Editorial

Echomail Writer
Doug Myers

With apologies to The Beatles:

Dear Sir or Madam, would you read my string
If you don't jump in it doesn't mean a thing.
It's a dirty ol' whine 'bout a dirty ol' man
And his Klingon Sysop who doesn't understand.
It's based on a bitch by a bygone fighter
And I need an avocation, so I wanna be an Echomail Writer...

Echomail concerns occupy Fidonet these last couple weeks. In last week's article about "The PacMan," Andy Manninger reported on the phenomenon wherein echomail messages stop flowing in some echoes, only to eventually come through in massive quantities... or worse, never to come through to some systems at all.

Since his article, several echo correspondents have noted these echo irregularities; indeed, some have even been traced to their causes and dealt with. Consensus seems to be, however, that it's a potentially continuing problem which needs to be monitored and dealt with for the foreseeable future.

Featured in this week's Fidonews are excerpts from two messages concerning unrelated echomail problems. Ross Cassell reveals a recent breakdown in echomail distribution between the two major backbones and the corrective steps applied, along with notice of the anticipated consequences.

Thom LaCosta explores corrective steps for unwanted echo acquisitions. His proposal for use of the echomail robot to automate echo renewals departs from the stated "hands off" policy of the past, and so he seeks input from sysops worldwide (or at least from Zone 1, where the echolist is most widely used).

Are these incidents the harbinger of doom and destruction for Fido echomail, as some are saying? Or are we dealing with routine problems, amplified somehow by the recent focus of attention?

It is of note that none of these problems are completely new. I recall complaints about the irregular flow of echomail from the days when Fidonet was in its heyday. Back then, people complained and other people acted... kinda like now.

Breakdowns between backbones appears to be a new problem... but that's only because Fidonet was dominated by the NAB through most of its history. If the "backbone problem" is considered a "hub problem," we've certainly seen and dealt with these before.

Nor does Thom LaCosta present us with a previously unexperienced problem - complaints about echo hijacking have filled the ether for as long as I can remember.

These problems, rather than indicating the death of Fido echomail instead testify to it's strength. Though the shrinking nodelist is a reality and it doesn't seem to be going away, the interest in echomail seems stronger than ever. This editor feels that echomail will survive any conceivable deterioration of Fidonet and remain vital so long as there are any number of active nodes.

I once belonged to an "othernet" with only nine active nodes which nonetheless sported echomail bases that drew one back for more. The sysops then were a lot less knowledgeable than those of Fidonet today, not nearly as quick to resolve problems... and yet the sense of community thrived. There's no reason Fido can't pull this off - even if the nodelist of the future continues to shrink.