• Fidonet => one unizone

    From August Abolins@2:221/360 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 03:41:35
    nathanael culver : August Abolins wrote:

    The technology, of course, requires them. But there's no technological
    reason why all of Fidonet today couldn't be tossed into a single zone and zones, as you mentioned, be repurposed to distinguish othernets.

    In some sense, in fact, even within Fidonet zones aren't precisely tied to geography any more. I'm in Taiwan, but being fed from Australia. The technology doesn't care.

    Precisely. I am totally onboard in that understanding.

    Just one zone number for Fidonet (modeled after the othernet style, and to recognize Tom Jennings' regrets) could help unify this apparently fractured network. Instead of separate 1,2,4,5,6,7 zones, why not just make it 1234 (to
    kinda represent the last existing zones) or add up the digits 1 thru 7 (in recognition of the original 7) and make it 28. OR.. just place everyone in 1, to represent the 1st in Fidonet existence.

    There is no reason that a bbs couldn't one day operate from an orbiting satellite. What zone does that non-geographically based bbs belong to? Would
    there be some sort of bidding war to divide the fidonet community even further?

    Fidonet needs to visibly look unified. One zone number to identify that.


    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)

    You are not "dumped". I see you as the humongous rogue amongous. ;) You could
    be the first sign of positive change. Making history!

    Cheers,
    ../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to August Abolins on Friday, March 15, 2019 10:12:47
    Fidonet needs to visibly look unified. One zone number to identify that.

    One Zone Number to rule them all? :-)

    I'd suggest Zone 1 for Fidonet in recognition of its historical importance.
    You could decomission zones 2-7 if you'd like so as to avoid future confusion.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to August Abolins on Friday, March 15, 2019 10:14:39
    You could be ... Making history!

    My kids tell me that all the time. Only they say it like, "Daddy, you belong
    in an antique store."

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 05:05:25
    nathanael culver : August Abolins wrote:
    You could be ... Making history!

    My kids tell me that all the time. Only they say it like, "Daddy, you
    belong in an antique store."

    Ah.. But do they banish/relegate you there? ..or is it an admiration?

    LOL

    I see young kids fascinated by old typewriters as decor in my shop. They are amazed that "when you press this, this arm rises, the other thingy lifts the ribbon, strikes the paper, all settles back in place and the device advances for the next strike".

    There is a thrift shoppe next door to me. I heard one kid refer to it as the "junk store", ..but it was a call to go there. They loved it.

    Vinyl records have regained popularity everywhere.

    Many retro things are embraced and incorporated into the latest lifestyles.

    Similarily, BBSing has a lingering interest, not necessarily a diminishing one.
    Sites like https://telenetbbsguide.com and http://bbs.guide are wonderful directories to browse, explore and discover.

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to nathanael culver on Thursday, March 14, 2019 22:18:00
    nathanael culver wrote to August Abolins <=-

    Fidonet needs to visibly look unified. One zone number to identify that.

    One Zone Number to rule them all? :-)

    I'd suggest Zone 1 for Fidonet in recognition of its historical importance. You could decomission zones 2-7 if you'd like so as
    to avoid future confusion.

    There are currently only zones 1-4 in FidoNet.



    ... I.R.S.: We've got what it takes to take what you've got!
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 05:42:22
    nathanael culver : August Abolins wrote:

    One Zone Number to rule them all? :-)

    ...as in "Nineteen of these rings were made by the Elven-smiths of Eregion, led
    by Celebrimbor. These were grouped into three rings for the Elves, seven rings
    for the Dwarves, and nine rings for men. One additional ring, the *One Ring*, was forged by Sauron himself at Mount Doom." ???

    For some forgotten reason I always thought there were just three rings (maybe because the books I read were 3 separate volumes) ..but I digress.

    Fidonet needs to abandon the idea of "rule"ing anything, but SERVING the bbs community.


    I'd suggest Zone 1 for Fidonet in recognition of its historical importance. You could decomission zones 2-7 if you'd like so as to avoid future confusion.

    I concur. An easy solution. Progress.

    The 21st century Fidonet (ie. nodelist) could be phased in and the old one no longer to be updated.

    With the current diminished nodelist, the workload to merge the existing Zones 2 3 and 4 entries with assigned new Zone 1 lines is pretty low.

    With today's resources, the new node assignments could be tracked and managed with a shared project manager or a shared spreadsheet that current sysops could
    VIEW, and verify the entries for correctness and observe the merge progress.

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 14:54:00
    On 03-15-19 10:12, nathanael culver wrote to August Abolins <=-

    Fidonet needs to visibly look unified. One zone number to identify that.

    One Zone Number to rule them all? :-)

    I'd suggest Zone 1 for Fidonet in recognition of its historical importance. You could decomission zones 2-7 if you'd like so as to
    avoid future confusion.

    As the first FTN ever, I'd agree with Zone 1 for all of Fidonet. That's historically significant. I'm in Z3, and have no objections to Z1 being "all of Fidonet", if that sort of restructure was done.


    ... It ain't over, but the fat lady is clearing her throat.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to August Abolins on Friday, March 15, 2019 13:18:38
    I see young kids fascinated by old typewriters as decor in my shop. They

    My daughter is fascinated by both manual typewriters and rotary dial phones
    (I actually had to show her how to use them). On our trip back to the US last month I dragged her kicking and screaming to an antique store, but she left
    an hour later with a phone-full of pictures of typewriters and rotary phones.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to Dan Clough on Friday, March 15, 2019 13:20:42
    There are currently only zones 1-4 in FidoNet.

    I realize that. But 5-7 still traditionally "belong" to FidoNet even if
    they're no longer in use, which is why I suggested decommissioning them as well.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to August Abolins on Friday, March 15, 2019 13:41:49
    Fidonet needs to abandon the idea of "rule"ing anything, but SERVING the

    Well, I was really only thinking of one zone to rule all of Fidonet. Being
    from Taiwan, the idea of Fidonet ruling the whole show sounds a lot like the ROC still planning to take back the mainland.

    current sysops could VIEW, and verify the entries for correctness and

    Posted on, say, Google docs for collaborative editing.

    TBH, I don't want to see Fidonet change too much. I do see some othernet groups gated to the Internet, but I'd resist that. First, Fidonet would get swallowed up pretty quick, as it doesn't bring anything unique to the Internet. Second, swelling it too much with total strangers would reduce it to an endless wasteland of verbal brawls a la Youtube or, more to the point, Disqus. Just look at what the Internet reduced USENET to.

    No, I think we most certainly need to keep Fidonet off the Internet.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 13:58:26
    No, I think we most certainly need to keep Fidonet off the Internet.

    Just for clarification, by "Internet" here of course I mean "the Web".

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to All on Friday, March 15, 2019 03:58:00
    On 15 Mar 19 05:42:22, August Abolins said the following to Nathanael Culver:

    The 21st century Fidonet (ie. nodelist) could be phased in and the old one longer to be updated.

    With the current diminished nodelist, the workload to merge the existing Zo 2 3 and 4 entries with assigned new Zone 1 lines is pretty low.

    Please, everyone... I'm begging you for all things holy, lets NOT get
    into this discussion. At best, this is laughable amusing fodder for our Zone 2 friends. At worst, its a cigarette tossed in the woods that ignites the fire.

    There are certain things in Fidonet that cannot and will not change because of too much bad blood and history. A lot of damage has been caused by "zone wars" and while technically one zone could work, politically its impossible.

    Lets just focus on websites, newcomers and better software.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to August Abolins on Friday, March 15, 2019 18:49:00
    On 03-15-19 05:42, August Abolins wrote to nathanael culver <=-

    With today's resources, the new node assignments could be tracked and managed with a shared project manager or a shared spreadsheet that
    current sysops could VIEW, and verify the entries for correctness and observe the merge progress.

    Or better still, once admitted to Fidonet, sysops can be given access to edit their own nodelist entry online, and it can be presented in a human friendly format. The nodelist can then be collated weekly from sysop provided data and distributed via file echo as it is today. Today's web based technology can make nodelist management easier. And for those sysops who for some reason don't have access to edit their node entry online (e.g. dialup nodes in remote areas), existing tools like MakeNL could still be used to forward nodelist fragments to the the system.


    ... No, I was trying to be funny. I guess I failed at it.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 18:49:00
    On 03-15-19 13:18, nathanael culver wrote to August Abolins <=-

    I see young kids fascinated by old typewriters as decor in my shop. They

    My daughter is fascinated by both manual typewriters and rotary dial phones (I actually had to show her how to use them). On our trip back
    to the US last month I dragged her kicking and screaming to an antique store, but she left an hour later with a phone-full of pictures of typewriters and rotary phones.

    That's cool! :)


    ... It's best to be judged by twelve than carried by six.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 18:50:00
    On 03-15-19 13:20, nathanael culver wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    There are currently only zones 1-4 in FidoNet.

    I realize that. But 5-7 still traditionally "belong" to FidoNet even if they're no longer in use, which is why I suggested decommissioning them
    as well.


    What was Zone 7? I remember 1-6 from the old days.


    ... My computer never locks u
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 18:54:00
    On 03-15-19 13:41, nathanael culver wrote to August Abolins <=-

    TBH, I don't want to see Fidonet change too much. I do see some
    othernet groups gated to the Internet, but I'd resist that. First,
    Fidonet would get swallowed up pretty quick, as it doesn't bring

    Judicious use of gated mailing lists are apporpriate for some groups - I do that for some of my VKradio echos. Best example is the IRLP reflector 9550 mailing list, which is gated from a VKRadio echo. The userbase on the Internet is small and niche, which makes the mailing list viable.

    anything unique to the Internet. Second, swelling it too much with
    total strangers would reduce it to an endless wasteland of verbal
    brawls a la Youtube or, more to the point, Disqus. Just look at what
    the Internet reduced USENET to.

    Agree. I see a strong case for keeping Fidonet as an independent network, like it is today, but some modernisation is a good thing.

    No, I think we most certainly need to keep Fidonet off the Internet.

    For the most part, I agree.


    ... I am Homer of Borg! Prepare to be ... Oooooo! Donuts!
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 18:55:00
    On 03-15-19 13:58, nathanael culver wrote to nathanael culver <=-

    No, I think we most certainly need to keep Fidonet off the Internet.

    Just for clarification, by "Internet" here of course I mean "the Web".

    OK, but one could argue similarly against gating Fidonet to fidonet.* or alt.bbs.fidonet.* newsgroups too. :)


    ... A system event? Wow! Can I get tickets?
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to Tony Langdon on Friday, March 15, 2019 16:12:01
    What was Zone 7?

    I could be mistaken. Was it only 1-6?

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to August Abolins on Friday, March 15, 2019 09:31:27
    There is no reason that a bbs couldn't one day operate from an orbiting satellite.

    There has already been a point that was operated from orbit and a node from Antarctica.

    Fidonet needs to visibly look unified. One zone number to identify that.

    Nice, not new, but you have no idea what you would be breaking, probably it would be the definitive end of Fidonet as we know it today with just a mere pockets surviving.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 20:40:00
    On 03-15-19 16:12, nathanael culver wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    What was Zone 7?

    I could be mistaken. Was it only 1-6?

    As far as I know it was.


    ... I'm pretty sure that none of us are here.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Paul Quinn@3:640/1384 to Tony Langdon on Friday, March 15, 2019 20:52:33
    Hi! Tony,

    On 15 Mar 19 20:40, you wrote to nathanael culver:

    What was Zone 7?

    I could be mistaken. Was it only 1-6?

    As far as I know it was.

    Zone 7 is only spoken of in hushed tones, and in darkened spaces. If I could get my old node containing the required info opened in a Virtualbox (vBox), I would whisper little nothings to you about it in netmail. But I can't as there
    is a monumental storm passing hereabouts that's been travelling nearby for the
    last two hours, and my other PC running the new 64-bit vBox doesn't have a working UPS.

    Remind me...

    Cheers,
    Paul.

    ... My toys! My toys! I can't do this job without my toys!
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130515
    * Origin: Quinn's Rock - Live from Paul's Xubuntu desktop! (3:640/1384)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to August Abolins on Friday, March 15, 2019 06:41:01
    Re: Fidonet => one unizone
    By: August Abolins to nathanael culver on Fri Mar 15 2019 03:41 am

    Just one zone number for Fidonet (modeled after the othernet style, and to recognize Tom Jennings' regrets) could help unify this apparently fractured network. Instead of separate 1,2,4,5,6,7 zones, why not just make it 1234 (to kinda represent the last existing zones) or add up the digits 1 thru 7 (in recognition of the original 7) and make it 28. OR.. just place everyone in 1, to represent the 1st in Fidonet existence.


    The last time this was discussed, someone in Zone 2 complained that they had more nodes and that everyone would need to move to it, instead of them moving to Zone 1. And the fun continues...

    1234 is nice, and has the benefit of pissing everyone off equally as we'd all need to renumber our configs. Makes me wonder how many nodes would fall off in a renumbering because they were running on autopilot or dead listings?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to August Abolins on Friday, March 15, 2019 07:08:44
    Re: Fidonet => one unizone
    By: August Abolins to nathanael culver on Fri Mar 15 2019 05:42 am

    With the current diminished nodelist, the workload to merge the existing Zones 2 3 and 4 entries with assigned new Zone 1 lines is pretty low.

    I've mentioned it before - I think you'd get rid of a lot of BBSes where sysops didn't want to make a change and would rather just shut down, and a lot of BBSes running on autopilot or dead. Which wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing.

    With today's resources, the new node assignments could be tracked and managed with a shared project manager or a shared spreadsheet that current sysops could VIEW, and verify the entries for correctness and observe the merge progress.

    Now that's 21st century thinking. Only problem is that we might end using something like Slack to track the transition, and using it instead of the
    BBSes we tracked after the transition! :)
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to Nick Andre on Friday, March 15, 2019 10:53:06
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizone
    By: Nick Andre to All on Fri Mar 15 2019 03:58 am

    There are certain things in Fidonet that cannot and will not change because of too much bad blood and history. A lot of damage has been caused by "zone wars" and while technically one zone could work, politically its impossible.

    If you let history hold you back, you are never going anywhere. I've heard this all too often in the workplace 'Well, it didn't work 20 years ago, so we decided to never, ever try again.' Everytime I hear that, it makes me want to work twice as hard to make it so.

    We have to let go of the past, and what happened back 10-20-30 years ago. None of that is relevant anymore. We have new technology, new people and new ideas - and it's time to start investing in all of that.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Kees van Eeten@2:280/5003.4 to Robert Stinnett on Friday, March 15, 2019 17:43:20
    Hello Robert!

    15 Mar 19 10:53, you wrote to Nick Andre:

    If you let history hold you back, you are never going anywhere. I've heard this all too often in the workplace 'Well, it didn't work 20 years ago, so we decided to never, ever try again.' Everytime I hear that, it makes me want to work twice as hard to make it so.

    We have to let go of the past, and what happened back 10-20-30 years ago. None of that is relevant anymore. We have new technology, new people and new ideas - and it's time to start investing in all of that.

    If all sysops had let go of the past and moved on to modern flasing technology, there would not have been any Fidonet to return to.

    Apparently the current Fidonet can survive as it is. Turning Fidonet into
    an Othernet along views by those who have missed 10-20-30 of its history,
    is not the solution to its future.

    Kees

    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5
    * Origin: As for me, all I know is that, I know nothing. (2:280/5003.4)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Robert Stinnett on Friday, March 15, 2019 13:13:30
    On 15 Mar 19 10:53:06, Robert Stinnett said the following to Nick Andre:

    If you let history hold you back, you are never going anywhere. I've heard this all too often in the workplace 'Well, it didn't work 20 years ago, so decided to never, ever try again.' Everytime I hear that, it makes me want work twice as hard to make it so.

    That is the workplace. At the end of the day, you can seperate your work
    life from your personal life. In Fidonet, there is no seperation... because a lot of people are retired. And more often than not, some who get off on
    being keyboard-warriors, Napoleons, totalitarian/authority figures and "How dare you" insult my system, my net, my zone, my country, etc.

    In the case of the ZC position, that is THE single most criticised and derided position even though a ZC does what they do out of love and devotion to keep the nodelist production running.

    Again - I may disagree with Bjorn but I do not resort to the "Beeorn" insult and am at least thankful I receive a regular Fidonews publication even if it has no content. I'd rather have this than a Fidonews that is published whenever its deemed "necessary".

    The vast majority of Fidonet users are happy to have a working system but the few that go the keyboard-warrior route absolutely spoil it for everyone.

    We have to let go of the past, and what happened back 10-20-30 years ago.

    I appreciate the enthusiasm.

    But there are some parts of Fidonet operation that are permanently damaged because of history. The most serious is the seemingly poor relations between many Zone 1 and Zone 2 Sysops. Some serious insults and actions were done by both. Thats just the tip of the iceberg of problems Fido has.

    Its why I'm begging for not another repeat of the zone-wars especially when I see a stupid remark like "One zone to rule them all" which I see was meant to be a joke but has already resulted in FOUR NETMAILS to me from people in both zone 1 and 2 commenting on the poor taste and ignorance.

    Its better to either start an Othernet - as a few have very successfully done - or just leave Fido alone. Sorry, progression just cannot happen. The only idea I could see happening is focusing on much better software for newcomers.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to Kees van Eeten on Friday, March 15, 2019 12:36:17
    Re: Fidonet => one unizone
    By: Kees van Eeten to Robert Stinnett on Fri Mar 15 2019 05:43 pm

    Apparently the current Fidonet can survive as it is. Turning Fidonet into
    an Othernet along views by those who have missed 10-20-30 of its history,
    is not the solution to its future.


    That's your opinion. And one that I think is not in the majority.

    That is quite possibly the silliest statement I have ever heard by effectively saying "Well, if you weren't around for the past you can't be a part of the future". With that kind of thinking then nobody should have a say in anything they didn't personally help create. That is just plain stupid.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to Nick Andre on Friday, March 15, 2019 12:44:31
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizone
    By: Nick Andre to Robert Stinnett on Fri Mar 15 2019 01:13 pm

    In the case of the ZC position, that is THE single most criticised and derided position even though a ZC does what they do out of love and devotion to keep the nodelist production running.

    Is that the main task of a ZC? If so, I'd like to learn more about how they do this because if I am understanding correctly, that could be completely automated. In fact, I don't see why node numbers can't automatically be generated and handed out; nodelists should be automatically compiled and verified.

    But there are some parts of Fidonet operation that are permanently damaged because of history. The most serious is the seemingly poor relations between many Zone 1 and Zone 2 Sysops. Some serious insults and actions were done by both. Thats just the tip of the iceberg of problems Fido has.

    Then let's split and be done with it. If the history is so bad, then why keep fighting it? Dissolve Fidonet as it is today and restart it. Zone1 can go their way, Zone2 can go the other.

    Sometimes, if no common ground can be found, then its best to just wash your hands of it all, then start over again.

    Its better to either start an Othernet - as a few have very successfully done - or just leave Fido alone. Sorry, progression just cannot happen. The only idea I could see happening is focusing on much better software for newcomers.

    Perhaps that is the ultimate solution. Fidonet should just die. I mean, it's on life support right now so in a few years, if not sooner, the plug will be pulled naturally.

    You are correct, there are a number of very good Othernets out there -- fsxNet for one.

    Robert
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Robert Stinnett on Friday, March 15, 2019 14:18:58
    On 15 Mar 19 12:44:31, Robert Stinnett said the following to Nick Andre:

    Is that the main task of a ZC? If so, I'd like to learn more about how the this because if I am understanding correctly, that could be completely automated. In fact, I don't see why node numbers can't automatically be

    It already "is" automated. My system receives segments from RC's and compiles the Zone 1 segment. That segment is used to create a few different "flavors" of the Nodelist, and is also passed on to Zone's 2 3 and 4 for them to create their own listing (out of a technical decision from the 1980's).

    There is no central "one person" that does the entire Nodelist. This is part of the problem that a one-zone idea fails to address. Who gets to do this,
    how are they qualified, what exactly can they bring to the table to do it better. And who is a backup-system when that person fails to do their duty.

    This automation all runs on the assumption that others are sending me segments with no problems. That is true of any automated system. Garbage in, garbage out. You send me a good segment, you get a good nodelist. You send me crap, well, your fix will depend on how drunk/sober I am.

    This production runs on a combination of custom-software I wrote for
    MS-DOS and Windows because it is not possible to run a reliable operation
    for ZC1 on Linux, not worth risking and no "new software" exists to run an entire ZC operation... period. Some utilities in use date back to the late 1980's.

    All of this works here completely automated. Zero babysitting, zero
    screwups (knock on wood). Zero finger-pointing. Zero segments randomly
    dropped or mismanaged. No matter how badly the Nodelist Police want that.

    More importantly... Zero experimenting. I am using Fido software and an OS that is proven to be reliable and stable and really no incentive to change or see any way to improve the operation. D'Bridge runs the entire back-office operations of Zone 1 and Zone 2; yet its amusing to see people comment about how things could be magically improved somehow with Linux.

    So to be a good ZC, you need to be extremely technically-competent as well as have tremendous people skills to work with other RC's and ZC's. None of this is possible unless you have a solid understanding and appreciation of both history, cultural difference and patience and not be so quick to dismiss things to start a new idea or concept.

    More importantly, dealing with know-it-alls, Linux zealiots and everyone eager to point out the most trivial of problems; even by a "probationary Sysop" who can't seem to figure out how to get a node number let alone send a Netmail.

    Most importantly.... trust. Ask Ward about that one.

    Sorry for the length but you asked.

    You are correct, there are a number of very good Othernets out there -- fsx for one.

    I know, my friend... I'm a member. 8-)

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 14:37:48
    On 2019 Mar 15 13:20:42, you wrote to Dan Clough:

    There are currently only zones 1-4 in FidoNet.

    I realize that. But 5-7 still traditionally "belong" to FidoNet

    Z7 is not and never was a fidonet zone... it was dreamed of being a fidonet zome encompassing maybe R50 in Z2 at one time but that never came to be... especially since another FTN or two was already using it...

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... Fish knives are a mystifying bourgeois affectation.
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to Nick Andre on Friday, March 15, 2019 14:14:39
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizone
    By: Nick Andre to Robert Stinnett on Fri Mar 15 2019 02:18 pm

    It already "is" automated. My system receives segments from RC's and compiles the Zone 1 segment. That segment is used to create a few different "flavors" of the Nodelist, and is also passed on to Zone's 2 3 and 4 for them to create their own listing (out of a technical decision from the 1980's).

    My question is why does it have to be so many people involved? Why can't the system just process and send it out itself? Nobody should have to touch, email, netmail, ftp, sneakernet or anything else segments. Make it all online and self-service.


    There is no central "one person" that does the entire Nodelist. This is part

    This is good, as I never think a process should be owned by one person. However, I'd much rather replace those x-number of persons who are doing this segment process with automation as well.


    This automation all runs on the assumption that others are sending me segments with no problems. That is true of any automated system. Garbage in, garbage out. You send me a good segment, you get a good nodelist. You send me crap, well, your fix will depend on how drunk/sober I am.

    Data validation is part of any good automation system. Did I get the right data, in the right format and does it match certain rules? If not, reject that data and keep on trucking. The whole system shouldn't come crashing down or abend because some bad data got into it.


    This production runs on a combination of custom-software I wrote for
    MS-DOS and Windows because it is not possible to run a reliable operation for ZC1 on Linux, not worth risking and no "new software" exists to run an entire ZC operation... period. Some utilities in use date back to the late 1980's.

    Is this software available in the open-source world or under a license that allows others to try and modernize it and bring it into the Linux world?

    What happens, if it is a closed-source system, if that person dies or decides they don't want to have anything to do with it anymore?


    All of this works here completely automated. Zero babysitting, zero
    screwups (knock on wood). Zero finger-pointing. Zero segments randomly dropped or mismanaged. No matter how badly the Nodelist Police want that.


    That's great -- now it's time to bring that automation to the next level. Progress.

    More importantly... Zero experimenting. I am using Fido software and an OS that is proven to be reliable and stable and really no incentive to change or see any way to improve the operation. D'Bridge runs the entire back-office operations of Zone 1 and Zone 2; yet its amusing to see people comment about how things could be magically improved somehow with Linux.

    While you may not see any room to improve it, I have found that letting others examine something can open up a world of opportunities. Perhaps it is perfect -- but it is hard to tell unless we get others looking at it and examing it as well. I believe in the wisdom of crowds -- while every idea may not be adopted, good information can be gleemed from others who don't deal with it on a day to day basis.

    So to be a good ZC, you need to be extremely technically-competent as well as have tremendous people skills to work with other RC's and ZC's. None of this is possible unless you have a solid understanding and appreciation of both history, cultural difference and patience and not be so quick to dismiss things to start a new idea or concept.

    I believe the best leaders in the world are those that challenge us to think outside the box.


    More importantly, dealing with know-it-alls, Linux zealiots and everyone eager to point out the most trivial of problems; even by a "probationary Sysop" who can't seem to figure out how to get a node number let alone send a Netmail.

    Kind of hard to send a netmail without having a number. Pretty hard to get a number when the website that has the information was last updated 10 years ago.

    Look, I'll be honest here, based on what I've seen, witnessed and read I don't have much faith in the future of Fidonet. That is a pretty harsh statement to make, but the politics nowadays seem 10x worse than they were back in the 90s -- and I thought that to be quite impossible. The network is highly segmented, or what is left of it, and it seems that no matter which way people turn they just hit blocks of resistance.

    I believe that the future at this point is with the Othernets and perhaps even complete abandonment of FTN type networks in favor of new technology or a re-use of another technology already out there. I'm not 100% convinced the technologies of FTN are really applicable in the modern BBS/forum world.

    There is a growing movement of people who want to connect with smaller, online communities and a BBS -- in whatever form that may be -- could very well be the answer for them. It may not a BBS as we all know them, or remember them, but I do believe there is at least some room for growth both in number of users/systems and technology.

    Someone, or perhaps several, said that I should write a FIDONEWS article about it -- so I am, and will submit it and we'll see if it gets anywhere. So I can at least say I tried my best. That's all any of us can do.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Paul Quinn on Saturday, March 16, 2019 06:25:00
    On 03-15-19 20:52, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Zone 7 is only spoken of in hushed tones, and in darkened spaces. If I could get my old node containing the required info opened in a
    Virtualbox (vBox), I would whisper little nothings to you about it in netmail. But I can't as there is a monumental storm passing hereabouts that's been travelling nearby for the last two hours, and my other PC running the new 64-bit vBox doesn't have a working UPS.

    Remind me...

    Interesting, I'm looking forward to reading that netmail. :)


    ... If some people said what they thought, they'd be speechless.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Kees van Eeten on Saturday, March 16, 2019 06:42:00
    On 03-15-19 17:43, Kees van Eeten wrote to Robert Stinnett <=-

    Apparently the current Fidonet can survive as it is. Turning Fidonet into
    an Othernet along views by those who have missed 10-20-30 of its history,
    is not the solution to its future.

    Some of us were around back then, and we've already lost 2 zones, what's another 2? ;)


    ... You bring this networks ratings down, and we'll do a special on you!
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Robert Stinnett on Friday, March 15, 2019 15:53:47
    On 15 Mar 19 14:14:39, Robert Stinnett said the following to Nick Andre:

    It already "is" automated. My system receives segments from RC's and

    My question is why does it have to be so many people involved? Why can't t system just process and send it out itself? Nobody should have to touch,

    I agree there shouldn't be so many people, but it is what it is in Fido. Technically-competent people are also hard to come by and are valuable when we have them hanging around.

    I still do not quite understand how a 100% automated system will work, how it gets decided what software to run, what server OS, what virtual-machine environment, who gets access to it and if so by what decisions is it made, who gets to vote on it, who is qualified and who isn't.

    My system and Ward's are about as automated as it gets... I'd say 99%. The 1 percent are segment errors or equipment failure, both extremely rare.

    This production runs on a combination of custom-software I wrote for
    MS-DOS and Windows because it is not possible to run a reliable operation

    Is this software available in the open-source world or under a license that allows others to try and modernize it and bring it into the Linux world?

    The MakeNL source I believe is open, but the rest is all custom to this system, just as ZC2's software is specific for him, ZC3 and ZC4 etc.

    As soon as I say MS-DOS and Windows, the instant reaction is why not switch to Linux, instead of understanding why I use what I use. I chose an OS and a commercial-grade server system that is reliable and stable and "just works" without experimenting or screwing around.

    Lets just say I want to be a fan of Linux... I really do. I administer
    Linux servers as part of my job. But that OS is just not the right fit for this system or its needs. I have had this discussion with others at length and believe me its easier to stick with what works at this point.

    What happens, if it is a closed-source system, if that person dies or decid they don't want to have anything to do with it anymore?

    I'm confident I can be replaced if something were to happen to me. The know-it-alls I've encountered would definately love an opportunity.

    I'm just a nodelist clerk... I'm not Christ.

    That's great -- now it's time to bring that automation to the next level. Progress.

    My system generates the Zone 1 nodelist accurately and on-time. If I were not doing my job, I would of been replaced by now.

    What other automation must there be that I am not providing?

    Look, I'll be honest here, based on what I've seen, witnessed and read I do have much faith in the future of Fidonet. That is a pretty harsh statement make, but the politics nowadays seem 10x worse than they were back in the 9

    Agreed. So much damage has been done. Believe me when I say its near impossible for some to move on from the past. It affects the present too much.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Kees van Eeten@2:280/5003.4 to Robert Stinnett on Friday, March 15, 2019 22:16:56
    Hello Robert!

    15 Mar 19 12:36, you wrote to me:

    Apparently the current Fidonet can survive as it is. Turning Fidonet
    into
    an Othernet along views by those who have missed 10-20-30 of its
    history,
    is not the solution to its future.


    That's your opinion. And one that I think is not in the majority.

    If I had followed the opinion of the majority, I would not still be in
    Fidonet.

    That is quite possibly the silliest statement I have ever heard by effectively saying "Well, if you weren't around for the past you can't be a part of the future". With that kind of thinking then nobody should have a say in anything they didn't personally help create. That is just plain stupid.

    To realize change, one has to demonstrate, that it can be done.
    If a new technology or procedure has a future, it will be used.
    Telling others, what should be done or developed, does not work in technology.

    Instant opinions on someones intelligence are never productive in any
    discussion.

    Kees

    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5
    * Origin: As for me, all I know is that, I know nothing. (2:280/5003.4)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Robert Stinnett on Friday, March 15, 2019 23:59:04
    Hello Robert,

    I'll try to write something but in view of all the noise here, I don't know if making a point will be a part of that.

    My question is why does it have to be so many people involved?

    In the making of the nodelist only the lowest level is involved, that will be either a hub or an NC. All the onward processing up the ladder is in this zone far as far as I can see automated as well except in one particular case.

    Hub sends it to NC who processes, NC sends it to RC who processes, RC sends it to ZC who processes and the 4 ZC-systems on a daily basis exchange ZONE-lists which provide you your nodelist on Friday. Since several years we now also provide daily=lists which are accurate within 24 hrs of where-ever globally. In
    zone-2 it is called Z2DAILY, the naming in other zones may be different.

    All of that is automated, has been ever since the first day I became a ZC.

    The different levels are explained by history and available technology at moments in Fido's history when compiling the nodelist took 40 minutes on my then Tandy-1000SX.

    I run a Windows7-based system with D'Bridge and a colourful collection of other
    software the oldest dated November 16 1988 (nineteen eighty-eight). Even procedures written in BASIC with a BASIC-interpretor dated Jan.1 1987. That's 32 year old crap which has served this zone and myself pretty well.

    I love reading about nifty software advertized by people heralding the solution
    for a problem that either doesn't exist or they don't understand. But if it ain't broke, why fix it?

    Why can't the
    system just process and send it out itself? Nobody should have to touch, email, netmail, ftp, sneakernet or anything else segments.

    Do you have any indication that any hanky-panky is happening somewhere? Because
    my system does netmail, echomail, files. nodelists ... without manual intervention. A lot of routed netmail is handled here and I don't get to see it, mail is secure here. And I'm 100% certain that Nick's system is fully automated and secure too, so is Scott's (ZC3). If a ZC can't automate, then that system is bound to crash and the person will never be able to take more than a 6-day vacation ... There exist suspicions at one time there was a ZC running a manual operation ...

    Data validation is part of any good automation system.

    Data 'IS' validated here.

    What happens, if it is a closed-source system, if that person dies or decides they don't want to have anything to do with it anymore?

    In Z2 we have a back-up system which also receives {almost} all the region and zone segments. If the primary system fails in a way that it could take a while,
    the back-up system takes over ... this has happened already in the past.

    Other zones are encouraged to do the same.

    I believe the best leaders in the world are those that challenge us to think outside the box.

    Oh dear, I had hoped I had left the corporate thinking behind me ... 8-)

    Can I interest you in a game of "Bullshit Bingo" ? 8-)

    Kind of hard to send a netmail without having a number. Pretty hard to
    get a number when the website that has the information was last updated
    10 years ago.

    ... because someone somewhere has been sitting on a password of the website without the domain-holder (i.e. me) having access to it. A situation which finally resolved itself last Feb.25 2019.

    .... but the politics nowadays seem 10x worse than they were back in the 90s -- and I thought that to be quite impossible.

    I don't think you have a real idea how easygoing it is these days compared to those 90's ... The election of Nick Andre as ZC1 was an injection of fresh air and almost instantaneous the zone-warz came to an end ... a few pockets remaining.

    And commenting on another mail in this thread ...

    Most importantly.... trust. Ask Ward about that one.

    Nick and I go a long way, even before an haphazard unplanned "the world is a small place"-meeting in Quebec City one day.

    He has a full access to my system, I think he has about every password of any Fido-link which I entertain. I'm OK with that because he can verify I'm not selling any Fido-Warz bullshit of which I've been accused so often and it enabled him to make me a better sysop and ZC.

