Editorial

WHAT'S NOT HAPPENING
There isn't always something happening on Fidonet, but there's always something which isn't happening. This column is dedicated to the lost causes which make Fido what it isn't today. Published semi-occasionally...

Policy Ratification
Doug Myers

Regular readers of the FN_SYSOP echo can attest to the fact that the biggest non-event shaping up in Fidonet this year is any type of action relating to Policy.

In one thread, David Moufarrege's proposed Policy revision was cited as current policy, though the author was quickly informed that the "new" policy was, indeed, a proposal. However, in that discussion, Ward Dossche, the Zone 2 Coordinator, revealed that he hadn't previously seen the proposal nor had he seen the debate in the Zone 1 echoes. Since any policy change would require a majority vote of ALL Regional Coordinators... and since the issue doesn't even seem to be rambling about outside Zone 1... and since the discussion in Zone 1 on that particular version has already died... don't expect a Policy revision any time soon.

In another thread, the question of whether the International Coordinator must be a sitting Zone Coordinator is argued. One section of Policy states that the International Coordinator is the "First among equals" among the Zone Coordinators, while another section of Policy states that Coordinators at any level should minimize the number of hats worn. So we seem to have one implication that the IC should be a sitting ZC, but another implication that the IC should resign as ZC upon his selection. Given that the call for a new IC earlier this year couldn't even draw a response from all the ZC's (let alone the IC), don't expect either a change of IC's soon, nor a resolution of P4's apparent conflict on the question of whether an IC must be a sitting ZC.

And yet another thread rages, centered on Darrell Salter's longstanding assertion that Policy 4 is not legitimate because it was never ratified by the Sysops of Fidonet. The solution to this would be obvious, it might seem: put the question to the Sysops and see what they say. However, two complications arise...

1. Darrell isn't interested in putting the question forward since he's chosen to simply ignore policy.
2. Those who disagree with him aren't interested in putting the question forward since Policy 4 itself says it isn't necessary... ratification is clearly placed in the hands of the Regional Coordinators.

If Policy is defined as that document that proclaims itself to be Policy (P4), then don't expect any action soon.

If, however, Policy is defined as that which is actually practiced rather than that which is documented... then the policy seems to be one of no particular action. Same result :)