Subj : 2021 FTSC Standing Member Election - Term Expirations
To   : Nicholas Boel
From : Carol Shenkenberger
Date : Sun Feb 14 2021 15:53:07

  Re: 2021 FTSC Standing Member Election - Term Expirations
  By: Nicholas Boel to Carol Shenkenberger on Sun Feb 14 2021 08:33 am

 > Hello Carol,
 > 
 > On Thu Feb 11 2021 22:03:16, Carol Shenkenberger wrote to Nicholas Boel:
 > 
 >  CS> Well Nick B, With no propsals, our 'work' has been helping people
 >  CS> understand how to MAKE one.
 > 
 > The last couple of proposals that I remember coming through here, ended up
 > going through a rigorous spelling and grammar checking, and once they could 
 > be almost completely reworded any more, they were forgotten and never brough
 > up again.
 > 
 >  CS> Ozz had a lot of problems with no modern guides.  Modern developers
 >  CS> aren't passing new guides to those who can follow suit.  We have
 >  CS> 'pipeline development' now.
 > 
 > Some of these modern developers (Synchronet, Husky, for example) have
 > documented their own software fully. One only has to go to the wiki to see i
 > all. Why would they want to burden themselves documenting their own software
 > and then writing up proposals and or documentation for the FTSC when they're
 > not a member, and probably don't want to be one?
 > 
 >  CS> Modern tech tells us that is a dead end eventually.
 > 
 > I'm not sure what modern tech is telling you this, but "---SBBSecho 2.11-Win
 > is 10-15 years old now. If you don't keep up with modern tech, I'm not sure 
 > you can use it as an excuse for anything.
 > 
 >  CS> Some of us are helping developers with how to get the 'word out' and
 >  CS> then we see what works.
 > 
 >  CS> I'd really hope Stas will help at least with some tech to smartphones
 >  CS> IOS if I got right.  I'd like to see somthing from the Mystic
 >  CS> developer and to see SBBS actually submit suggested implementation
 >  CS> proposals would be excellent.
 > 
 > My point is, why should they have to submit anything? They're doing the work
 > their own softwares, and documenting it quite nicely. There is absolutely no
 > reason to burden them with twice the amount of work. It's the FTSC's job to
 > document for Fidonet, not theirs.
 > 
 >  CS> Technically SBBS is open source but that doesnt mean others know the
 >  CS> basics to find it.
 > 
 > No but any current FTSC members should know how to find it. If they don't, t
 > probably shouldn't be FTSC members.
 > 
 >  CS> So, any better ideas?  With no repository on 'how-to' we leave all
 >  CS> developers hanging and we die.  It doesnt MATTER if it is a proposal
 >  CS> or raised to a standard just now.  It needs to be where they can find
 >  CS> it.
 > 
 > It is where they can find it. They're just not looking.
 > 
 > Regards,
 > Nick
 > 
 > ... "Take my advice, I don't use it anyway."

Nick, we are talking OTHER developers may not know where to find it.

   xxcarol
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS telnet://shenks.synchro.net (1:275/100)

.