    Politics? Which politics are you talking about? Pls get specific ... I have fought the commercialization in this zone, I have fought real-life criminals, I
    have fought the Italian police when they cracked-down on R33 not understanding
    computers thinking it was a maffia operation, I have been taken to court on Fido-matters and stood my ground ....

    So pls tell me in what way Fidonet is now worse off than 20+ years ago. I'd like to know.

    Someone, or perhaps several, said that I should write a FIDONEWS article about it -- so I am, and will submit it and we'll see if it gets
    anywhere.

    If you properly deliver it in a proper format following the guidelines all should be well.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From Paul Quinn@3:640/1384.125 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 09:36:33
    Hi! Tony,

    On 03/16/2019 06:25 AM, you wrote:

    Remind me...

    Interesting, I'm looking forward to reading that netmail. :)

    Thanks, but that may take some time best spent on other tasks I have on my 'todo'. OTOH, I would suggest that you look for Mark Lewis's note to Nathanael
    Culver in this morning's bunch of posts. (MSGID: 1:3634/12.73 5c8bf140 refers.) Mark does a succinct job on the outcome.

    Cheers,
    Paul.

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
    * Origin: (This space intentionally left blank) (3:640/1384.125)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to Ward Dossche on Friday, March 15, 2019 18:37:42
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizone
    By: Ward Dossche to Robert Stinnett on Fri Mar 15 2019 11:59 pm

    If you properly deliver it in a proper format following the guidelines all should be well.

    As long as the format isn't some 1980's relic that no modern editor supports -- sure.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Nick Andre on Saturday, March 16, 2019 10:50:00
    On 03-15-19 15:53, Nick Andre wrote to Robert Stinnett <=-

    I agree there shouldn't be so many people, but it is what it is in
    Fido. Technically-competent people are also hard to come by and are valuable when we have them hanging around.

    For technically competence, we should be encouraging others to learn the ropes.
    None of us are going to life forever, and some form of succession planning is needed to ensure that the technical knowledge is (1) not lost, and (2) evolves with the times.

    I still do not quite understand how a 100% automated system will work,
    how it gets decided what software to run, what server OS, what virtual-machine environment, who gets access to it and if so by what decisions is it made, who gets to vote on it, who is qualified and who isn't.

    An automated system should be based on standards. Where standards don't yet exist, create then document and release them, so other developers can implement them. Server OS shouldn't matter, except for specific implementations. In an ideal world, the server OS should be up to the server admin(s). The system should NOT rely on Windows, DOS or Linux, but be able to be ported to any OS that someone cares to port it to.

    My system and Ward's are about as automated as it gets... I'd say 99%.
    The 1 percent are segment errors or equipment failure, both extremely rare.

    But nodelist data maintenance is still concentrated in the hands of NCs, and aggregated by RCs and ZCs. Some of these roles could be replaced by a web based front end, where individual sysops actually maintain their own nodelist entries. The interface would validate all fields, so that the nodelist data at least conformed to standards (of course, there's still a degree of "GIGO", but that goes for any human entered content ;) ).

    And the system should have some sort of redundancy, so if hardware fails, a backup system can keep nodelist processing happening.

    In the longer term (because it would require software to be written), Internet connected nodes could be able to access a DNS or DNS like "online nodelist" that sysops have access to update their specific node entery (could be given public keys for thos on admission to Fidonet). A question that would naturally arise is how to handle legacy software. This is certainly a valid question, and implies some form of nodelist is likely needed for those systems.

    I'm just thinking out loud for the purpose of stimulating discussion.

    This production runs on a combination of custom-software I wrote for
    MS-DOS and Windows because it is not possible to run a reliable operation

    Is this software available in the open-source world or under a license
    hat
    allows others to try and modernize it and bring it into the Linux world?

    The MakeNL source I believe is open, but the rest is all custom to this system, just as ZC2's software is specific for him, ZC3 and ZC4 etc.

    Yes, I have the MakeNL source here that I compiled on my Pi. I use MakeNL on the Pi and x86_64 to generate my VLRadio nodelists. Further processing by another script generates my DNS zone file. Along the way, scripts hatch the nodelist and rebuild and hatch the infopack every week, including the latest nodelist. For various reasons, I require 100% automation to keep everything up to date.

    As soon as I say MS-DOS and Windows, the instant reaction is why not switch to Linux, instead of understanding why I use what I use. I chose
    an OS and a commercial-grade server system that is reliable and stable
    and "just works" without experimenting or screwing around.

    That has traditionally been the basis on what OS I select for a certain job. It does make sense to me.

    Lets just say I want to be a fan of Linux... I really do. I administer Linux servers as part of my job. But that OS is just not the right fit
    for this system or its needs. I have had this discussion with others at length and believe me its easier to stick with what works at this
    point.

    You've got me curious though, because I generally find Linux easier to make do what I want than Windows, especially when a high degree of automation and networking is needed. What is it that DOS and Windows have that make them more suitable? I'm not picking, obviously I'm overlooking something that's important to the system you use.

    What happens, if it is a closed-source system, if that person dies or
    ecid
    they don't want to have anything to do with it anymore?

    I'm confident I can be replaced if something were to happen to me. The know-it-alls I've encountered would definately love an opportunity.

    :)

    Look, I'll be honest here, based on what I've seen, witnessed and read I
    o
    have much faith in the future of Fidonet. That is a pretty harsh
    tatement
    make, but the politics nowadays seem 10x worse than they were back in the


    Agreed. So much damage has been done. Believe me when I say its near impossible for some to move on from the past. It affects the present
    too much.

    Sadly, you may be right. I'd like to see everyone acknowledge the past then move on, but I can't see that happening. :(


    ... Scepticism is the beginning of faith.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Paul Quinn on Saturday, March 16, 2019 10:53:00
    On 03-16-19 09:36, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Hi! Tony,

    On 03/16/2019 06:25 AM, you wrote:

    Remind me...

    Interesting, I'm looking forward to reading that netmail. :)

    Thanks, but that may take some time best spent on other tasks I have on
    my 'todo'. OTOH, I would suggest that you look for Mark Lewis's note
    to Nathanael Culver in this morning's bunch of posts. (MSGID: 1:3634/12.73 5c8bf140 refers.) Mark does a succinct job on the
    outcome.

    Such back references are a pain to follow, that's now in my "past". :(


    ... Sorry for the typos...I wix my mords quite often.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 18:32:00
    nathanael culver wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    There are currently only zones 1-4 in FidoNet.

    I realize that. But 5-7 still traditionally "belong" to FidoNet
    even if they're no longer in use, which is why I suggested
    decommissioning them as well.

    I've never heard of any Zone 7 in FidoNet, even all the way back
    to the "good ole days". I believe it was only 1-6.

    Anyway, what's the difference between "no longer in use" and
    "decommissioned"? Seems like the same thing, unless there is some
    formal process which decommissions them.




    ... If it weren't for Edison we'd be using computers by candlelight
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Paul Hayton@3:770/100 to Robert Stinnett on Saturday, March 16, 2019 14:05:05
    On 15 Mar 2019 at 02:14p, Robert Stinnett pondered and said...

    My question is why does it have to be so many people involved? Why
    can't the system just process and send it out itself? Nobody should
    have to touch, email, netmail, ftp, sneakernet or anything else
    segments. Make it all online and self-service.

    I get where you are going with this and have some thoughts of my own around this topic. I'm going to forward this thread to an othernet to pick it up there. I don't wish to take a discussion about Fido (in this context) off
    topic here in this thread.

    While you may not see any room to improve it, I have found that letting others examine something can open up a world of opportunities. Perhaps
    it is perfect -- but it is hard to tell unless we get others looking at
    it and examing it as well. I believe in the wisdom of crowds -- while every idea may not be adopted, good information can be gleemed from
    others who don't deal with it on a day to day basis.

    Agreed with this in principle... it can be scary but also empowering.

    Look, I'll be honest here, based on what I've seen, witnessed and read I don't have much faith in the future of Fidonet. That is a pretty harsh

    I believe that the future at this point is with the Othernets and
    perhaps even complete abandonment of FTN type networks in favor of new technology or a re-use of another technology already out there. I'm not 100% convinced the technologies of FTN are really applicable in the
    modern BBS/forum world.

    There is a growing movement of people who want to connect with smaller, online communities and a BBS -- in whatever form that may be -- could
    very well be the answer for them. It may not a BBS as we all know them, or remember them, but I do believe there is at least some room for
    growth both in number of users/systems and technology.

    Best, Paul

    --- E:avon@bbs.nz ------ W:bbs.nz ---
    --- K:keybase.io/avon --------------

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Windows/32)
    * Origin: Agency BBS | Dunedin, New Zealand | agency.bbs.nz (3:770/100)
  • From Paul Quinn@3:640/1384 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 11:31:27
    Hi! Tony,

    On 16 Mar 19 10:53, you wrote to me:

    OTOH, I would suggest that you look for Mark Lewis's note to
    Nathanael Culver in this morning's bunch of posts. (MSGID:
    1:3634/12.73 5c8bf140 refers.) Mark does a succinct job on the
    outcome.

    Such back references are a pain to follow, that's now in my "past". :(

    Oh, you poor dear. You have my sympathies. Here's what Mark says...

    Z7 is not and never was a fidonet zone... it was dreamed of being a fidonet zome encompassing maybe R50 in Z2 at one time but that never
    came to be... especially since another FTN or two was already using
    it...

    === MultiMail/Win v0.51

    Mmm... I thought Multimail was pretty bloody good... last century. Aarrrgh! Yes! QWK mail. The light bulb lit. Oh, yes. You have my sympathy. ;)

    Cheers,
    Paul.

    ... "Too much of a good thing is wonderful", Mae West.
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130515
    * Origin: Quinn's Rock - Live from Paul's Xubuntu desktop! (3:640/1384)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Tony Langdon on Friday, March 15, 2019 21:31:05
    On 16 Mar 19 10:50:00, Tony Langdon said the following to Nick Andre:

    An automated system should be based on standards. Where standards don't ye exist, create then document and release them, so other developers can imple

    I still do not understand what automation is needed beyond what I'm doing. A ZC system processes segments from RC's which contain segments from NC's. This is by itself mostly an automated process and either a segment can be
    processed by MakeNL or it is rejected. But okay, I'll bite:

    But nodelist data maintenance is still concentrated in the hands of NCs, an aggregated by RCs and ZCs. Some of these roles could be replaced by a web based front end, where individual sysops actually maintain their own nodeli

    There are many problems with this I can see, and I know you're just thinking out loud, but it is a solution for a completely non-existant problem. Where is this need for this automated system coming from? If a node is disgruntled with their NC, there is a resolution process for that.

    Whether its Fido or some Othernet, you need things "concentrated in the hands of" people trustworthy and competent to run these back-end systems. Nobody waves a magic wand and presto theres a fully functional Nodelist server
    system. Nobody waved their wand and presto I became ZC1 (maybe Phil Kimble). I was elected to be competent and trustworthy enough to publish the nodelist.

    You've got me curious though, because I generally find Linux easier to make what I want than Windows, especially when a high degree of automation and networking is needed. What is it that DOS and Windows have that make them suitable? I'm not picking, obviously I'm overlooking something that's important to the system you use.

    MS-DOS makes up most of my operation. Mailer, tosser, ZC1 production and BBS software are all pure DOS. Windows runs a Telnet server as well as executing scripts and backup sets. Its really just acting as a glorified multi-tasker.

    Because DOS just works and is so versatile and portable for me, the ZC1 operation can be zipped up and easily ran on someone else's pure DOS machine, OS/2, Windows 32-bit, maybe even DOSEMU and DosBox.

    Windows for me, does NOT crash, is locked down, does what its supposed to do, no surprises, no screwing around, exceptionally long periods of uptime and good redundant backup sets taken every night. Spare hardware on standby.

    Sadly, you may be right. I'd like to see everyone acknowledge the past the move on, but I can't see that happening. :(

    Its not the first discussion held in Fido about all of this, but certainly at least interesting.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to Dan Clough on Saturday, March 16, 2019 11:25:48
    Anyway, what's the difference between "no longer in use" and "decommissioned"? Seems like the same thing, unless there is some

    In a theoretical world where Fidonet were reduced to a single zone (hypothetically Zone 1) and zones were repurposed to represent othernets, "decommissioned" would mean "everyone agrees not to use 2-6 for any othernets in the future."

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 15, 2019 23:18:00
    nathanael culver wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Anyway, what's the difference between "no longer in use" and "decommissioned"? Seems like the same thing, unless there is some

    In a theoretical world where Fidonet were reduced to a single
    zone (hypothetically Zone 1) and zones were repurposed to
    represent othernets, "decommissioned" would mean "everyone agrees
    not to use 2-6 for any othernets in the future."

    Ahhhh, OK. Yep, that sounds good. I like it.



    ... Eye witnesses were on the scene in minutes.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Paul Quinn on Saturday, March 16, 2019 17:12:00
    On 03-16-19 11:31, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Z7 is not and never was a fidonet zone... it was dreamed of being a fidonet zome encompassing maybe R50 in Z2 at one time but that never
    came to be... especially since another FTN or two was already using
    it...

    OK, I did see that, but the reference was vague ant not timely. :)

    === MultiMail/Win v0.51

    Mmm... I thought Multimail was pretty bloody good... last century. Aarrrgh! Yes! QWK mail. The light bulb lit. Oh, yes. You have my sympathy. ;)

    I've never been a big fan of online interfaces and the machine is not local.


    ... What? Don't you write your own taglines?
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Nick Andre on Saturday, March 16, 2019 17:26:00
    On 03-15-19 21:31, Nick Andre wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    I still do not understand what automation is needed beyond what I'm
    doing. A ZC system processes segments from RC's which contain segments from NC's. This is by itself mostly an automated process and either a segment can be processed by MakeNL or it is rejected. But okay, I'll
    bite:

    MakeNL seems to be pretty comprehensive. Being effectively ZC for my othernet, I don't need the nodelist merging functionality, but I did note it was there.

    There are many problems with this I can see, and I know you're just thinking out loud, but it is a solution for a completely non-existant problem. Where is this need for this automated system coming from? If a node is disgruntled with their NC, there is a resolution process for
    that.

    Actually, the less I do the better! :) My net is so quiet, it's trivial, but at least I'm now at the point that all I have to do is edit the nodelist data file and the automation does the rest. As for where the need comes from. Some seem to be concerned about concentration of power, others about inconsistent nodelist maintenance.

    MS-DOS makes up most of my operation. Mailer, tosser, ZC1 production
    and BBS software are all pure DOS. Windows runs a Telnet server as well
    as executing scripts and backup sets. Its really just acting as a glorified multi-tasker.

    Fair enough. Whereas my environment nowadays is 100% Linux for the server side of BBSing. Only Windows is the desktop that I'm typing this on, and there's no MS-DOS here... YET. I want to resurrect my older systems one day, which used DOS software (under DOS, OS/2 or NT 4). It's looking like Qemu will allow me to pretty much run the systems as they were, with the addition of tty0tty and tcpser on the Linux VM host to make them accessible over telnet.

    Because DOS just works and is so versatile and portable for me, the ZC1 operation can be zipped up and easily ran on someone else's pure DOS machine, OS/2, Windows 32-bit, maybe even DOSEMU and DosBox.

    Or a Qemu VM, which is how I plan on resurrecting my 90s era DOS systems. :)

    Windows for me, does NOT crash, is locked down, does what its supposed
    to do, no surprises, no screwing around, exceptionally long periods of uptime and good redundant backup sets taken every night. Spare hardware
    on standby.

    I'd agree. Properly setup, Windows is quite stable. It's a far cry from the Windows 3.x days.

    Sadly, you may be right. I'd like to see everyone acknowledge the past
    he
    move on, but I can't see that happening. :(

    Its not the first discussion held in Fido about all of this, but
    certainly at least interesting.

    Indeed.


    ... It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one. === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Paul Quinn@3:640/1384 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 18:18:18
    Hi! Tony,

    On 16 Mar 19 17:12, you wrote to me:

    I've never been a big fan of online interfaces and the machine is not local.

    I like a modicum of AC/DC. This note is via SSH from my notebook on the coffee
    table (aka my point system). :)

    Cheers,
    Paul.

    ... Toto, I don't think we're in DOS any more...
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130515
    * Origin: Quinn's Rock - Live from Paul's Xubuntu desktop! (3:640/1384)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Robert Stinnett on Saturday, March 16, 2019 04:11:30
    On 2019 Mar 15 18:37:42, you wrote to Ward Dossche:

    If you properly deliver it in a proper format following the guidelines
    all should be well.

    As long as the format isn't some 1980's relic that no modern editor supports -- sure.

    the nodelist and the segments that make it are plain ASCII files... any editor worth its salt should be able to handle them...

    the structure of the file is CSV with specific field definitions... if one is manually editing their segment, they should know the proper format... that's part of learning and understanding that experienced FTN operators will have... one can easily refer to the FTSC document describing the nodelist, too...

    http://ftsc.org/docs/fts-0005.003

    as for checking the format and publishing a segment, that's what nodelist processors (vs nodelist compilers that simply generate nodelist indexes) are for... makenl-ng is the most common one used these days... it is also still maintained and updates are issued when necessary... check the MAKENL echo ;)

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... Caution: Incorrigible Punster...don't incorrige!
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 04:27:54
    On 2019 Mar 16 10:50:00, you wrote to Nick Andre:

    But nodelist data maintenance is still concentrated in the hands of NCs, and aggregated by RCs and ZCs.

    since they are tasked by policy for this job, this is as it should be... they are responsible for their segments...

    Some of these roles could be replaced by a web based front end, where individual sysops actually maintain their own nodelist entries.

    this is already possible and has been since the early days... no web thing needed... it just takes operators that know and understand the format... the worst part is knowing what to use when and where but that's easily sussed by reading the documentation of the nodelist format...

    at one time, my makenl was configured to allow operators to submit their own individual nodelist entries... it worked quite well when the proper format and data was submitted...

    The interface would validate all fields, so that the nodelist data at least conformed to standards (of course, there's still a degree of
    "GIGO", but that goes for any human entered content ;) ).

    already done and handled since eons... just no web interface where you have to employ more security than necessary to prevent bots and humans from attacking, changing others' entries, submitting invalid/false data, etc... a NC/HUB should
    know who is in their segment and not just rubber stamp what is sent to them for processing... the RCs/ZCs have to have some trust in their NCs but they should also still check the segments they generate to send upstream...

    The MakeNL source I believe is open, but the rest is all custom to
    this system, just as ZC2's software is specific for him, ZC3 and ZC4
    etc.

    Yes, I have the MakeNL source here that I compiled on my Pi. I use
    MakeNL on the Pi and x86_64 to generate my VLRadio nodelists. Further processing by another script generates my DNS zone file. Along the
    way, scripts hatch the nodelist and rebuild and hatch the infopack
    every week, including the latest nodelist. For various reasons, I
    require 100% automation to keep everything up to date.

    how do you know if/when invalid data gets in? i'm speaking of data that passes the tests but is still invalid/incorrect...

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... A single fact can ruin a good argument everytime!
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 04:38:46
    On 2019 Mar 16 10:53:00, you wrote to Paul Quinn:

    Thanks, but that may take some time best spent on other tasks I have
    on my 'todo'. OTOH, I would suggest that you look for Mark Lewis's
    note to Nathanael Culver in this morning's bunch of posts. (MSGID:
    1:3634/12.73 5c8bf140 refers.) Mark does a succinct job on the
    outcome.

    Such back references are a pain to follow, that's now in my "past". :(

    sounds like some software could use a threading model which makes it easy to go
    back through threads and even to list posts so they can easily be read and then return to where one was in their reading ;)

    here's what i posted...

    ----- snip -----

    There are currently only zones 1-4 in FidoNet.

    I realize that. But 5-7 still traditionally "belong" to FidoNet

    Z7 is not and never was a fidonet zone... it was dreamed of being a fidonet zome encompassing maybe R50 in Z2 at one time but that never came to be... especially since another FTN or two
    was already using it...

    ----- snip -----

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... If you keep a Goldfish in the dark room it will eventually turn white.
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Robert Stinnett on Saturday, March 16, 2019 10:00:43
    If you properly deliver it in a proper format following the guidelines all should be well.

    As long as the format isn't some 1980's relic that no modern editor supports -- sure.

    Piece of cake:

    1) Ascii text
    2) Line length of 70
    3) Put this at the very top:

    *The title of your text
    The title of your text
    Robert Stinnett - 1:290/10

    The title is there twice, the line with the * is how it will be visible in the table of content.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to nathanael culver on Saturday, March 16, 2019 10:05:30
    Anyway, what's the difference between "no longer in use" and
    "decommissioned"? Seems like the same thing, unless there is some

    In a theoretical world where Fidonet were reduced to a single zone (hypothetically Zone 1) and zones were repurposed to represent othernets, "decommissioned" would mean "everyone agrees not to use 2-6 for any othernets in the future."

    If Terry Roata and other people from the former Z6 would get together and decide they want to try to revive it, I'm all for it.

    When Fidonet becomes one big server, then the fun is gone as well as the tinkering, the 'make it work against all odds', the enjoyment of making something work of your own.

    Disbanding zones is going to break a lot, difficult links, passworded stuff, paid-for licences hardcoded to certain addresses and no source-code available or author willing ... that's only the top of the iceberg.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 10:06:08
    Tony,

    Some seem to be concerned about concentration of power, others about inconsistent nodelist maintenance.

    One day someone will need to explain to me "the concept of power" in Fidonet. I've never understood it and still don't.

    I do understand however the concept of "accepting responsibility to make it work" ... that's something different.

    Over the years Fidonet has cost me a lot of money and generated a lot of stomach acid, but then so does bowling or playing pool. It's a hobby, a very interesting hobby, I learned a lot here and made some real friends ... not just
    the BFF-stuff.

    Then what is important? Football is ... my team plays for the title this evening, there will be lots of beer.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Paul Quinn on Saturday, March 16, 2019 20:19:00
    On 03-16-19 18:18, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    I like a modicum of AC/DC. This note is via SSH from my notebook on
    the coffee table (aka my point system). :)

    I like being isolated from the network and a non terminal interface. :)

    ... Toto, I don't think we're in DOS any more...

    Nope, largely left it behind years ago. ;)


    ... We have normality, I repeat, we have normality. (Whatever that is.)
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to mark lewis on Saturday, March 16, 2019 20:30:00
    On 03-16-19 04:27, mark lewis wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    at one time, my makenl was configured to allow operators to submit
    their own individual nodelist entries... it worked quite well when the proper format and data was submitted...

    Which then relies too much on human input. Wouldn't be the first time I've typod something. I only discovered half of my nodelist was broken when I started generating DNS RRs for it, and finding that half of the entries didn't convert. I don't see why in 2019 we need to be relying so heavily on humans to validate syntax that can be done by machine. Let the machine do that and let the people look at the _content_.

    already done and handled since eons... just no web interface where you have to employ more security than necessary to prevent bots and humans from attacking, changing others' entries, submitting invalid/false
    data, etc... a NC/HUB should know who is in their segment and not just rubber stamp what is sent to them for processing... the RCs/ZCs have to have some trust in their NCs but they should also still check the
    segments they generate to send upstream...

    Good points re security. I still think some machine validation of syntax on entry/generation would be helpful. Obviously, only a human can verify that the contents of the nodelist entries are actually correct.

    how do you know if/when invalid data gets in? i'm speaking of data that passes the tests but is still invalid/incorrect...

    ATM, it's a one man show, so same way you do - manually. ;)


    ... Error: Bad Or Missing Mouse Driver. Blame The Cat?? (Y/n)
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to mark lewis on Saturday, March 16, 2019 20:31:00
    On 03-16-19 04:38, mark lewis wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    sounds like some software could use a threading model which makes it
    easy to go back through threads and even to list posts so they can
    easily be read and then return to where one was in their reading ;)

    Threading would be nice, but I'd need a different means of reading messages to do that. Web is the obvious one, but for me web interfaces suck.


    ... A BAND AID?!?! I'm a doctor not a... Oh yeah...
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Ward Dossche on Saturday, March 16, 2019 20:37:00
    On 03-16-19 10:06, Ward Dossche wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Yeah sure it's a hobby. In the past, I've sunk a lot of money into it, but these days, newer technology makes it much cheaper. :) I don't let it get to me. I'm here to enjoy myself. :)

    Then what is important? Football is ... my team plays for the title
    this evening, there will be lots of beer.

    Well both of those are so unimportant for me it's not funny. :P

    I don't pay much attention to most professional sport these days, I'm more of a doer in that area, though this weekend, I took a break to ensure I've fully recovered from a recent injury. But next weekend, I'm off to Melbourne to compete in the Victorian Masters athletics. A few sprints and hurdles are on the program for me ;) I balance my nerdy pursuits with a lot of exercise. :)


    ... Want 20/20 hindsight? Go read History .............
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Paul Quinn@3:640/1384 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 19:55:33
    Hi! Tony,

    On 16 Mar 19 20:19, you wrote to me:

    I like being isolated from the network and a non terminal interface.
    :)

    I can't do that any longer.

    ... Toto, I don't think we're in DOS any more...
    Nope, largely left it behind years ago. ;)

    It's still lying in wait here. I had to move the second of two Win98se vBox appliances over to the Xunubtu 64-bit vBox server, after this older Xubuntu 32-bit vBox server refused to run *absolutelty* after a 'kernel header' upgrade
    re-boot. That'll make two more loverly MS-DOS playthings on it... till this server is upped to 64-bit also. Then they come back... fingers crossed. :)

    Cheers,
    Paul.

    ... Emergency repair procedure #1: Kick it.
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130515
    * Origin: Quinn's Rock - Live from Paul's Xubuntu desktop! (3:640/1384)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 11:09:46
    But next weekend, I'm off to Melbourne to
    compete in the Victorian Masters athletics. A few sprints and hurdles
    are on the program for me ;) I balance my nerdy pursuits with a lot of exercise. :)

    I bought a 31ft 3 cabin sailyacht, full galley, toilet ... and the weather is becoming sailable.

    The nerd can come along. There's wifi and my point on a tablet.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From TERRY ROATI@3:640/1321 to Ward Dossche on Saturday, March 16, 2019 14:17:24
    Hello Ward,

    This is very good news, how long did this take to resolve?

    Terry

    On Mar 15, 2019 11:59pm, Ward Dossche wrote to Robert Stinnett:

    ... because someone somewhere has been sitting on a password of the website without the domain-holder (i.e. me) having access to it. A situation which finally resolved itself last Feb.25 2019.


    ... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
    * Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to TERRY ROATI on Saturday, March 16, 2019 12:42:34
    Terry,

    This is very good news, how long did this take to resolve?

    Years. Litterally.

    When the domain was salvaged many many moons ago my name was inserted as the owner, but I was not given access to the domain nor the website. Communication was very difficult.

    Mind you, I am thankful to the person who salvaged it.

    It was expiring and I didn't manage to renew it, I was refered to an Italian language website of an ISP (in Italy) with a broken link somewhere and I feared
    I was losing the domain.

    Finally a very friendly person at that ISP reset the password for me and I was able to renew 11 hrs before expiration. Suddenly I had access after so many years... but not to the website-part ... yet.

    Next, before I move/change anything I need someone to explain to me what the functionality of these lines is:

    Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    Also, people approaching me with the statement "Trust me, I know what I'm doing" get an odd look.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From TERRY ROATI@3:640/1321 to Ward Dossche on Saturday, March 16, 2019 21:31:46
    Hello Ward,

    I am now living in Oz but when I go back to the Philippines in a couple of months I will chat to the ex-sysops and see if any are willing to revive their systems.

    Roughly how many systems will it take to revive Zone 6, at the moment I know
    of 3 active systems in Asia, 1 in Taiwan, 1 in Singapore and 1 in Philippines?

    Terry

    On Mar 16, 2019 10:05am, Ward Dossche wrote to nathanael culver:

    If Terry Roata and other people from the former Z6 would get together
    and decide they want to try to revive it, I'm all for it.

    ... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
    * Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Ward Dossche on Saturday, March 16, 2019 10:14:02
    On 16 Mar 19 12:42:34, Ward Dossche said the following to Terry Roati:

    Next, before I move/change anything I need someone to explain to me what th functionality of these lines is:

    Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    These are the addresses of the servers that host the DNS records for the domain. As it stands, you have control of the fidonet.org domain but you do not have control over the DNS records.

    The last time I looked at it, there were hundreds of records, most related to Region 50 and gating Internet email. There is a Perl script that runs on Bofh.it which supposedly "sync's up" this with the current Nodelist. That script is what is actually generating the DNS records for BIND. My understanding is that it is not possible to directly edit the records.

    Region 50 is effectively acting as their own collective Internet Email
    provider and the gating is askin to the old days of the IEEE gateway.

    I have fidonet.org's script and DNS records Marco sent me in a backup here... I can look at it more in detail next week.

    The last conversation I had with Macro was that the domain is extremely high-traffic with the amount of DNS queries, Email to Region 50 and overall spam/script attacks. There is absolutely no way that someone can just host this domain on a home server for example. You need a more robust host for this... and remember what I said about "trust".

    A correct solution is to have at least two virtual-machines set up through a cheap cloud company - OVH out of Montreal Quebec for example - as the Name Servers and one that runs the Perl script to generate DNS for BIND. This
    will at least ensure no downtime or complaints and completely eliminate the existing situation with Marco and the Italians... until this setup with Region 50 can be looked at further.

    Now lets cue to the know-it-alls.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to Ward Dossche on Saturday, March 16, 2019 09:32:23
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizone
    By: Ward Dossche to TERRY ROATI on Sat Mar 16 2019 12:42 pm

    Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    Those are your nameservers, or basically where your records are kept for that domain. For example, on those nameserers are where you would find the record that points www.fidonet.org to the website (probably listed as an IP address).

    So at this point you have owneship of the domain -- to start making real changes you need to point to your own nameservers (your registrar usually provides this in most cases, but not all) or you need to get access to those nameservers. Keep in mind when you switch to a new nameserver, all the old records *will not* show up. You are starting from scratch.

    BTW, NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA looks to be running a website as well. Seeing some Fidonet documentation on there. However, looks like a lot of Forbidden links as well.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Ward Dossche on Saturday, March 16, 2019 08:20:00
    Ward Dossche wrote to TERRY ROATI <=-

    Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    Those name servers carry a list of hostnames and the IP addresses they
    map to. Effectively, they control the where your browser goes when you
    type in www.fidonet.org, for example, by telling it what IP address to
    go to.

    If you wanted to change information about the domain, or which IP
    address a hostname resolved to, you'd need access to the name server
    to do so.





    ... Would you like to go back?
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.49
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 11:23:18
    On 2019 Mar 16 20:30:00, you wrote to me:

    On 03-16-19 04:27, mark lewis wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    at one time, my makenl was configured to allow operators to submit
    their own individual nodelist entries... it worked quite well when the
    proper format and data was submitted...

    Which then relies too much on human input. Wouldn't be the first time
    I've
    typod something. I only discovered half of my nodelist was broken

    yup, depending on the typo, makenl or another nodelist processor might have found it... we've all seen what happens when a broken segment gets included and
    entire nets and regions are dropped out of the nodelist...

    when I started generating DNS RRs for it, and finding that half of the entries didn't convert.

    i can't say that i've run into that in a similar situation where i was generating f.n.z.my.domain stuff for my old email<->FTN gating stuff but i did have to really work on my regexes ;)

    I don't see why in 2019 we need to be relying so heavily on humans to validate syntax that can be done by machine. Let the machine do that
    and let the people look at the _content_.

    makenl and similar nodelist processors are supposed to be used to validate the format... humans have been checking the content... that's been SOP for eons...

    already done and handled since eons... just no web interface where
    you have to employ more security than necessary to prevent bots and
    humans from attacking, changing others' entries, submitting
    invalid/false data, etc... a NC/HUB should know who is in their
    segment and not just rubber stamp what is sent to them for
    processing... the RCs/ZCs have to have some trust in their NCs but
    they should also still check the segments they generate to send
    upstream...

    Good points re security. I still think some machine validation of
    syntax on entry/generation would be helpful. Obviously, only a human
    can verify that the contents of the nodelist entries are actually
    correct.

    very true... the problem would come when bots spew proper format garbage into the list which a human then has to remove before processing with makenl...

    how do you know if/when invalid data gets in? i'm speaking of data
    that passes the tests but is still invalid/incorrect...

    ATM, it's a one man show, so same way you do - manually. ;)

    i freely admit that it was a long time before i looked at makenl and implemented it in my setup... i was doing the whole thing manually before then... manually editing the segment and then manually attaching it to a netmail to my upstream coordinator... when i added makenl, things got a lot easier but one still has to manually edit the segment in a plain ASCII text editor... edlin was used over here for a long time OB-)

    these days, the nets in my region send their segments in, makenl finds them in the inbound and moves them when the testing function is executed... if the testing and manual review passes, the NCs are notified that their segment has been processed and accepted when the process function is executed... makenl generates the file attach netmail and puts it in the netmail directory where the mail tosser then processes it and exports it so the mailer can handle it...

    i'm not saying that makenl will catch everything, though... there are only a few required fields so at least X number of commas are required... however, the
    last comma separated fields are not mandatory so they may be missed... i've seen flags joined into one because a comma was missed and that's where the human comes into play but it is easy for those to be missed, too... it isn't perfect and the format could stand some updating so the flag fields are denoted
    in a better manner but that would break a lot of existing software so we keep on doing what it takes to make things work...

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... BEWARE - Tagline Thief in this echo
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 11:37:26
    On 2019 Mar 16 20:31:00, you wrote to me:

    sounds like some software could use a threading model which makes it
    easy to go back through threads and even to list posts so they can
    easily be read and then return to where one was in their reading ;)

    Threading would be nice, but I'd need a different means of reading messages to do that. Web is the obvious one, but for me web
    interfaces suck.

    yeah, i know the feeling... QWK just doesn't have all the needed information for proper threading... things today are a lot better than they were when messages were ""threaded"" together by subject line, though... that was attrocious... i won't even mention systems that sort the mail by date before tossing into the message bases... especially bad since timezone data is not included for proper sorting into the local timezone...

