Editorial

It's interesting to see how questions asked are not answered.

In my own case, there are many questions asked of me for which I sometimes have no answer for...and the refusal to respond is taken as 'hiding something'.

What's forgotten is that asking questions is the means by which one can gain knowledge. By the same token, what is often forgotten is that getting an answer is sometimes a courtesy, as much as it is sometimes a requirement.

Too often, especially in FidoNet, the mere act of asking questions is tantamount to making an accusation...perhaps, it seems, because the person being asked does often not want those same questions asked of them.

Too true, I too have been accused of these same things...but also true is that I have had 'real world' experience as both a print and broadcast journalist.

Sometimes, failing to answer a question is simply a matter of not wishing to interfere in the process of gathering information, much as the local police do not always answer questions about ongoing investigations as to motive or even the names of the victims.

Sometimes, however, failing to answer a question is a means of hiding from the truth of the matter...especially in political situations.

One only has to look at the media in Zone 1 for the ongoing Clinton debacle as one example; no doubt, you've seen your own local version at some point in time.

Too often, the same questions are used to enable an effort to create and manipulate a 'lynch mob' mentality...and allow the 'court of public opinion' to rule by emotion and innuendo, rather than logic and reason.

To date, I have now had three RECs advise me that Ben Hamilton was 'duly appointed' to post the results of the RECC vote...

But no one has yet answered the question of whether or not the ZEC was advised of the charges, let alone given the chance to respond to them.

How interesting that this particular question has not only been not answered, but that any explanation of the charges or the particulars, as well as the causes, examples and reasons, have been declared as being "secret", and not for you or I to know.

How interesting that the RECC would use the FidoNews to make an 'official announcement'...then refuse to give the basis for that vote being taken, let alone be announced.

How pathetic that the FidoNews is sought for use to encourage a 'star chamber' courtroom, where secret trials are conducted without the knowledge of the accused, as a means to give a sort of "validation" of the effort.

How much worse it is that the first person elected by a SysOp-level election in Zone 1 is to be removed by a 'secret vote' with 'secret charges' of 'secret crimes' that those who elected the ZEC cannot be told what these 'secrets' entail...let alone tell the ZEC who is the 'secret criminal' in their 'secret trial'.

To that end, I suppose we must thank Ben Hamilton...without his post, at the direction of the RECC, would we have even known that such a trial was underway?

Or should we be thankful for the small favors that our "elected" officials deign to grant us mere peasants in their "fight" for an 'open and informed' FidoNet?

Does anyone else notice the oddity of logic in the actions of the RECC? Especially since several of the RECC themselves have made it a point to identify themselves as 'elected' officials within FidoNet?

But then, these are questions...and we've seen what these 'mean' in terms of FidoNet...

And, in my own situation? The answers are forthcoming.

In other news...

Bob Kohl was retained as Region 10 Coordinator, by an almost 2:1 margin vote. Not that this is expected to stop what sniping and accusations that have already occurred, nor the comments about 'wearing multiple hats in violation of Policy'.

[An interesting note: If 'wearing multiple hats' is a violation of Policy, then why is the ZC also an IC, as a matter of course? Hmm? Doesn't the ZC have as much to do administratively as the IC?]

And, Thom LaCosta is currently testing a new EchoList software that he is modifying to use in FidoNet Zone 1. Moderators are suggested to link in and establish a new set of passwords, separate from any already in place.

However, there are some concerns over the issue of the Zone 2 ELIST containing different moderators than the same echoes listed in the Zone 1 ELIST...and that the apparent NAB spokesman is pushing to have the Z2ELIST be adopted instead as 'official' in Zone 1.

I can't think of a neater way to eliminate opposition than to take their echoes from them, can you?

Consider this yet another reason why the ELIST should be independent of the various distribution services is to eliminate the 'political usefulness' of the echoes as leverage.

-zf-

### 30 ###