Hi Ward,

On 2019-09-17 16:39:38, you wrote to mark lewis:

Ever since July 6th 2018 there is a new situation and a possibility
for the active ZCs to again become a group of people who can function together.

You wrote "active ZCs". Is the Z4C communicating at all with the rest of you? He hasn't send in a zone segment in almost a year now. Or are they still going to Janis?

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Wilfred,

You wrote "active ZCs". Is the Z4C communicating at all with the rest of you? He hasn't send in a zone segment in almost a year now. Or are they still going to Janis?

1. The ZONE4-segment is dated March 1st. Not last year

2. ZC4 does not communicate but when I crash the ZONE2-segment to his
system, it answers.

That's all I can tell.

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

Hi Ward,

On 2019-09-17 17:07:43, you wrote to me:

You wrote "active ZCs". Is the Z4C communicating at all with the rest
of you? He hasn't send in a zone segment in almost a year now. Or are
they still going to Janis?

1. The ZONE4-segment is dated March 1st. Not last year

The Z1C's system reports: Processing Zone4.292 in its daily nodelist generation
reports.

.292, is not march but mid october, so almost a year old. Is Z2 using a different Z4 segement than Z1?

2. ZC4 does not communicate but when I crash the ZONE2-segment to his
system, it answers.

That's all I can tell.

Ok...

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Wilfred,

1. The ZONE4-segment is dated March 1st. Not last year

The Z1C's system reports: Processing Zone4.292 in its daily nodelist generation reports.

.292, is not march but mid october, so almost a year old. Is Z2 using a different Z4 segement than Z1?

I'm sorry about that, I will try to get an older segment which is one year out of date then. OK?

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

Hi Ward,

On 2019-09-17 19:31:31, you wrote to me:

1. The ZONE4-segment is dated March 1st. Not last year

The Z1C's system reports: Processing Zone4.292 in its daily nodelist
generation reports.

.292, is not march but mid october, so almost a year old. Is Z2 using a
different Z4 segement than Z1?

I'm sorry about that, I will try to get an older segment which is one year out of date then. OK?

I was asking, not judging, because I noticed a difference...

So what is the first line of the segment you are using? And if it's newer then .292, maybe you could share it with Nick? So Z1 can use the latest too...

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Wilfred,

So what is the first line of the segment you are using? And if it's newer then .292, maybe you could share it with Nick? So Z1 can use the latest too...

1.
;A Zone Nodelist for Friday, March 1, 2019 -- Day number 060 : 50357
;A
;A /\__/\
;A \/oo\/ The FidoNet NodeList
;A ((__)) List of the systems within FidoNet
;A _/ \_ Zone 4 (America Latina) Edition
;A (__/__\__) (dm)

I wonder why I need to post this ... If I tell you as your ZC that I have a more recent segment than the one you are referencing, shouldn't that be enough ?

2. The problem with the segments from Z4 is that the ZC4 still hasn't understood there is a new ZC1 ... the fact that Nick uses an expired segment says something about Manuel's operation, not Nick's.

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

Hi Ward,

On 2019-09-17 20:10:08, you wrote to me:

So what is the first line of the segment you are using? And if it's
newer then .292, maybe you could share it with Nick? So Z1 can use
the latest too...

1.
;A Zone Nodelist for Friday, March 1, 2019 -- Day number 060 : 50357
;A
;A /\__/\
;A \/oo\/ The FidoNet NodeList
;A ((__)) List of the systems within FidoNet
;A _/ \_ Zone 4 (America Latina) Edition
;A (__/__\__) (dm)

I wonder why I need to post this ... If I tell you as your ZC that I have

a

more recent segment than the one you are referencing, shouldn't that be enough ?

I reported the file extension, you answered with a date, which could be the file date, which could be changed regardless of the content or the file extension. I'm a software engineer, I often have to deal with inaccurate or incomplete bug reports, so I always try to get the facts straight first, beyond
any doubt, where reported "facts" could be interpreted in multiple ways...