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... An oyster is a fish built like a nut.
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Ward Dossche on Saturday, March 16, 2019 11:41:54
    On 2019 Mar 16 12:42:34, you wrote to TERRY ROATI:

    Next, before I move/change anything I need someone to explain to me
    what the functionality of these lines is:

    Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    those are the two DNS servers that provide the IP address lookup results of the
    site to the rest of the DNS... two because two is better than one which is also why they are in two separate domains instead of one... if there's only one
    DNS server or all the DNS servers for the domain are on a domain that goes down or is otherwise inaccessible, then the site(s) those DNS servers provided IP lookups for are also gone...

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... Brain - the apparatus with which we think that we think.
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Kees van Eeten on Saturday, March 16, 2019 20:14:26
    Hello Kees,

    Apparently the current Fidonet can survive as it is. Turning Fidonet
    into an Othernet along views by those who have missed 10-20-30 of its
    history, is not the solution to its future.

    Fidonet is about communication. Not just the technology that
    makes it possible for folks to communicate with others.

    That's your opinion. And one that I think is not in the majority.

    If I had followed the opinion of the majority, I would not still be in Fidonet.

    Following the herd is what most folks have done throughout history.

    That is quite possibly the silliest statement I have ever heard by
    effectively saying "Well, if you weren't around for the past you RS>can't
    be a part of the future". With that kind of thinking then RS>nobody
    should
    have a say in anything they didn't personally help RS>create. That is
    just
    plain stupid.

    To realize change, one has to demonstrate, that it can be done.
    If a new technology or procedure has a future, it will be used.
    Telling others, what should be done or developed, does not work in technology.

    "Change is hard." ~US President Barack Obama

    Throughout his life in politics, Barack Obama has had to demonstrate
    that change is not only possible, but that it can be done. Rather
    than just talk about change, he acted. What worked was usually kept.
    What did not work, was usually ditched.

    Instant opinions on someones intelligence are never productive in any discussion.

    That's what twitter is for.

    --Lee

    --
    Erections, That's Our Game

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Kurt Weiske on Saturday, March 16, 2019 22:32:40
    Kurt Weiske : August Abolins wrote:

    The last time this was discussed, someone in Zone 2 complained that they
    had more nodes and that everyone would need to move to it, instead of them moving to Zone 1. And the fun continues...

    What Z number gets to be used in the Z:net/node position doesn't have to preclude starting the project. But "1" would make most sense.

    It is probably quite normal human behaviour to resist and complain at first about *anything* in many circumstances in life. And then, a while later it doesn't matter anymore.


    1234 is nice, and has the benefit of pissing everyone off equally as
    we'd all need to renumber our configs. Makes me wonder how many nodes would
    fall
    off in a renumbering because they were running on autopilot or dead listings?

    I guess at one point the old NL would have to be replaced with NL 2.0 within a certain number of days after "release". But until then, NL 2.0 can get started
    in creation and viewed/monitored by anyone interested to use it.

    I wonder if this topic might be best in another echo. Would the exisiting FUTURE4FIDO work?

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Ward Dossche on Sunday, March 17, 2019 01:06:05
    Ward Dossche : August Abolins wrote:
    There is no reason that a bbs couldn't one day operate from an orbiting satellite.

    There has already been a point that was operated from orbit and a node
    from Antarctica.

    Hi Ward! That's very interesting. Can you cite a reference? Google was not revealing its secrets to me.


    Fidonet needs to visibly look unified. One zone number to identify
    that.

    Nice, not new, but you have no idea what you would be breaking, probably
    it would be the definitive end of Fidonet as we know it today with just
    a mere pockets surviving.

    Maybe you are referring to some specific technical issues that I am
    mostly likely unaware of. Fine. But I am not convinced that Fidonet under one
    number is impossible.

    The build of the new zone Fidonet can start as an experiment, automated assignments, and when confirmed via netmail (to "prove" a working exchange) authorize the entry. The build of the new onezone nodelist can get started and
    conceptually proven before actually implemented.

    BTW.. Maybe this echo is not the best place to continue this topic. Perhaps FUTURE4FIDO might be better?

    Cheers!
    .../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to TERRY ROATI on Sunday, March 17, 2019 00:21:35
    Terry,

    Roughly how many systems will it take to revive Zone 6, at the moment I know of 3 active systems in Asia, 1 in Taiwan, 1 in Singapore and 1 in Philippines?

    Whatever number of active people willing to give it a shot. If there are 3 as a
    start, then that's better than nothing. You need to start somewhere.

    Personally I would not like to see a one-node zone again as Z5 has been for quite a while.

    I would be quite OK with 3 one-node regions and see where it takes us. These three people could maintain their present status where-ever they are until such
    a time when a revived Z6 really takes off. And if it doesn't we trashcan that revived Z6 and nothing's lost.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Ward Dossche on Sunday, March 17, 2019 02:31:46
    Ward Dossche : TERRY ROATI wrote:

    Next, before I move/change anything I need someone to explain to me what
    the functionality of these lines is:

    Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    Hi Ward, A few people have already provided an explanation about those entries, but no one has really explained what you need to do.

    Nick has explained the current traffic situation/stats very well. But you don't need to run any scripts or mess with CNAME or MX or anything like that, right now. All you want to accomplish right now is "point forward" the domain fidonet.org (which is in your control) to the servers that Joacim's host is using.

    So, instead of..

    1st. Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    2nd. Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    ...put in the server names that Joacim's ISP is using. Joacim should be able to tell you that.

    Then all Joacim has to do is create a local domain as "fidonet.org" on his ISP's Control Panel. He then can point that name to the directories where he has built the fidonet.io pages.

    But, all you have to do is the 1st and 2nd fields above.

    Don't worry about MX (for mail) and CNAME or any of that other stuff at this point.

    Hope this helps!
    .../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Rob Swindell@1:103/705 to mark lewis on Saturday, March 16, 2019 17:54:33
    Re: Fidonet zone 7
    By: mark lewis to Tony Langdon on Sat Mar 16 2019 11:37 am


    On 2019 Mar 16 20:31:00, you wrote to me:

    sounds like some software could use a threading model which makes it
    easy to go back through threads and even to list posts so they can
    easily be read and then return to where one was in their reading ;)

    Threading would be nice, but I'd need a different means of reading messages to do that. Web is the obvious one, but for me web
    interfaces suck.

    yeah, i know the feeling... QWK just doesn't have all the needed information for proper threading...

    Synchronet has provided Message and Reply IDs in QWK packets since 2004 and many other useful header fields (in newer HEADERS.DAT file) since then. Just need offline mailer support. And the age-old standard QWK/REP msg header format does include an 8-digit "reference message number" which can be used for proper thread linkage in most message bases (though, oddly, QWK message numbers are limited to 7-digits).

    digital man

    This Is Spinal Tap quote #44:
    It really, it does disturb me, but i'll rise above it; I'm a professional. Norco, CA WX: 75.0F, 23.0% humidity, 0 mph SE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to Ward Dossche on Sunday, March 17, 2019 09:09:44
    are until such a time when a revived Z6 really takes off. And if it doesn't we trashcan that revived Z6 and nothing's lost.

    I'm confused. Just two days ago you were telling me about how badly Fidonet would break if zones were disbanded. Now you're talking about reviving and potentially again disbanding a zone as if it were nothing.

    Which is it?

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Tony Langdon on Sunday, March 17, 2019 03:24:10
    Tony Langdon : nathanael culver wrote:

    What was Zone 7? I remember 1-6 from the old days.

    By bad. I did it. I was running off with my fingers.

    BUT.. someone *did* acknowledge of a proposed 7 back in the day. I'm curious.

    .../|

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to mark lewis on Sunday, March 17, 2019 03:26:39
    mark lewis : nathanael culver wrote:

    Z7 is not and never was a fidonet zone... it was dreamed of being a
    fidonet zome encompassing maybe R50 in Z2 at one time but that never
    came to be... especially since another FTN or two was already using it...

    SORRY. The original mention of 7 was my fault.

    Too many numbers running through my head. We just need one. ;)


    .../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Paul Quinn on Sunday, March 17, 2019 10:21:00
    On 03-16-19 19:55, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Hi! Tony,

    On 16 Mar 19 20:19, you wrote to me:

    I like being isolated from the network and a non terminal interface.
    :)

    I can't do that any longer.

    I haven't found a "live" interface that works for me.

    ... Toto, I don't think we're in DOS any more...
    Nope, largely left it behind years ago. ;)

    It's still lying in wait here. I had to move the second of two Win98se vBox appliances over to the Xunubtu 64-bit vBox server, after this
    older Xubuntu 32-bit vBox server refused to run *absolutelty* after a 'kernel header' upgrade re-boot. That'll make two more loverly MS-DOS playthings on it... till this server is upped to 64-bit also. Then
    they come back... fingers crossed. :)

    Good luck. I might be bringing DOS back myself, as I want to resurrect old systems, which are DOS based.

    Cheers,
    Paul.

    ... Emergency repair procedure #1: Kick it.

    Haha true! :D


    ... All those updates, and still imperfect!
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Ward Dossche on Sunday, March 17, 2019 10:22:00
    On 03-16-19 11:09, Ward Dossche wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    I bought a 31ft 3 cabin sailyacht, full galley, toilet ... and the
    weather is becoming sailable.

    Nice! :)

    The nerd can come along. There's wifi and my point on a tablet.

    Haha gotta have the essentials. :D


    ... Secret of electronics: Keep the smoke in the wires.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to mark lewis on Sunday, March 17, 2019 10:31:00
    On 03-16-19 11:23, mark lewis wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    yup, depending on the typo, makenl or another nodelist processor might have found it... we've all seen what happens when a broken segment gets included and entire nets and regions are dropped out of the nodelist...

    MakeNL didn't find it. It was only when I added the DNS stuff that I discovered the nodelist formatting issue.

    when I started generating DNS RRs for it, and finding that half of the entries didn't convert.

    i can't say that i've run into that in a similar situation where i was generating f.n.z.my.domain stuff for my old email<->FTN gating stuff
    but i did have to really work on my regexes ;)

    Yes, handy to know! :D

    makenl and similar nodelist processors are supposed to be used to
    validate the format... humans have been checking the content... that's been SOP for eons...

    Didn't work in my situation. MakeNL doesn't pick up stuff that breaks the rest of the chain, so it has to be 100% human checked now on my net.

    very true... the problem would come when bots spew proper format
    garbage into the list which a human then has to remove before
    processing with makenl...

    What are the odds of that - a bot getting in then somehow generating valid data? And that's after getting past a login.

    how do you know if/when invalid data gets in? i'm speaking of data
    that passes the tests but is still invalid/incorrect...

    ATM, it's a one man show, so same way you do - manually. ;)

    i freely admit that it was a long time before i looked at makenl and implemented it in my setup... i was doing the whole thing manually
    before then... manually editing the segment and then manually attaching
    it to a netmail to my upstream coordinator... when i added makenl,
    things got a lot easier but one still has to manually edit the segment
    in a plain ASCII text editor... edlin was used over here for a long
    time OB-)

    Yeah, even though MakeNL is technically overkill, I use it and consider it a usefull tool in the chain to do some of the "donkey work" of processing the nodelist.

    these days, the nets in my region send their segments in, makenl finds them in the inbound and moves them when the testing function is executed... if the testing and manual review passes, the NCs are
    notified that their segment has been processed and accepted when the process function is executed... makenl generates the file attach
    netmail and puts it in the netmail directory where the mail tosser then processes it and exports it so the mailer can handle it...

    Which is as things should be. Again, these parts are not needed here, since all of my nodelist is managed in the one place. I don't have the more complex structure of Fidonet, and doubt I ever will.

    i'm not saying that makenl will catch everything, though... there are
    only a few required fields so at least X number of commas are
    required... however, the last comma separated fields are not mandatory
    so they may be missed... i've seen flags joined into one because a
    comma was missed and that's where the human comes into play but it is
    easy for those to be missed, too... it isn't perfect and the format
    could stand some updating so the flag fields are denoted in a better manner but that would break a lot of existing software so we keep on
    doing what it takes to make things work...

    Has been a while, but I think my issue was something to do with how the hostnames were saved in the nodelist. MakeNL was happy with it, but the script used for the DNS is a lot stricter than MakeNL or the nodelist.


    ... Patriotism is not who can leak the most Secret documents to the NY Times... === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to mark lewis on Sunday, March 17, 2019 10:47:00
    On 03-16-19 11:37, mark lewis wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    yeah, i know the feeling... QWK just doesn't have all the needed information for proper threading... things today are a lot better than they were when messages were ""threaded"" together by subject line, though... that was attrocious... i won't even mention systems that sort the mail by date before tossing into the message bases... especially
    bad since timezone data is not included for proper sorting into the
    local timezone...

    Threading wouldn't have necessarily helped with this issue. I tend to move on with the discussion fairly quickly, and even with the thread available, a back reference to "someone said something" often doesn't work with me, it's already "ancient history". It's the same for me on more modern media. Only difference is I have the older messages in the thread to look at (no guarantees I'd find what you're referring to or get the reference!). :)


    ... Ignorance is the mother of research.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Ward Dossche on Sunday, March 17, 2019 11:37:00
    On 03-16-19 12:42, Ward Dossche wrote to TERRY ROATI <=-

    Next, before I move/change anything I need someone to explain to me
    what the functionality of these lines is:

    Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    These tell DNS the nameservers to use when looking up .fidonet.org addresses. But this looks like a copy and paste from something, and I'd like to see more to get the proper context. However, it looks informational, rather than part of a configuration file.

    Also, people approaching me with the statement "Trust me, I know what
    I'm doing" get an odd look.

    LOL


    ... He knew everything about literature, except how to enjoy it.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Nick Andre on Sunday, March 17, 2019 11:47:00
    On 03-16-19 10:14, Nick Andre wrote to Ward Dossche <=-

    A correct solution is to have at least two virtual-machines set up
    through a cheap cloud company - OVH out of Montreal Quebec for example
    - as the Name Servers and one that runs the Perl script to generate DNS for BIND. This will at least ensure no downtime or complaints and completely eliminate the existing situation with Marco and the
    Italians... until this setup with Region 50 can be looked at further.

    You wouldn't get any argument from me on that approach.

    Now lets cue to the know-it-alls.

    :)


    ... All right who's been cooking hot dogs in the Warp Drive?
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Nick Andre on Sunday, March 17, 2019 03:38:57
    Nick Andre : All wrote:

    On 15 Mar 19 05:42:22, August Abolins said the following to Nathanael Culver:

    The 21st century Fidonet (ie. nodelist) could be phased in and the
    old one nolonger to be updated.

    Please, everyone... I'm begging you for all things holy, lets NOT get
    into this discussion. At best, this is laughable amusing fodder for our
    Zone 2..

    We can ignore that aspect, and just talk tech.


    There are certain things in Fidonet that cannot and will not change
    because of too much bad blood and history.

    Dwelling on blood and history is childish. We don't have to groom the new generation (and people who are interest in betterment for the tech) with animosity from the past.

    A lot of damage has been caused by "zone wars"
    and while technically one zone could work, politically its impossible.

    Again.. I am sure there are many that don't care about the politics you mention
    that have occurred in the past. Myself included.

    Lets just focus on websites, newcomers and better software.

    I concur. And from what I've been reading here, that is already taking place.
    Additionaly, it is wonderful to be reminded that someone had the vision as early as 1997 to start working on binkd that many here (even your ancient politically scarred veterans) have adopted without further injuries. ;)

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to August Abolins on Saturday, March 16, 2019 22:04:45
    On 17 Mar 19 02:31:46, August Abolins said the following to Ward Dossche:

    So, instead of..

    1st. Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    2nd. Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    ...put in the server names that Joacim's ISP is using. Joacim should be ab to tell you that.

    No.

    In any domain-transfer, Name server or DNS situation, I would rather suggest playing safe than merely switching name servers.

    Ward should not start switching name servers unless he first studies very carefully what DNS records are on those existing name servers.

    Unless Joacim is running a commercial-grade DNS server setup and has replicated the existing DNS structure, and his ISP is okay with the
    level of DNS queries, please do NOT suggest merely switching name servers.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Tony Langdon on Sunday, March 17, 2019 03:49:30
    Tony Langdon : nathanael culver wrote:

    No, I think we most certainly need to keep Fidonet off the Internet. Just for clarification, by "Internet" here of course I mean "the Web".

    Too late. fidonet.ozzmosis.com posts everything from the echos in the clear, since 2002. And from the looks of it, nothing gets purged.

    Very handy! LOL


    OK, but one could argue similarly against gating Fidonet to fidonet.* or alt.bbs.fidonet.* newsgroups too. :)

    That has been experimented with. I tried that with the IEEE echo and comp.org.ieee, briefly. I quickly realized that it could become filled with garbage. Today comp.org.ieee is relatively clean, but there is the ocassional troll or annoyance.

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to nathanael culver on Sunday, March 17, 2019 03:56:53
    nathanael culver : Ward Dossche wrote:

    are until such a time when a revived Z6 really takes off. And if it doesn't we trashcan that revived Z6 and nothing's lost.

    I'm confused. Just two days ago you were telling me about how badly Fidonet would break if zones were disbanded. Now you're talking about reviving and potentially again disbanding a zone as if it were nothing.

    Which is it?

    You see it the same way I do. Fidonet was 1-6. Now, 1-4. It could become 1-2
    someday. Then, why not just 1 that spans globally? 1 that represents a unified cooperative happy family.

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Robert Stinnett on Sunday, March 17, 2019 04:33:48
    Robert Stinnett : Nick Andre wrote:

    There is no central "one person" that does the entire Nodelist. This
    is part

    This is good, as I never think a process should be owned by one person. However, I'd much rather replace those x-number of persons who are doing
    this segment process with automation as well.

    Fidonet could start by first embracing a new automated method of generating NL entries, just as it has had no problem accepting new protocols following the demise of dialup.


    Data validation is part of any good automation system. Did I get the right data, in the right format and does it match certain rules? If not,
    reject that data and keep on trucking. The whole system shouldn't come
    crashing
    down or end because some bad data got into it.

    Yes, totally doable. The Fidonet application process for potential members ought to be accomplished with an online registration and automated validation process. No need for humans to intercede until a proper netmail exchange has occurred. When successful, the segment has already been built and only needs final hub/node approval.


    ..I believe in the wisdom of crowds -- while every idea may not be
    adopted, good information can be gleemed from others who don't deal with
    it on a day to day basis.

    Exactly. Sometimes we don't see the trees because of the forest.

    Should this exciting topic be best in another echo? I'm game. I'd like to ease-drop on the new wisdom.

    Kind of hard to send a netmail without having a number. Pretty hard to
    get a number when the website that has the information was last updated 10 years ago.

    Catch-22, eh? (Hey.. maybe the unizone # should be 22). ;) Nah.. looks funny, almost like two zone 2's. LOL


    I believe that the future at this point is with the Othernets and
    perhaps even
    complete abandonment of FTN type networks in favor of new technology or a re-use of another technology already out there. I'm not 100% convinced the technologies of FTN are really applicable in the modern BBS/forum world.

    By "technologies of FTN" do you mean the collection of binkd, FTP, telnet, etc?
    Those seem pretty good modern improvements to me.

    ..I do believe there is at least some room for growth both in number of users/systems and technology.

    Me too!


    .../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to nathanael culver on Saturday, March 16, 2019 21:49:43
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: nathanael culver to Ward Dossche on Sun Mar 17 2019 09:09 am

    I'm confused. Just two days ago you were telling me about how badly Fidonet would break if zones were disbanded. Now you're talking about reviving and potentially again disbanding a zone as if it were nothing.

    Which is it?

    What day of the week is it? The answer changes with the day of the week and which way the wind is blowing.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to August Abolins on Sunday, March 17, 2019 12:46:00
    On 03-17-19 03:24, August Abolins wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Tony Langdon : nathanael culver wrote:

    What was Zone 7? I remember 1-6 from the old days.

    By bad. I did it. I was running off with my fingers.

    :)

    BUT.. someone *did* acknowledge of a proposed 7 back in the day. I'm curious.

    That question was answered. Apparently part of Z2 floated the idea of forming a new zone, but it never happened, was my understanding. It has been mentioned further back in this echo.


    ... Stay back! I have a modem and I know how to use it!
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to August Abolins on Sunday, March 17, 2019 13:57:00
    On 03-17-19 03:49, August Abolins wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Too late. fidonet.ozzmosis.com posts everything from the echos in the clear, since 2002. And from the looks of it, nothing gets purged.

    Looks like that particular horse has well and truly bolted. ;)

    Very handy! LOL


    OK, but one could argue similarly against gating Fidonet to fidonet.* or alt.bbs.fidonet.* newsgroups too. :)

    That has been experimented with. I tried that with the IEEE echo and comp.org.ieee, briefly. I quickly realized that it could become filled with garbage. Today comp.org.ieee is relatively clean, but there is
    the ocassional troll or annoyance.

    I know Usenet is routinely gated to Fidonet and other FTNs, and I had a suspicion that there were experiments done in the other direction too.


    ... Among economists, the real world is considered to be a special case.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Nick Andre on Sunday, March 17, 2019 14:02:00
    On 03-16-19 22:04, Nick Andre wrote to August Abolins <=-

    Unless Joacim is running a commercial-grade DNS server setup and has replicated the existing DNS structure, and his ISP is okay with the
    level of DNS queries, please do NOT suggest merely switching name
    servers.

    I'm inclined to agree. One needs to know what the domain is actually being used for, and what the implications of changing things are. From there, it's a case of proceed very carefully.

    At best, you're going to piss someone off, at worst, cause major issues for lots of people, unless this is approached very carefully. First step is to investigate - ask questions, gather information, etc.


    ... Amiga: The Computer They Couldn't Kill
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Nick Andre on Sunday, March 17, 2019 04:44:42
    Nick Andre : Robert Stinnett wrote:

    I still do not quite understand how a 100% automated system will work,
    how it
    gets decided what software to run, what server OS, what virtual-machine environment, who gets access to it and if so by what decisions is it
    made, who
    gets to vote on it, who is qualified and who isn't.

    It could start with an application form hosted at fidonet.org, and/or at an exisiting NC's website if they have one.

    The data from that form is processed to "figure out" the best available "already qualifid" NC or host based on the application results.

    There might still be required some human monitoring of course, but the most of the work to generate a properly constructed NL entry would be done.

    .../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Paul Quinn@3:640/1384 to Tony Langdon on Sunday, March 17, 2019 12:55:44
    Hi! Tony,

    On 17 Mar 19 10:21, you wrote to me:

    I like being isolated from the network and a non terminal
    interface. :)
    I can't do that any longer.

    I haven't found a "live" interface that works for me.

    Mmm... well, I think I have. I've kinda lost the point of discussion, being a simpleton. Are we talking Fidonet access? With my point system the OS, my mailer, tosser, and, reader/editor(s) travel on a USB stick. (I just need access to either of my binkD servers with a mobile ISP account, to complete the
    loop.) Any non-specific boot-from-USB PC-doohickey can be used, either mobile
    or desktop.

    Consistent/persistent interface(s) on a 'stick'. Is that close?

    Good luck. I might be bringing DOS back myself, as I want to
    resurrect old systems, which are DOS based.

    I just need it for reference purpose(s), having over 25 years' of stuff and what was still-running software. :) It's just the modern virtualisation software that fucked up.

    ... Emergency repair procedure #1: Kick it.
    Haha true! :D

    Whenever I see the quote I'm reminded of (someone like Kenneth More, made up with a beard) playing the part of a Scottish-British Naval "beachmaster" directing traffic on an invasion beach in 'The Longest Day' (D-day) flick, presented with a Bren Gun Carrier with conked-out engine. He uses his gnarly Scottish walking stick to give the car a superhero bang! on the engine cowling,
    and gets it going!, much to his & the driver's surprise.

    Cheers,
    Paul.

    ... BoomDeYada: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC-jau-fpJY
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130515
    * Origin: Quinn's Rock - Live from Paul's Xubuntu desktop! (3:640/1384)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Nick Andre on Sunday, March 17, 2019 06:02:19
    Nick Andre : August Abolins wrote:

    ...put in the server names that Joacim's ISP is using.

    No.

    In any domain-transfer, Name server or DNS situation, I would rather
    suggest
    playing safe than merely switching name servers.

    But it is safe. It is easy to put in another DNS at any time, or clear those fields. Updating those DNS fields is not a "transfer" (which would require the "AUTH CODE" exchange).

    IMHO, to be really "safe", Ward should have built a fidonet.org place-holder page(s) a long time ago on his ISP host that he is paying for. And if the new 1st and 2nd DNS entry results look bad or break something, it can simply be undone to revert to his place-holder page(s).

    Take a look at http://propertyownersbuyandsale.ca/. What can you discern from that?

    The domain owner asked me to build a site. They have a completely different ISP
    than me. I forget the original 1st and 2nd DNS names, but the ISP is namespro.ca.

    I built a site at my own ISP host in a subdirectory *exactly* the same way fidonet.io exists. The owner, once happy with my design approved the DNS forward *exactly* like it is being described here. We changed the default namespro.ca entries, and put in:

    1st. Name Server: ns1.globat.com
    2nd. Name Server: ns2.globat.com

    Namespro calls this "if your domain is hosted by another company.. change 1st DNS and 2nd DNS. As done above.

    At my account with Globat, I simply have an entry for their domain name "propertyownersbuyandsale.ca" and all I have to do is steer that to the subdirectory where my designed pages are.

    This is not a transfer. Ward does not lose control. He can always "clear" the 1st and 2nd fields and his ISP will default to a local landing page or a pages of his own creation.


    Ward should not start switching name servers unless he first studies very carefully what DNS records are on those existing name servers.

    I hear ya. But I doubt that the new DNS "destination" is of nefarious nature.
    And we're only talking about pages that have text. There is also no email involved (unless Ward feels like creating info@fidonet.org) in which case he *should* point info@fidonet.org to any existing mailbox that someone will actually read and answer.) No ISP is going to object to that.


    Unless Joacim is running a commercial-grade DNS server setup and has replicated the existing DNS structure, and his ISP is okay with the
    level of DNS queries, please do NOT suggest merely switching name servers.

    Queries to fidonet.org isn't going to break anyone's internet. Come on! Robots
    are probably to blame for hits/queries at sites everywhere.

    What is there to replicate, other than to first point the fidonet.org name to the new DNSs. There should be no MX CNAME (the structure?) stuff to deal with at this first step.

    The first step with the new 1st and 2nd DNS entries will ultimately load Joacim's pages just fine.

    This simple forwarding thing via DNSs shouldn't be taking so long since Feb 25!
    If I would have taken so long to have a "live" site for the folks at propertyownersbuyandsale.ca, I would have lost a job.

    BTW, propertyownersbuyandsale.ca is DNS forwarded the same way as described above, but the domain is dropping soon - hence there is only a place-holder page now and I was asked to remove the old site content until instructed otherwise.


    .../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to August Abolins on Saturday, March 16, 2019 23:08:00
    August Abolins wrote to nathanael culver <=-

    You see it the same way I do. Fidonet was 1-6. Now, 1-4. It
    could become 1-2 someday. Then, why not just 1 that spans
    globally? 1 that represents a unified cooperative happy family.

    Yes, I agree. The "zone boundaries" are part of the problem with
    FidoNet today. Makes it easy for "turf wars" and big egos to get
    in the way of progress.

    Look at some of the better "Othernets" today. Every single one of
    them has only one "Zone", with very loose geographical groupings
    of nodes under a host. Even a Region is not really necessary, or
    perhaps there's only one Region in the Zone. The real point here
    is that they only need one Zone, and they work fine because of the
    new technology that doesn't care about dial-up phone costs.

    An improved numbering system would just need: Zone:Host/Node
    (which is how many/all Othernets are operating *TODAY*).

    I say Fido could/should go to ONLY Zone 1, and keep zones 2-6 out
    of circulation for historical/sentimental reasons. All other nets
    can be Zone 7+ (as they already are).



    ... Be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slower to become angry.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Tony Langdon on Sunday, March 17, 2019 06:15:48
    Tony Langdon : August Abolins wrote:

    OK, but one could argue similarly against gating Fidonet to fidonet.* or alt.bbs.fidonet.* newsgroups too. :)

    That has been experimented with. I tried that with the IEEE echo and comp.org.ieee, briefly.

    I know Usenet is routinely gated to Fidonet and other FTNs, and I had a suspicion that there were experiments done in the other direction too.

    It was working both ways in IEEE quite nicely. But the professional-speak in comp.org.ieee did not appeal to many fido sysops.
    But there were still interesting announcements from the tech world. There was little traffic in the IEEE -> comp.org.ieee direction, except my own!

    I *did* meet some other engineers that observed the headers from my posts to comp.org.ieee and this spawned opportunities to talk about BBSing and Fidonet.

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to August Abolins on Sunday, March 17, 2019 15:33:00
    On 03-17-19 06:15, August Abolins wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    It was working both ways in IEEE quite nicely. But the
    professional-speak in comp.org.ieee did not appeal to many fido sysops. But there were still interesting announcements from the tech world.
    There was little traffic in the IEEE -> comp.org.ieee direction, except
    my own!

    I think you're misunderstanding me. That looks like a newsgroup that's been gated to Fidonet. Sure, the gate is bidirectional, but the original entity was the newsgroup. The Fido echo only came along after the gateway was setup (unless both existed as separate entities).

    That is routinely done today, and BBS packages like Synchronet can do the gating without any additional software.

    What would be a big no-no (most moderator posts I've seen on Fidonet explicitly forbit it anyway) is to gate an echo like this to something like say alt.bbs.fido-echomail.fidonews. In this case, the original messaging area is the Fidonet echo, and the newsgroup only gets created because of the gateway.


    ... Anything good in life is either illegal, immoral, or fattening.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Tony Langdon on Sunday, March 17, 2019 06:36:08
    Tony Langdon : Paul Quinn wrote:

    === MultiMail/Win v0.51

    Mmm... I thought Multimail was pretty bloody good... last century. Aarrrgh! Yes! QWK mail. The light bulb lit. Oh, yes. You have my sympathy. ;)

    I've never been a big fan of online interfaces and the machine is not
    local.

    Are you adverse to windows-gui? If not, take a look at SemPoint. I believe it
    can be set up with non-point node numbers too.

    But my main comment is that it supports QWK, JAM, PKT, etc.. concurrently with any system or othernet you pull your echos from, and has a database approach to
    storing offline messages. So, if you have multiple QWK files, they will "merge" into the database of messages that you previously pull in. There is no
    need to work on one QWK group of messages at a time anymore.

    Easy to do Searchs. It displays threads graphically by MSGID.

    The subject line is *not* limited to a fixed number.

    I couldn't find anything wrong with it except that it lacked the tcp/ip transport that I would appreciate today.

    .../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to mark lewis on Sunday, March 17, 2019 06:41:25
    mark lewis : Tony Langdon wrote:

    Such back references are a pain to follow, that's now in my "past". :(

    sounds like some software could use a threading model which makes it
    easy to go back through threads and even to list posts so they can
    easily be read and then return to where one was in their reading ;)

    Tony is using QWK. SemPoint could fill the threading gap very nicely, and he wouldn't be limited to one QWK file/session at a time.

    He could even switch to Jam and any format later.


    .../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to mark lewis on Sunday, March 17, 2019 07:11:49
    mark lewis : Tony Langdon wrote:

    The interface would validate all fields, so that the nodelist data at least conformed to standards (of course, there's still a degree of "GIGO", but that goes for any human entered content ;) ).

    already done and handled since eons... just no web interface where you
    have to employ more security than necessary to prevent bots and humans
    from attacking, changing others' entries, submitting invalid/false data, etc...

    Hello Mark!

    A good captcha at the front door would foil the bots.

    No one would be able to change another entry. A valid change could be approved
    after a valid netmail to prove proper FTN setup.


    a NC/HUB should know who is in their segment and not just rubber
    stamp what is sent to them for processing...

    Yes, the NC/HUB would review the NL application - in person, and approve the merge into their segment if all looks good.


    the RCs/ZCs have to have
    some trust in their NCs but they should also still check the segments
    they generate to send upstream...

    Absolutely. Humans would certainly need to monitor the new segments until all the bugs are ironed out. That would be akin to having a PAUSE command to give you a chance to CTRL'C out if necessary. Otherwise.. let it go up the ladder.

    how do you know if/when invalid data gets in? i'm speaking of data that passes the tests but is still invalid/incorrect...

    It won't be valid if the netmail exchange fails? I'm just thinking out loud here. Do you mean the various descriptive FLAGS (to avoid lying about a system's true capabilities)? The sysop could engage in a human-to-human at that time, but only after a successful netmail exchange.

    I'm watching FUTURE4FIDO to continue this, if you're game. ;)

    .../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/360 to Tony Langdon on Sunday, March 17, 2019 07:21:45
    Tony Langdon : mark lewis wrote:

    ..I don't see why in 2019 we need to be relying so heavily on
    humans to
    validate syntax that can be done by machine. Let the machine do that
    and let
    the people look at the _content_.

    Absolutely. The onus would be on the applicant (a battle with the machine) to go through all the necessary fields including the Flags. Their purpose are already described in the nodelist. Offer those in a drop-down and a link for a
    H)help for each field and flag.

    That would be a good test of comprehension and competence and leave the the human NC/HUB alone to get on with their life until a successful netmail with that validated data is submitted.

    [I've attempted to do my 1st crosspost to FUTURE4FIDO with this message.]

    .../|ug

    --- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to August Abolins on Sunday, March 17, 2019 16:36:00
    On 03-17-19 07:21, August Abolins wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    That would be a good test of comprehension and competence and leave the the human NC/HUB alone to get on with their life until a successful netmail with that validated data is submitted.

    Yep, the netmail needs to be part of the process.

    [I've attempted to do my 1st crosspost to FUTURE4FIDO with this
    message.]

