Articles

• IP FidoNet in Region 33
• A Summation

IP FidoNet in Region 33
by Marco d'Itri

[Editor's Note: This IP Nodelist segment was _well_ beyond the 70-character limit required for FidoNews production. If you plan to use this IP Nodelist, remove the extraneous spaces beforehand. -zf- ]

;A manually generated R33 IP extended nodelist
Zone,2,Europe_&_more,Belgium,Ward_Dossche,32-3-4480880, 9600,CM,XX,U,K12,Z19
Region,33,Italy,I,Mario_Mure',39-931-833773, 9600,V34,XX,CM,MO,U,Z19,ENC
Pvt,505,Agnese,Mario_Mure',-Unpublished-, U,#,INET,agnese.fidoitalia.net,33.6K,RAW,IFC,BND,TELN
;
Host,331,Alberto_Network,Mantova_I,Maurizio_Andreoli,39-376-364001, 9600,CM,XA,V34,U,X75
Host,332,Italia_Centro_Nord,Bologna,Mario_Battacchi,39-51-6236527, 9600,CM,XA,H16,V32T,VFC,V34,U,X75
Hub,800,Quasar_HUB,La_Spezia,Roberto_Mascolo,39-187-750175, 9600,CM,XA,V34,VFC,#,INET,195.120.155.157,0,BND
,806,Quasar,La_Spezia,Thomas_Capasso,39-187-23155, 9600,CM,XA,V34,VFC,U,X75,U,#,INET,195.120.155.157,0,BND
,807,Quasar_II,La_Spezia,Roberto_Mascolo,39-187-750175, 9600,CM,XX,V34,U,X75,U,#,INET,195.120.155.157,0,BND
,801,Banana's,Parma,Nicola_Lottici,39-521-941845, 9600,CM,XA,V34,VFC,U,#,INET,bananas.netsis.it,128K,BND
Host,335,Italia_Centro_Sud,Taranto_I,Gaetano_Ble',39-931-833773, 9600,V34,XX,CM,MO,U,Z19,ENC
,437,Connecting_BBS,Perugia,Francesco_Marozzi,39-75-5140631, 9600,CM,XA,V34,V42B,#,INET,os2.iw0qmn.ampr.org,0,BND,TELN
,626,Car_Systems_Service,Montesilvano_Spiaggia_PE_I, Lorenzo_Di_Blasio,39-85-4492408,9600,CM,XA,V34,V42B, U,#,INET,stevens.alicom.org,64K,BND,TELN,VMP
,680,Eagle's_Nest,Montesilvano_Spiaggia_PE_I,Stefano_Brandimarte, 39-85-4455650,9600,CM,MO,V34,V42B, U,#,INET,tella.alicom.org,64K,BND,RAW,IFC,TELN,FTP, #,EMAIL,fido-vmailer@tella.alicom.org,UUE
,705,The_Ghost_Multisystem,Bari,Gianni_Medusa,39-80-5023688, 9600,CM,XA,V32B,V42B,VFC,U,#,INET,ghostbbs.pandora.it,0,TELN,VMP

--
ciao,
Marco d'Itri
<md@linux.it>

### 30 ###

A Summation

[Editor's note: I have been asked to place this into the Snooze by several individuals who see it as being of general interest to FidoNet at large. The opinions contained within are wholly my own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy within the FidoNews itself. Comments/responses welcomed. -zf- ]

* Original In : Z1_ELECTION
* Original To : John Souvestre, 1:396/1
* Original From: Zorch Frezberg, 1:205/1701
* Original Date: Feb 18 17:18

In a msg on <Feb 17 21:40>, John Souvestre of 1:396/1 writes to Zorch Frezberg:

ZF>> If you wish to deny that John has made significant efforts
ZF>> to attempt to influence or force a change in Region 10
ZF>> without the consent of the majority of the sysops here,
ZF>> feel free to do so.
JS> Zorch, you are one of the largest hypocrites I've ever seen.
JS> You claim to be for "free speech" - but only as long as it
JS> isn't critical of you.

Do I? Hmmmm...perhaps it's because I believe free speech works _both_ ways.

I believe that is the part of my claim that you don't seem to understand. Part of 'free speech' is the right to _disagree_, something you tend not to tolerate too well.

JS> The only change I've worked for in R10 is to give SysOps a say
JS> in who there C and ECs are.

Finally, a clear admission. You have been working in Region 10 to interfere with the process already in place.

JS> Indeed, to make these title subject to the consent of the majority of the
JS> SysOps - not the other way around.

The majority of SysOps, or the majority of those who participate? An important distinction here, John...could you please clarify it?

JS> Your only interest in supporting democracy is when you don't like
JS> the current leader.

Let me ask you a specific question, then, John...when Bruce Bodger put his hat in the ring for the Z1C post last, did you support him?

Did you support Bruce because you supported democracy, or because you don't like Satti as Z1C?

JS> That's a very shortsighted view, one which you will certainly
JS> live to regret.

I doubt it, John...that's a fundamental principle of any government, democracy or otherwise.

