Articles

• The real stranglehold on Fidonet
• An old friend of mine died last week
• ROLLER_JAM

The real stranglehold on Fidonet

John Souvestre, echomail controller, manipulator
by Gary Gilmore, 1:2410/400

Once again, John Souvestre power-trips, and we all lose for it. I give you this:

Area : Z1_RBC
Date : Sun Jan 10, 17:20
From : George Peace 1:270/101
To : John Souvestre
Subj : Low Traffic

JS>Butch can't seem to find time to post in public, except for the
JS>occasional proclamation. George will wait till it's all over with
JS>and then tell everyone what mistakes they made. Ken and Bob will
JS>follow the crowd in the long run.

As usual, John, you've done your best to play politics in the shadows. As usual, you're afraid to venture out in the open until you've gathered up your fan club and instructed them how to act. As usual, you're using an amassed history of small incidents to develop a certain course of events that will once again return you to control. King John and JohnBone at any cost. Pardon me if I don't bow before you.

Guess what. I'm not going to wait for your little game to play out. I'm damned tired of the games YOU have been playing. I'm damned tired of the acusations YOU have been tossing about. And most important, I'm damned tired of being slandered and defamed by the likes of YOU and your band of yes-men.

I brought democratic reform to FidoNet. I pounded on tables and exposed you and your cronies when you wanted to shove unilateral policies in SysOps' faces without due process. I was the only thing standing in the way of your total control of FidoNet.

Well Johnny, I'm finally done dealing with your petty games and accusations.

Poof. Now there are three ZHubs. Your skapegoat is gone.

-!- FLAME v1.1/b
! Origin: Pennsylvania Online! 717.657.9785 (1:270/101)

One of the best, and most impartial ZHubs around (as well as the father of our current "Fidonet via Internet" method), bullied until he could take no more by "King John", and there we go. John has yet again saved all us poor dumb sysops.

Tired of this sort of "leadership" from John? Tired of his "GMD" making decisions about YOUR echomail? (Like killing mail because JOHN thinks it's too old) Tired of John making moderators jump thru HIS hoops?

Cancel your accounts with him, and use one of the others (George Peace, Ken Wilson, Bob Seaborn, or others that don't link thru Souvestre) and send him a real message.

Get John out of OUR Fidonet business. "Move the mail, and shut up, John". That's the message we need to send, once and for all.

Don't think John -is- into power? How about this threat from John to Bob Seaborn in the Z1_BACKBONE echo:

JS> This is strike three for you on this matter Bob. Either fix it
JS> or forget about remaining a NAB hub of any sort.

Now maybe I'm wrong, but since when does John himself make decisions about who's a NAB Hub or not? According to John himself, anyone that moves mail is a "NAB Hub", so what's he threatening here? Is he threatening to keep Bob from moving any mail? Or is he overstepping his bounds (yet again) and threatening to remove Bob as a ZHub. (Since it requires a majority of the OBO and ZHubs to make such a move, where does John get off making this sort of threat?)

John's gotten into trouble once already for making arbitrary threats like this. He was completely against Bob Seaborn as a NAB Hub in the first place, and at the first opportunity, removed Bob from the Hub listing in the BACKSTAT.NA file. Result? Butch Walker pulled John's right to release the BACKSTAT,NA, and took back the production of the file. (Which is why you now see the "Authorized version" tag on them now.)

Need more proof of John's power tripping? How about this quote from the FILE_MOVERS echo (where the FDN heads and Filebone hubs congregate):

JS> There is a balance there. Giving FDN heads any say at all in
JS> running the Filebone upsets that balance, in my opinion.

..and then we have this:

JS> I agree fully! Also, the Filebone Hubs should have more say than
JS> the FDN heads, in my opinion. :-)

Hmm.. the Filebone would be a pretty useless thing without the FDN's, yet John doesn't want the FDN coordinators to have any say in how the Filebone operates? He wants to shut out the very people that make the Filebone possible.

Why would that be? ...perhaps because John sees himself as "Filebone Hub #1"? You draw the conclusions, but it's painfully obvious that John covets all the power he can wield. John gets his power from writing rules, or whipping out "FAQ's" (and treating them like stone tablets from the mountain), or whipping up a frenzy amongst his supporters. (Many of which are downlinks, and I'd venture that they're afraid to say "Boo" to John anyway.)

John uses his GMD program to force YOUR echomail to fit the "specs" that he deems proper. (Although some of his "specs" are not adopted Fidonet specs, mind you.) How about the fact that John himself decides how old is "too old" where echomail is concerned, and stops it in transit. Who gave him this power? Where is there any Fidonet policy that says he has such a right? Doesn't matter... John decided, and you've let him.

It's high time that this sort of abuse of OUR echomail be stopped, once and for all.

John (at least once) has pulled an echo from distribution because he didn't like it. Is that what we need? (Though he did hide behind a smokescreen of excuses for why he did it, and what his authority was to do it. All weak excuses indeed.)

John will get his power, or at least influence by any means, underhanded, by "rules" or "FAQ's" (which he usually writes), from behind the scenes, or in whatever manner he finds handy at the time.