    Hopefully it will show up here. :)


    ... To eat, perchance, to barf.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Rob Swindell@1:103/705 to Tony Langdon on Saturday, March 16, 2019 23:15:35
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizone
    By: Tony Langdon to Ward Dossche on Sun Mar 17 2019 11:37 am

    On 03-16-19 12:42, Ward Dossche wrote to TERRY ROATI <=-

    Next, before I move/change anything I need someone to explain to me what the functionality of these lines is:

    Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    These tell DNS the nameservers to use when looking up .fidonet.org addresses. But this looks like a copy and paste from something, and I'd like to see more to get the proper context.

    $ dig fidonet.org

    ; <<>> DiG 9.10.3-P4-Debian <<>> fidonet.org
    ;; global options: +cmd
    ;; Got answer:
    ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 34348
    ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 1

    ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
    ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 1452
    ;; QUESTION SECTION:
    ;fidonet.org. IN A

    ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
    fidonet.org. 86400 IN SOA ns.bofh.it. md.linux.it. 2014070

    ;; Query time: 46 msec
    ;; SERVER: 1.1.1.1#53(1.1.1.1)
    ;; WHEN: Sat Mar 16 23:14:52 PDT 2019
    ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 95


    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #85:
    The ZMODEM file transfer protocol is limited to files of 4 gigabytes or smaller.
    Norco, CA WX: 61.5F, 39.0% humidity, 0 mph SW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Rob Swindell on Sunday, March 17, 2019 17:26:00
    On 03-16-19 23:15, Rob Swindell wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizone
    By: Tony Langdon to Ward Dossche on Sun Mar 17 2019 11:37 am

    On 03-16-19 12:42, Ward Dossche wrote to TERRY ROATI <=-

    Next, before I move/change anything I need someone to explain to me what the functionality of these lines is:

    Name Server: NS.BOFH.IT
    Name Server: NS.FIDONET.ORG.UA

    ;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
    fidonet.org. 86400 IN SOA ns.bofh.it.
    md.linux.it. 2014070

    Interesting there's a nameserver that's different to the one above.


    ... Enter that again, just a little slower.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to August Abolins on Sunday, March 17, 2019 17:49:53
    On 17/03/2019 11:56, August Abolins -> nathanael culver wrote:

    You see it the same way I do. Fidonet was 1-6. Now, 1-4. It could become 1-2 someday. Then, why not just 1 that spans globally? 1 that represents a unified cooperative happy family.

    As our software requires data in the zone field, what is the advantage of all having the same number - or should I ask what is the disadvantage of having differing zone numbers? With different zone numbers we get an idea of where in the world the writer is.

    Making all the same zone number would still leave us with differing region and net numbers, we could fight about that I suppose in lieu of inter zonal fighting.


    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 17, 2019 16:36:07
    what is the advantage of all having the same number

    No more zone wars? How about a reduction of bureaucracy? Having multiple
    zones was an advantage back when calls were expensive and each zone
    encompassed thousands of nodes. Today there are no calls to pay for, and
    there may even still be a thousand Fidonet nodes left worldwide -- most with only a single user. Having multiple zones to manage the dregs that remain is stupidly redundant. Didn't I just read that all of Zone 5 consists of a single node? And now there's talk of reviving Zone 6 for what? three nodes? Just why?

    of having differing zone numbers? With different zone numbers we get an idea of where in the world the writer is.

    I really don't get this obsession with geography. Why do we care where in
    the world someone is? In any case, at best all the zone number tells you is where the node I posted from is; I could literally be telneting in from the other side of the planet. In some of the othernets I'm subscribed to, my NC literally IS half a planet away and no one cares.

    If you *really* want to know where I am, you can check the nodelist. My zone number isn't going to tell you.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From TERRY ROATI@3:640/1321 to Tony Langdon on Sunday, March 17, 2019 18:05:46
    It's been that way for years, getting it right is a must so no hurry.

    Get all the facts, look at the options and go from there.

    Terry

    On Mar 17, 2019 01:52pm, Tony Langdon wrote to Nick Andre:

    On 03-16-19 22:04, Nick Andre wrote to August Abolins <=-

    Unless Joacim is running a commercial-grade DNS server setup and has
    replicated the existing DNS structure, and his ISP is okay with the
    level of DNS queries, please do NOT suggest merely switching name
    servers.

    I'm inclined to agree. One needs to know what the domain is actually being used for, and what the implications of changing things are. From there, it's a case of proceed very carefully.

    At best, you're going to piss someone off, at worst, cause major issues for lots of people, unless this is approached very carefully. First
    step is to investigate - ask questions, gather information, etc.


    ... Amiga: The Computer They Couldn't Kill
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au
    (3:633/410)

    ... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
    * Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)
  • From Kees van Eeten@2:280/5003.4 to Lee Lofaso on Sunday, March 17, 2019 18:22:52
    Hello Lee!

    16 Mar 19 20:14, you wrote to me:

    Fidonet is about communication.
    Not just the technology that
    makes it possible for folks to communicate with others.

    I am only in it for the technology, if I were in it for communication,
    I would have left many years ago.

    Following the herd is what most folks have done throughout history.

    That is their problem.

    To realize change, one has to demonstrate, that it can be done.
    If a new technology or procedure has a future, it will be used.
    Telling others, what should be done or developed, does not work in
    technology.

    "Change is hard." ~US President Barack Obama

    Throughout his life in politics, Barack Obama has had to demonstrate
    that change is not only possible, but that it can be done. Rather
    than just talk about change, he acted. What worked was usually kept.
    What did not work, was usually ditched.

    Barack Obama was a lawyer, not a technologist. Lawyers write laws

    Instant opinions on someones intelligence are never productive in
    any
    discussion.

    That's what twitter is for.

    I have never used twitter. I have heard, that in some countries it is the
    leaders main channel of oneway communication.

    Kees

    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5
    * Origin: As for me, all I know is that, I know nothing. (2:280/5003.4)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to August Abolins on Sunday, March 17, 2019 07:47:00
    August Abolins wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    I wonder if this topic might be best in another echo. Would the
    exisiting FUTURE4FIDO work?

    I've never heard of that echo - another problem Fidonet has is with so
    many dead echoes it's hard to find the live ones. I don't think I've
    ever seen that echotag on the STATS echo, is it alive?



    ... What do you think of the guests?
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.49
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 17, 2019 08:30:00
    David Drummond wrote to August Abolins <=-

    As our software requires data in the zone field, what is the advantage
    of all having the same number - or should I ask what is the
    disadvantage of having differing zone numbers? With different zone
    numbers we get an idea of where in the world the writer is.

    Does it matter where in the world the writer is from, or do the words
    matter?


    ... How does this work, is there an orientation?
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.49
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Tony Langdon on Sunday, March 17, 2019 08:37:00
    Tony Langdon wrote to Paul Quinn <=-


    ... Toto, I don't think we're in DOS any more...
    Nope, largely left it behind years ago. ;)

    Good luck. I might be bringing DOS back myself, as I want to resurrect old systems, which are DOS based.

    I do most of my BBSing through vDos under Windows, using MultiMail and
    Qedit - essentially the same setup I've used since setting up a mail
    door in Maximus in 1993.



    ... Have you done something wrong?
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.49
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to nathanael culver on Monday, March 18, 2019 07:10:49
    On 17/03/2019 18:36, nathanael culver -> David Drummond wrote:
    what is the advantage of all having the same number

    No more zone wars?

    Do you honestly think that the "zone wars" are about what zone number appears in our addresses? You don't think it is about the culture displayed by the different places of origin?

    How about a reduction of bureaucracy?

    How much "bureaucracy do you see displayed by your ZC?

    Having multiple zones was an advantage back when calls were expensive and
    each zone
    encompassed thousands of nodes. Today there are no calls to pay for, and there may even still be a thousand Fidonet nodes left worldwide -- most
    with
    only a single user. Having multiple zones to manage the dregs that remain
    is
    stupidly redundant.

    But our software demands that "redundant" zone number - regardless of what it is. Will you have all of the software rewritten to allow the zone number to be disposed of?

    Didn't I just read that all of Zone 5 consists of a single
    node? And now there's talk of reviving Zone 6 for what? three nodes?
    Just why?

    For the same reason we have nets with just one "real node" (as opposed to an admin alias). The numbers have waned, the structure remains.

    of having differing zone numbers? With different zone numbers we get an
    idea of where in the world the writer is.

    I really don't get this obsession with geography. Why do we care where in the world someone is?

    Ah, an advocate of one world government?

    Things that are acceptable in some societies/nations are not in others. Knowing
    that one comes from a different country can help one understand why certain people respond the way they do to some posts. What may seem objectionable to you may be perfectly normal and acceptable to others.

    In any case, at best all the zone number tells you is
    where the node I posted from is; I could literally be telneting in from
    the
    other side of the planet.

    You could but as a sysop you tend to post from your own system.

    In some of the othernets I'm subscribed to, my NC
    literally IS half a planet away and no one cares.

    Othernets are of no consequence to the operations of Fidonet.

    If you *really* want to know where I am, you can check the nodelist. My
    zone
    number isn't going to tell you.

    Have you read the book 1984?

    One of the premises of that story was the government removing certain words from the language so that insurrection could not be discussed, and after time, even thought about.

    Do you honestly think that making us all the same zone number will achieve a similar idea?

    Of course, I might be in favour of one world zone number if that zone was to be
    "2" and managed from within Russia - after all that is where the vast majority
    of the nodelisted are.

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Alan Ianson@1:153/757 to Kurt Weiske on Sunday, March 17, 2019 15:06:28
    I wonder if this topic might be best in another echo. Would the
    exisiting FUTURE4FIDO work?

    I've never heard of that echo - another problem Fidonet has is with so
    many dead echoes it's hard to find the live ones. I don't think I've
    ever seen that echotag on the STATS echo, is it alive?

    I remember seeing that echo at one time. I don't think I ever connected the area.

    After reading this thread I did a %list at a couple of links but haven't seen it in the replies yet but I'll keep looking.

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Ward Dossche on Sunday, March 17, 2019 23:43:23
    Hello Ward,

    But next weekend, I'm off to Melbourne to
    compete in the Victorian Masters athletics. A few sprints and hurdles
    are on the program for me ;) I balance my nerdy pursuits with a lot of
    exercise. :)

    I bought a 31ft 3 cabin sailyacht, full galley, toilet ... and the weather is becoming sailable.

    I have a pirogue. Built it myself. And a paddle. Never thought
    about using a sail. Need something to smack the alligators when they
    try to get in to take a nap.

    The nerd can come along. There's wifi and my point on a tablet.

    We have swamp tours in these parts. One of the tricks to get
    alligators close to the pirogue is to train them. Usually by
    feeding them. When they see what appears to them to be food ...

    --Lee

    --
    We're Great In Bed

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Kurt Weiske on Monday, March 18, 2019 10:20:00
    On 03-17-19 08:37, Kurt Weiske wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    I do most of my BBSing through vDos under Windows, using MultiMail and Qedit - essentially the same setup I've used since setting up a mail
    door in Maximus in 1993.

    I do mine nativer in the desktop OS that I'm using at the time - Windows or Linux, with SyncTerm and Multimail. :)


    ... You bring this networks ratings down, and we'll do a special on you!
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Kurt Weiske on Monday, March 18, 2019 10:41:00
    On 03-17-19 07:47, Kurt Weiske wrote to August Abolins <=-

    I've never heard of that echo - another problem Fidonet has is with so many dead echoes it's hard to find the live ones. I don't think I've
    ever seen that echotag on the STATS echo, is it alive?

    I've been linked for ages as it turns out, but no traffic seen here.


    ... It's okay to stay true to your roots as long as you grow your own leaves. === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Alan Ianson@1:153/757 to Tony Langdon on Sunday, March 17, 2019 17:33:46
    I've been linked for ages as it turns out, but no traffic seen here.

    I just connected and sent a hello world message in there. Hopefully you'll see it.

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 17, 2019 19:38:51
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to nathanael culver on Mon Mar 18 2019 07:10 am

    Of course, I might be in favour of one world zone number if that zone was to be "2" and managed from within Russia - after all that is where the vast majority of the nodelisted are.

    Ok, who won the "bickering about which zone to collapse Fidonet into" pool? I had 5 days, which appears to be overly optimistic.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Tony Langdon on Sunday, March 17, 2019 19:43:26
    Re: Re: Fidonet zone 7
    By: Tony Langdon to Kurt Weiske on Mon Mar 18 2019 10:20 am

    I do mine nativer in the desktop OS that I'm using at the time - Windows or Linux, with SyncTerm and Multimail. :)

    What do you use for an editor? If I could find a 32-bit console editor I liked with Wordstar bindings I'd be able to retire my old DOS environment.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Monday, March 18, 2019 11:08:48
    Do you honestly think that the "zone wars" are about what zone number appears in our addresses? You don't think it is about the culture

    I think it was more about power and egos than culture, and yes, the
    additional layer in the hierarchy exacerbated things by facilitating the
    growth of fiefdoms within Fidonet.

    But our software demands that "redundant" zone number - regardless of

    The technology demands *A* zone number; it doesn't require multiple
    redundant zone numbers. Othernets all run with a single zone number.

    Ah, an advocate of one world government?

    Umm, no. I'm talking about network topology, not global hegemonies.

    Knowing that one comes from a different country can help one understand why certain people respond the way they do to some posts. What may seem

    One is not one's culture. In my life I have lived in over a dozen countries scattered across all seven continents (yes, including Antarctica; trust me
    -- penguins stink!). Through all that it has been my experience that people
    are just people, and everyone responds pretty much to the same things: show basic respect to others and they'll do the same. Individual differences are
    far greater than cultural ones and you can't encapsulate that in a zone
    number.

    In any case, in the absence of an intimate knowledge of Zimbabwean
    culture, how does it help me to know a poster is from Zimbabwe?

    You could but as a sysop you tend to post from your own system.

    But your argument was that geographically assigned zone numbers tell us where the poster is from. Now you're arguing that it's less about the zone number
    and more about your assumptions.

    Yes, I do mostly post from my own system. My assertion stands. Neither I nor
    my system is located geographically within the zone I am assigned to. Only
    the nodelist will tell you where I am. And even at that, I am an ex-pat. Knowing that I am in Taiwan wouldn't tell you anything about me culturally.

    Othernets are of no consequence to the operations of Fidonet.

    FTN-based othernets serve as a reminder that the arugments in favor of multiple nodes in Fidonet are not technological, but political.

    Do you honestly think that making us all the same zone number will
    achieve a similar idea?

    I don't know where this came from. Literally no one is advocating for a "one world government".

    And BTW I want to apologize for the tone of my previous post. It was sharper than it should have been.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to Alan Ianson on Monday, March 18, 2019 11:21:12
    I remember seeing that echo at one time. I don't think I ever connected the area.

    AREAFIX tells me I'm linked to future4fido, but I'll be doggoned if I can
    find it in my echo list.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to August Abolins on Sunday, March 17, 2019 22:40:50
    On 17 Mar 19 06:02:19, August Abolins said the following to Nick Andre:

    In any domain-transfer, Name server or DNS situation, I would rather
    suggest
    playing safe than merely switching name servers.

    But it is safe. It is easy to put in another DNS at any time, or clear tho fields. Updating those DNS fields is not a "transfer" (which would requir

    I'm sorry to completely disagree with you here, but I suggest going back and reading my message carefully before assuming that I do not understand how DNS or name servers or host transfers work. The correct assumption is that if the DNS at fidonet.org were easy, someone would of fixed this a long time ago.

    I also suggest looking at a recent nodelist, scroll down to Region 50.

    There is more to the fidonet.org domain than just the crude outdated website you see in your browser. If thats all what the domain is, my 12 year old daughter could muscle control and configure DNS and a Wordpress site in probably an hour. Ward's granddaughter, probably in less time.

    Again - The name server system that runs fidonet.org is a BSD deployment with BIND and Perl generating the DNS records from entries in the Nodelist. This
    is done to satisfy a segment of Fidonet that is often ignored in most discussions... Russia.

    About a year or so ago, I was given a mostly-complete copy of the DNS records for fidonet.org as well as the Perl script. The last time I checked, I saw
    at least a hundred or so A, CNAME and MX entries just for Region 50. There
    are subdomain entries for Region 50 to essentially clone the operation of the IEEE gateway from the 90's.

    Since nobody has yet established a concise dialog with the Russians about their use of the DNS system in this way, I would not suggest breaking things for them... they take Fidonet a bit more seriously.

    This likely also explains why the website at fidonet.org was not updated for quite some time either. The fidonet.org system just became overtly complex.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Dan Clough on Sunday, March 17, 2019 22:47:22
    On 16 Mar 19 23:08:00, Dan Clough said the following to August Abolins:

    I say Fido could/should go to ONLY Zone 1, and keep zones 2-6 out
    of circulation for historical/sentimental reasons. All other nets
    can be Zone 7+ (as they already are).

    It may be "technically correct" that only one Zone is needed in Fidonet given our numbers, but theres no way to convince people to change their address. Especially to Zone 1 which has a notorious history of zone-wars, power trips and general stupidity, bullshit and bad decisions. Couple this with the rediculous idea being tossed around of a completely unnecessary web-nodelist-management system and its just a recipe for disaster.

    Many Sysops zone-wide just can't get over the past events which have permanently destroyed credibility and something called "trust".

    As I just wrote... Russia takes Fidonet a tad bit more seriously and if you glance at a recent nodelist, skip down to Region 50. Keep in mind that BinkD and HPT and likely other cool stuff comes from there. They are not stupid.

    There is not enough vodka in the world to convince them to move to Zone 1,
    so I guess all of them will be kept out of circulation for historical/sentimental reasons?

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to August Abolins on Sunday, March 17, 2019 22:55:19
    On 17 Mar 19 07:11:49, August Abolins said the following to Mark Lewis:

    A good captcha at the front door would foil the bots.

    No one would be able to change another entry. A valid change could be approved after a valid netmail to prove proper FTN setup.

    I really have yet to have it explained to me, in simple logic and detail, perhaps drawn out in crayon why exactly we need this "automatic web nodelist" solution to a non-existant problem. If this was such an amazingly bright
    idea, it would of been designed, programmed and accepted by every *C back in the 90's. Mark Lewis would lower-case-rant to the heavens of its virtues.

    The closest explanation I got was to reduce the number of people involved - Fair enough, I get that Fidonet has a lot of "hats". But who gets to write
    this wonderful new system, manage it, pay for the domains and servers, work
    out the bugs, train Sysops to use it, integrate this at the RC and ZC level.
    Do we get to vote on the people involved with this? If so, who is eligable
    to vote? Or will the operators be dictated?

    MakeNL already does the automation an NC, RC and ZC needs... period.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Alan Ianson@1:153/757 to nathanael culver on Sunday, March 17, 2019 21:25:16
    I remember seeing that echo at one time. I don't think I ever connected
    the area.

    AREAFIX tells me I'm linked to future4fido, but I'll be doggoned if I can find it in my echo list.

    I've connected the area now, I'm linked to a node in Z2 and have seen posts from a couple people in Z1 and 2 but not seen any other traffic yet.

    I think the area was on the backbone at one time but may have been removed for low traffic or?? August has elisted the area a short time ago and requested that the area be added to the backbone so hopefully the area will be easy to connect once those backbone hubs have the area online. It may take a little time to get it back on the air.

    If you would like to link here you (or anyone at all) are welcome to.. :)

    I just need a netmail with details to setup a secure session and passwords to be used.

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)
  • From Alan Ianson@1:153/757 to nathanael culver on Sunday, March 17, 2019 21:52:28
    I remember seeing that echo at one time. I don't think I ever connected
    the area.

    AREAFIX tells me I'm linked to future4fido, but I'll be doggoned if I can find it in my echo list.

    I just received a new backbone.na and backstat.na that includes FUTURE4FIDO.

    I'm not sure how things are done in other zones but that means the echo is on the NAB (North American BackBone).

    Some may have harsh words for the NAB but that will mesh the echo at the NAB and make it easily and reliably connectable in Z1, and other zones too I think.

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to Alan Ianson on Monday, March 18, 2019 13:33:07
    AREAFIX tells me I'm linked to future4fido, but I'll be doggoned if I ca find it in my echo list.
    I've connected the area now, I'm linked to a node in Z2 and have seen posts from a couple people in Z1 and 2 but not seen any other traffic

    I just manually created an echo base for FUTURE4FIDO on my Mystic board (apparently somehow the mass echo import I did a while back missed it) and instantly had 35 messages waiting, so looks like I'm good.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Alan Ianson on Monday, March 18, 2019 17:07:00
    On 03-17-19 17:33, Alan Ianson wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    I've been linked for ages as it turns out, but no traffic seen here.

    I just connected and sent a hello world message in there. Hopefully
    you'll see it.

    Let's hope so. I've never seen any traffic in FUTURE4FIDO, hopefully that's about to change. :)


    ... It's okay to stay true to your roots as long as you grow your own leaves. === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Kurt Weiske on Monday, March 18, 2019 17:10:00
    On 03-17-19 19:43, Kurt Weiske wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    What do you use for an editor? If I could find a 32-bit console editor
    I liked with Wordstar bindings I'd be able to retire my old DOS

    I just use Notepad. ;)

    But I wonder if there's a Windows port of "joe", which is a *NIX editor that has Wordstar key bindings.


    ... I've had enough of gardening - I'm just about ready to throw in the trowel === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Kurt Weiske on Monday, March 18, 2019 19:09:59
    On 18/03/2019 01:30, Kurt Weiske -> David Drummond wrote:

    As our software requires data in the zone field, what is the advantage
    of all having the same number - or should I ask what is the
    disadvantage of having differing zone numbers? With different zone
    numbers we get an idea of where in the world the writer is.

    Does it matter where in the world the writer is from, or do the words matter?

    Our "zone wars" tend to be based on the cultural differences that reflect were in the world we hail from.

    Many times I've been berated by persons from USA who objected to my "every day"
    Australian vernacular.

    If we know were people come from we can be aware of their cultural differences.

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Kurt Weiske on Monday, March 18, 2019 19:16:12
    On 18/03/2019 12:38, Kurt Weiske -> David Drummond wrote:

    Of course, I might be in favour of one world zone number if that zone was
    to be "2" and managed from within Russia - after all that is where the vast
    majority of the nodelisted are.

    Ok, who won the "bickering about which zone to collapse Fidonet into"
    pool? I
    had 5 days, which appears to be overly optimistic.

    I'm sorry, was there a contest?

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to nathanael culver on Monday, March 18, 2019 19:27:56
    On 18/03/2019 13:08, nathanael culver -> David Drummond wrote:

    I think it was more about power and egos than culture, and yes, the additional layer in the hierarchy exacerbated things by facilitating the growth of fiefdoms within Fidonet.

    What power are you speaking of? None of the Fidonet *C structure have any power
    - they're just clerical positions.

    Of course if you bow and scrape to them they may appear to have power.

    But our software demands that "redundant" zone number - regardless of

    The technology demands *A* zone number; it doesn't require multiple redundant zone numbers.

    Othernets all run with a single zone number.

    If "othernets are such an ideal environment why are their advocates wasting their time in Fidonet?

    Ah, an advocate of one world government?

    Umm, no. I'm talking about network topology, not global hegemonies.

    Knowing that one comes from a different country can help one understand
    why certain people respond the way they do to some posts.

    One is not one's culture. In my life I have lived in over a dozen
    countries
    scattered across all seven continents (yes, including Antarctica; trust me -- penguins stink!).

    Been there - sniffed that.

    Through all that it has been my experience that people
    are just people, and everyone responds pretty much to the same things:
    show
    basic respect to others and they'll do the same. Individual differences
    are
    far greater than cultural ones and you can't encapsulate that in a zone number.

    True - but the majority of us are in the zone of our cultural origin.

    In any case, in the absence of an intimate knowledge of Zimbabwean culture, how does it help me to know a poster is from Zimbabwe?

    It may help you to understand that he isn't being obstructional - just Zimbabwean.


    You could but as a sysop you tend to post from your own system.

    But your argument was that geographically assigned zone numbers tell us
    where
    the poster is from. Now you're arguing that it's less about the zone
    number
    and more about your assumptions.


    Yes, I do mostly post from my own system. My assertion stands. Neither I
    nor
    my system is located geographically within the zone I am assigned to. Only the nodelist will tell you where I am. And even at that, I am an ex-pat. Knowing that I am in Taiwan wouldn't tell you anything about me
    culturally.

    You are an exception to the greater numbers in Fidonet.

    Othernets are of no consequence to the operations of Fidonet.

    FTN-based othernets serve as a reminder that the arugments in favor of
    multiple
    nodes in Fidonet are not technological, but political.

    Then stick to othernets.

    Do you honestly think that making us all the same zone number will
    achieve a similar idea?

    I don't know where this came from. Literally no one is advocating for a
    "one
    world government".

    Yet it has been advocated that we should all use "Z1" the zone relegated to the
    most hated nation in the western world. Surely we don't all want to be associated with them...

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From TERRY ROATI@3:640/1321 to Ward Dossche on Sunday, March 17, 2019 18:15:02
    Ward,

    Could you email me sysop @ tfb-bbs.org

    Terry


    On Mar 17, 2019 12:21am, Ward Dossche wrote to TERRY ROATI:


    Terry,

    Roughly how many systems will it take to revive Zone 6, at the moment I TR>> know of 3 active systems in Asia, 1 in Taiwan, 1 in Singapore and 1 in TR>> Philippines?

    Whatever number of active people willing to give it a shot. If there
    are 3 as a start, then that's better than nothing. You need to start somewhere.

    Personally I would not like to see a one-node zone again as Z5 has been for quite a while.

    I would be quite OK with 3 one-node regions and see where it takes us. These three people could maintain their present status where-ever they
    are until such a time when a revived Z6 really takes off. And if it doesn't we trashcan that revived Z6 and nothing's lost.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)

    ... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
    * Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to David Drummond on Monday, March 18, 2019 11:12:28
    Hi David,

    On 2019-03-18 19:27:56, you wrote to nathanael culver:

    If "othernets are such an ideal environment why are their advocates wasting their time in Fidonet?

    FOMO.

    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to TERRY ROATI on Monday, March 18, 2019 11:42:42
    Terry,

    Could you email me sysop @ tfb-bbs.org

    Done.

    Ward

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Monday, March 18, 2019 18:45:27
    You are an exception to the greater numbers in Fidonet.

    But I am not an exception to human beings. And as I said, individual personalities vary far more than cultural differences do.

    Yet it has been advocated that we should all use "Z1" the zone relegated to the most hated nation in the western world. Surely we don't all want

    If you reread the posts you'll discover the reasons that have been floated for using Zone 1 have nothing to do with politics. 2 works as well, if you'd rather.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to Nick Andre on Monday, March 18, 2019 08:55:00
    Nick Andre wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    I say Fido could/should go to ONLY Zone 1, and keep zones 2-6 out
    of circulation for historical/sentimental reasons. All other nets
    can be Zone 7+ (as they already are).

    It may be "technically correct" that only one Zone is needed in
    Fidonet given our numbers, but theres no way to convince people
    to change their address.

    Well, that isn't really known to be true. Yet.

    Especially to Zone 1 which has a
    notorious history of zone-wars, power trips and general
    stupidity, bullshit and bad decisions. Couple this with the
    rediculous idea being tossed around of a completely unnecessary web-nodelist-management system and its just a recipe for
    disaster.

    OK, so I take it you're like the Zone 2 folks who will resist all
    change, regardless of merit?

    Many Sysops zone-wide just can't get over the past events which
    have permanently destroyed credibility and something called
    "trust".

    Sounds like a personal problem for them.

    As I just wrote... Russia takes Fidonet a tad bit more seriously
    and if you glance at a recent nodelist, skip down to Region 50.
    Keep in mind that BinkD and HPT and likely other cool stuff comes
    from there. They are not stupid.

    I don't believe anybody has said they were stupid. Yes, that is
    an impressive Region, looks like a snippet from my previous stint
    in Fido in the early 90's.

    There is not enough vodka in the world to convince them to move
    to Zone 1, so I guess all of them will be kept out of circulation
    for historical/sentimental reasons?

    Well, using "Zone 1" for Fido isn't written in cement. It could
    just as well be Zone 2. The real point is that multiple Zones are
    not needed.

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see *ANY* posts
    from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming they
    have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious
    question...


    ... All the easy problems have been solved.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Tony Langdon on Monday, March 18, 2019 08:18:00
    Tony Langdon wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    But I wonder if there's a Windows port of "joe", which is a *NIX editor that has Wordstar key bindings.

    I've found a couple of them, but when you go full screen, they have a console-sized font that takes up the same amount of screen as if it
    were a window. With DOSBOX/vDOS, I get a full screen 80x25 window.



    ... Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality?
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.49
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/2140.2 to Dan Clough on Monday, March 18, 2019 18:55:06
    Hi, Dan Clough!
    I read your message from 18.03.2019 08:55

    DC> It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see*ANY* posts
    DC> from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    DC> post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming
    DC> they have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    DC> participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious
    DC> question...

    No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something! ;-)

    Bye, Dan!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.fidonews 2019
    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    * Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to Dan Clough on Monday, March 18, 2019 12:34:35
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Dan Clough to Nick Andre on Mon Mar 18 2019 08:55 am

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see *ANY* posts
    from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming they
    have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious

    I'd like to know the answer to this one too.

    If touching the slightest thing is going to send their world into a spin, you'd think they would maintain at least a presence on some of these echoes.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From BOB ACKLEY@1:123/140 to ROBERT STINNETT on Monday, March 18, 2019 16:11:32
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Dan Clough to Nick Andre on Mon Mar 18 2019 08:55 am

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see *ANY* posts
    from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming they
    have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious

    I'd like to know the answer to this one too.

    If touching the slightest thing is going to send their world into a
    spin, you'd
    think they would maintain at least a presence on some of these echoes.

    A couple of (presumably) Russians used to post in this echo - although
    I haven't seen them lately. Perhaps it's their government controlling
    their feed(s) out of the country
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
    * Origin: Fido Since 1991 | QWK by Web | BBS.FIDOSYSOP.ORG (1:123/140)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Wilfred van Velzen on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 07:22:37
    On 18/03/2019 20:12, Wilfred van Velzen -> David Drummond wrote:

    If "othernets are such an ideal environment why are their advocates
    wasting their time in Fidonet?

    FOMO.

    I must lead a sheltered life - I had to Google that expression.

    Thank you for enlightening me.

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to nathanael culver on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 07:24:56
    On 18/03/2019 20:45, nathanael culver -> David Drummond wrote:
    You are an exception to the greater numbers in Fidonet.

    But I am not an exception to human beings. And as I said, individual personalities vary far more than cultural differences do.

    Yet it has been advocated that we should all use "Z1" the zone relegated
    to the most hated nation in the western world. Surely we don't all want

    If you reread the posts you'll discover the reasons that have been floated
    for
    using Zone 1 have nothing to do with politics. 2 works as well, if you'd rather.

    Actually, after being in Z3 for over 3 decades I think I'll stick with that thanks.

    With today's all encompassing internet connectivity why don't you simply have yourself nodelisted in Z1?

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Clough on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 07:32:03
    On 18/03/2019 23:55, Dan Clough -> Nick Andre wrote:

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see *ANY* posts
    from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming they
    have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious
    question...

    Because certain persons of anal mentality insist that we only communicate in these echoes in some form of English.

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Robert Stinnett on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 07:34:23
    On 19/03/2019 03:34, Robert Stinnett -> Dan Clough wrote:

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see *ANY* posts
    from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming they
    have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious

    I'd like to know the answer to this one too.

    If touching the slightest thing is going to send their world into a spin,
    you'd
    think they would maintain at least a presence on some of these echoes.

    Can you read/write in Russian?

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to BOB ACKLEY on Monday, March 18, 2019 16:22:21
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: BOB ACKLEY to ROBERT STINNETT on Mon Mar 18 2019 04:11 pm

    If touching the slightest thing is going to send their world into a
    spin, you'd
    think they would maintain at least a presence on some of these echoes.

    I haven't seen them lately. Perhaps it's their government controlling
    their feed(s) out of the country

    You know what I say? Send out the proposal, call for input and set a date.
    "On this date, this will happen - you have until XX/XX/2019 to provide input".

    Blast it wide, blast it far - but when that date comes, the change happens.

    Otherwise, you will constantly be paralized to do anything (the current state we are in).
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to alexander koryagin on Monday, March 18, 2019 16:41:00
    alexander koryagin wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    DC> It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see*ANY* posts
    DC> from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    DC> post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming
    DC> they have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    DC> participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious
    DC> question...

    No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something! ;-)

    Haha! Hello Alexander, thanks for the reply. The Russian
    connection is confirmed! :-)

    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.fidonews 2019
    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds

    ...confirmed via a Usenet gateway, anyway. Do you guys still do
    FidoNet echos the "old-fashioned way"?

    Here's another quick question: Does the "fido7" in that Usenet
    group name refer to the rumored FidoNet Zone 7 from the dim and
    dark past mysteries of Fido...?



    ... Forbidden fruit is responsible for many a bad jam.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Monday, March 18, 2019 16:47:00
    David Drummond wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see *ANY* posts
    from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming they
    have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious
    question...

    Because certain persons of anal mentality insist that we only
    communicate in these echoes in some form of English.

    Ahhhh, well that would certainly explain it.

    It would be kind of a mess if there were multiple languages being
    used in echo(s), though. I can't think of a very good solution to
    that issue. Are there "Zonal echos" that are in a specific
    language, then?

    Thanks for the reply.



    ... Toto, I don't think we're in DOS any more...
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Monday, March 18, 2019 16:51:00
    David Drummond wrote to Wilfred van Velzen <=-

    If "othernets are such an ideal environment why are their advocates
    wasting their time in Fidonet?

    FOMO.

    I must lead a sheltered life - I had to Google that expression.
    Thank you for enlightening me.

    Same here... It does make pretty good sense and is very likely
    the actual reason, though.

    In spite of it's problems and faults, FidoNet carries a certain...
    allure. A prestige, as it were, being the first real "Net" I
    guess.



