Subj : en vßlsmakande liten bit To : Michiel van der Vlist From : Rob Swindell Date : Sun Mar 26 2023 08:06 pm Re: en vßlsmakande liten bit By: Michiel van der Vlist to Kurt Weiske on Sat Mar 25 2023 07:40 pm > Hello Kurt, > > On Saturday March 25 2023 09:29, you wrote to me: > > KW> I'm surprised Fidonet didn't specify UTC (or some USA time zone) for > KW> all of Fidonet, given the ZMH requirement back before continuous mail > KW> was possible. > > I will go further than that: the founding fathers made a serious mistake by > using local time instead of UTC - or GMT as it was called back then. There > has always been a large overlap between the HAM community and the Fidonet > community. When I became a HAM in the early sixties of the previous century > HAMs already used GMT when logging contacts and exchanging QSL cards. It > makes sense when using a medium that does not stop at national borders and > time zones. > > While it may not have been clear that Fidonet would quickly become a global > thing, it would have been clear that it was never limited to one time zone. > And while Tom Jennings was not a HAM (AFAIK) my intelligent guess is that by > the time Fidonet had reached 50 nodes, about half of the sysops were HAMs > and it would not have been too late to make the change from local time to > GMT. Each message can specify the date/time and zone which can be converted to/from UTC if desired by the receiving system. If the sender prefers, they can just use UTC (which I agree, should have been the assumed-default when no timezone header was included). Like NNTP articles, it's really up to the sender as to how they want to represent the date/time of the message they're sending, but it should always be easily converted or compared with a local timezone of a reader. -- digital man (rob) Rush quote #71: He's not concerned with yesterday, he knows constant change is here today Norco, CA WX: 54.9øF, 44.0% humidity, 0 mph ESE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs .