Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor, aka Zorch, aka Mark Hernandez, aka Snoopy:

Your editorials contain as much fiction as fact. Last week:

Fact: Adrian Walker has stepped down as the Z1 EchoList Coordinator.

Fiction: Adrian handed over the EchoList or it's source code to me.

Needless to say, your conclusions are equally flawed. Get some facts!

Regards,

John

RESPONSE TO EDITORIAL IN FIDONEWS DATED 9 JUNE 1998
By Ben Hamilton, FidoNet 1:124/7008

This letter is in response to the editorial that was included in the FidoNews issue on June 9, 1998.

The editorial contained several inaccuracies that I would like to talk about. Hopefully, the personal knowledge I have of some of the issues will be of more value than the best guesses of the editor.

> Adrian Walker has stepped down as the Zone 1 EchoList Coordinator,
> with the June 1998 ECHOLIST being his final publication. While
> Adrian is admired for his work, it is odd that he would hand over
> his source code, long stated as both his own and not to be
> disclosed, to John Souvestre...

Not odd at all. In fact, Adrian, in his message which notified us that he was leaving, he praised his working relationship with John.

To clarify, Adrian handed over only the source code to the Backbone Robot, not the Echolist Robot. The editorial simply says "source code," which is misleading.

> In another odd development, the RECC, in the guise of Ben Hamilton,
> has cast a 'no confidence' vote against Bob Kohl, the Zone 1
> EchoMail Coordinator.

To me, and I'm sure to many folks, the word "guise" implies some sort of cover or cloak, and I am wearing none. I am simply a FidoNet sysop, an elected Region Echomail Coordinator, and a member of the RECC who has specific personal knowledge of the recent vote of confidence that was taken.

I speak only for myself. I am not the spokesperson for the RECC. I do not speak on their behalf. They were aware that I was posting the results of the vote in FidoNews, but they neither assisted in nor approved any specific wording in last week's submission.

> the RECC holding secret meetings and refusing to discuss matters
> with the ZEC, and other similarly puerile activities, make it odd
> that Ben and the RECC would not include their 'list of grievances'
> that they claim would prove their position...in a public setting.

Much discussion takes place in the RECC Mailing List. This is a

As for a "list of grievances," the ZEC duties that Bob Kohl wrote sum it up quite nicely, so there was no reason to include one.

Again, to quote the relevant section of Kohl's duties:

>> If the RECC concludes that the ZEC is not active, <<
>> ineffective in his/her job or is just not taking <<
>> care his/her responsibilities; they may take a <<
>> vote of no-confidence. <<

Careful consideration has been going on for about two months.

Also, we never refused to discuss this with the ZC. I think we each

> After all, the RECC posted the vote in public; why _not_ the
> reasons?

Again, I speak only for myself. My submission last week was not done on behalf of the RECC. If I had been speaking on behalf of them, I would have said so and signed the message accordingly.

> Butch effectively disappeared as the OBO after his unilateral
> declaration that all nodes which distribute EchoMail are under
> the direct authority of the OBO and the NAB.
>
> Strange that the RECC was so deathly silent on that issue, acting
> as individuals instead of a group...

There was nothing to say. What Butch said was his own personal opinion. He is certainly entitled to that. And that declaration did not produce even a fraction of the controversy that continually surrounds Bob Kohl.

> It is hoped that the Z1C sees past the rhetoric and lack of
> reasoning involved, and directs the RECC to accept mediation...

We tried mediation for the first month. You may recall Bob Kohl's first act as ZEC: Advice from the RECC on how to remove an NEC from their position. It went downhill like a snowball headed for Hell from there... Bob Kohl did remove that NEC. Then he removed an NC. His REC quit, naming Bob Kohl as the reason. Kohl allows non-approved nodelist flags to fly. He discloses in-transit netmail. He routes netmails only when the mail includes text that he personally approves of, it appears, revoking the routing agreements at will, without proper notification of such. Sysop-level election? He doesn't even believe in holding elections in his own region!

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

I considered not responding. The editor certainly has a way with words. When he turns these around, as I am sure he will, I will be back to offer what I'm sure will be a quite different personal perspective known as "the truth."

Again, I speak only for myself. The views expressed in this letter to the editors do not necessarily reflect the views of any other RECC members.

-Ben Hamilton
FidoNet 1:124/7008
Internet: ben.hamilton@compconn.net