    ... She kept saying I didn't listen to her, or something like that.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to Robert Stinnett on Monday, March 18, 2019 16:56:00
    Robert Stinnett wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see *ANY* posts
    from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming they
    have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious

    I'd like to know the answer to this one too.

    If touching the slightest thing is going to send their world into
    a spin, you'd think they would maintain at least a presence on
    some of these echoes.

    I think David Drummond answered you already, and that's surely the
    reason (language barriers). I'm sure some speak some English, but
    effectively that is a huge problem for most.

    Sometimes I think we (including myself) forget that the entire
    world doesn't speak English...



    ... I.R.S.: We've got what it takes to take what you've got!
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to Dan Clough on Monday, March 18, 2019 19:34:29
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Dan Clough to Robert Stinnett on Mon Mar 18 2019 04:56 pm

    I think David Drummond answered you already, and that's surely the
    reason (language barriers). I'm sure some speak some English, but effectively that is a huge problem for most.

    Sometimes I think we (including myself) forget that the entire
    world doesn't speak English...


    Ok, I can understand that. However, right now we are in a situation because we can't move forward without breaking their stuff. So how do we solve this? BEcause otherwise we will just sit here for years (like it has been) waiting for what?

    I don't know the answer, but it seems like somehow we need to start a dialogue. Even if we just use Google Translate to send out the first SOS.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Dan Clough on Monday, March 18, 2019 22:14:35
    On 18 Mar 19 08:55:00, Dan Clough said the following to Nick Andre:

    OK, so I take it you're like the Zone 2 folks who will resist all
    change, regardless of merit?

    Its real easy to write me off as someone reisting change, when I have done
    more to help people here and in "real life" than you can ever understand.
    I guess I just do not see the merit in me being ZC1 and have to tell others that you must migrate to my zone, or be left behind for historial/sentimental reasons as you say.

    Cue to the Zone-wars all over again... and if not me, well then get Ward to move everyone from Zone 1 to Zone 2. Oh you Eurotrash socialist shit-pig pussy, Europe sucks, nobody will tell me how to run my system, and I can't believe Nick is going along with this, blah blah blah.

    Maybe those who see merit in this little utopian exodus fantasy-land of
    "One zone to rule them all" should've first Netmailed the ZC's to see how
    we felt? Share some stories one on one without know-it-alls or trolls
    chiming in? Get some friendly insight?

    You know what idea I would seriously get behind? BETTER SOFTWARE for newcomers, instead of masturbatory zone-ruling fantasies.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to Nick Andre on Monday, March 18, 2019 22:34:00
    Nick Andre wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    OK, so I take it you're like the Zone 2 folks who will resist all
    change, regardless of merit?

    Its real easy to write me off as someone reisting change, when I
    have done more to help people here and in "real life" than you
    can ever understand. I guess I just do not see the merit in me
    being ZC1 and have to tell others that you must migrate to my
    zone, or be left behind for historial/sentimental reasons as you
    say.

    Wow... I didn't mean to sound like I was "writing you off" there,
    cowboy, and meant no offense. I certainly never said anything
    about you helping others.

    Cue to the Zone-wars all over again... and if not me, well then
    get Ward to move everyone from Zone 1 to Zone 2. Oh you Eurotrash socialist shit-pig pussy, Europe sucks, nobody will tell me how
    to run my system, and I can't believe Nick is going along with
    this, blah blah blah.

    Yes, I get that. Probably a no-win situation, the more I think
    about it.

    Maybe those who see merit in this little utopian exodus
    fantasy-land of "One zone to rule them all" should've first
    Netmailed the ZC's to see how we felt? Share some stories one on
    one without know-it-alls or trolls chiming in? Get some friendly
    insight?

    Well, at least two of the ZC's were right here having the
    conversation in public. Yes, there could have been some private
    messages, but didn't really seem to be needed (yet).

    You know what idea I would seriously get behind? BETTER SOFTWARE
    for newcomers, instead of masturbatory zone-ruling fantasies.

    I'm not even sure what that last part is supposed to mean, but yes
    I think the need for better software was part of the original
    focus of this whole conversation, among other things. In my take
    on it, the whole problem is how deeply ingrained the idea of
    keeping everything the same is. Nobody seems to WANT anything to
    change, INCLUDING THE SOFTWARE, and the cumbersome/difficult
    procedures for getting information on how to join FidoNet.

    Honestly, the whole condensing the Zones into a single one is a
    secondary and minor factor in all this. Let's try to re-focus on
    how to make it easier to join FidoNet in order to help it survive.

    Regards and Cheers.



    ... Pros are those who do their jobs well, even when they don't feel like it. === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Tony Langdon on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 08:45:00
    Tony Langdon wrote to Nick Andre <=-

    However, everything is working, and others have pointed out there's
    nodes with abandonware registrations likely tied to their node number. There's no reason why we can't continue to use 4 zones (providing the smaller zones don't lose too many nodes). Let's work on something more important.

    I think leaving the zones in place, but cleaning up the nodelist would
    go a long way. I've spent the last couple of years collapsing legacy
    nets where it makes sense (when there's no need for a geographical net,
    since all of the nodes are IP only)

    We could have one region with one IP net and a couple of smaller nets
    (only when needed). That would streamline routing.

    You know what idea I would seriously get behind? BETTER SOFTWARE for newcomers, instead of masturbatory zone-ruling fantasies.

    Mystic is ahead of Synchronet in having had a mailer built-in for
    longer, but now that with either you could configure an integrated
    mailer and filefix together, it wouldn't be too hard to come up with a
    HOWTO for FTN.




    ... Discover your formulas and abandon them
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.49
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From BOB ACKLEY@1:123/140 to ALEXANDER KORYAGIN on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 17:06:48
    Hi, Bob Ackley!
    I read your message from 18.03.2019 16:11

    BA> A couple of (presumably) Russians used to post in this echo -
    BA> although I haven't seen them lately. Perhaps it's their
    BA> government controlling their feed(s) out of the country

    You better tell me when will the US wage a civil war in Venezuela,
    like
    it did in Syria?

    I don't think that'll happen.

    The war in Syria had been going on for years before Obama sent US
    troops there
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
    * Origin: Fido Since 1991 | QWK by Web | BBS.FIDOSYSOP.ORG (1:123/140)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Kurt Weiske on Thursday, March 21, 2019 07:29:00
    On 03-20-19 08:45, Kurt Weiske wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    I think leaving the zones in place, but cleaning up the nodelist would
    go a long way. I've spent the last couple of years collapsing legacy
    nets where it makes sense (when there's no need for a geographical net, since all of the nodes are IP only)

    That makes a lot of sense. A lot less "visible", and does leave some structure in place for dialup nodes, where they still exist.

    We could have one region with one IP net and a couple of smaller nets (only when needed). That would streamline routing.

    Yep.

    You know what idea I would seriously get behind? BETTER SOFTWARE for newcomers, instead of masturbatory zone-ruling fantasies.

    Mystic is ahead of Synchronet in having had a mailer built-in for
    longer, but now that with either you could configure an integrated
    mailer and filefix together, it wouldn't be too hard to come up with a HOWTO for FTN.

    Synchronet and Mystic are both light years ahead of what we ran in the 90s. And even better, if you _want_ a mailer with more advanced capabilities than the one that comes with either package, you can use a separate mailer. I run binkd with Synchronet, because that's what I originally ran with it, and it works. I already know binkd and I like its feature set. I could switch to BinkIT and go 100% Synchronet, but I'm happy the way things are. And it works well.

    As for ease of use, between the two, I'd give that score to Mystic, but OTOH, Synchronet does have some pretty powerful capabilities under the hood, especially in regards to Internet integration. Suffice to say that I like both, for different reasons. :)

    Still, there's probably more that can be done to improve the learning curve for newcomers. I can't really comment, because once I started working with Synchronet, all my prior FTN knowledge quickly came back.


    ... Democracy: Three wolves and a sheep voting on what's for lunch.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Clough on Thursday, March 21, 2019 09:13:53
    On 19/03/2019 07:47, Dan Clough -> David Drummond wrote:

    Because certain persons of anal mentality insist that we only
    communicate in these echoes in some form of English.

    Ahhhh, well that would certainly explain it.

    It would be kind of a mess if there were multiple languages being
    used in echo(s), though. I can't think of a very good solution to
    that issue. Are there "Zonal echos" that are in a specific
    language, then?

    And yet this echo, and some of the sysop echoes are global - not zone specific.

    Should the language written in the messages in those echoes be mandated to be a
    language that is not that which the majority of Fidonetters use?

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Robert Stinnett on Thursday, March 21, 2019 09:22:11
    On 19/03/2019 10:34, Robert Stinnett -> Dan Clough wrote:

    Sometimes I think we (including myself) forget that the entire
    world doesn't speak English...


    Ok, I can understand that. However, right now we are in a situation
    because we
    can't move forward without breaking their stuff.

    Is limiting Fidonet to one zone moving "forward" or moving "backward". Fidonet was effectively one zone once and we "moved forward" from that.

    Is change for the sake of change any more advantage than sticking to tradition because "that's how we've always done it"?

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to alexander koryagin on Thursday, March 21, 2019 09:24:52
    On 19/03/2019 15:52, alexander koryagin -> Alexander Kruglikov wrote:

    No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something! ;-)
    You are russian hacker? ;)

    I prefer to penetrate right into American brains. ;=)

    Is that an oxymoron?

    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Tony Langdon on Thursday, March 21, 2019 09:33:17
    On 20/03/2019 13:35, Tony Langdon -> alexander koryagin wrote:

    No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something! ;-)

    The Russians are coming! ;)

    Good movie :)


    --

    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to David Drummond on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 19:55:10
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Robert Stinnett on Thu Mar 21 2019 09:22 am

    Is limiting Fidonet to one zone moving "forward" or moving "backward". Fidonet was effectively one zone once and we "moved forward" from that.


    It goes far deeper than zones. We can't even update a simple website right now. It will only get worse.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 20:17:00
    David Drummond wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Because certain persons of anal mentality insist that we only
    communicate in these echoes in some form of English.

    Ahhhh, well that would certainly explain it.

    It would be kind of a mess if there were multiple languages being
    used in echo(s), though. I can't think of a very good solution to
    that issue. Are there "Zonal echos" that are in a specific
    language, then?

    And yet this echo, and some of the sysop echoes are global - not
    zone specific.

    Yes, understood.

    Should the language written in the messages in those echoes be
    mandated to be a language that is not that which the majority of Fidonetters use?

    I would have to say "no".

    Certainly doesn't seem fair to some. Some thoughts on this:

    1. It wouldn't really be a workable situation if everybody just
    used their native language, because there would be no common
    ground to talk/debate with.

    2. In general (and I know it's hazardous to "generalize", but...),
    folks who natively speak something other than English often have
    *some* ability with English as a second language. Certainly that
    is not uncommon. However, nearly ALL native English speakers have
    very little or ZERO ability with any other language. I'm not
    commenting on whether or not that's right, or the reasons for it,
    just that it's TRUE.

    3. So....... in light of (1) and (2) above, the only solution with
    any chance of allowing the most people to get involved is to use
    English. Again not arguing for or against that, just making a
    logical conclusion, the way I see it anyway.


    ... A day without sunshine is like night.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 21:25:00
    David Drummond wrote to Robert Stinnett <=-

    Is limiting Fidonet to one zone moving "forward" or moving
    "backward". Fidonet was effectively one zone once and we "moved
    forward" from that.

    Yes, it "moved forward" because of the HUGE increase in nodes,
    across the entire globe.

    Then it peaked.

    Then... it nose-dived. What's the comparison of nodes now
    compared to the peak in the mid-90's? 10% ? Less maybe?

    So, logic would tell you that it *IS* time to drastically reduce
    the number of zones, right? Of course there are other factors, I
    know, including embedded software reasons and political/historical
    bad blood. So the decision (and need) becomes a cloudy issue.

    Is change for the sake of change any more advantage than sticking
    to tradition because "that's how we've always done it"?

    No, it isn't. But the question at hand here is not as simple as
    you phrased it right there.



    ... Pros are those who do their jobs well, even when they don't feel like it. === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Robert Stinnett on Thursday, March 21, 2019 12:30:33
    On 21/03/2019 10:55, Robert Stinnett -> David Drummond wrote:

    Is limiting Fidonet to one zone moving "forward" or moving "backward".
    Fidonet was effectively one zone once and we "moved forward" from that.


    It goes far deeper than zones. We can't even update a simple website
    right
    now. It will only get worse.

    Could it be that Fidonet is its own network, a network that does not include websites?

    Fidonet has been operating perfectly well since long before the "web" was available to us. Whether or not we have operational websites in the future is of no consequence. Fidonet is about "archaic" technology, not "the web".

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to David Drummond on Thursday, March 21, 2019 11:37:00
    On 03-21-19 09:33, David Drummond wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    On 20/03/2019 13:35, Tony Langdon -> alexander koryagin wrote:

    No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something! ;-)

    The Russians are coming! ;)

    Good movie :)

    ;-)


    ... Car thieves should be used as expendible crash test dummies.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to Dan Clough on Thursday, March 21, 2019 11:38:54
    Should the language written in the messages in those echoes be mandated to be a language that is not that which the majority of Fidonetters use?

    It may be apropos to point out here that Policy dictates English as the official language of Fidonet:

    "1.0 Language

    The official language of FidoNet is English. All documents
    must exist in English. Translation into other languages is encouraged".

    However, nearly ALL native English speakers have
    very little or ZERO ability with any other language.

    This may be true in the US (though being the second largest Spanish-speaking country in the world, maybe no) and perhaps the UK, but India, for example, has 125 million English speakers, many of whom are fluent in other
    languages, while Canada has a sizeable English/French bilingual population.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Thursday, March 21, 2019 11:41:36
    Fidonet has been operating perfectly well since long before the "web" was

    You have a strange definition of "perfectly well", me thinks.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to nathanael culver on Thursday, March 21, 2019 08:05:02

    "1.0 Language

    The official language of FidoNet is English. All documents
    must exist in English. Translation into other languages is encouraged".

    That is from P4 but the reality is there is more russian being spoken by Fidonet sysops than anything else combined. So what is "official" ...

    However, nearly ALL native English speakers have
    very little or ZERO ability with any other language.

    while Canada has a sizeable English/French bilingual population.

    I guess you have never gone into a Calgary bar, "any" Calgary bar, and ordered a beer in french...

    Bilingual is an ambiguous word ... Belgium, my home country, officially is bilingual but in reality the french speaking population in large parts understand shit of dutch, being the other language.

    During all my years in the US I've met plenty people claiming french or german language knowledge because they studied it at school so when I switch to that, as I'm fluent in either, I get looks as if it were chinese.

    Even the english language capabilities of a lot of native speakers are questionable.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/2140.2 to BOB ACKLEY on Thursday, March 21, 2019 12:55:36
    Hi, Bob Ackley!
    I read your message from 20.03.2019 17:06

    BA>>> A couple of (presumably) Russians used to post in this echo -
    BA>>> although I haven't seen them lately. Perhaps it's their
    BA>>> government controlling their feed(s) out of the country
    ak>> You better tell me when will the US wage a civil war in Venezuela,
    ak>> like it did in Syria?

    BA> I don't think that'll happen.
    BA> The war in Syria had been going on for years before Obama sent US
    BA> troops there

    For a while the US follows the same trick - the opposition denies the
    election results, violent protests, accusing the president of being
    cruel, declaring him illegitimate, creating parallel government
    structures and finally military units that are provided with weapon from abroad. If such things are done in bitter divide country you cause a
    civil war deliberately. And it is awful.

    There many places in the world where regimes are not perfect. Take for instance Europe. The Europeans live quite well, they are become lazy, sluggish. The European country leader should be a real fucking ass personification so as to make people rise and go onto the streets for
    months despite arrests and repressions.

    In France, people bust their guts shouting how President Macron is wrong
    in his politics. But what can we see? We see that in a so called
    democratic country, people's outrage worths nothing. They can shout till Second Advent, but they cannot influence the country destiny. More of
    that - Macron is just using a wise Israeli tactic - let them shout;
    after that, when they understand that it is useless let them commit
    violent acts; after that declare them terrorists and put in prison. That
    is the democracy in France now.

    But anyway, if the yellow vests leader declares Macron illegitimate how
    on Earth it is possible for other countries to accept that leader as a president? We will increase havoc, that's all.

    Bye, Bob!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.fidonews 2019

    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    * Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/2140.2 to David Drummond on Thursday, March 21, 2019 16:11:27
    Hi, David Drummond!
    I read your message from 21.03.2019 00:08

    ak>>>> No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something!
    ak>>>> ;-)
    AK>>> You are russian hacker? ;)
    ak>> I prefer to penetrate right into American brains. ;=)
    DD> Is that an oxymoron?

    Well, it was a jocular answer that corresponded the question. ;-)

    Bye, David!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.fidonews 2019

    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    * Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to Ward Dossche on Thursday, March 21, 2019 22:02:30
    That is from P4 but the reality is there is more russian being spoken by

    Probably true. I wasn't making any sort of argument, just pointing out
    official policy. I'm multilingual myself, so if we want to switch to Chinese
    or Tok Pisin, I'm in :-)

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Bjrn Felten@2:203/2 to nathanael culver on Thursday, March 21, 2019 15:29:56
    so if we want to switch to Chinese

    Bring it on! I assume that you can do UTF-8?

    瓦쇿컛삸訝訝ゆ쐣擁g쉪瀯껂튌

    (Zh챔 ji훮ng sh챙 y카g챔 y뭫q첫 de li횪nx챠)

    ..

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Thursday, March 21, 2019 09:42:33
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Robert Stinnett on Thu Mar 21 2019 12:30 pm

    On 21/03/2019 10:55, Robert Stinnett -> David Drummond wrote:

    Is limiting Fidonet to one zone moving "forward" or moving "backward".
    Fidonet was effectively one zone once and we "moved forward" from that.

    It goes far deeper than zones. We can't even update a simple website right now. It will only get worse.

    Could it be that Fidonet is its own network, a network that does not include websites?

    Perhaps it's more accurate to say that Fidonet is its own network
    full of old men shouting at clouds and waiting for the good old days
    to magically reappear. That may be overly harsh, but it certainly
    is suffering from a fair amount of Founder's Syndrome (even though
    the current people in charge aren't "founders" in the traditional
    sense. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder%27s_syndrome

    Fidonet has been operating perfectly well since long before the "web" was available to us. Whether or not we have operational websites in the future is of no consequence. Fidonet is about "archaic" technology, not "the web".

    Well, it's certainly archaic. But it's funny...I see people talking
    about "better software", but refusing to make any sort of technical
    changes that would facilitate that. What then, would this better
    software be for, precisely? What would one expect to run it on? DOS?

    The other day, someone objected to the idea of combining zones (an architectural oddity of Fidonet that was built to support the legacy
    phone system and is totally irrelevant today) because, "what if
    Fidonet becomes popular again and we need multiple zones?" Well,
    the reality is that that is just not going to happen. Ever. That
    is optimizing for a case that will not happen.

    How many nodes are ACTUALLY on Fidonet now days? Several hundred?
    The heyday of tens of thousands is gone and not coming back. If the
    people who don't want to change are so set against change, why not
    declare yourselves to be "Fidonet Legacy" and relinquish the name to
    those who might actually want to change things around?

    Seriously: What would happen if a group of interested people just
    created their own "fidonet" and ignored the existing network? Would
    anyone other than a couple of people notice?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to nathanael culver on Thursday, March 21, 2019 15:48:45
    I'm multilingual myself, so if we want to switch to Chinese
    or Tok Pisin, I'm in :-)

    So it is absolutely possible to have a Pisin match? 8-)

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Dan Cross on Thursday, March 21, 2019 16:18:29
    Hi Dan,

    The other day, someone objected to the idea of combining zones (an architectural oddity of Fidonet that was built to support the legacy
    phone system and is totally irrelevant today) because, "what if
    Fidonet becomes popular again and we need multiple zones?" Well,
    the reality is that that is just not going to happen. Ever. That
    is optimizing for a case that will not happen.

    Just so you are aware, from what I heard there is a meeting being planned in Manilla to relaunch zone-6.

    If they can pull it off, they have my full support.

    Can't be done? Chances are these guys may very well do exactly that.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to Ward Dossche on Thursday, March 21, 2019 12:02:41
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Ward Dossche to Dan Cross on Thu Mar 21 2019 04:18 pm

    The other day, someone objected to the idea of combining zones (an architectural oddity of Fidonet that was built to support the legacy phone system and is totally irrelevant today) because, "what if
    Fidonet becomes popular again and we need multiple zones?" Well,
    the reality is that that is just not going to happen. Ever. That
    is optimizing for a case that will not happen.

    Just so you are aware, from what I heard there is a meeting being planned in Manilla to relaunch zone-6.

    My goodness, whatever would they do that for? Seriously,
    what is the realized objective of another Fidonet zone?

    If they can pull it off, they have my full support.

    Why? What useful purpose does that serve?

    Can't be done? Chances are these guys may very well do exactly that.

    I think you misinterpreted my statement. What I said is
    that Fidonet won't become so popular again that multiple
    zones are _required_. If someone wants to restart a zone,
    they are doing so as an academic exercise.

    It seems silly to me: put effort into making what's there
    better or improving the underlying technology, not vain
    monuments to delusions of past glory.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Dan Cross on Thursday, March 21, 2019 13:08:05
    On 21 Mar 19 09:42:33, Dan Cross said the following to David Drummond:

    Seriously: What would happen if a group of interested people just
    created their own "fidonet" and ignored the existing network? Would
    anyone other than a couple of people notice?

    I'm not sure I understand. If you mean use the Fidonet software to start up their own network away from Fidonet, its already been done for decades, they are called Othernets. Fsxnet, Dovenet, Micronet are excellent examples.

    If you mean just branch off and establish your own Fidonet structure; sure but all that it does is further cause a divide and animosity by leaving behind people that you just can't get along with. Effectively you will have "two Fidonets" and both will have fun trying to explain why the other exists. And right back to zone-wars, you-suck and my-way-is-the-best-way troll fests.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Ward Dossche on Thursday, March 21, 2019 13:08:20
    On 21 Mar 19 15:48:45, Ward Dossche said the following to Nathanael Culver:

    *MSGID: 2:292/854 11334266
    *REPLY: 3:712/886 748fc468

    I'm multilingual myself, so if we want to switch to Chinese
    or Tok Pisin, I'm in :-)

    So it is absolutely possible to have a Pisin match? 8-)

    Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.......

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Tony Langdon on Thursday, March 21, 2019 09:06:00
    Tony Langdon wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    Synchronet and Mystic are both light years ahead of what we ran in the 90s. And even better, if you _want_ a mailer with more advanced capabilities than the one that comes with either package, you can use a separate mailer. I run binkd with Synchronet, because that's what I originally ran with it, and it works. I already know binkd and I like
    its feature set. I could switch to BinkIT and go 100% Synchronet, but
    I'm happy the way things are. And it works well.

    I was tempted to go with Binkd, my eventual plan is to get the BBS
    off of Windows and onto a Linux BBS. Either would have worked, but I
    flipped a coin one weekend - literally. :)

    As for ease of use, between the two, I'd give that score to Mystic, but OTOH, Synchronet does have some pretty powerful capabilities under the hood, especially in regards to Internet integration. Suffice to say
    that I like both, for different reasons. :)

    I'd given Mystic serious thought; at the time Synchronet didn't have a
    mailer or tick manager. What's keeping me on Synchronet now is years
    worth of echomail in Synchronet's message bases. I'd hate to lose that
    history.




    ... The inconsistency principle
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.51
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to David Drummond on Thursday, March 21, 2019 09:22:00
    David Drummond wrote to Robert Stinnett <=-

    Fidonet has been operating perfectly well since long before the "web"
    was available to us. Whether or not we have operational websites in the future is of no consequence. Fidonet is about "archaic" technology, not "the web".

    If we want new sysops/opinions/perspectives, we need to be able to
    advertise. The web is most effective way.



    ... The most easily forgotten thing is the most important
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.51
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Dan Cross on Thursday, March 21, 2019 09:27:00
    Dan Cross wrote to David Drummond <=-

    Seriously: What would happen if a group of interested people just
    created their own "fidonet" and ignored the existing network? Would anyone other than a couple of people notice?

    That would be in line with Fidonet's history of "voting with your
    feet". I'm game, let's do this. All we'd need is a Fido nodelist, a
    working echolist, and a routing scheme. It'd work alongside the
    current environment transparently and would be a nice experiment.



    ... The inconsistency principle
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.51
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to Nick Andre on Thursday, March 21, 2019 13:08:56
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Nick Andre to Dan Cross on Thu Mar 21 2019 01:08 pm

    On 21 Mar 19 09:42:33, Dan Cross said the following to David Drummond:

    Seriously: What would happen if a group of interested people just created their own "fidonet" and ignored the existing network? Would anyone other than a couple of people notice?

    I'm not sure I understand. If you mean use the Fidonet software to start up their own network away from Fidonet, its already been done for decades, they are called Othernets. Fsxnet, Dovenet, Micronet are excellent examples.

    Yeah, everyone understands that.

    If you mean just branch off and establish your own Fidonet structure; sure but all that it does is further cause a divide and animosity by leaving behind people that you just can't get along with. Effectively you will have "two Fidonets" and both will have fun trying to explain why the other exists. And right back to zone-wars, you-suck and my-way-is-the-best-way troll fests.

    Well, since the people left behind can't figure out how to
    update a DNS RR, the difference between a registrar or a name
    server, or how to update a web page that hasn't been touched
    in 15 years, don't understand Unix and are still using DOS in
    2019, I don't think it'll matter: they won't be able to
    communicate outside of their ever shrinking bubble and no one
    would be looking for them so the issue of their existence just
    won't come up.

    If it came to pass, they could continue hashing out the same
    tired arguments they've been been fighting over for the last
    2 or 3 decades on Legacy Fidonet, while other people actually
    got some utility out of Fidonet. Let go of the name, embrace
    the legacy status for the old software that can't be updated
    and keep chugging on along your merry ways.

    The explanation for why the legacy Fidonet exists, if it ever
    even came up, would be simple: "they couldn't get over it and
    wouldn't let go, so everyone else moved away."

    Meanwhile, everyone else could standardize on zone 0, net 0,
    region 0, with just the node number being significant. All
    the relevant software could be modified to accept zeros in
    the appropriate positions. Or, if that were impractical, then
    pick an arbitrary zone number: 1, 4, or 6 (the latter two
    being isomorphic to IP version numbers).

    Or come up with a new scheme entirely that doesn't depend on
    zones and regions and nets and other artifacts of the PSTN.
    That certainly sounds a lot more fun to me than listening to
    the same group of naysayers resist change.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Roger Nelson@1:3828/7 to Ward Dossche on Thursday, March 21, 2019 13:11:31
    On Thu Mar-21-2019 16:18, Ward Dossche (2:292/854) wrote to Dan Cross:

    Hi Dan,

    The other day, someone objected to the idea of combining zones (an architectural oddity of Fidonet that was built to support the legacy
    phone system and is totally irrelevant today) because, "what if
    Fidonet becomes popular again and we need multiple zones?" Well,
    the reality is that that is just not going to happen. Ever. That
    is optimizing for a case that will not happen.

    Just so you are aware, from what I heard there is a meeting being
    planned in Manilla to relaunch zone-6.

    If they can pull it off, they have my full support.

    Can't be done? Chances are these guys may very well do exactly
    that.

    And they could call it "The Thriller From Manilla Part 2".


    Regards,

    Roger
    --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+ Amanda Tapping
    * Origin: NCS BBS - Houma, LoUiSiAna - (1:3828/7)
  • From Paul Quinn@1:1/0 to Kurt Weiske on Friday, March 22, 2019 08:00:52
    Hi! Kurt,

    On 03/22/2019 02:06 AM, you wrote to Tony Langdon:

    I'd given Mystic serious thought; at the time Synchronet didn't have a mailer or tick manager. What's keeping me on Synchronet now is years
    worth of echomail in Synchronet's message bases. I'd hate to lose that history.

    There is a rumour that GoldEd can read SBBS message areas. Check for SuperBBS or SBBS in the gold_ref.txt in the editor's package. With that, you could copy
    from SBBS to JAM format.

    Cheers,
    Paul.

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
    * Origin: ARRRRRGGGHHH!!!! ... Tension breaker, had to be done. (3:640/1384.125)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to Ward Dossche on Friday, March 22, 2019 06:17:11
    So it is absolutely possible to have a Pisin match? 8-)

    LOL

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Kurt Weiske on Friday, March 22, 2019 07:49:00
    On 03-21-19 09:06, Kurt Weiske wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    I was tempted to go with Binkd, my eventual plan is to get the BBS
    off of Windows and onto a Linux BBS. Either would have worked, but I
    flipped a coin one weekend - literally. :)

    Sometimes it comed down to that. :-)

    I'd given Mystic serious thought; at the time Synchronet didn't have a mailer or tick manager. What's keeping me on Synchronet now is years
    worth of echomail in Synchronet's message bases. I'd hate to lose that history.

    You could import that into Mystic, if you temporarily set Mystic up as a QWK node, and set Synchronet to export all messages, including messages from you to that user.

    Or you could use FTN - setup Mystic as a point then link all areas, then rescan. And then switch the node number in and configure the real uplinks.

    But yeah the choice between Synchronet and Mystic comes down to preference and which feature set is the best fit. Both packages are very good and actively maintained. I know, I run both. :)

    For Internet integration and QWK hubbing, I prefer Synchronet. For my FTN hub, I like Mystic, it's just a little easier to manage in that role.


    ... One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Dan Cross on Thursday, March 21, 2019 23:26:25
    .... If someone wants to restart a zone,
    they are doing so as an academic exercise.

    Part of Fidonet also is having fun. And if these guys want to have fun by taking a shot at it then there's nothing available to me to stop them. So better help them.

    I can understand they feel they belong in a niche of their own.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to Ward Dossche on Thursday, March 21, 2019 17:53:03
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Ward Dossche to Dan Cross on Thu Mar 21 2019 11:26 pm

    .... If someone wants to restart a zone,
    they are doing so as an academic exercise.

    Part of Fidonet also is having fun. And if these guys want to have fun by taking a shot at it then there's nothing available to me to stop them. So better help them.

    Great! So you'll assist with fidonet.io and fixing up the
    fidonet.org domain too, right? Perhaps help putting together
    some kind of automated node number assignment system?

    I can understand they feel they belong in a niche of their own.

    Physician, heal thyself! Those who feel they belong in a niche
    by themselves are those who seem dead set against any sort of
    progressive change on Fidonet.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Dan Cross on Friday, March 22, 2019 00:06:41
    Part of Fidonet also is having fun. And if these guys want to have fun
    by taking a shot at it then there's nothing available to me to stop
    them. So better help them.

    Great! So you'll assist with fidonet.io and fixing up the
    fidonet.org domain too, right?

    Certainly the fidonet.org-domain...

    Perhaps help putting together
    some kind of automated node number assignment system?

    I leave the "walking the walk"-part to the people who are "talking the talk".

    Physician, heal thyself! Those who feel they belong in a niche
    by themselves are those who seem dead set against any sort of
    progressive change on Fidonet.

    It must be such a reassuring sentiment knowing all the answers, even to questions which haven't been asked yet.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Paul Quinn on Thursday, March 21, 2019 16:51:33
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Paul Quinn to Kurt Weiske on Fri Mar 22 2019 08:00 am

    There is a rumour that GoldEd can read SBBS message areas. Check for SuperBBS or SBBS in the gold_ref.txt in the editor's package. With that, you could copy from SBBS to JAM format.

    Worth a check - thanks for the pointer!

    ... How does this work, is there an orientation?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Tony Langdon on Thursday, March 21, 2019 16:52:29
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Tony Langdon to Kurt Weiske on Fri Mar 22 2019 07:49 am

    You could import that into Mystic, if you temporarily set Mystic up as a QWK node, and set Synchronet to export all messages, including messages from you to that user.

    Oh, that would work - why didn't I think of that?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Paul Quinn@3:640/1384 to Kurt Weiske on Friday, March 22, 2019 10:37:56
    Hi! Kurt,

    On 21 Mar 19 16:51, you wrote to me:

    There is a rumour that GoldEd can read SBBS message areas. Check
    for SuperBBS or SBBS in the gold_ref.txt in the editor's package.
    With that, you could copy from SBBS to JAM format.

    Worth a check - thanks for the pointer!

    Yes. Perhaps disregard any reference to version numbers too. I recall that Joe Delahaye once used to use GoldEd on his Synchronet, even though the evidence said he couldn't. YMMV. Good luck!

    Cheers,
    Paul.

    ... Teamwork is critical; it allows you to blame someone else.
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20130515
    * Origin: Quinn's Rock - Live from Paul's Xubuntu desktop! (3:640/1384)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to Ward Dossche on Thursday, March 21, 2019 20:40:21
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Ward Dossche to Dan Cross on Fri Mar 22 2019 12:06 am

    Part of Fidonet also is having fun. And if these guys want to have fun by taking a shot at it then there's nothing available to me to stop them. So better help them.

    Great! So you'll assist with fidonet.io and fixing up the
    fidonet.org domain too, right?

    Certainly the fidonet.org-domain...

    That of course begs the question, "why hasn't it been done
    in 16 years?"

    Perhaps help putting together
    some kind of automated node number assignment system?

    I leave the "walking the walk"-part to the people who are "talking the talk".

    Right. I'll take that as a, "no, I won't be doing that."

    Physician, heal thyself! Those who feel they belong in a niche
    by themselves are those who seem dead set against any sort of progressive change on Fidonet.

    It must be such a reassuring sentiment knowing all the answers, even to questions which haven't been asked yet.

    Projection is a wonderful thing. Have fun on Fidonet Legacy.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Kurt Weiske on Friday, March 22, 2019 12:41:00
    On 03-21-19 16:52, Kurt Weiske wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Tony Langdon to Kurt Weiske on Fri Mar 22 2019 07:49 am

    You could import that into Mystic, if you temporarily set Mystic up as a QWK node, and set Synchronet to export all messages, including messages from you to that user.

