Subj : Re: Fidonet To : Janis Kracht From : Robert Couture Date : Thu Oct 25 2001 04:07 pm Hello Janis! 25 Oct 01 18:19, you wrote to Darrell Salter: JK|> Hello Darrell, >> Is it your policy to force all new sysops to be grouped into their >> geographic regions? If so, please explain why this makes sense to >> you, how it will benefi Fidonet, and how you intend to enforce this >> policy. JK|> We have a working system. If you don't like it, that's too bad. JK|> When an NC is contacted by someone not in their net, or region, it is JK|> common courtesy to contact the NC or RC of the region where the node JK|> should be listed, or point the applicant in that direction. It may be JK|> that the net or region cannot accomodate something that the applicant JK|> requires, and in this case the node may be placed elsewhere. There JK|> have been other exceptions made for non-regional placement, such as JK|> the trouble Ruth went through. JK|> If I were you however, I would not push this issue. Fidonet policy JK|> 4.07 is still in effect in Fidonet. Our IC follows it. He certainly JK|> could push the buttons to close this discussion. Threats are so becoming, Janis. It really helps solve issues. It really helps to promote harmony and fair play. Why not take P4 and use it to destroy FidoNet with your petty bickering over who's got a bigger one. And I don't mean just you. It is the whole gang of P4 worshipers. The document is a antiquated old beast that you and others keep alive with your worship. Why not come to the realization that when it comes to ION's geographical limitations don't apply. It doesn't matter what counter arguments come to mind. This is the internet age. The age where people don't seem to care about old fashioned ideas such as Long Distance costs because there are no long distance cost. People don't "get together" for coffee anymore because BBS nodes are so few and far between. There is a good chance that the nearest fellow sysop is a couple hundred miles away ... And let's face it, today's society is of the nature that if I have to wait for something, I can look elsewhere for it. I personally don't care where a prospective node gets listed as long as they get listed. As long as someone is doing something to promote FidoNet, where exactly is the harm? (Egos don't count) In this particular case, instead of bickering over it, preening and prancing around it should have been left as simply offers to list the node. Sysops and node numbers are not chattel to be fought over like spoiled children which is what the lot of you are doing. This is the way I see it. If a node drops me a NetMail asking for a node number, and they are ION, I am going to list them. I am not going to play games and pass the node off to someone else. Period. If there is a problem with that, file a Policy Complaint. I think it stupid and childish to do so. On the other side of the coin, I fully expect that if a node comes to Ross, Andrea, yourself or anyone else and asks to be listed, that Ross, Andrea, yourself or anyone else capable and in a position to do so list the node regardless of where they are from. I fully see no reason not to list the node if it is ION. If the node wants to be geogrphically listed, then by all means, they can be geographically listed. But I am sick of this infantile bickering over ION's. The lot of you people need to wake up and smell the changes in the air. Let a node get listed wherever they find the assistance to get listed. There is no harm to FidoNet in that. (Ego's have nothing to do with FidoNet, BTW -- at least not in a technical sense.) DISCLAIMER: Opinions expressed here are soley those of the author. They in no way reflect the opinion or beliefs of Region 12, Net 229 it's RC, NC, NEC, Hubs or Nodes nor should the be contrued as such. Robert --- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-1022 * Origin: RuneKeep - telnet://runekeep.darktech.org (1:229/2000) .