We will only be free from this oppressive influence when John is removed from the NAB, and his "power" over OUR echomail is diminished by such an action. I urge you to write to these people and request that John Souvestre be removed immediately as NAB ZHub:

Overseer of Backbone Operations:

Butch Walker 1:157/2 bwalker@en.com

Zone Hubs:

Ken Wilson 1:12/12 kwilson@ccai.com
Bob Seaborn 1:140/1 bob@nwstar.com

Many cry and wail about putting Fidonet control back into the hands of the "grunt sysop", but John Souvestre has no such desire. Oh, he might say he does, but don't be fooled... anything that would remove his death-grip on the control of OUR echomail, or his influence on file distributions is completely out of the question for him. He'll be totally against it, and will work against it either in public or behind the scenes (where he's most comfortable) to stop it. You can turn that around. Spend 5 minutes writing to one (or better yet) all of the above people with a simple statement;

"I wish to see John Souvestre removed as a NAB Zhub"

Only then can we really begin to put the "power" and "control" of OUR echomail (and file distributions) back into OUR hands. It's up to you.

I'll sit back now, and await the diatribe by John (or his followers) that's sure to follow. He'll name call, slander, and try to generally discredit me or anyone that agrees with these views. Don't be swayed by his "turn the tables" or "switch the topic" tactics. He's a master at it, and it's his forte. That's how he's kept his power so long. By bullying, blustering, and doing what some call his "Spin master" technique. Expect it, but don't be fooled by it. If I'm lying, then so must George Peace. Allow me redirect you to his words above:

"I pounded on tables and exposed you and your cronies when you wanted to shove unilateral policies in SysOps' faces without due process. I was the only thing standing in the way of your total control of FidoNet."

George has probably worked closer with John Souvestre than anyone, and is privy to far more "inside" information than anyone. His statement would seem to bear out what I've mentioned here, wouldn't it? (Perhaps we should be worried more about what we don't know than what is obvious from John's actions, no?)

Given the choice of the two, I think anyone would trust George's word over John's. (Unless, of course, you're part of the "John can do no wrong" party.)

Remove John, and remove the self-proclaimed king from the throne he has stolen from us when we weren't watching. Again, I urge you to write & send your netmail (or email) today, and send it direct, just to avoid any potential "problems".

An old friend of mine died last week.

OPUS 1.03 Makes Last Event Exit
Storrs, CT, USA <FidoNews>

Sometime in the wee hours of January 4, 1999, OPUS v1.03 quietly curled up its toes and died peacefully in its sleep. It was 11 years old. The quickness of the end came as a surprise to its long-time friend and last remaining sysop, Lee Ayrton. "It was well known that OPUS 1.03 had difficulty with leap years," said Mr. Ayrton in a prepared statement, "And we knew that OPUS wouldn't make it past The Great Rollover, but we didn't expect v1.03c to go so soon."

Forgotten by most of its former sysops and users, OPUS 1.03 lived on at 1:320/455 on a small hard disk with its companions, Binkley and QMail. "OPUS was its usual self the day before, handling a caller just fine," said Mr. Ayrton, "And now it is gone. It was a fine program, one that I've known for over a decade, and I shall miss it." OPUS 1.79a has now taken over the BBS duties.

While no autopsy was performed, it was assumed that the same internal date calculation difficulties that had caused problems in 1990 were responsible for its inability to load this year. OPUS 1.03 had twice undergone post-release patching. Efforts to resuscitate the aging BBS by reinstalling version b in place of version c were fruitless and v1.03 made its last Event Exit at 10am on January 4th.

OPUS v1.03 remained robust, caller-friendly and flexable to the end. In spite of its reputation for repeatedly biting new sysops during initial set-up, OPUS 1.03 was once the choice of thousands of FidoNet sysops and was well known for its wry sense of humor -- and its habit of greeting other OPUS BBSi with the exchange "YOOHOO/2U2". Once supported by scores of developers, it learned to run external doors, allowing on-line games and other tricks that it hadn't been designed to do.

OPUS 1.03 is survived by three later releases. It was predeceased by three earlier releases and by v2.xx. No services are planned.

Lee Ayrton (1:320/455)
dayrton@wesleyan.edu

ROLLER_JAM!
By: Bobby Queen, 1:3667/5, wizards@connectu.net

For those of you considering whether or not to contact your REC to request the new echo ROLLER_JAM I just wanted to post the scores for this weeks game. This beginning week featured the New York Enforcers vs the Florida Sun Dogs. The Enforcers won by a score of 25 to 24. Next week the Florida Sun Dogs will be against the California Quakes. If you missed this weeks game then you missed a good one. One of the referees got his arm broken while trying to break up a brawl. I told you ROLLER_JAM was going to be more intense than Roller Derby was. If you are interested in seeing more about ROLLER_JAM on the WWW their address is http://www.rollerjam.com Or at least thats what I think it was. :) I was too busy watching the action.

They also have a fan club where you can get a newsletter and to find out about that just call 1-877-ROLLERJAM. This is a toll free number. You can also get tickets through this number if you are going to be in the Orlando area and want to watch it live at Universal Studios. Hawk from American Gladiators is one of the announcers. So send in those requests today and lets get this echo backboned and get started talkin about the matches.

And of course for the men those girls fighting are well worth the 2 hour show. :) See you in ROLLER_JAM which will be available soon at a HUB near you!