    Oh, that would work - why didn't I think of that?

    Yeah where there's a will, there's a way. :)


    ... Mashed potatoes with skim milk is like a sports car with an automatic.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Paul Quinn on Friday, March 22, 2019 13:25:00
    On 03-22-19 08:00, Paul Quinn wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    There is a rumour that GoldEd can read SBBS message areas. Check for SuperBBS or SBBS in the gold_ref.txt in the editor's package. With
    that, you could copy from SBBS to JAM format.

    I have heard this, but also led to believe there's some limitations. Haven't tried it, because I'd have to run it remotely over SSH anyway.


    ... Gee! How'd you ever get it to do THAT?
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Ward Dossche on Friday, March 22, 2019 13:25:00
    On 03-21-19 23:26, Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Cross <=-

    .... If someone wants to restart a zone,
    they are doing so as an academic exercise.

    Part of Fidonet also is having fun. And if these guys want to have fun
    by taking a shot at it then there's nothing available to me to stop
    them. So better help them.

    All we can do is offer suggestions. It's up to them whether they form a zone, net or keep the status quo. :)


    ... PCDOS&MSDOS&CP/M&WINDOWSI'LLFIDDLEWITHOS/2WOULDN'TYOU
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Clough on Friday, March 22, 2019 13:27:42
    On 21/03/2019 12:25, Dan Clough -> David Drummond wrote:

    Is change for the sake of change any more advantage than sticking
    to tradition because "that's how we've always done it"?

    No, it isn't. But the question at hand here is not as simple as
    you phrased it right there.

    Then what is the advantage to Fidonet as a whole to redo our addressing system?

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to nathanael culver on Friday, March 22, 2019 13:30:38
    On 21/03/2019 13:41, nathanael culver -> David Drummond wrote:
    Fidonet has been operating perfectly well since long before the
    "web" was

    You have a strange definition of "perfectly well", me thinks.

    I am speaking of the technical nature of Fidonet - the addressing method etc.

    What we use that for at a social level may be another story, one that will not change with a technical change.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Cross on Friday, March 22, 2019 13:44:54
    On 22/03/2019 00:42, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    Could it be that Fidonet is its own network, a network that does not include
    websites?

    Perhaps it's more accurate to say that Fidonet is its own network
    full of old men shouting at clouds and waiting for the good old days
    to magically reappear. That may be overly harsh, but it certainly
    is suffering from a fair amount of Founder's Syndrome (even though
    the current people in charge aren't "founders" in the traditional
    sense. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder%27s_syndrome
    [...]
    How many nodes are ACTUALLY on Fidonet now days? Several hundred?
    The heyday of tens of thousands is gone and not coming back. If the people who don't want to change are so set against change, why not
    declare yourselves to be "Fidonet Legacy" and relinquish the name to
    those who might actually want to change things around?

    So... the Fidonet that I have been part of, and happy with for more than 3 decades should change its name because some "johhny come lately" wants to change it into something different?

    Seriously: What would happen if a group of interested people just
    created their own "fidonet" and ignored the existing network? Would anyone other than a couple of people notice?

    That is what the Othernets do - isn't it?

    It does sound like the logical choice - if one wants something that Fidonet isn't then start up a network that suits those requirements.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Kurt Weiske on Friday, March 22, 2019 13:46:05
    On 22/03/2019 02:22, Kurt Weiske -> David Drummond wrote:

    Fidonet has been operating perfectly well since long before the "web"
    was available to us. Whether or not we have operational websites in the
    future is of no consequence. Fidonet is about "archaic" technology, not
    "the web".

    If we want new sysops/opinions/perspectives, we need to be able to advertise. The web is most effective way.

    I wonder how Fidonet has managed to last more than 30 years with no real Web presence...

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Cross on Friday, March 22, 2019 13:49:55
    On 22/03/2019 11:40, Dan Cross -> Ward Dossche wrote:

    Great! So you'll assist with fidonet.io and fixing up the
    fidonet.org domain too, right?

    Certainly the fidonet.org-domain...

    That of course begs the question, "why hasn't it been done
    in 16 years?"

    Fidonet is not a legal entity - and has no ownership rights of any domain name.

    All domain names that appear to be Fidonet related are owned by other individuals.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Paul Quinn@3:640/1384.125 to Tony Langdon on Friday, March 22, 2019 16:01:50
    Hi! Tony,

    On 03/22/2019 01:25 PM, you wrote:

    On 03-22-19 08:00, Paul Quinn wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-
    you could copy from SBBS to JAM format.

    I have heard this, but also led to believe there's some limitations. Haven't tried it, because I'd have to run it remotely over SSH anyway.

    There's not a lot involved. Just get GoldEd to read the area, mark blocks & copy to the JAM area.

    SSH can be fun. It has been for me so far. ;)

    Cheers,
    Paul.

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
    * Origin: Operator, trace this call and tell me where I am. (3:640/1384.125)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Paul Quinn on Friday, March 22, 2019 17:22:00
    On 03-22-19 16:01, Paul Quinn wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    There's not a lot involved. Just get GoldEd to read the area, mark
    blocks & copy to the JAM area.

    SSH can be fun. It has been for me so far. ;)

    One of these days, I will have to install GoldEd+ on my Pi. :)


    ... A liberal is a man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Deon George@3:633/509.1 to Tony Langdon on Friday, March 22, 2019 09:21:18
    On 22 Mar 2019, Tony Langdon said the following...
    One of these days, I will have to install GoldEd+ on my Pi. :)

    I'm made it into a DEB if that helps. Saves compiling...

    ...deon

    _--_|\ | Deon George
    / \ | Chinwag BBS - A BBS on a PI in Docker!
    \_.__.*/ |
    V | Coming from the 'burbs of Melbourne, Australia

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A42 2018/12/27 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: Chinwag | MysticBBS in Docker on a Pi! (3:633/509.1)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 08:02:00
    David Drummond wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Is change for the sake of change any more advantage than sticking
    to tradition because "that's how we've always done it"?

    No, it isn't. But the question at hand here is not as simple as
    you phrased it right there.

    Then what is the advantage to Fidonet as a whole to redo our
    addressing system?

    That's a difficult question to answer because of each person's
    differing idea of what the definition of "advantage" is... I'll
    try to answer using *MY* definition and reasoning:

    It would amount to what we call here in the US a "spring
    cleaning". A chance to get rid of the old cruft and useless junk
    that clutters up our houses, and our nodelists. Everybody gets a
    Zone 1 (or 2, or 3, whatever) address, and by carefully going
    through that during the re-assigning process, most (all?) of the
    dead/useless entries in there go away. Now, does that help the
    flow of mail work any better? Maybe not. But it's still a good
    thing. It would simplify the process of nodelist updates and
    distribution.

    If every member of Fidonet was in the same Zone, wouldn't that put
    a stop to the so-called "Zone Wars"? Yes, a few *C's might lose
    their titles and that would probably piss them off, but perhaps
    they could get over it in time.

    Now, I want to make one thing clear. I have spoken out in favor
    of consolidating the Zones, yes. But that isn't really the
    central issue here to me. I can live with keeping the zones the
    way they are. The original focus of this whole discussion was (I
    think) the topic of how hard it is for potential new Fido sysops
    to get useful information on how to join, and the pathetic shape
    that the web site(s) are in. Let's not lose sight of that. As
    far as I'm concerned we can forget about the Zone thing and try to
    reach some consensus on what can be done to improve the public
    "face" of FidoNet. That's all I'm really after.

    Cheers.


    ... To err is human, to forgive is against SysOp policy.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 09:43:57
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Dan Cross on Fri Mar 22 2019 01:44 pm

    On 22/03/2019 00:42, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    Could it be that Fidonet is its own network, a network that does not include
    websites?

    Perhaps it's more accurate to say that Fidonet is its own network
    full of old men shouting at clouds and waiting for the good old days
    to magically reappear. That may be overly harsh, but it certainly
    is suffering from a fair amount of Founder's Syndrome (even though
    the current people in charge aren't "founders" in the traditional sense. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founder%27s_syndrome
    [...]
    How many nodes are ACTUALLY on Fidonet now days? Several hundred?
    The heyday of tens of thousands is gone and not coming back. If the people who don't want to change are so set against change, why not declare yourselves to be "Fidonet Legacy" and relinquish the name to those who might actually want to change things around?

    So... the Fidonet that I have been part of, and happy with for more than 3 decades should change its name because some "johhny come lately" wants to change it into something different?

    No. It should change it's name because other people want
    to make forward-looking changes that are either backwards
    incompatible or otherwise unacceptable to those who refuse
    to change anything at all.

    By the way, your _current_ logical fallacy is a combination
    of "No True Scotsman" and "Appeal to Tradition."

    Seriously: What would happen if a group of interested people just created their own "fidonet" and ignored the existing network? Would anyone other than a couple of people notice?

    That is what the Othernets do - isn't it?

    It does sound like the logical choice - if one wants something that Fidonet isn't then start up a network that suits those requirements.

    Cool. We'll call it "Fidonet" and use zone 1 for all the
    hosts, or come up with better technology for conference
    distribution.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 09:58:16
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Dan Cross on Fri Mar 22 2019 01:49 pm

    On 22/03/2019 11:40, Dan Cross -> Ward Dossche wrote:

    Great! So you'll assist with fidonet.io and fixing up the
    fidonet.org domain too, right?

    Certainly the fidonet.org-domain...

    That of course begs the question, "why hasn't it been done
    in 16 years?"

    Fidonet is not a legal entity - and has no ownership rights of any domain name.

    All domain names that appear to be Fidonet related are owned by other individuals.

    Great! So I'll pay US $500 to someone for the fidonet.org domain
    name so I can point `www.fidonet.org` to fidonet.io. Anyone want
    to sell it?

    But that doesn't answer the question at all.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 09:56:07
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Kurt Weiske on Fri Mar 22 2019 01:46 pm

    On 22/03/2019 02:22, Kurt Weiske -> David Drummond wrote:

    Fidonet has been operating perfectly well since long before the "web"
    was available to us. Whether or not we have operational websites in the
    future is of no consequence. Fidonet is about "archaic" technology, not
    "the web".

    If we want new sysops/opinions/perspectives, we need to be able to advertise. The web is most effective way.

    I wonder how Fidonet has managed to last more than 30 years with no real Web presence...

    It hasn't. It's been dying an asymptotic death for 25 years,
    since the Internet started to become commercialized and people
    realized they didn't have to kowtow to the hierarchy because
    it wasn't a monopoly anymore.

    Also, define "last": if it gets down to the point of being exactly
    three MS-DOS computers exchanging data, is that still considered
    to be "lasting"?

    You're not far from that now because no one can figure out how to
    join the thing since information isn't publicly available outside
    the walled garden of the existing network.

    Those who stick out the haze fest to get a node number quickly
    tire of the infighting. There was a reason it was called,
    "fight-o-net" back in the day and it obviously hasn't changed.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Gerrit Kuehn@2:240/12 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 17:17:56
    Hello David!

    22 Mar 19 13:49, David Drummond wrote to Dan Cross:


    Fidonet is not a legal entity - and has no ownership rights of any
    domain name.

    Careful, this depends on the country and jurisdiction you're under.
    Under German law, FidoNet is probably something like a "club" which may or may not be regarded as a "legal entitity" (whatever that might be under German law). And who knows about the status in other countries?


    Regards,
    Gerrit

    ... 5:17PM up 81 days, 19:13, 7 users, load averages: 0.19, 0.31, 0.23

    --- Msged/BSD 6.1.2
    * Origin: Things I already know (2:240/12)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 10:15:00
    David Drummond wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Then what is the advantage to Fidonet as a whole to redo our addressing system?

    After thinking this discussion through, probably not much advantage,
    given that now with the advent of continuous mailers and binkp we can effectively crashmail most any node in Fidonet, instead of relying on
    zone gates and toll calls.

    There are some here helping to test that listed nodes are available
    and haven't fallen off, and as RCs and NCs treat attrition reasonably
    (by removing dead nodes, creating IP nets when geographic nets are no
    longer needed and consolidating in their own areas when possible) I
    think we'll be in a better place.



    ... Is the tuning appropriate?
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.51
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Deon George on Friday, March 22, 2019 21:27:00
    On 03-22-19 09:21, Deon George wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    On 22 Mar 2019, Tony Langdon said the following...
    One of these days, I will have to install GoldEd+ on my Pi. :)

    I'm made it into a DEB if that helps. Saves compiling...

    Depends what distro it's for. My Pis are older installations - Raspian Wheezy.


    ... There is a multi-legged creature crawling on your shoulder.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Deon George@3:633/509.1 to Tony Langdon on Friday, March 22, 2019 22:30:02
    On 22 Mar 2019, Tony Langdon said the following...
    Depends what distro it's for. My Pis are older installations - Raspian Wheezy.

    OK, its a stretch DEB.

    ...deon

    _--_|\ | Deon George
    / \ | Chinwag BBS - A BBS on a PI in Docker!
    \_.__.*/ |
    V | Coming from the 'burbs of Melbourne, Australia

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A42 2018/12/27 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: Chinwag | MysticBBS in Docker on a Pi! (3:633/509.1)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Clough on Saturday, March 23, 2019 08:44:53
    On 22/03/2019 23:02, Dan Clough -> David Drummond wrote:

    Then what is the advantage to Fidonet as a whole to redo our
    addressing system?

    That's a difficult question to answer because of each person's
    differing idea of what the definition of "advantage" is... I'll
    try to answer using *MY* definition and reasoning:

    It would amount to what we call here in the US a "spring
    cleaning". A chance to get rid of the old cruft and useless junk
    that clutters up our houses, and our nodelists.

    Everybody gets a Zone 1 (or 2, or 3, whatever) address, and by carefully
    going
    through that during the re-assigning process, most (all?) of the dead/useless entries in there go away. Now, does that help the
    flow of mail work any better? Maybe not. But it's still a good
    thing. It would simplify the process of nodelist updates and distribution.

    I guess your utopian view will never eventuate then - for years the US contingent have been lobbied to "tidy up" their segments - to no avail.

    There is some idea amoung some USAmericans that the nodelist in not a technical
    document to aid addressing, but rather a memorial document where one can remember dead curmudgeons (some of whom are best forgotten).

    The zone numbers do simplify mail routing - if we were all the same zone we would have to put an entry in our routing tables for EVERY net to get the mail to the correct destination - whereas at the moment I can lump all of a given zone under the one entry "Z:*" to go in a desired direction.

    I suppose I could just send everything to the next node up the tree and perpetuate the NAB's dominance of the whole system...

    If every member of Fidonet was in the same Zone, wouldn't that put
    a stop to the so-called "Zone Wars"?

    Have you read "1984"? The proposition in that story was to remove all words from the language used to express sedition. The theory was that after a while people would not even have the language to think about
    rejecting the bureaucracy.

    It didn't work there either. People would still be in other nets, and expressing cultural differences.

    Yes, a few *C's might lose their titles and that would probably piss them
    off, but perhaps
    they could get over it in time.

    Surely the RCs would remain, it would be the ZCs that lost their roles?

    Now, I want to make one thing clear. I have spoken out in favor
    of consolidating the Zones, yes. But that isn't really the
    central issue here to me. I can live with keeping the zones the
    way they are. The original focus of this whole discussion was (I
    think) the topic of how hard it is for potential new Fido sysops
    to get useful information on how to join, and the pathetic shape
    that the web site(s) are in.

    Considering that the websites are not part of Fidonet, rather some individual's
    view of Fidonet nothing you can do will change that.

    Fidonet is not a legal entity - it cannot "own" a domain name. All of those supposed Fidonet related domains are in fact owned by other individuals, some of whom have lost interest in Fidonet but still own the name.

    Let's not lose sight of that. As far as I'm concerned we can forget
    about the Zone thing and try to
    reach some consensus on what can be done to improve the public
    "face" of FidoNet. That's all I'm really after.

    Fidonet is similar to Ham radio in that it is a dying concept populated by some
    old "stick in the muds" hanging on to times gone by. As soon as you "modernise" it to have a fabulous flashy web presence/tech then it ceases to be
    Fidonet and becomes just another of the millions of useless websites.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Cross on Saturday, March 23, 2019 08:51:59
    On 23/03/2019 00:43, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    So... the Fidonet that I have been part of, and happy with for more than 3
    decades should change its name because some "johhny come lately" wants to
    change it into something different?

    No. It should change it's name because other people want
    to make forward-looking changes that are either backwards
    incompatible or otherwise unacceptable to those who refuse
    to change anything at all.

    Fucking up the addressing structure is NOT looking forward.

    By the way, your _current_ logical fallacy is a combination
    of "No True Scotsman" and "Appeal to Tradition."

    Huh?

    Seriously: What would happen if a group of interested people just
    created their own "fidonet" and ignored the existing network? Would
    anyone other than a couple of people notice?

    That is what the Othernets do - isn't it?

    It does sound like the logical choice - if one wants something that Fidonet
    isn't then start up a network that suits those requirements.

    Cool. We'll call it "Fidonet" and use zone 1 for all the
    hosts,

    We already have a Fidonet entity - with a Zone 1. How can you "re-invent" that?
    It doesn't matter what you call your "Fidonet", the name is not part of the addressing model. That you put all of your nodes in Z1 will not matter either -
    it only takes one zone gate to link the other zones to your "Z1"

    or come up with better technology for conference distribution.

    The Europeans have already come up with a better technology for conference distribution - have you looked at that model?

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Cross on Saturday, March 23, 2019 08:58:17
    On 23/03/2019 00:56, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    I wonder how Fidonet has managed to last more than 30 years with no real Web
    presence...

    It hasn't.

    You are mistaken - we are communicating now via the phenomenon of Fidonet.

    Yes, it is not as prolific as it was during its hey day but it still exists.

    It's been dying an asymptotic death for 25 years,
    since the Internet started to become commercialized and people
    realized they didn't have to kowtow to the hierarchy because
    it wasn't a monopoly anymore.

    And that "hierarchy" was all based in USA - in Z1. That is the origin of the "zone wars".

    Also, define "last": if it gets down to the point of being exactly
    three MS-DOS computers exchanging data, is that still considered
    to be "lasting"?

    Yes. Until the penultimate node shuts down there is still the network.

    You're not far from that now because no one can figure out how to
    join the thing since information isn't publicly available outside
    the walled garden of the existing network.

    It is that walled garden that makes it a network - otherwise it is just another
    useless piece of the WWW.

    Those who stick out the haze fest to get a node number quickly
    tire of the infighting. There was a reason it was called,
    "fight-o-net" back in the day and it obviously hasn't changed

    Then why are you here? Why are you not enjoying the utopia of a single zone othernet where everyone is of one exact same mind?

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Cross on Saturday, March 23, 2019 09:00:05
    On 23/03/2019 00:58, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    That of course begs the question, "why hasn't it been done
    in 16 years?"

    Fidonet is not a legal entity - and has no ownership rights of any domain
    name.

    All domain names that appear to be Fidonet related are owned by other
    individuals.

    Great! So I'll pay US $500 to someone for the fidonet.org domain
    name so I can point `www.fidonet.org` to fidonet.io. Anyone want
    to sell it?

    But that doesn't answer the question at all.

    Of course not - as soon as you, the owner of the domain name, lose interest in Fidonet, the site's content drops out of currency.

    Fidonet is NOT the WWW. The WWW is NOT Fidonet.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Gerrit Kuehn on Saturday, March 23, 2019 09:02:01
    On 23/03/2019 02:17, Gerrit Kuehn -> David Drummond wrote:

    Fidonet is not a legal entity - and has no ownership rights of any
    domain name.

    Careful, this depends on the country and jurisdiction you're under.
    Under German law, FidoNet is probably something like a "club" which may
    or may not be regarded as a "legal entitity" (whatever that might be
    under German law). And who knows about the status in other countries?

    Does a club in Germany not have to have elected officials (chairperson, secretary, treasurer etc)?

    Fidonet is a transport technology.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Kurt Weiske on Saturday, March 23, 2019 09:03:45
    On 23/03/2019 03:15, Kurt Weiske -> David Drummond wrote:

    Then what is the advantage to Fidonet as a whole to redo our addressing
    system?

    After thinking this discussion through, probably not much advantage,
    given that now with the advent of continuous mailers and binkp we can effectively crashmail most any node in Fidonet, instead of relying on
    zone gates and toll calls.

    There are some here helping to test that listed nodes are available
    and haven't fallen off, and as RCs and NCs treat attrition reasonably
    (by removing dead nodes, creating IP nets when geographic nets are no longer needed and consolidating in their own areas when possible) I
    think we'll be in a better place.

    I find it interesting that those most in favour of us all being moved to zone 1
    - are already in zone 1.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 21:18:34
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Dan Cross on Sat Mar 23 2019 08:51 am

    On 23/03/2019 00:43, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    So... the Fidonet that I have been part of, and happy with for more than 3
    decades should change its name because some "johhny come lately" wants to
    change it into something different?

    No. It should change it's name because other people want
    to make forward-looking changes that are either backwards
    incompatible or otherwise unacceptable to those who refuse
    to change anything at all.

    Fucking up the addressing structure is NOT looking forward.

    Right. So consolidating and changing is "fucking up" the
    address structure.

    By the way, your _current_ logical fallacy is a combination
    of "No True Scotsman" and "Appeal to Tradition."

    Huh?

    A logical fallacy is a type of logical error made in a debate
    or argument. Yours appears to be a combination of appeal to
    tradition, where you appeal to 3 decades of service as an
    argument not to change anything, and "no true scotsman", which
    is the idea that one can declare other ideas invalid by
    continually making the criteria they have to fit into ever
    smaller until they (surprise) do not fit.

    Seriously: What would happen if a group of interested people just
    created their own "fidonet" and ignored the existing network? Would
    anyone other than a couple of people notice?

    That is what the Othernets do - isn't it?

    It does sound like the logical choice - if one wants something that Fidonet
    isn't then start up a network that suits those requirements.

    Cool. We'll call it "Fidonet" and use zone 1 for all the
    hosts,

    We already have a Fidonet entity - with a Zone 1. How can you "re-invent" that?

    Simple! Just start using it and ignore the existing network
    entirely. If someone wants to be on fidonet, they don't use
    the legacy fidonet network.

    It doesn't matter what you call your "Fidonet", the name is not part of the addressing model.

    Failure of imagination.

    That you put all of your nodes in Z1 will not matter either -
    it only takes one zone gate to link the other zones to your "Z1"

    Or we ignore the existing "zones" and just build a
    different, parallel network.

    or come up with better technology for conference distribution.

    The Europeans have already come up with a better technology for conference distribution - have you looked at that model?

    Is it called HTTP, RSS, or Atom?

    Let me guess: it still relies on zones, regions, nets, and
    all the rest of that antiquated nonsense? Nodes are given
    multidimensional numeric identifiers presented as manfiest
    constants instead of symbolic names? It has some silly
    bit-level protocol for distribution that tries to make a
    TCP connection look like a modem? It's tied to legacy file
    formats and conventions for filesystems that haven't been
    used seriously in 25 years? It uses a binary interchange
    format instead of something rationale and structured?

    Yeah, that's not "better". That's more of the same.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 21:24:29
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Dan Cross on Sat Mar 23 2019 08:58 am

    On 23/03/2019 00:56, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    I wonder how Fidonet has managed to last more than 30 years
    with no real Web presence...

    It hasn't.

    You are mistaken - we are communicating now via the phenomenon of Fidonet.

    That "whooshing" sound you hear is the point, saily gently
    far over your head.

    Yes, it is not as prolific as it was during its hey day but it still exists.

    On average, are more nodes being added per unit time than
    are disappearing?

    It's been dying an asymptotic death for 25 years,
    since the Internet started to become commercialized and people
    realized they didn't have to kowtow to the hierarchy because
    it wasn't a monopoly anymore.

    And that "hierarchy" was all based in USA - in Z1. That is the origin of the "zone wars".

    I could care less about the ancient history.

    Also, define "last": if it gets down to the point of being exactly three MS-DOS computers exchanging data, is that still considered
    to be "lasting"?

    Yes. Until the penultimate node shuts down there is still the network.

    Have fun with that!

    You're not far from that now because no one can figure out how to
    join the thing since information isn't publicly available outside
    the walled garden of the existing network.

    It is that walled garden that makes it a network - otherwise it is just another useless piece of the WWW.

    So...is USENET a piece of the "WWW"?

    Those who stick out the haze fest to get a node number quickly
    tire of the infighting. There was a reason it was called, "fight-o-net" back in the day and it obviously hasn't changed

    Then why are you here? Why are you not enjoying the utopia of a single zone othernet where everyone is of one exact same mind?

    I think Fidonet is clearly the sort of place where "everyone
    is of one exact same mind": the inability to _conceive_ of
    change is astounding. I am here because I find that both
    fairly ridiculous and faintly amazing.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 21:42:56
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Dan Cross on Sat Mar 23 2019 09:00 am

    On 23/03/2019 00:58, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    That of course begs the question, "why hasn't it been done
    in 16 years?"

    Fidonet is not a legal entity - and has no ownership rights of any domain
    name.

    All domain names that appear to be Fidonet related are owned by other
    individuals.

    Great! So I'll pay US $500 to someone for the fidonet.org domain
    name so I can point `www.fidonet.org` to fidonet.io. Anyone want
    to sell it?

    But that doesn't answer the question at all.

    Of course not - as soon as you, the owner of the domain name, lose interest in Fidonet, the site's content drops out of currency.

    Fidonet is NOT the WWW. The WWW is NOT Fidonet.

    You have mentioned the web now several times, but I don't
    think you are saying what you think you are saying.

    In particular, you seem to be conflating the Internet, being
    the globally connected network of nodes using the TCP/IP
    protocol suite.

    On the other hand, the World Wide Web is merely one of
    many applications that are hosted on the Internet. I well
    remember the early days of the web, before it was a
    well-known service: in those days, the largest Internet
    applications were email (transferred via the SMTP protocol)
    and interactive host access via e.g. the TELNET protocol
    (or occasionally rlogin). FTP was also very popular, and
    NNTP for transfer of USENET news similarly.

    The web seemed like a joke: anemic markup language (for those
    of us used to working with troff, TeX, LaTeX, and PostScript
    [this was before PDF and many of us programmed directly in
    PS]), the protocol was a joke (a separate TCP connection per
    resource request? No way to detect a short transfer?
    Gah!) and bloated, buggy software (NCSA Mosaic was a hog
    on my SPARCstation 10 running SunOS 4.1.4 *and* on my
    RS/6000. I never bothered running it on a VAXstation or
    the Alpha that later replaced that. The CERN HTTP server
    was just bad software). It was something of an unpleasant
    surprise when it overtook TELNET and SMTP as the most
    widely used protocol.

    But it doesn't change the fact that it's only something
    that runs over the net, it is not the net itself.

    In fact, for all intents and purposes, at this point Fidonet
    is also an application of the Internet as well, with some
    special cases to support the handful of remaining dialup
    nodes. So in that sense, it's really no different from, and
    in some way, parallel to the web.

    But because the web is the dominent Internet application,
    it is the place people turn to for information. Like, for
    example, how to join Fidonet (which just runs over the
    Internet, like most things these days). Since the information
    sources on the web are so lacking, it's harder than it should
    be to join and use that parallel application.

    What's amazing is the resistence to fixing this, as if
    making the instructions available via the application people
    expect to use to find them will somehow make that other
    application go away.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 21:44:58
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Kurt Weiske on Sat Mar 23 2019 09:03 am

    I find it interesting that those most in favour of us all being moved to zone 1 - are already in zone 1.

    The zone number itself really doesn't matter. Arguably,
    it shouldn't even be visible to the end user, though that's
    another matter. If it makes you happier, why not declare
    that everyone shall move to zone 3? Or 7? Or 6? Or 0?

    Why do you care?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 23:09:00
    David Drummond wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Let's not lose sight of that. As far as I'm concerned we can
    forget about the Zone thing and try to
    reach some consensus on what can be done to improve the public
    "face" of FidoNet. That's all I'm really after.

    Fidonet is similar to Ham radio in that it is a dying concept
    populated by some old "stick in the muds" hanging on to times
    gone by. As soon as you "modernise" it to have a fabulous flashy
    web presence/tech then it ceases to be Fidonet and becomes just
    another of the millions of useless websites.

    Once again I will try to clarify what I'm advocating...

    I am *NOT* trying to see FidoNet "modernized" into some flashy web
    presence. I am against that in every way possible.

    All I want to see is the public "face" of FidoNet be made (more)
    accessible via the web (WWW). Not the actual workings of Fidonet echomail/FDN. Just the "advertising" side of things. A way for a
    potential new Sysop who wants to join Fidonet to be able to easily
    access the information needed to join. Who to contact, and how to
    contact them. Basic policy documents. A nodelist. An overview
    of how it all works. The reason it should be more visible on the
    WWW is because THAT IS HOW THINGS ARE DONE THESE DAYS. People
    google something they want to find out about, and then expect/want
    to be directed to some web page to read about it. Not to a
    fucking Usenet server, or an ancient website with NOTHING but dead
    links on it.

    Why is this so abhorrent to the (your words) "stick in the muds"?
    Hell, I'm probably in that category myself. I was a Fido sysop
    long ago, then I left for a long time due to Real Life (and other
    factors), and now I'm back. I'm just trying to promote the idea
    of making it EASIER for new people to become FidoNet sysops. How
    can that be considered a BAD THING? Do we not want to try and
    keep Fido alive? If nothing is done, Fido will CONTINUE to
    decline and eventually die. Why not try to save it? We all know
    it will never be the same as it was in the early 90's, but it can
    be salvaged and probably grow a little from what it is today.

    Can we put aside the bullshit and fears of losing the "old ways",
    and just put a shiny new public face on what curious investigators
    see when they research what FidoNet is? Just a fucking workable
    website is what we're talking about here.



    ... As a matter of fact, it IS a banana in my pocket.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Saturday, March 23, 2019 13:21:25
    I find it interesting that those most in favour of us all being moved to zone 1 - are already in zone 1.

    We are?

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to David Drummond on Friday, March 22, 2019 23:43:55
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Kurt Weiske on Sat Mar 23 2019 09:03 am

    I find it interesting that those most in favour of us all being moved to zone 1 - are already in zone 1.

    Of course you do.

    ... What do you think management's real interests are?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Win32
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Gerrit Kuehn@2:240/12 to David Drummond on Saturday, March 23, 2019 10:56:34
    Hello David!

    23 Mar 19 09:02, David Drummond wrote to Gerrit Kuehn:

    Does a club in Germany not have to have elected officials
    (chairperson, secretary, treasurer etc)?

    Nope. This is only required if you want to have a "eingetragener Verein" (registered club). That would definitely make you a legal entitity. As a non-registered club, you are still a so-called "Krperschaft" in Germany, but not a "juristische Person". As my dictionary tells me to translate both terms with "legal entitity" to English, I'm unsure how to explain the difference. ;)

    Fidonet is a transport technology.

    For Germany, I'm pretty sure it would be seen as a non-registered club.


    Regards,
    Gerrit

    ... 10:56AM up 82 days, 12:52, 8 users, load averages: 0.33, 0.49, 0.61

    --- Msged/BSD 6.1.2
    * Origin: So come and try to tell me (2:240/12)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Deon George on Saturday, March 23, 2019 20:05:00
    On 03-22-19 22:30, Deon George wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    On 22 Mar 2019, Tony Langdon said the following...
    Depends what distro it's for. My Pis are older installations - Raspian Wheezy.

    OK, its a stretch DEB.

    That's not gonna work. Looks like source it is when I get around to it. :)


    ... A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tommi Koivula@2:221/360 to Dan Cross on Saturday, March 23, 2019 11:54:07
    Hello, Dan Cross,
    On 23/03/2019 4.44 you wrote:

    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Kurt Weiske on Sat Mar 23 2019 09:03 am
    I find it interesting that those most in favour of us all being moved to zone 1 - are already in zone 1.
    The zone number itself really doesn't matter. Arguably,
    it shouldn't even be visible to the end user, though that's
    another matter. If it makes you happier, why not declare
    that everyone shall move to zone 3? Or 7? Or 6? Or 0?

    Why should anyone move to any other zone? There are no overlapping networks anymore, so anyone might use any zone 1,2,3,4 or even 6...

    So I could have akas 1:221/360 and 3:221/360 as well as 2:221/360. :)


    --
    Tommi

    --- HotdogEd/2.13.5 (Android; Google Android; rv:1) Hotdoged/1546513055000 Hotd
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Dan Cross@1:123/115 to Tommi Koivula on Saturday, March 23, 2019 07:45:52
    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Tommi Koivula to Dan Cross on Sat Mar 23 2019 11:54 am

    Hello, Dan Cross,
    On 23/03/2019 4.44 you wrote:

    Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: David Drummond to Kurt Weiske on Sat Mar 23 2019 09:03 am
    I find it interesting that those most in favour of us all being moved to zone 1 - are already in zone 1.
    The zone number itself really doesn't matter. Arguably,
    it shouldn't even be visible to the end user, though that's
    another matter. If it makes you happier, why not declare
    that everyone shall move to zone 3? Or 7? Or 6? Or 0?

    Why should anyone move to any other zone? There are no overlapping networks anymore, so anyone might use any zone 1,2,3,4 or even 6...

    The primary reason would be to get rid of "zones" as an
    archaic relic of the telephone system.

    So I could have akas 1:221/360 and 3:221/360 as well as 2:221/360. :)

    That's actually not a bad idea. Then people who want to
    cling to their precious zone numbers can do so while they're
    still rendered irrelevant.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Dan Cross on Saturday, March 23, 2019 11:31:46
    On 2019 Mar 22 21:18:34, you wrote to David Drummond:

    or come up with better technology for conference distribution.

    The Europeans have already come up with a better technology for
    conference distribution - have you looked at that model?

    Is it called HTTP, RSS, or Atom?

    no... those are not fidonet protocols used to package and/or transfer mail from
    one FTN system to another...

