Kaye:

VK>> And so it goes...we had a dish on Net3618 and it disappeared and
VK>> also on Net3666 and it disappeared...what gives...Fidoscism?

RB> Why do you continue to ignore the moderator here and post off-
RB> topic messages?

Please forgive my ignorance of the inner workings of Fido and the only reason I ask is that I would really like to know;

Where are comments like the above allowable? Is there a forum in Fido where people are accorded a chance to critique where they perceive to be problems in their small part of this wonderful world of cyberspace?

I realize that this being listed as FidoNews that perhaps comments should be limited to FidoNews but it seems with the 5 or 6 different Fido administration areas there could be one where just about anything goes as long as it pertains to Fido, such as the above comment. In all honesty I don't have a complaint about what goes on with Fido in my particular neck of the woods since everyone here seems to stick to the straight and narrow (i.e. no planned coups or anything like that or at least that I am aware of <g>) but it would be nice to be able to see what is happening, or perceived to be happening, in other parts of the world which is one of the reasons I signed up with Fido. That and the fact that I don't care much for the glitz with the little or no substance of www. But that's a different can of worms ... or is it? <g>

Please consider this message as my "letter to the editor" as well as an "inquiring minds want to know" kind of thingy.

Yours To Consider,
Maurice Kinal

Origin: Wandering Point - > Ladysmith, BC (1:351/255.1)

-30-

Echomail answers

--- Following message extracted from FIDONEWS @ 1:18/14 ---
By Christopher Baker on Thu Jan 29 02:16:10 1998

From: Ron Bemis
To: Maurice Kinal
Date: 27 Jan 98 18:19:40
Subj: Re: kiss it goodbye

VK>> And so it goes...we had a dish on Net3618 and it disappeared and
VK>> also on Net3666 and it disappeared...what gives...Fidoscism?

RB> Why do you continue to ignore the moderator here and post off-
RB> topic messages?

MK> Please forgive my ignorance of the inner workings of Fido
MK> and the only reason I ask is that I would really like to know;

MK> Where are comments like the above allowable? Is there a
MK> forum in Fido where people are accorded a chance to
MK> critique where they perceive to be problems in their small
MK> part of this wonderful world of cyberspace?

There are certainly echos to discuss almost anything you'd like. There are hundreds of echos, some with very specific topics, some with more general ones. Find one that suits your needs for the topic you want to discuss. I'd like to follow this echo, but don't care about Vincent's paranoia and childish whinings. The moderator has asked him to get back on topic. Vincent has ignored Chris's request. As is the case with most of the busy backboned echos with a huge signal to noise ratio, I'll probably just end up turning this one off because there's so little on-topic content. This, to me, is the real reason behind the "death of Fidonet".

Origin: Nibbles & Bytes, 1-972-231-3841 (1:124/1113)

-30-

Even more Echomail answers

--- Following message extracted from FIDONEWS @ 1:18/14 ---
By Christopher Baker on Thu Jan 29 02:16:43 1998

From: Zorch Frezberg
To: Maurice Kinal
Date: 27 Jan 98 22:19:29
Subj: Re: kiss it goodbye

In a msg on <Jan 27 10:49>, Maurice Kinal of 1:351/255.1 writes to Ron Bemis:

VK>>> And so it goes...we had a dish on Net3618 and it
VK>>> disappeared and also on Net3666 and it disappeared...what
VK>>> gives...Fidoscism?

RB>> Why do you continue to ignore the moderator here and post
RB>> off-topic messages?

MK> Please forgive my ignorance of the inner workings of Fido and the
MK> only reason I ask is that I would really like to know;
MK> Where are comments like the above allowable? Is there a forum in
MK> Fido where people are accorded a chance to critique where they
MK> perceive to be problems in their small part of this wonderful
MK> world of cyberspace?

(With apologies to Our Editor...)

First, this is a forum for the _Editor_ of FidoNews to receive articles for inclusion in FidoNews, as well as for pretty much discussion of items of interest for inclusion in future articles.

If Vincent Kaye had bothered to take his ideas and express them in a coherent manner, as an article for submission, then he would have been 'on topic'.

Second, had he been discussing an article already published, then the NEWSCHAT echo would be the likely place to discuss.

Third, a look at the EchoList and other distributions would indicate several areas, but specifically, those based on both FidoNet and SysOps would be the likely ones to look into, such as:

FN_SYSOP
SYSOP
SYSOP_ISSUES
SYSOPS
Z1_CHAT
Z1_FIDONET
Z1_POLITICAL

and that's a start. There is also DEBATE, REAL FREE SPEECH, FLAME and others where it may not be _on_ topic, but close enough to be allowed.

Vincent, on the other hand, is pretty much just wasting electrons with his antics here, though I haven't been too vocal in arguing against him...if he pushes the envelope too far, then Our Editor will know how to deal with him.

<shrug>

MK> Please consider this message as my "letter to the editor" as well
MK> as an "inquiring minds want to know" kind of thingy.

Seems that you've caught on...and also asked a few questions some moderators need to examine. As moderator of FN_SYSOP, you've put me on the spot with a couple of your comments, and I'm going to have to re-examine the purposes of the echo and how it is listed.