The power elite always does what it can to insure that it remains in the control of the societal macrocosm. The "13 Old Men in Geneva" or the "Illuminati" are archetypes of that structure, though the more correct and proper power elite are the holding companies which provide the financial support for industry, and thus the economy.

In Britain and the US, and to a large extent most English-speaking nations, that power structure is the insurance/pension industry which is heavily invested. In Asia, particularly Japan, and some of the so-called Lowland Countries in Europe, that structure is the banking industry.

If anyone were to threaten their ability to dominate and influence the power structure, then the organic model of governmental theory comes to light...the 'system' reacts as a 'living being' and does what it can to repel the 'threat', up to and including damaging itself as necessary.

Or, if you will, like the various species of lizard, the 'system' will be willing to lose a leg or a tail if it insures continued survival.

The dynamic questions present in FidoNet currently are whether the sysops are reacting to the overt control expressed by the *C structure as well as the growing monopolization of the control of echomail/file distributions, or if it is the *C/*EC structure reacting to both mollify the sysops and protect itself from being overwhelmed by the echomail distribution system's growning influence over FidoNet operations, or if it is the effort of the echomail distribution to bring about a change in the societal understanding of cooperation between the various levels of FidoNet by incurring a larger influence on the events of sysop connectivity, inter-network distribution (between nets, Regions, and Zones, as well as between the various smaller distributions) as well as attempting to insure that a sufficient income is available to offset the costs of echomail distribution as much as is economically feasible.

At this point in time, it appears that the echomail distribution services (EDS) is taking it in the shorts, and that the *C/*EC structure is ganging up on it with the cooperation of the sysops.

The net result of this will either be that the EDS will shut down, leaving a vacuum for the smaller distributions to move into, or the EDS will finally look to the reasons *why* this point in time has been reached, and how it got there...the key factor will be if it can look _past_ the personalities involved, and truly _examine_ the issues rather than casting blame on anyone who happens to disagree with it (see above, your comments and mine on "free speech").

The end result will be that FidoNet will become a close-knit, almost incestuous group that will dwindle down to nothing for fear that 'cooperation' and 'philanthropy' will be considered signs of weakness, or FidoNet will figure out that no _one_ group can control the whole...and that all parts need to cooperate openly and clearly, without resorting to the "Me! Mine!" mentality that leads to the previous.

Or, total order and total anarchy. Without the breaking of the pattern, those are the two futures that FidoNet faces. One person/ group overwhelmingly controls it, micromanaging it to death; the other disregards any and all rules and works "at the moment".

Your reactions and response fit into the classic patterns that most any student of governance and governmental structures can see. Lots of laymen, too.

Your stated objectives may be noble-sounding, but your actions and efforts say far more about your agenda than what you wish others to believe.

To wit:

JS> The only change I've worked for in R10 is to give SysOps a say in
JS> who there C and ECs are.

That you are _making_ an effort and doing it _in_ any Region is a clearer indication of your goals than anything else could possibly display. Your otherwise noble statement of wishing the SysOps the ability to choose their own leadership is belied by the effort you've made to cast aspersions and doubts on the ability of Bob Kohl to do his job, and repeated comments on how an election needs to be held, when there hasn't been any 'popular support' or 'groundswell of discontent' to back it up.

There is dissent...if there were not, then I would be one of the first to complain, if for no other reason than to _provide_ that dissent.

But there is no reason to not allow _response_ to that dissent, regardless of how it is phrased....again, refer back to the comment of "free speech" at the beginning.

JS> You spend the majority of your time attacking personalities
JS> rather than debating the issues. You have a small mind.

Not at all, John. No matter what happens, it will always boil down to personal matters...after all, that's what "free choice" is about.

In many cases, the issues being discussed are beyond, above or irrelevant to what is on the minds of most of the readers here.

In others, the issues are occulted by lesser discussions that _seem_ more important but are irrelevant.

It ends up leaving those who would be involved to either throw up their hands in frustration (the majority response) or to delve into the issues and understand the dynamics involved.

In this case, you apparently don't want a ZEC who will act against _your_ wishes, even if it is for the *betterment* of FidoNet _overall_. You apparently don't even want the _possibility_ of such a ZEC coming to power.

Unlike yourself, however, I see where decisions may be made like that which I won't agree with, either...but I can see beyond myself, and look to the betterment of the group _as_a_whole_.

You and I are only two small _parts_ of a larger mechanism. Our independence of action is solely based on how we wish to interact with the whole, not just _parts_ of the whole.

If you want _total_ individuality, then you shouldn't be in an association of cooperating individuals.

JS> Chris Baker pegged you well.

Perhaps he did. Didn't seem to indicate this when we discussed matters after the weekend just past.

Or are you simply exhibiting poor taste again in bringing up Chris' name at this time?

Either way, John, is there now any point in contacting you about hatching the FidoNews into distribution as Chris said to, if your opinion of me is so low?

Or are you going to take the 'far view' as I do, and do it for the overall benefit of FidoNet itself?

Your call. The issue goes out Sunday at or about 1800 Pacific time.

-zf-