    Let me guess: it still relies on zones, regions, nets, and
    all the rest of that antiquated nonsense?

    nope... it embraces the fact that systems may pull their echomail from any other system(s) they desire... the key factor is having multiple links to the same area... it embraces the use of duplicates to ensure that messages arrive even if one node goes down for some reason...

    fidonet used to detect and take steps to break "dupe loops" because of cost... now, instead of cost being the limiting factor, a system's ability to handle possibly large numbers of dupes is the limiting factor... especially if a system puts those dupes into a special area for the operator to look over and determine why a message was classified by their system as a duplicate... this is/was how faulty duplicate detection routines were discovered, reported and corrected...

    some systems these days just throw dupes into the bitbucket even if they are not truly duplicates... an example of that would be echo rules posted to an echo... rules that didn't change in message body even though the header was different and the path/seenbys were also different... in many cases, the only difference was the date of the post and the MSGID if one was used in the post...

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... A single great deed can be undone by the sum of many small actions.
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Dan Cross on Saturday, March 23, 2019 10:52:32
    On 2019 Mar 22 21:24:28, you wrote to David Drummond:

    And that "hierarchy" was all based in USA - in Z1. That is the origin
    of the "zone wars".

    I could care less about the ancient history.

    i think you meant "could not care less" ;) ;) ;)

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... It's *not* a bald spot...it's a solar panel ;*)
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Dan Cross on Saturday, March 23, 2019 10:57:00
    On 2019 Mar 22 21:44:58, you wrote to David Drummond:

    I find it interesting that those most in favour of us all being moved to
    zone 1 - are already in zone 1.

    The zone number itself really doesn't matter. Arguably,
    it shouldn't even be visible to the end user,

    how is a user supposed to be able to respond to an echomail message via netmail
    if they cannot see the node number of the user they are responding to?? netmail is not limited to sysops even though a lot of sysops didn't allow their
    users access to netmail back in the day... for many, it was limited because of
    not understanding routing and thus not wanting to incur more cost for their system's connections to other systems over POTS...

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... No one ever surrenders. Sometimes a truce is declared.
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Dan Cross on Saturday, March 23, 2019 11:02:22
    On 2019 Mar 23 07:45:52, you wrote to Tommi Koivula:

    Why should anyone move to any other zone? There are no overlapping
    networks anymore, so anyone might use any zone 1,2,3,4 or even 6...

    The primary reason would be to get rid of "zones" as an archaic relic
    of the telephone system.

    that's not what they were for... zone, regions, nets and hubs were created for management purposes... that they were grouped by POTS calling areas is another matter...

    trivia: do you know how the NCAA played a part in the development of fidonet? ;)

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... I honor and express all facets of my being, regardless of the law.
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Cross on Sunday, March 24, 2019 07:38:56
    On 23/03/2019 12:18, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    Fucking up the addressing structure is NOT looking forward.

    Right. So consolidating and changing is "fucking up" the
    address structure.

    Changing the technical structure of the addressing model for no practical reason is "fucking up".

    What we have works for all of the different software currently employed by Fidonetters.

    By the way, your _current_ logical fallacy is a combination
    of "No True Scotsman" and "Appeal to Tradition."

    Huh?

    A logical fallacy is a type of logical error made in a debate
    or argument. Yours appears to be a combination of appeal to
    tradition, where you appeal to 3 decades of service as an
    argument not to change anything, and "no true scotsman", which
    is the idea that one can declare other ideas invalid by
    continually making the criteria they have to fit into ever
    smaller until they (surprise) do not fit.

    If you say so.

    Cool. We'll call it "Fidonet" and use zone 1 for all the
    hosts,

    We already have a Fidonet entity - with a Zone 1. How can you "re-invent"
    that?

    Simple! Just start using it and ignore the existing network
    entirely. If someone wants to be on fidonet, they don't use
    the legacy fidonet network.

    That would be best, as it would suit everyone - those who want to all be in one
    zone, and those who wish to keep the addressing model we currently have.

    It doesn't matter what you call your "Fidonet", the name is not part of the
    addressing model.

    Failure of imagination.

    Fidonet is not just imagination, it is technical fact.

    That you put all of your nodes in Z1 will not matter either -
    it only takes one zone gate to link the other zones to your "Z1"

    Or we ignore the existing "zones" and just build a different, parallel
    network.

    I concur - do exactly that. Except it would not be parallel having only the one/or no zone.

    or come up with better technology for conference distribution.

    The Europeans have already come up with a better technology for conference
    distribution - have you looked at that model?

    Is it called HTTP, RSS, or Atom?

    BinkP and "FidoWeb"

    Let me guess: it still relies on zones, regions, nets, and
    all the rest of that antiquated nonsense?

    The "antiquity" is what attracts us/hold us to Fidonet - otherwise we'd all be twittering and facebooking.

    Nodes are given multidimensional numeric identifiers presented as manfiest constants instead of symbolic names? It has some silly
    bit-level protocol for distribution that tries to make a
    TCP connection look like a modem? It's tied to legacy file
    formats and conventions for filesystems that haven't been
    used seriously in 25 years? It uses a binary interchange
    format instead of something rationale and structured?

    That is to make it backward compatible with those who still run the antiquated software - that is the attraction of Fidonet to them.

    If they wanted to just twitter and facebook they would change to that model.

    Yeah, that's not "better". That's more of the same.

    Just as is any "historical interest" group.

    I agree that it is time for all of those who do not like the historical technical structure of Fidonet to create their own "othernet" and structure it however they can agree on. What they choose to call it is irrelevant.

    --

    Enjoy
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Cross on Sunday, March 24, 2019 07:51:51
    On 23/03/2019 12:24, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    I wonder how Fidonet has managed to last more than 30 years
    with no real Web presence...

    It hasn't.

    You are mistaken - we are communicating now via the phenomenon of
    Fidonet.

    That "whooshing" sound you hear is the point, saily gently
    far over your head.

    Yes, it is not as prolific as it was during its hey day but it still
    exists.

    On average, are more nodes being added per unit time than
    are disappearing?

    The numbers are diminishing as the old pharts lose interest, cognitive skills, or die. Those old pharts are in Fidonet to relive/continue to live the interest
    of their younger days.

    That some newcomers want to totally change the structure will just drive the remaining ones away, turn it into something that is not the Fidonet they know and love.

    [...] realized they didn't have to kowtow to the hierarchy because
    it wasn't a monopoly anymore.

    And that "hierarchy" was all based in USA - in Z1. That is the
    origin of the "zone wars".

    I could care less about the ancient history.

    Those that ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

    [...]
    Yes. Until the penultimate node shuts down there is still the network.

    Have fun with that!

    Thanks, I will - but I suspect that the Fidonet network will still be functioning after my/my node's demise.
    [...]

    It is that walled garden that makes it a network - otherwise it is just
    another useless piece of the WWW.

    So...is USENET a piece of the "WWW"?

    The "web based" portals certainly are.
    [...]
    Then why are you here? Why are you not enjoying the utopia of a single zone
    othernet where everyone is of one exact same mind?

    I think Fidonet is clearly the sort of place where "everyone
    is of one exact same mind": the inability to _conceive_ of
    change is astounding. I am here because I find that both
    fairly ridiculous and faintly amazing.

    So... you see it as your life task to indoctrinate us "stick in the muds" to your utopian view of network interactions?

    By all means run your system under any addressing method you choose, leave mine
    to my preference. I don't want what you're selling.

    --

    Enjoy
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Cross on Sunday, March 24, 2019 07:59:39
    On 23/03/2019 12:42, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    But that doesn't answer the question at all.

    Of course not - as soon as you, the owner of the domain name, lose interest
    in Fidonet, the site's content drops out of currency.

    Fidonet is NOT the WWW. The WWW is NOT Fidonet.

    You have mentioned the web now several times, but I don't
    think you are saying what you think you are saying.

    There are two threads - one to change the addressing method of the Fidonet FTN, the other is to have web pages that contain Fidonet information.
    [ ...]

    What's amazing is the resistence to fixing this,

    How does one fix that which is not broken?

    The Fidonet addressing model works - for all of the variations of software currently in use throughout the world.

    To change it just to suit some personal interest of your is just bloody minded arrogance.

    If you do not like the Fidonet we have then simply don't play here - set up your own Fidonet where everyone uses the same zone number (of course you would have to phase that out as it is antiquated and redundant) - where everyone is of the same mind, no dissent.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Cross on Sunday, March 24, 2019 08:03:08
    On 23/03/2019 12:44, Dan Cross -> David Drummond wrote:

    I find it interesting that those most in favour of us all being moved to
    zone 1 - are already in zone 1.

    The zone number itself really doesn't matter. Arguably,
    it shouldn't even be visible to the end user, though that's
    another matter. If it makes you happier, why not declare
    that everyone shall move to zone 3? Or 7? Or 6? Or 0?

    Surely it would have to be done away with - if it is the same number for everyone it would be redundant.

    Why do you care?

    Because I don't want to be bunched in with the arrogant USAians with their "one
    size fits all", it might be contagious!

    The zonal difference gives me a layer of separation.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Alan Ianson@1:153/757 to mark lewis on Saturday, March 23, 2019 14:32:34
    trivia: do you know how the NCAA played a part in the development of fidonet? ;)

    No, I'm not sure what the NCAA is either. Can you explain?

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to mark lewis on Sunday, March 24, 2019 08:31:00
    On 03-23-19 10:57, mark lewis wrote to Dan Cross <=-

    how is a user supposed to be able to respond to an echomail message via netmail if they cannot see the node number of the user they are
    responding to?? netmail is not limited to sysops even though a lot of

    As long as either the user can see the node address, or the system can insert it correctly (e.g. when doing a reply via netmail) it'll work.

    sysops didn't allow their users access to netmail back in the day...
    for many, it was limited because of not understanding routing and thus
    not wanting to incur more cost for their system's connections to other systems over POTS...

    I always allowed users routed netmail that went with the nightly mail polls. Netmail routing isn't exactly rocket science. :)


    ... Micro$oft: How much money is left in your wallet today?
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Clough on Sunday, March 24, 2019 08:28:40
    On 23/03/2019 14:09, Dan Clough -> David Drummond wrote:

    I am *NOT* trying to see FidoNet "modernized" into some flashy web presence. I am against that in every way possible.

    All I want to see is the public "face" of FidoNet be made (more) accessible via the web (WWW).

    Not the actual workings of Fidonet echomail/FDN. Just the "advertising"
    side of things. A way for a
    potential new Sysop who wants to join Fidonet to be able to easily
    access the information needed to join.

    Who to contact, and how to contact them. Basic policy documents. A
    nodelist. An overview
    of how it all works. The reason it should be more visible on the
    WWW is because THAT IS HOW THINGS ARE DONE THESE DAYS.

    Not in Fidonet it isn't. Fidonet (and the associated BBSs) is an alternative to
    the WWW. All of the "how to join" stuff should already be available at those BBSs.

    People google something they want to find out about, and then expect/want to be directed to some web page to read about it. Not to a
    fucking Usenet server, or an ancient website with NOTHING but dead
    links on it.

    Ancient dead websites are a fact of life when people lose interest in maintaining them. There is nothing you can do about that until you come up with
    some way that these can be set up and funded by *other than one individual*.

    Why is this so abhorrent to the (your words) "stick in the muds"?
    Hell, I'm probably in that category myself. I was a Fido sysop
    long ago, then I left for a long time due to Real Life (and other factors), and now I'm back.

    Why? If Fidonet is such an antiquated redundant thing then why did you return?

    I'm just trying to promote the idea of making it EASIER for new people to
    become FidoNet sysops. How
    can that be considered a BAD THING?

    You are NOT making it easier with a website - you are just making one person's opinion of the available information available.

    Do we not want to try and keep Fido alive? If nothing is done, Fido will
    CONTINUE to
    decline and eventually die. Why not try to save it? We all know
    it will never be the same as it was in the early 90's, but it can
    be salvaged and probably grow a little from what it is today.

    Fidonet will NOT die out until the penultimate node drops out.

    Can we put aside the bullshit and fears of losing the "old ways",
    and just put a shiny new public face

    Because there is NO shiny public face - only one person's opinion of how that face should look.

    on what curious investigators see when they research what FidoNet is?

    Just a fucking workable website is what we're talking about here.

    Should we also be taking out advertising in bus shelters, on highway billboards? How do people even hear about Fidonet in the first place to want to
    become a node?

    Set up your web site - pay for the domain registration, fund the hosting fees, display your fascist manifesto - and make out that it is the collective opinion
    of Fidonet.

    Fidonet has no collective social opinion. The only thing we vaguely agree with is connection methods/protocols (and even then some of us cannot connect with others of us - my node does not support POTS, your node does not support ISDN etc.).

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to nathanael culver on Sunday, March 24, 2019 08:34:31
    On 23/03/2019 15:21, nathanael culver -> David Drummond wrote:

    I find it interesting that those most in favour of us all being moved to
    zone 1 - are already in zone 1.

    We are?

    I'm sure I used the word "most" (I concede, in the wrong place in the sentence).

    Can you list the people not in zone 1 (other than yourself) who are in favour of this change?

    I still think that if *you* want to be in zone 1 then you should get *yourself*
    listed there. What you want and what I want may not always be the same thing.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Kurt Weiske on Sunday, March 24, 2019 08:36:16
    On 23/03/2019 16:43, Kurt Weiske -> David Drummond wrote:

    I find it interesting that those most in favour of us all being moved to
    zone 1 - are already in zone 1.

    Of course you do.

    The zone wars are back on! (Were they ever really ended?)

    .. What do you think management's real interests are?

    Fidonet has no *management*, we are all lord and masters of our own systems (or
    was that just a tear line?).


    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Gerrit Kuehn on Sunday, March 24, 2019 08:38:54
    On 23/03/2019 19:56, Gerrit Kuehn -> David Drummond wrote:

    Nope. This is only required if you want to have a "eingetragener Verein" (registered club). That would definitely make you a legal entitity. As a non-registered club, you are still a so-called "K봱perschaft" in
    Germany, but not a "juristische Person". As my dictionary tells me to translate both terms with "legal entitity" to English, I'm unsure how to explain the difference. ;)

    Fidonet is a transport technology.

    For Germany, I'm pretty sure it would be seen as a non-registered club.

    You'd better take out indemnity insurance then, I will be suing your club for some perceived slight against me soon (as soon as I can think of the infraction).

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 24, 2019 07:15:28
    Surely it would have to be done away with - if it is the same number for everyone it would be redundant.

    Not at all. Zone numbers still distinguish the various FTN nets.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to alexander koryagin on Sunday, March 24, 2019 00:34:10
    Hello Alexander,

    A couple of (presumably) Russians used to post in this echo -
    although I haven't seen them lately. Perhaps it's their
    government controlling their feed(s) out of the country

    You better tell me when will the US wage a civil war in Venezuela,
    like it did in Syria?

    I don't think that'll happen.
    The war in Syria had been going on for years before Obama sent US
    troops there

    For a while the US follows the same trick - the opposition denies the election results, violent protests, accusing the president of being
    cruel, declaring him illegitimate, creating parallel government
    structures and finally military units that are provided with weapon from abroad. If such things are done in bitter divide country you cause a
    civil war deliberately. And it is awful.

    There many places in the world where regimes are not perfect. Take for instance Europe. The Europeans live quite well, they are become lazy, sluggish. The European country leader should be a real fucking ass personification so as to make people rise and go onto the streets for months despite arrests and repressions.

    In France, people bust their guts shouting how President Macron is wrong in his politics. But what can we see? We see that in a so called democratic country, people's outrage worths nothing. They can shout till Second Advent, but they cannot influence the country destiny. More of
    that - Macron is just using a wise Israeli tactic - let them shout;
    after that, when they understand that it is useless let them commit violent acts; after that declare them terrorists and put in prison. That is the democracy in France now.

    But anyway, if the yellow vests leader declares Macron illegitimate how
    on Earth it is possible for other countries to accept that leader as a president? We will increase havoc, that's all.

    Oh, come now. You don't really believe that, do you? I mean, think
    about it. God appointed Trump to save Israel. Not Macron, or Putin,
    or anybody else. The US Secretary of State said so himself. Right
    after Trump said the US would recognize the Golan Heights as part of
    Israel. So it must be true.

    "After 52 years it is time for the United States to fully recognize
    Israel's Sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which is of critical
    strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability!" ~Trump tweeted on Purim, a Jewish holiday

    Remember the USS Liberty! Israeli warplanes bombed a US ship minding
    its own business in international waters, killing several on board.
    On the very day Israel invaded the Golan. To date, Israel has never
    apologized to the US, or paid reparations, for its actions.

    --Lee

    --
    Get Her Wet Here

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to alexander koryagin on Sunday, March 24, 2019 00:34:22
    Hello Alexander,

    A couple of (presumably) Russians used to post in this echo -
    although I haven't seen them lately. Perhaps it's their
    government controlling their feed(s) out of the country

    You better tell me when will the US wage a civil war in Venezuela, like it did in Syria?

    That might take a while. Trump ordered the Marines to defend
    the border between the US and Mexico. The Marines refused his
    order, telling him they had other more important things to do.

    In 1846, the US invaded Mexico. What if the US had never left?
    What would Trump do then, with no wall to build to keep anybody
    out?

    --Lee

    --
    Every Bottom Needs A Top

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 24, 2019 07:51:48
    Not in Fidonet it isn't. Fidonet (and the associated BBSs) is an alternative to the WWW.

    Your attitude is puzzling. On the one hand, you insist that Fidonet and the
    WWW have nothing to do with each other. Yet, you still drum up a whole ream
    of arguments in opposition to anyone attempting to maintain any sort of web presence.

    If FN and the WWW have nothing to do with each other, the logical attitude should be who cares?

    you are just making one
    person's opinion of the available information available.

    So what? Since FN and the WWW are worlds apart, it should make no difference
    to you at all if someone wants to put up a website full of his "opinions". Worst case is it would have no effect on Fidonet at all.

    You are NOT making it easier with a website

    But that's just one person's opinion, right?

    In my case, having an up-to-date website would have made joining significantly easier. Having all that information available on Fidonet BBSes is of no help
    at all to someone who doesn't know how to find those BBSes.

    fees, display your fascist manifesto - and make out that it is the collective opinion of Fidonet.

    But since Fidonet and the WWW have nothing whatsoever to do with each other, you shouldn't care at all. Yet you obviously feel strongly enough about it to gratuitously throw words like "fascist" at the mere suggestion.

    Very strange.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 24, 2019 08:11:21
    Can you list the people not in zone 1 (other than yourself) who are in favour of this change?

    It was *your* claim, so the onus of proof rests with you.

    I still think that if *you* want to be in zone 1 then you should get *yourself* listed there.

    As has been explained multiple times, it's not about the number, it's about
    the redundancy of multiple zones. It could just as easily be 2, 3, 4 or 728.

    You have this penchant for wanting to view everything through the
    lense of ancient Fidonet politics. The suggestion of Zone 1 was never political, but you seem unable to grasp that.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to nathanael culver on Sunday, March 24, 2019 01:56:20
    As has been explained multiple times, it's not about the number, it's
    about the redundancy of multiple zones. It could just as easily be 2, 3,
    4 or 728.

    You can go on harping about this until hell freezes over, but it isn't going to
    happen on my watch nor on Nick Andre's. I would assume neither on Scott Little's but I haven't asked him.

    It's obvious you have no clue what you're going to break when going single-zone.

    This has got nothing to do with petty-politics, or conservatism, or just sitting on one's ass but everything with experience.

    And if you don't know what experience is, it is what you get when you didn't get what you wanted.

    Come on vacation here for a week or so and I'll show you how and why Fidonet functions plus how and why it is being kept duct-taped together.

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to nathanael culver on Sunday, March 24, 2019 10:35:31
    On 24/03/2019 09:15, nathanael culver -> David Drummond wrote:
    Surely it would have to be done away with - if it is the same number for
    everyone it would be redundant.

    Not at all. Zone numbers still distinguish the various FTN nets.

    Which are of no consequence to Fidonet.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Lee Lofaso on Sunday, March 24, 2019 10:38:11
    On 24/03/2019 09:34, Lee Lofaso -> alexander koryagin wrote:

    In 1846, the US invaded Mexico. What if the US had never left?
    What would Trump do then, with no wall to build to keep anybody
    out?

    Would he not have built it on Mexico's southern border to keep those terrorists
    from further south out of USA/Mexico?

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to nathanael culver on Sunday, March 24, 2019 10:56:52
    On 24/03/2019 09:51, nathanael culver -> David Drummond wrote:

    Not in Fidonet it isn't. Fidonet (and the associated BBSs) is an
    alternative to the WWW.

    Your attitude is puzzling. On the one hand, you insist that Fidonet and
    the
    WWW have nothing to do with each other. Yet, you still drum up a whole
    ream
    of arguments in opposition to anyone attempting to maintain any sort of
    web
    presence.

    Actually I have no objection to anyone putting up a web page. Go ahead and do it - but it will always be *your* web page, not Fidonet's.

    Why are you even asking in here about publishing such a page, why are you not just doing it?

    If FN and the WWW have nothing to do with each other, the logical attitude should be who cares?

    Because the way you and your ilk speak it sounds as though you think *your* web
    page and the opinions expressed there-on are in some way Fidonet sanctioned, or the opinion of the collective.

    you are just making one person's opinion of the available information available.

    So what? Since FN and the WWW are worlds apart, it should make no
    difference
    to you at all if someone wants to put up a website full of his "opinions". Worst case is it would have no effect on Fidonet at all.

    True - go ahead and do it - I implore you. Spend your time and money, do it now
    before someone beats you to the jump.

    What are you wasting time discussing it with me for? I have no say over what web sites/domain names you choose to publish.

    You are NOT making it easier with a website

    But that's just one person's opinion, right?

    And my opinion is just as valid as yours. Especially with over 30 years of hind
    sight.

    I am *NOT* telling you that you cannot do something, nor insisting that you do something - I am expressing my opinion that you will be wasting your time/resources if you think it will cause some sort of noticeable influx into Fidonet.

    In my case, having an up-to-date website would have made joining
    significantly
    easier. Having all that information available on Fidonet BBSes is of no
    help
    at all to someone who doesn't know how to find those BBSes.

    I agree - the modern computer geek isn't as capable as those of yesteryear - they need all of the molly-coddling they can get.

    fees, display your fascist manifesto - and make out that it is the
    collective opinion of Fidonet.

    But since Fidonet and the WWW have nothing whatsoever to do with each
    other,
    you shouldn't care at all. Yet you obviously feel strongly enough about it
    to
    gratuitously throw words like "fascist" at the mere suggestion.

    You're welcome, no payment necessary.

    Now instead of wasting time writing to me I suggest you get out there and register your domain and get your fabulously informative web site on line - there are millions of prospective Fidonetters champing at the bit to join our illustrious "brotherhood" who cannot find the info elsewhere.

    I am puzzled about how they even heard about Fidonet in the first place, but apparently I'm a bit slow.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to nathanael culver on Sunday, March 24, 2019 11:03:42
    On 24/03/2019 10:11, nathanael culver -> David Drummond wrote:

    Can you list the people not in zone 1 (other than yourself) who are in
    favour of this change?

    It was *your* claim, so the onus of proof rests with you.

    OK - we'll drop the whole idea then.

    How are you going to cope with the suggested resurrection of zone 6? Will you still insist of "one zone to rule them all" or will you move you node/net to zone 6?

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Ward Dossche on Sunday, March 24, 2019 11:41:55
    On 24/03/2019 01:56, Ward Dossche -> nathanael culver wrote:

    As has been explained multiple times, it's not about the number, it's
    about the redundancy of multiple zones. It could just as easily be
    2, 3, 4 or 728.

    You can go on harping about this until hell freezes over, but it isn't going to happen on my watch nor on Nick Andre's. I would assume neither
    on Scott Little's but I haven't asked him.

    It's obvious you have no clue what you're going to break when going single-zone.

    This has got nothing to do with petty-politics, or conservatism, or just sitting on one's ass but everything with experience.

    And if you don't know what experience is, it is what you get when you didn't get what you wanted.

    Come on vacation here for a week or so and I'll show you how and why Fidonet functions plus how and why it is being kept duct-taped together.

    Maybe we/he should be holding a referendum in the international Fidonet sysop echoes to gauge the opinions of the actual Fidonetters as a whole, not just one
    or two Z1 (or would be Z1) nodes, about changing everyone's zone to Z3.

    A reasonable majority in favour should prompt the authors of all of our software to make it possible - no?

    If only a minority are in favour, surely they can put a convincing technical argument to the "three amigos" to force it to be made so.

    Then again - it could be that I need to ease up on the rum at this time of day. --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- No rum, no fun.

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Dan Richter@1:317/3 to David Drummond on Saturday, March 23, 2019 20:23:55
    On 24 Mar 2019, David Drummond said the following...

    Because I don't want to be bunched in with the arrogant USAians with
    their "one size fits all", it might be contagious!

    Don't group all of us into an debate with a handful of people...

    It must not be contagious, because I haven't contracted it... :)


    ---

    Black Panther(RCS)
    a.k.a. Dan Richter
    Sysop - Castle Rock BBS
    telnet://bbs.castlerockbbs.com
    http://www.castlerockbbs.com
    The sparrows are flying again....

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Castle Rock BBS - bbs.castlerockbbs.com (1:317/3)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Richter on Sunday, March 24, 2019 14:23:53
    On 24/03/2019 12:23, Dan Richter -> David Drummond wrote:

    Because I don't want to be bunched in with the arrogant USAians with
    their "one size fits all", it might be contagious!

    Don't group all of us into an debate with a handful of people...

    Then kindly ignore the discussion thanks. If you're not one of the arrogant holding that opinion then I am most certainly not referring to you.

    It must not be contagious, because I haven't contracted it... :)

    Obviously some will have a genetic immunity...

    --

    Have a great day,
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Dan Richter@1:317/3 to David Drummond on Saturday, March 23, 2019 23:02:02
    On 24 Mar 2019, David Drummond said the following...

    Don't group all of us into an debate with a handful of people...

    Then kindly ignore the discussion thanks. If you're not one of the arrogant holding that opinion then I am most certainly not referring to you.

    I find this 'discussion' to be entertaining. I just get upset when people are trying to get past the zone wars of the past, but then generalize them by groups or zones.


    ---

    Black Panther(RCS)
    a.k.a. Dan Richter
    Sysop - Castle Rock BBS
    telnet://bbs.castlerockbbs.com
    http://www.castlerockbbs.com
    The sparrows are flying again....

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Castle Rock BBS - bbs.castlerockbbs.com (1:317/3)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to Ward Dossche on Sunday, March 24, 2019 13:47:08
    You can go on harping about this until hell freezes over, but it isn't going to happen on my watch nor on Nick Andre's. I would assume neither

    I'm not pushing it. I'm simply pointing out to David that Zone 1 was not floated for political reasons, despite his apparent wont to see it in
    political terms.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 24, 2019 13:52:15
    Not at all. Zone numbers still distinguish the various FTN nets.

    Which are of no consequence to Fidonet.

    If you say so.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 24, 2019 14:11:12
    Actually I have no objection to anyone putting up a web page.

    Wouldn't have gathered that from your last post.

    Why are you even asking in here about publishing such a page, why are
    you not just doing it?

    I wasn't asking you for permission. I was asking for clarification on your attitude.

    Because the way you and your ilk speak it sounds as though you think *your* web page and the opinions expressed there-on are in some way Fidonet sanctioned, or the opinion of the collective.

    I don't recall anyone even suggesting such a thing. Certainly there was
    nothing in the Dan Clough post you were responding to even remotely "fascistic". But you seem to have a tendency to read sinister
    motives into things.

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From nathanael culver@3:712/886 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 24, 2019 14:13:19
    How are you going to cope with the suggested resurrection of zone 6?

    I'm not holding my breath but if it should happen I will probably move to
    Zone 6.

    Why?

    靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴 靈컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴
    *HUMONGOUS* BBS nathanael : jenandcal.familyds.org:2323
    聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴 聃컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴컴

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Raspberry Pi/32)
    * Origin: *HUMONGOUS* BBS (3:712/886)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 24, 2019 07:06:08
    Then again - it could be that I need to ease up on the rum at this time
    of day.

    Which forces the all important question ... was it good rum ?

    \%/@rd

    --- D'Bridge 3.99 SR41
    * Origin: Ceci n'est pas un courriel (2:292/854)
  • From Gerrit Kuehn@2:240/12 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 24, 2019 09:17:46
    Hello David!

    24 Mar 19 08:38, David Drummond wrote to Gerrit Kuehn:


    You'd better take out indemnity insurance then, I will be suing your
    club for some perceived slight against me soon (as soon as I can
    think of the infraction).

    Have fun. ;)
    German laws and courts are different from what you are used to, I guess.

    DD> Gang warily

    Thinking about sending money squeezing people over here? ;-)


    Regards,
    Gerrit

    ... 9:17AM up 83 days, 11:13, 8 users, load averages: 0.46, 0.39, 0.37

    --- Msged/BSD 6.1.2
    * Origin: We are the second generation (2:240/12)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Ward Dossche on Sunday, March 24, 2019 19:38:40
    On 24/03/2019 07:06, Ward Dossche -> David Drummond wrote:

    Then again - it could be that I need to ease up on the rum at this time
    of day.

    Which forces the all important question ... was it good rum ?

    There is no such thing as bad rum - just that some are better than others.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Dan Richter on Sunday, March 24, 2019 19:55:09
    On 24/03/2019 15:02, Dan Richter -> David Drummond wrote:

    Don't group all of us into an debate with a handful of people...

    Then kindly ignore the discussion thanks. If you're not one of the
    arrogant holding that opinion then I am most certainly not referring to
    you.

    I find this 'discussion' to be entertaining. I just get upset when people
    are
    trying to get past the zone wars of the past, but then generalize them by groups or zones.

    I'm not trying to get past any "zone wars" - I still bear a grudge.
    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to nathanael culver on Sunday, March 24, 2019 19:56:19
    On 24/03/2019 15:52, nathanael culver -> David Drummond wrote:
    Not at all. Zone numbers still distinguish the various FTN nets.

    Which are of no consequence to Fidonet.

    If you say so.

    Are you hinting that they might?

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Gerrit Kuehn on Sunday, March 24, 2019 20:05:38
    On 24/03/2019 18:17, Gerrit Kuehn -> David Drummond wrote:

    You'd better take out indemnity insurance then, I will be suing your
    club for some perceived slight against me soon (as soon as I can
    think of the infraction).

    Have fun. ;)
    German laws and courts are different from what you are used to, I guess.

    That doesn't seem to bother the litigious USAmericans...


    Gang warily

    Thinking about sending money squeezing people over here? ;-)

    Money? You have some impression that I have money?

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/2140.2 to Lee Lofaso on Sunday, March 24, 2019 13:37:25
    Hi, Lee Lofaso!
    I read your message from 24.03.2019 00:16

    BA>>> A couple of (presumably) Russians used to post in this echo -
    BA>>> although I haven't seen them lately. Perhaps it's their
    BA>>> government controlling their feed(s) out of the country
    ak>> You better tell me when will the US wage a civil war in Venezuela,
    ak>> like it did in Syria?

    LL> That might take a while. Trump ordered the Marines to defend the
    LL> border between the US and Mexico. The Marines refused his order,
    LL> telling him they had other more important things to do.

    LL> In 1846, the US invaded Mexico. What if the US had never left? What
    LL> would Trump do then, with no wall to build to keep anybody out?

    Trump also should think of millions refuges in case of civil war in
    Venezuela. Syria from Europe is also quite far - but millions of refuges managed to get Europe legally or illegally. So, Trump probably decided
    make the Wall first.

    Bye, Lee!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.fidonews 2019
    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    * Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)
  • From Gerrit Kuehn@2:240/12 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 24, 2019 12:22:58
    Hello David!

    24 Mar 19 20:05, David Drummond wrote to Gerrit Kuehn:


    That doesn't seem to bother the litigious USAmericans...

    Of course not.

    Gang warily

    Thinking about sending money squeezing people over here? ;-)

    Money? You have some impression that I have money?

    No, I was of the impression that this might be what gangs might be up to.


    Regards,
    Gerrit

    ... 12:22PM up 83 days, 14:18, 8 users, load averages: 0.40, 0.42, 0.40

    --- Msged/BSD 6.1.2
    * Origin: Tall orders to fulfil (2:240/12)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Alan Ianson on Sunday, March 24, 2019 12:31:18
    On 2019 Mar 23 14:32:34, you wrote to me:

    trivia: do you know how the NCAA played a part in the development of
    fidonet? ;)

    No, I'm not sure what the NCAA is either. Can you explain?

    NCAA := National Collegiate Athletic Association

    the answer to the trivia question is here ;)
    https://youtu.be/_Cm6EFYktRQ?t=476

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... I wish more of my handcuff stories involved sex instead of police officers ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Gerrit Kuehn on Monday, March 25, 2019 07:39:49
    On 24/03/2019 21:22, Gerrit Kuehn -> David Drummond wrote:

    Gang warily

    Thinking about sending money squeezing people over here? ;-)

    Money? You have some impression that I have money?

    No, I was of the impression that this might be what gangs might be up to.

    The word "gang" in that quote is a verb, not a noun. The quote is "Googlable".

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 24, 2019 07:56:00
    David Drummond wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    The zone wars are back on! (Were they ever really ended?)

    For many of us, yes. We've left them in the last century.

    .. What do you think management's real interests are?

    Fidonet has no *management*, we are all lord and masters of our own systems (or was that just a tear line?).

    That was a tag line. Have you watched the HBO show "Westworld"? I have
    a list of questions asked of the "hosts" when they were being
    repaired.

    Another list of tags I have are from Brian Eno's "Oblique Strategies", originally a series of cards used to inspire creativity.




    ... What do you think of the guests?
    --- MultiMail/XT v0.51
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Kurt Weiske on Monday, March 25, 2019 11:19:25
    On 25/03/2019 00:56, Kurt Weiske -> David Drummond wrote:

    .. What do you think management's real interests are?