Thanks!

-zf-

Origin: Fido Bites It's Masters...What Next? (1:205/1701)

-30-

Goodbye? What about thanks for the fish?

--- Following message extracted from FIDONEWS @ 1:18/14 ---
By Christopher Baker on Sat Jan 31 04:34:47 1998

From: Michele Stewart
To: Bill Whitehouse
Date: 28 Jan 98 10:58:38
Subj: kiss it goodbye

> According to Wayne Delisle Sr. (1:379/33) on Thu, Jan 22 at 13:48:
>
>BW> Kiss it goodbye. Our current coordinators want the network all
>BW> to themselves. And that's what they'll get.
>
>WDS> You might want to stay around for a few months. Things will
>WDS> change.
>
> You think? I see no evidence of it but I hope so. I know I
> got something out of the ten years I spent at this. Exactly what,
> I'm hard pressed to say.

You've made no friends? Learned nothing new? Didn't have your mind challenged in any way? Didn't share your opinions or ideas with anyone else?

I've been in Fidonet since 1988... the same amount of time you claim, Bill. I've not only gotten a husband out of the ten years I spent at this, I got a sense of community. I've made friends, influenced people, learned new ideas, helped see a wall come down between countries, watched another join the free world from the people's point of view. I travelled to the Gulf Coast with strangers, who's parents, spouses and siblings became my friends and I helped them keep in touch with those they loved far away. I learned of a friend of my friend's children who got kidnapped, abused and murdered. I aided the victims of Hurricane Hugo, was aided by others for Hurricane Andrew, sent sympathy, canned foods and blankets to earthquake victims and shared the ups and downs of this country and others with strangers who have become friends. I can travel the world and find someone I "know" almost anywhere I go. Someone who will buy me a cup of coffee, show me the sights or even put me up for a few days. I've had good times and bad times, seen petty squabbling, friendship poems and jokes.

I don't know about you, Bill, but I got alot of something out of the ten years I spent at this. Exactly what I'm not hard pressed to say, just hard pressed to limit to one page without boring the bejeesus out of others. LOL I wish you the best and hope you find whatever you're looking for wherever you're looking for it! :)

.\\ichele

Origin: SunShine PCBoard, So. Florida * (1:369/21)

-30-

Zone 6 in deep trouble

From: pradjitno@usa.net
X-Sender: pradjitno@pop.netaddress.com
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 17:38:27
To: webmaster@mindsedge.com
Subject: Re: Indonesia wants Fido!
Cc: postmaster@fidonet.fidonet.org, postmaster@z6.fidonet.org, cbaker84@digital.net, sysop@ptmudge.westsound.com

Might this interested... Zone 6 ASIA is not longer in service. Duh, to where else I must request FidoNet node address and to get FidoNet flow over here (Indonesia)??? :-(

I'm getting desperate and tired with FidoNet... please anybody help me.........

-wp
Widjoen Pradjitno
Jakarta, INDONESIA

>X-Sender: winglee@singnet.com.sg
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
>Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 17:59:49 +0800
>To: Ivan Shim <ivan@shim.org>
>From: Wing Lee <winglee@singnet.com.sg>
>Subject: Re: Indonesia wants Fido!
>Cc: pradjitno@usa.net
>
>
>>> BTW, how my node address request going/status? I really desperate
>>> and stuck with node request to Singapore (ASEAN Host). Could you
>>> tell to Wing Lee this situation?
>>
>>Please contact Wing Lee directly at winglee@singnet.com.sg
>
>FidoNet in ASIA does not exist anymore. Please contact Zone 6 gate.
>I hope they can help you.

-30-

Zone 6 troubles

--- Following message extracted from FN_SYSOP @ 1:18/14 ---
By Christopher Baker on Sat Jan 31 04:33:48 1998

From: Shinji Nishikawa
To: All
Date: 30 Jan 98 12:22:23
Subj: Z6

Hello All,

I belong to Net732 in R63. We have a big problem. Our RC was already got out of FidoNet (his BBS closed) about 6 months ago. I have nothing to do for changing my BBS' telephone number. Our Z6C, he post to the local echo in zone6 called ZONE6SYSOP saying that he wants to quit Z6C, but no one answers except me. He seems to stop any job for nodediff. I've never receive any diff files for a few months. Looking at my Net732. My NC of 732, he also wants to quit NC, not only NC, but also a FidoNet node, he said. He also stopped take care of Nodelist. Several nodes in 732, but only 2 nodes are active and open as a FidoNet BBS. Others were closed or unlink FidoNet.

Z6's gate has no carry this echo, so no meaning to ask them to come out. For me, I see this because I link a node in the US via ftp. I want to see all echoes. Many sysops quit, but FidoNet is still fun to me. I can do something for N732, R63 and even Z6. I'm willing to do for FidoNet. I want to refresh N732, R63 as well as Z6. How can I do? Does someone give me a good idea? Any suggestions are welcome.

Best Regards,

Shinji 6:732/10.0

Origin: A F O L (Osaka, Japan) afol.xg.com (6:732/10)

-30-