Columns

Dear Editorbeing,

This missive is submitted by Doc Logger (163/110) who was busy trying to sort out whether Hans Mangold really exists, or whether he is just another one of Zorch's pseudos...or maybe it was the other way around.

Roll da flic, Zorch....

Dear Reverend Visage,

This may turn out to be a shorter epic than usual because the squid are mating in the lagoon and I can tell you there there is no finer daiquiri than that which is made from squid eggs, fresh bananas, and some of the local potent alcoholic beverages. This is one of those seasonal rarities where I give in to indolence and forgo the usual educational discussions with the Giant Clams.

This week, the ace Nodelist detectives went rangy when they discovered that even more souls had fled to the Sherwood Forest sanctuary of Net163. First moron up to the plate was good ole' Dallas Hinton who whined " I wish to protest most strongly you allowing yet another private node from out of the Net 163 geographic area. ... As required by policy, I am writing to you to discuss the problem before taking any other steps. I await your reply at your earliest convenience." Alas poor Dallas still doesn't get it. The node in question asked to join our net because he felt that he was being harassed by his NC and could get no joy from Hinton.

Next up, striving to outdo even Hinton for idiocy was Tom Hall (1:342/1) "I am therefore forced to conclude that the following represents a violation of Policy4, and if this violation is not reversed in a timely fashion, then I shall file a formal policy complaint with you over the action of your NC." Hint for Blondes there Tom: Stop abusing your nodes and maybe they'd actually want to stay in your net.

And finally, batting clean-up and as usual, dumber than squid, we heard from Bob "Noted" Satti who said: "I don't recall granting you a geographical exemption for nodes from Edmonton and Rhode Island. NOW he is saying that he will stay in net 163 because you folks 'want him to'. THAT isn't a good enough reason. Please clean up your net segment. You don't have a single geographical exemption from me, and so there shouldn't be any out of area nodes in your segment. It's not as if you weren't given fair warning that I would be watching your segment." Poor Bob doesn't get it either. If he'd quit sitting on his thumbs and install a little accountability among his elflords, there really wouldn't be a need to have nodes joining Net163. Hint for Blonde Bobs: With respect to your demand to "clean up the net segment", piss off and go away. When you get a mandate to do anything other than clerk the nodelist, then perhaps we'll sit in rapt attention at your semiliterate grumblings.

And finally, a rather long quote taken from an ancient Fidonews, written by Tom Jennings.

" FidoNews 6-33 Page 11 14 Aug 1989

How Did This Happen?
Tom Jennings 1:125/111

Let's keep this simple: at no time have the sysops of our FidoNet network given /0's the privilege of determining how our network is run. They are not representatives of anyone but themselves; they are merely administrative nodes to generate nodelist fragments, help new sysops get online and act as repositories of the necessary network files. They are ordinary nodes with more work to do.

A dangerous thing has been attempted, and is undermining the trust that we rely on. "POLICY4" is simply not in effect, it was not voted upon by the members at large. I, and many many others, are simply ignoring the supposed policy "change". How did this happen?

POLICY4 is terrible policy. It takes the right to choose your own net host way! It entrenches /0's as positions of authority. This is insane and does not facilitate our communications. A "smoothly running network" is not our goal; we are here to communicate, that is all. We do that well now. Even voting on POLICY4 is insane, it certainly will not benefit the 6000 or so sysops in the network!

I've had FidoNet users tell me that their host doesn't automatically route them their host-routed mail. This was the most basic purpose of a net host to begin with! The whole concept of host-routing was to make FidoNet more effecient by concentrating calls!

Anyways, If a few-dozen or -hundred /0's can vote, then a few-thousand can represent themselves just as simply. So what if it takes a long time, expediency is not a goal. If we don't have the tool(s), write them or do it by hand. Freeze a nodelist as the "list of registered voters". Have everyone send in a message. Check them off the list. Hold redundant votes, compare results. Give it a month. The net runs fine, there is no need to implement bad policy just to satisfy some bureaucratic urge!"

This is no real Chautauqua in this week's column other than the one that juxtaposes Satti and Hinton's lunacies against the words of Tom Jennings. Being an incurable optimist, I believe that we'll eventually return to the point where Fidonet exists solely as a cooperative effort among sysops and not as the fiefdom of Satti and his fartcatchers in the RCC.

I must go Visage, the tide is turning which means that I'll be battling the Fiddler crabs for the rum if I don't hurry. Sorry about your car. How was I supposed to know that the shocks would give out after I'd loaded it with a mere 20 tonnes of concrete?

Regards,
Doc Logger
Furlang Island,
South Pacific