Subj : Echo Rules To : Dan Clough From : Lee Lofaso Date : Fri Sep 20 2024 05:16 pm Hello Dan, [..] WD>> And know you desire me to deal with an echomail-issue based on my WD>> P4-status? Really? DC> Let's look at this from a different angle. We all know P4 has no status as any kind of official document in Fidonet. After all, not a single soul (living or dead) has ever signed it. Not that anybody cares. DC> Is it really an echomail-issue? Why should it be? By your own admission, echomail is just another flavor of netmail. Whatever that means. DC> Or is it a Sysop/NC/RC issue where a Sysop is allowing access to an area DC> designated for Sysops only, to a non-Sysop? Oh, come now. We are all sysops, of one kind or another. Some are more permanent rather than probationary, but all are sysops. DC> Section 9.9 of P4 states that "echomail is simply a different flavor of DC> netmail, and is therefore covered by Policy." A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. But that does not make echomail (or netmail) any kind of rose. DC> So maybe this is a case of a Sysop having his system mis-configured DC> *knowingly*, and allowing behavior that annoys other FidoNet Sysops. See DC> P4 section 1.2.1.1 and section 2.1.3. There are two parts to that silly little "rule" in P4 - * Thou shalt not be too easily annoyed. Oops. I guess you forgot about that part. DC> Also please re-read section 1.3.5, with particular attention to the word DC> "persists". Oh, relax. I find your rants quite amusing. Please continue ... [..] DC> The real question here is whether what I'm talking about is an echomail DC> issue, or a policy/procedural issue. A Sysop is allowing unauthorized DC> access to a Sysop-only area. Participants own the echo. As a participant of this echo, you have the same rights and privileges as all other participants. That is how things work, at least in this part of the Fidoverse. WD>> Also I'm a firm believer in freedom of speech, that doesn't mean WD>> insulting someone is OK. Bjorn is not a wanker, and neither are you. So WD>> pls cut the vocabulary. DC> I give as good as I get. We are all waiting, with bated breath, for you to start showing it. WD>> The person "Lee Lofaso", whether real or fake, does not bother me, does WD>> not impress me, does not interest me, does not annoy me ... because I WD>> figured out in order to be annoyed, you need to want to be annoyed. WD>> There are a lot more important things to deal with than a self-declared WD>> ghost spreading AI-khrap. DC> Not everyone is annoyed by the same things. And yet there are some who are always bothered by the same things. WD>> Really, you need to sit down and carefully consider what freedom of WD>> speech really is, because if someone cannot go beyond your self-imposed WD>> borders, then you are no advocate of it. WD>> There's no reason to deal with Bjorn, I'm certain he is a nice human WD>> being trying to deal with the kind of miseries of life that some here WD>> cannot even begin to grasp. DC> Maybe he is a nice human in Real Life. In FidoNet he is not. It all depends on which version of me you are talking about. Sometimes I even wonder myself which version of myself I might be. There used to be a site online that I could find out which version of me existed at any given time (howmanyofme.com) but that site is no longer up and running. So now I have no way of knowing which version of me is real and which version is not. WD>> I hope in a few weeks or months I'll be able to hop to Sweden, have a WD>> few drinks with Bjorn and publish a long overdue photo of him and I WD>> sharing a beer. Just like I went to eat pizza with Janis. breakfasted WD>> with Pablo Kleinman, dined with Ron Dwight, shared beers with Basilis WD>> Tsapas (I think), went to see Bob Bashe who all figured at some time I WD>> was an incompetent demon ... DC> I hope you get a chance to do that, too. I'd probably get along with DC> him too, over a beer and non-Fido conversation. Not really relevant to DC> the discussion though. Freedom of speech is all-inclusive, not pick and choose. WD>> Freedom of speech, Dan, and friendships. There are people who can't WD>> mutually stand each other's guts, but I like 'm all. Some Russian WD>> sysops I'd love to meet (and teach m how to drink beer), also go to WD>> Ukraine, go to the Crimea and drink some of their wines (and the WD>> destilates, so I'm told)... DC> Freedom of speech is also pretty much not relevant here. Then move to Russia, and sign up for Putin's brigade. I hear Steven Seagal is training new recruits ... DC> That has to do with the powers of a Government over a country's citizens. Fidonet sysops are not a government, and never will be. Steven Seagal is not a Fidonet sysop, although I could be mistaken. But he is a friend of Vladimir Putin. DC> Not really what we're talking about. Yes, it is. WD>> Some advice: why not try to learn from Bjorn, he has stuff to give and WD>> is very generous. I'm sure you are too... DC> I'm always willing to learn. The problem in this case is that the DC> person in question cannot put aside his biases and talk in a civil DC> manner, without politics, innuendo and "witty" barbs. Everything we do in life is political. It is a part of who and what we are. A social and political creature. For Life, Lee -- GOP thinks banning guns won't elminate guns. GOP thinks banning abortion will elininate abortions. --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb * Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2) .