    Fidonet has no *management*, we are all lord and masters of our own
    systems (or was that just a tag line?).

    That was a tag line. Have you watched the HBO show "Westworld"?

    I watch very little TV - I feel that 50% of it is bull, and the other half is shit.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to David Drummond on Monday, March 25, 2019 12:49:00
    On 03-24-19 08:28, David Drummond wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Not in Fidonet it isn't. Fidonet (and the associated BBSs) is an alternative to the WWW. All of the "how to join" stuff should already
    be available at those BBSs.

    That could lead to a Catch-22. One at least needs to know BBSs are out there and what it's about to get that far. And that part is what the web is good at.
    of course, there's still the issue of finding an up to date BBS list, so people can find one to try out (and download Fidonet information from).

    Should we also be taking out advertising in bus shelters, on highway billboards? How do people even hear about Fidonet in the first place to want to become a node?

    in 1991 - BBSs, of course. in 2019 (well 2016 in my case), prior experience as a Fidonet sysop. I'd like to know where someone totally new to BBSing heard about BBSs and Fidonet from (there have been a few new users in the mix). That would inform us as to good places to put information.

    Fidonet has no collective social opinion. The only thing we vaguely
    agree with is connection methods/protocols (and even then some of us cannot connect with others of us - my node does not support POTS, your node does not support ISDN etc.).

    That is true. I can't talk to a POTS (or ISDN) only node, or anything else that doesn't support binkp. :)


    ... To err is human. To forgive is against company policy.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to David Drummond on Monday, March 25, 2019 12:52:00
    On 03-24-19 08:34, David Drummond wrote to nathanael culver <=-

    Can you list the people not in zone 1 (other than yourself) who are in favour of this change?

    IF (big if) it happened, I would not be opposed to being in Z1, but in my opinion, I don't feel the need to move to a single zone. It's not important, and what we have is working. I don't think it's worth the effort and potential other issues to change. Someone pointed out there may be potential hidden issues as well. In other words, if it ain't broke... ;)


    ... So easy, a child could do it. Child sold separately.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Tony Langdon on Monday, March 25, 2019 16:47:06
    On 25/03/2019 12:49, Tony Langdon -> David Drummond wrote:

    Not in Fidonet it isn't. Fidonet (and the associated BBSs) is an
    alternative to the WWW. All of the "how to join" stuff should already
    be available at those BBSs.

    That could lead to a Catch-22. One at least needs to know BBSs are out
    there
    and what it's about to get that far.

    I may be a little sluggish to day but can you please tell me why someone would want to know how to set up a Fidonet BBS if they didn't know that BBSs were out
    there?
    [...]
    Fidonet has no collective social opinion. The only thing we vaguely
    agree with is connection methods/protocols (and even then some of us
    cannot connect with others of us - my node does not support POTS, your
    node does not support ISDN etc.).

    That is true. I can't talk to a POTS (or ISDN) only node, or anything
    else
    that doesn't support binkp. :)

    Are you therefore Policy compliant?

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Tony Langdon on Monday, March 25, 2019 16:48:14
    On 25/03/2019 12:52, Tony Langdon -> David Drummond wrote:

    Can you list the people not in zone 1 (other than yourself) who are in
    favour of this change?

    IF (big if) it happened, I would not be opposed to being in Z1, but in my opinion, I don't feel the need to move to a single zone. It's not
    important,
    and what we have is working. I don't think it's worth the effort and
    potential
    other issues to change. Someone pointed out there may be potential hidden issues as well.

    In other words, if it ain't broke... ;)

    Yeah, that.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to David Drummond on Monday, March 25, 2019 18:46:00
    On 03-25-19 16:47, David Drummond wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    I may be a little sluggish to day but can you please tell me why
    someone would want to know how to set up a Fidonet BBS if they didn't
    know that BBSs were out there?

    They might have heard of BBSs and be curious. Might have even found a copy of Synchronet or Mystic, then read about Fidonet and want to join.

    That is true. I can't talk to a POTS (or ISDN) only node, or anything
    else
    that doesn't support binkp. :)

    Are you therefore Policy compliant?

    Well, I think you'll find a LOT of nodes in the same boat. A better question might be "is Policy keeping up with the times and still valid?"


    ... A cat is always on the wrong side of the door!
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to David Drummond on Monday, March 25, 2019 18:47:00
    On 03-25-19 16:48, David Drummond wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    In other words, if it ain't broke... ;)

    Yeah, that.

    Exactly, deal with more imprtant things. :)


    ... Don't drink and park; accidents cause people.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Alan Ianson@1:153/757 to mark lewis on Monday, March 25, 2019 01:08:38
    No, I'm not sure what the NCAA is either. Can you explain?

    NCAA := National Collegiate Athletic Association

    the answer to the trivia question is here ;) https://youtu.be/_Cm6EFYktRQ?t=476

    Ah, I've watched the BBS Documentary before and never caught the mention of NCAA. I did this time but didn't connect the dots.

    I'll revist that episode agian.. :)

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)
  • From Kees van Eeten@2:280/5003.4 to Tony Langdon on Monday, March 25, 2019 11:05:32
    Hello Tony!

    25 Mar 19 12:52, you wrote to David Drummond:

    Can you list the people not in zone 1 (other than yourself) who are in
    favour of this change?

    IF (big if) it happened, I would not be opposed to being in Z1, but in my opinion, I don't feel the need to move to a single zone. It's not important, and what we have is working. I don't think it's worth the effort and potential other issues to change. Someone pointed out there may be potential hidden issues as well. In other words, if it ain't broke... ;)

    Those, who have wet dreams about a single zone Fidonet, should be aware, that
    there are still overlapping Netnumbers.

    Kees

    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5
    * Origin: As for me, all I know is that, I know nothing. (2:280/5003.4)
  • From mark lewis@1:3634/12.73 to Kees van Eeten on Monday, March 25, 2019 09:52:56
    On 2019 Mar 25 11:05:32, you wrote to Tony Langdon:

    Those, who have wet dreams about a single zone Fidonet, should be
    aware, that there are still overlapping Netnumbers.

    oh?? have we somehow gained one or more back? it was reported several years ago
    that there were no more...

    )\/(ark

    Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
    Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
    ... 6. When entrusted with a secret, keep it.
    ---
    * Origin: (1:3634/12.73)
  • From Tommi Koivula@2:221/360 to mark lewis on Monday, March 25, 2019 18:07:42
    On 25.03.2019 15:52, mark lewis wrote:

    Those, who have wet dreams about a single zone Fidonet, should be
    aware, that there are still overlapping Netnumbers.

    oh?? have we somehow gained one or more back?

    Oh yes! :(

    it was reported several years ago that there were no more...

    That was also my understanding...

    'Tommi

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.
    * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)
  • From Gerrit Kuehn@2:240/12 to David Drummond on Monday, March 25, 2019 19:26:52
    Hello David!

    25 Mar 19 07:39, David Drummond wrote to Gerrit Kuehn:


    The word "gang" in that quote is a verb, not a noun. The quote is "Googlable".

    Oh well, who would have thought that this "gang" is more or less a German word in the case... ;-)


    Regards,
    Gerrit

    ... 7:26PM up 84 days, 21:22, 8 users, load averages: 0.23, 0.36, 0.39

    --- Msged/BSD 6.1.2
    * Origin: America asleep, since Mulberry's too long (2:240/12)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Gerrit Kuehn on Tuesday, March 26, 2019 08:08:48
    On 26/03/2019 04:26, Gerrit Kuehn -> David Drummond wrote:

    The word "gang" in that quote is a verb, not a noun. The quote is
    "Googlable".

    Oh well, who would have thought that this "gang" is more or less a
    German word in the case... ;-)

    As with "modern" English, I'm sure that the languages of yesterday were an amalgamation of other tongues too.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to David Drummond on Wednesday, March 27, 2019 23:37:33
    Hello David,

    As with "modern" English, I'm sure that the languages of yesterday
    were an amalgamation of other tongues too.

    Sure they are. But imho English has inherited especially many words,
    phrases and grammar from other languages due to the eventful English
    history.

    People of the United Kingdom - mongrels in genes, language and culture.

    Except for the Scots, and the Welsh, and the Irish ...

    --Lee

    --
    Sleep With Someone New

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Lee Lofaso on Thursday, March 28, 2019 13:12:14
    On 28/03/2019 08:37, Lee Lofaso -> David Drummond wrote:

    As with "modern" English, I'm sure that the languages of yesterday
    were an amalgamation of other tongues too.

    Sure they are. But imho English has inherited especially many words,
    phrases and grammar from other languages due to the eventful English
    history.

    People of the United Kingdom - mongrels in genes, language and culture.

    Except for the Scots, and the Welsh, and the Irish ...

    I think that some of the invaders made it into those places too.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to David Drummond on Friday, March 29, 2019 04:33:33
    Hello David,

    As with "modern" English, I'm sure that the languages of yesterday
    were an amalgamation of other tongues too.

    Sure they are. But imho English has inherited especially many
    words,
    phrases and grammar from other languages due to the eventful
    English
    history.

    People of the United Kingdom - mongrels in genes, language and
    culture.

    Except for the Scots, and the Welsh, and the Irish ...

    I think that some of the invaders made it into those places too.

    Vikings. No doubt. Vikings. On orders from Odin.

    --Lee

    --
    Our Nuts, Your Mouth

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Ward Dossche on Friday, March 29, 2019 17:46:13
    Hello Ward,

    [..]

    Come on vacation here for a week or so and I'll show you how and why
    Fidonet
    functions plus how and why it is being kept duct-taped together.

    You're on!

    --Lee

    --
    Your Hole Is Our Goal

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to David Drummond on Friday, March 29, 2019 17:46:26
    Hello David,

    In 1846, the US invaded Mexico. What if the US had never left?
    What would Trump do then, with no wall to build to keep anybody
    out?

    Would he not have built it on Mexico's southern border to keep those terrorists from further south out of USA/Mexico?

    What terrorists?

    --Lee

    --
    Often Licked, Never Beaten

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to alexander koryagin on Friday, March 29, 2019 17:46:42
    Hello Alexander,

    A couple of (presumably) Russians used to post in this echo -
    although I haven't seen them lately. Perhaps it's their
    government controlling their feed(s) out of the country
    You better tell me when will the US wage a civil war in Venezuela,
    like it did in Syria?

    That might take a while. Trump ordered the Marines to defend the
    border between the US and Mexico. The Marines refused his order,
    telling him they had other more important things to do.

    In 1846, the US invaded Mexico. What if the US had never left? What
    would Trump do then, with no wall to build to keep anybody out?

    Trump also should think of millions refuges in case of civil war in Venezuela. Syria from Europe is also quite far - but millions of refuges managed to get Europe legally or illegally. So, Trump probably decided make the Wall first.

    I do not understand Trump's position on this matter.
    There are over 3 million Venezuelan refugees, none of whom
    have been mentioned as having been criminals, thugs, or
    whatever by the Trump administration. Certainly they must
    all be staying somewhere, as everybody needs a place to stay.

    --Lee

    --
    We Put Big Loads In Tight Places

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Lee Lofaso on Saturday, March 30, 2019 08:46:01
    On 29/03/2019 13:33, Lee Lofaso -> David Drummond wrote:

    People of the United Kingdom - mongrels in genes, language and
    culture.

    Except for the Scots, and the Welsh, and the Irish ...

    I think that some of the invaders made it into those places too.

    Vikings. No doubt. Vikings. On orders from Odin.

    And that bloke with the hammer...

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Lee Lofaso on Saturday, March 30, 2019 08:48:23
    On 30/03/2019 02:46, Lee Lofaso -> David Drummond wrote:

    In 1846, the US invaded Mexico. What if the US had never left?
    What would Trump do then, with no wall to build to keep anybody
    out?

    Would he not have built it on Mexico's southern border to keep those
    terrorists from further south out of USA/Mexico?

    What terrorists?

    Err - the ones the present wall is intended to keep out?

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Carol Shenkenberger@1:275/100 to nathanael culver on Saturday, March 30, 2019 13:16:23
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: nathanael culver to Ward Dossche on Sun Mar 17 2019 09:09 am

    are until such a time when a revived Z6 really takes off. And if it
    doesn't we trashcan that revived Z6 and nothing's lost.

    I'm confused. Just two days ago you were telling me about how badly Fidonet would break if zones were disbanded. Now you're talking about reviving and potentially again disbanding a zone as if it were nothing.

    Which is it?

    I think he is talking a tandem setupwhere you present a number not in the official nodelist and see if it works?

    Sorry, I do not read this echo normally. I have not read all the messages.
    --- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
    * Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS (1:275/100)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 31, 2019 18:50:33
    Hello David,

    People of the United Kingdom - mongrels in genes, language and
    culture.

    Except for the Scots, and the Welsh, and the Irish ...

    I think that some of the invaders made it into those places too.

    Vikings. No doubt. Vikings. On orders from Odin.

    And that bloke with the hammer...

    What if in the olden days the North Pole was much closer to
    Scandinavia than it is now? Could that be the reason why Vikings
    travelled westward, to England, and Iceland, and Greenland, and
    Canada (North America)? What if they got stranded when the North
    Pole returned to where it is today?

    I wonder what archaeologists will find when all that ice in
    Greenland melts due to global warming. Entire Viking villages
    may be discovered ...

    --Lee

    --
    We Put Big Loads In Tight Places

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to David Drummond on Sunday, March 31, 2019 18:50:45
    Hello David,

    In 1846, the US invaded Mexico. What if the US had never left?
    What would Trump do then, with no wall to build to keep anybody
    out?

    Would he not have built it on Mexico's southern border to keep those
    terrorists from further south out of USA/Mexico?

    What terrorists?

    Err - the ones the present wall is intended to keep out?

    What wall?

    --Lee

    --
    Our Nuts, Your Mouth

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Lee Lofaso on Monday, April 01, 2019 13:03:01
    On 1/04/2019 02:50, Lee Lofaso -> David Drummond wrote:

    In 1846, the US invaded Mexico. What if the US had never left?
    What would Trump do then, with no wall to build to keep anybody
    out?

    Would he not have built it on Mexico's southern border to keep those
    terrorists from further south out of USA/Mexico?

    What terrorists?

    Err - the ones the present wall is intended to keep out?

    What wall?

    Could it be the wall that Trump promised to build? Has he not fulfilled that promise?

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to David Drummond on Wednesday, April 03, 2019 17:49:29
    Hello David,

    In 1846, the US invaded Mexico. What if the US had never left?
    What would Trump do then, with no wall to build to keep anybody
    out?

    Would he not have built it on Mexico's southern border to keep those
    terrorists from further south out of USA/Mexico?

    What terrorists?

    Err - the ones the present wall is intended to keep out?

    What wall?

    Could it be the wall that Trump promised to build? Has he not fulfilled
    that
    promise?

    He is still collecting rocks. Or trying to find folks to
    collect them for him. So far, without success.

    --Lee

    --
    We Make Your Wet Dreams Come True

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/2140.2 to BOB ACKLEY on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 09:55:31
    Hi, Bob Ackley!
    I read your message from 18.03.2019 16:11

    BA> A couple of (presumably) Russians used to post in this echo -
    BA> although I haven't seen them lately. Perhaps it's their
    BA> government controlling their feed(s) out of the country

    You better tell me when will the US wage a civil war in Venezuela, like
    it did in Syria?

    Bye, Bob!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.fidonews 2019

    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    * Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/2140.91 to Dan Clough on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 10:01:12
    Hi, Dan!

    On 18 뙛設 2019 16:41, you wrote you:
    post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming
    they have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious
    question...

    No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something! ;-)

    Haha! Hello Alexander, thanks for the reply. The Russian
    connection is confirmed! :-)

    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.fidonews 2019
    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds

    ...confirmed via a Usenet gateway, anyway. Do you guys still do
    FidoNet echos the "old-fashioned way"?

    Yes, I've also got an old Golded-NSF soft. For instance, this messeage is sent as a traditional Fidonet message. Although, I prefer a GUI interface, what's why I usually use Thunderbird and fidogates.

    Here's another quick question: Does the "fido7" in that Usenet
    group name refer to the rumored FidoNet Zone 7 from the dim and
    dark past mysteries of Fido...?

    Yes, all the Russian fidonet newsgroups, which I know, have the prefix fido7.


    Best regards - alexander
    --- ---------------------------------------
    * Origin: Cool&Hot (2:5020/2140.91)
  • From Vladimir Fyodorov@2:50/15.1 to Dan Clough on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 11:57:12
    Hello, Dan!

    18 March 2019, Dan Clough wrote to alexander koryagin:

    fido7.fidonews 2019
    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    ...confirmed via a Usenet gateway, anyway. Do you guys still do
    FidoNet echos the "old-fashioned way"?

    No, this is the exception rather than the rule.

    Sincerely yours, Vladimir Fyodorov, esquire.

    ... Necessity is the mother of invention
    --- GoldED+/OSX 1.1.5-b20180707
    * Origin: Esquire Station (2:50/15.1)
  • From Alexander Kruglikov@2:5053/58 to Dan Clough on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 13:29:26
    Good ${greeting_time}, Dan!

    18 Mar 19 08:55, you wrote to Nick Andre:

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see ANY posts from
    these important Russians.

    Probably, in these echoes there is nothing interesting for discussion by important Russians =)))
    Example for me, writing just because I can write - the wrong way =)

    With best regards, Alexander.

    --- "GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707" ---
    * Origin: 24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case, Hmmm... (2:5053/58)
  • From Alexander Kruglikov@2:5053/58 to alexander koryagin on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 13:33:10
    Good ${greeting_time}, alexander!

    18 Mar 19 18:55, you wrote to Dan Clough:

    No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something! ;-)

    You are russian hacker? ;)

    With best regards, Alexander.

    --- "GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707" ---
    * Origin: 24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case, Hmmm... (2:5053/58)
  • From Alexander Kruglikov@2:5053/58 to Vladimir Fyodorov on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 13:38:10
    Good ${greeting_time}, Vladimir!

    19 Mar 19 11:57, you wrote to Dan Clough:

    fido7.fidonews 2019
    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    ...confirmed via a Usenet gateway, anyway. Do you guys still do
    FidoNet echos the "old-fashioned way"?
    No, this is the exception rather than the rule.

    Wow!
    MacBook with GoldEd. You are not Russian, i think!

    With best regards, Alexander.

    --- "GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707" ---
    * Origin: 24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case, Hmmm... (2:5053/58)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Dan Clough on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 05:48:24
    On 18 Mar 19 22:34:00, Dan Clough said the following to Nick Andre:

    Well, at least two of the ZC's were right here having the
    conversation in public. Yes, there could have been some private
    messages, but didn't really seem to be needed (yet).

    As I wrote to August - Othernets work because they are Othernets, they are not Fido. Fido is just too tarnished with too many bad decisions and mistakes. Othernets work and are popular because they learnt from Fido's mistakes.

    Not because they just have one zone-number in the addressing.

    keeping everything the same is. Nobody seems to WANT anything to
    change, INCLUDING THE SOFTWARE, and the cumbersome/difficult
    procedures for getting information on how to join FidoNet.

    Its simple, really. Better software for newcomers and make it dumbed-down and attractive enough so it catches on. Have a simplistic display of messages with easy ways to reply. Make it a little bit cool.

    Mystic isn't my cup of tea but I'm a huge fan of the "cool" factor of everyone being able to install it and have a BBS up and running in minutes. And
    have something to show off and others think is cool. I'm on Fsxnet and cannot keep up with the volume of Mystic-related messages. Everyone loves Mystic.

    It helps tremendously when we do not have people running out and registering Fidonet domains and putting up websites in hopes that their site is the "right place to come to" for information (see fidonet.ca and fidonet.us as examples). The more websites, the more confusion, because none are consistant, the SEO is all over the place, and just a mess. I appreciate the effort with this fidonet.io site but I think its a bit misguided and personified.

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Alexander Kruglikov on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 05:49:01
    On 19 Mar 19 13:33:10, Alexander Kruglikov said the following to Alexander Kory

    No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something! ;-)

    You are russian hacker? ;)

    We are all Russian hackers!

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Vladimir Fyodorov@2:50/15.1 to Alexander Kruglikov on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 13:32:16
    Hello, Alexander!

    19 March 2019, Alexander Kruglikov wrote to Vladimir Fyodorov:

    FidoNet echos the "old-fashioned way"?
    No, this is the exception rather than the rule.
    Wow!
    MacBook with GoldEd. You are not Russian, i think!

    Even worse. This is not a MacBook, this is Mac Pro. \m/ \m/

    Sincerely yours, Vladimir Fyodorov, esquire.

    ... Necessity is the mother of invention
    --- GoldED+/OSX 1.1.5-b20180707
    * Origin: Esquire Station (2:50/15.1)
  • From alexander koryagin@2:5020/2140.2 to Alexander Kruglikov on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 15:52:00
    Hi, Alexander Kruglikov!
    I read your message from 19.03.2019 10:01

    ak>> No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something! ;-)
    AK> You are russian hacker? ;)

    I prefer to penetrate right into American brains. ;=)

    Bye, Alexander!
    Alexander Koryagin
    fido7.fidonews 2019

    --- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
    * Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to Nick Andre on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 08:21:00
    Nick Andre wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Well, at least two of the ZC's were right here having the
    conversation in public. Yes, there could have been some private
    messages, but didn't really seem to be needed (yet).

    As I wrote to August - Othernets work because they are Othernets,
    they are not Fido. Fido is just too tarnished with too many bad
    decisions and mistakes. Othernets work and are popular because
    they learnt from Fido's mistakes.
    Not because they just have one zone-number in the addressing.

    Understood, and agreed. Tarnish can be removed, though, with
    enough effort and willingness.

    keeping everything the same is. Nobody seems to WANT anything to
    change, INCLUDING THE SOFTWARE, and the cumbersome/difficult
    procedures for getting information on how to join FidoNet.

    Its simple, really. Better software for newcomers and make it
    dumbed-down and attractive enough so it catches on. Have a
    simplistic display of messages with easy ways to reply. Make it a
    little bit cool.

    Well, not sure it needs to be dumbed-down, and I think a lot of
    young people already feel "retro" stuff (like FidoNet) is cool. I
    think the MAIN focus of this whole thread is not so much that
    better software is needed, just better INFORMATION on FidoNet.
    Like how to join, and who to contact, and basic information such
    as a readily accessible nodelist and what software is needed.

    Mystic isn't my cup of tea but I'm a huge fan of the "cool"
    factor of everyone being able to install it and have a BBS up and
    running in minutes. And have something to show off and others
    think is cool. I'm on Fsxnet and cannot keep up with the volume
    of Mystic-related messages. Everyone loves Mystic.

    Yes, Mystic has a place and is well liked by those who use it.
    Not completely my cup of tea, either. Again a little drift away
    from the intended topic of this thread.

    It helps tremendously when we do not have people running out and registering Fidonet domains and putting up websites in hopes that
    their site is the "right place to come to" for information (see
    fidonet.ca and fidonet.us as examples). The more websites, the
    more confusion, because none are consistant, the SEO is all over
    the place, and just a mess. I appreciate the effort with this
    fidonet.io site but I think its a bit misguided and personified.

    You're right that putting up websites willy-nilly doesn't help
    much. I have only seen ONE new one (fidonet.io) put up recently.
    Again it always seems to come back to people being frustrated with
    the NON-availability of valid, up-to-date INFORMATION on FidoNet.
    I'm not sure how anyone who claims to want to promote/grow FidoNet
    could be opposed to such a thing. Keeping dead websites around
    that contain nothing but dead links isn't helping anybody. Is it?
    What is the logical answer, then? Yes. Put up a website with
    useful information that will HELP people instead of frustrate
    them. I believe that's all that's going on here.



    ... She kept saying I didn't listen to her, or something like that.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to Alexander Kruglikov on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 08:42:00
    Alexander Kruglikov wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see ANY posts from
    these important Russians.

    Probably, in these echoes there is nothing interesting for
    discussion by important Russians =)))

    You're probably right! :)

    Example for me, writing just because I can write - the wrong way
    =)

    With best regards, Alexander.

    Thanks for the reply!



    ... Anything good in life is either illegal, immoral, or fattening.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Alexander Kruglikov@2:5053/58 to Vladimir Fyodorov on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 19:54:00
    Good ${greeting_time}, Vladimir!

    *** Answering a msg posted in area CarbonArea (뚮レ璵 ㄻ Д).

    19 Mar 19 13:32, you wrote to me:

    FidoNet echos the "old-fashioned way"?
    No, this is the exception rather than the rule.
    Wow! MacBook with GoldEd. You are not Russian, i think!
    Even worse. This is not a MacBook, this is Mac Pro. \m/ \m/

    You are a State Department spy! =)

    With best regards, Alexander.

    --- "GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707" ---
    * Origin: 24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case, Hmmm... (2:5053/58)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to Nick Andre on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 11:05:46
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Nick Andre to Dan Clough on Tue Mar 19 2019 05:48 am

    Mystic isn't my cup of tea but I'm a huge fan of the "cool" factor of

    Nor mine. After the guy who writes it basically accused me of wanting to steal his source code when I asked a question I wouldn't use Mystic if it was the last thing on earth.

    Plus, its closed source - we all learned that model doesn't work in the BBS world nowadays. How many utilities/doors/BBS programs have been lost forever under that model?
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Robert Stinnett@1:290/10 to Dan Clough on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 11:08:36
    Re: Re: Fidonet => one unizon
    By: Dan Clough to Nick Andre on Tue Mar 19 2019 08:21 am

    much. I have only seen ONE new one (fidonet.io) put up recently.
    Again it always seems to come back to people being frustrated with
    the NON-availability of valid, up-to-date INFORMATION on FidoNet.
    I'm not sure how anyone who claims to want to promote/grow FidoNet
    could be opposed to such a thing. Keeping dead websites around
    that contain nothing but dead links isn't helping anybody. Is it?
    What is the logical answer, then? Yes. Put up a website with
    useful information that will HELP people instead of frustrate
    them. I believe that's all that's going on here.


    My personal thought is this: Nobody has a monopoly on information. If you create a good, updated source of information then people are going to use it and link to it and your site will naturally float to the top on Google and other search engines.

    I don't play these "pissing games" about who owns what domain, and who can use what domain for what. If you have the dedication and desire to go make something that is up to date, I will support your effort 100%. Those who want to complain I just turn a deaf ear too.
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Gateway to the West BBS | St. Louis, Missouri (1:290/10)
  • From Andrew Ivanov@2:5023/24.3586 to Dan Clough on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 22:52:23
    Hello, Dan Clough.
    On 3/18/19 8:55 AM you wrote:

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see *ANY* posts
    from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming they
    have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious
    question...

    Yes, we mostly use our Russian-language echoes whose names start with an RU. or
    SU. prefix. I'm rather new to Fidonet (joined last summer), but my impression is that most communication in the Russian part happens in certain sysops' local
    echoes. Topic echoes are far less popular these days, with some exceptions like RU.FIDONET.TODAY which is probably a Russian equivalent of FIDONEWS.


    --
    With best regards, Andrew Ivanov
    Posted using Hotdoged on Android
    --- InterSquish NNTP Server/FTN Gate
    * Origin: www.wfido.ru (2:5023/24.3586)
  • From Dan Clough@1:123/115 to Andrew Ivanov on Tuesday, March 19, 2019 19:33:00
    Andrew Ivanov wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    It's a little curious to me as to why we don't see *ANY* posts
    from these important Russians. I don't think I've seen a single
    post in ANY echo that I follow, from a Russian. I'm assuming they
    have their own set of echos, but why wouldn't ANY of them
    participate in a "Fido-wide" echo like this one? Serious
    question...

    Yes, we mostly use our Russian-language echoes whose names start
    with an RU. or SU. prefix. I'm rather new to Fidonet (joined last
    summer), but my impression is that most communication in the
    Russian part happens in certain sysops' local echoes. Topic
    echoes are far less popular these days, with some exceptions like RU.FIDONET.TODAY which is probably a Russian equivalent of
    FIDONEWS.

    All right, that's cool. The language thing is surely a big factor
    and all that makes sense. Thanks for the reply, Andrew!



    ... Windows 3.1 - From the people who brought you EDLIN.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.06-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Kurt Weiske on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 12:26:00
    On 03-18-19 08:18, Kurt Weiske wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    I've found a couple of them, but when you go full screen, they have a console-sized font that takes up the same amount of screen as if it
    were a window. With DOSBOX/vDOS, I get a full screen 80x25 window.

    That's a good point, DOS editors will fill an 80x25 window properly (though back in the day, I preferred the VGA 80x50 text mode).


    ... At the end of the day, it gets dark.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to alexander koryagin on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 13:35:00
    On 03-18-19 18:55, alexander koryagin wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    No, no, Russians are omnipresent! Ask me something! ;-)

    The Russians are coming! ;)


    ... When in doubt, predict that the trend will continue.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Dan Clough on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 13:37:00
    On 03-18-19 16:51, Dan Clough wrote to David Drummond <=-

    In spite of it's problems and faults, FidoNet carries a certain...
    allure. A prestige, as it were, being the first real "Net" I
    guess.

    For me, Fidonet is part of my history, so it was logical to reconnect, when I got a BBS up.


    ... It's funny because *I* said it!
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Nick Andre on Wednesday, March 20, 2019 13:44:00
    On 03-18-19 22:14, Nick Andre wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    On 18 Mar 19 08:55:00, Dan Clough said the following to Nick Andre:

    OK, so I take it you're like the Zone 2 folks who will resist all
    change, regardless of merit?

    Its real easy to write me off as someone reisting change, when I have
    done more to help people here and in "real life" than you can ever understand. I guess I just do not see the merit in me being ZC1 and
    have to tell others that you must migrate to my zone, or be left behind for historial/sentimental reasons as you say.

    While Fidonet doesn't _need_ multiple zones, we have them, and mail is flowing, so "fixing" this is low on the priority list. Better to direct energies elsewhere. Earlier I was only saying _if_ (and a very big if at that), Fidonet ever went to a single zone, Z1 would make sense from the sense that Fidonet was the first FTN. But there'd be solid reasons to use Z2 instead.

    However, everything is working, and others have pointed out there's nodes with abandonware registrations likely tied to their node number. There's no reason why we can't continue to use 4 zones (providing the smaller zones don't lose too many nodes). Let's work on something more important.

    But this doesn't stop me discussing these possibilities, for the sake of discussion.

    You know what idea I would seriously get behind? BETTER SOFTWARE for newcomers, instead of masturbatory zone-ruling fantasies.

    Now that would be worth working on.


    ... I'll be unstoppable when I get started.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From TERRY ROATI@3:640/1321 to Tommi Koivula on Saturday, March 23, 2019 22:46:20
    Hi Tommy.

    Sounds like you want to the secret echos of each zone, I's sure you will be bored or they are almost the same. :)

    Terry

    So I could have akas 1:221/360 and 3:221/360 as well as 2:221/360. :)


    --
    Tommi

    --- HotdogEd/2.13.5 (Android; Google Android; rv:1)
    Hotdoged/1546513055000 Hotd * Origin: - nntp://rbb.fidonet.fi - Lake
    Ylo - Finland - (2:221/360)

    Terry - 3:640/1231 (tfb-bbs.org)

    ... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
    * Origin: The File Bank BBS! (3:640/1321)
  • From Tommi Koivula@2:221/1 to TERRY ROATI on Tuesday, March 26, 2019 15:37:10
    From TERRY ROATI To Tommi Koivula

    Hi Tommy.

    Hi TERRI.

    Sounds like you want to the secret echos of each zone, I's sure you will be bored or they are almost the same. :)

    In fact the original idea about using fake zones in echomail
    transportation came to my mind when I found out the 'forced interzone
    seen-by stripping' thing in Fastecho. :)

    'Tommi

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.
    * Origin: smapinntpd/linux @ nntps://news.fidonet.fi (2:221/1)
  • From Gerrit Kuehn@2:240/12 to David Drummond on Tuesday, March 26, 2019 18:27:32
    Hello David!

    26 Mar 19 08:08, David Drummond wrote to Gerrit Kuehn:

    As with "modern" English, I'm sure that the languages of yesterday
    were an amalgamation of other tongues too.

    Sure they are. But imho English has inherited especially many words, phrases and grammar from other languages due to the eventful English history.


    Regards,
    Gerrit

    ... 6:27PM up 85 days, 20:23, 8 users, load averages: 0.22, 0.38, 0.41

    --- Msged/BSD 6.1.2
    * Origin: We are the second generation (2:240/12)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Kees van Eeten on Tuesday, March 26, 2019 20:08:00
    On 03-25-19 11:05, Kees van Eeten wrote to Tony Langdon <=-

    Those, who have wet dreams about a single zone Fidonet, should be
    aware, that
    there are still overlapping Netnumbers.

    As I said, there's likely be hidden traps like that. :)


    ... Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the crap.
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Gerrit Kuehn on Wednesday, March 27, 2019 08:15:21
    On 27/03/2019 03:27, Gerrit Kuehn -> David Drummond wrote:

    As with "modern" English, I'm sure that the languages of yesterday
    were an amalgamation of other tongues too.

    Sure they are. But imho English has inherited especially many words, phrases and grammar from other languages due to the eventful English history.

    People of the United Kingdom - mongrels in genes, language and culture.

    --

    Gang warily
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
    * Origin: Bucca, Qld, Australia (3:640/305)
  • From Tony Langdon@3:633/410 to Gerrit Kuehn on Wednesday, March 27, 2019 09:12:00
    On 03-26-19 18:27, Gerrit Kuehn wrote to David Drummond <=-

    Sure they are. But imho English has inherited especially many words, phrases and grammar from other languages due to the eventful English history.

    English is like the Borg of languages, it assimilates words from other languages as needed. :)


    ... Command not found. Damn, it was here a minute ago... hold on...
    === MultiMail/Win v0.51
    --- SBBSecho 3.03-Linux
    * Origin: Freeway BBS Bendigo,Australia freeway.apana.org.au (3:633/410)