2. The problem with the segments from Z4 is that the ZC4 still hasn't understood there is a new ZC1 ... the fact that Nick uses an expired segment says something about Manuel's operation, not Nick's.

Ok...

Bye, Wilfred.

--- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
* Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)

Re: Re: ZCC
By: Ward Dossche to Wilfred van Velzen on Tue Sep 17 2019 20:10:08

2. The problem with the segments from Z4 is that the ZC4 still hasn't

understood there is a new ZC1 ... the fact that Nick uses an expired segment says something about Manuel's operation, not Nick's.

are they not dumped into the ZSEGS FDN for distribution? if not, that's just crazy...


)\/(ark
--- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
* Origin: SouthEast Star Mail HUB - SESTAR (1:3634/12)

On 2019 Sep 17 17:07:42, you wrote to Wilfred van Velzen:

You wrote "active ZCs". Is the Z4C communicating at all with the rest
of you? He hasn't send in a zone segment in almost a year now. Or are
they still going to Janis?

1. The ZONE4-segment is dated March 1st. Not last year

if you are getting them, why isn't Z1C??

2. ZC4 does not communicate but when I crash the ZONE2-segment to his
system, it answers.

That's all I can tell.

one does what one can with the tools one has at hand... no more can be asked or
demanded...

)\/(ark

Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set
them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them. ... If a thing is working, change it only gradually.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

On 17 Sep 19 15:02:53, Mark Lewis said the following to Ward Dossche:

2. The problem with the segments from Z4 is that the ZC4 still hasn't

understood there is a new ZC1 ... the fact that Nick uses an expired segmen says something about Manuel's operation, not Nick's.

are they not dumped into the ZSEGS FDN for distribution? if not, that's jus crazy...

That would require the ZC4 to actually understand how to do that.

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

On 17 Sep 19 15:41:56, Mark Lewis said the following to Ward Dossche:

You wrote "active ZCs". Is the Z4C communicating at all with the rest
of you? He hasn't send in a zone segment in almost a year now. Or are
they still going to Janis?

1. The ZONE4-segment is dated March 1st. Not last year

if you are getting them, why isn't Z1C??

Maybe because ZC4's system is broken and sends to Janis?

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

mark,

are they not dumped into the ZSEGS FDN for distribution? if not, that's just crazy...

If you don't know what you're talking about, as it is in this case, you should say "In my opinion, that's just crazy" and not assuming you're the oracle of Delphi dispensing universal truths.

Just because I'm such a nice guy ... let me explain.

They are still dumped in ZSEGS and other than a backboned-style operation, every ZC now links it to every other ZC, that way there's no single point of failure when a ZC temporarily drops-out, the distribution does not go on its knees.

So why do I have a more recent ZONE4-file. Because Manuel hatched it and sent it to me, Nick's nodenumber is in the seen-by so I will not forward it.

The problem here is that Manuel is not sending it to Nick probably thinking that Janis still is the ZC1. For more than 10 years I have been saying there's a problem there ... hopefully an IC could find a way out.

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

On 09-17-19 08:22, Mark Lewis <=-
spoke to Terry Roati about Trolls <=-

traditionally, moderators are sysops because they are the
ones that created the message areas on their BBSes and
decided to share them with other BBSes via FTN transport...
it is not a requirement that the moderator be a sysop,
though... they only need an operator willing to setup the
area and provide links for transportation... how echos are
moderated and how the moderator hat is passed is up to each
individual echo moderator...

In the echo that I used to moderate until I turned it over to someone
else, to the best of my knowledge none of the moderators were sysops
when chosen. I became a sysop only after I became moderator. None of
the moderators after me were sysop-moderators either.

That echo was then and still is the echo which consistently had the most traffic of echos with communication between people and without robot
postings.

Dale Shipp
fido_261_1466 (at) verizon (dot) net
(1:261/1466)


... Shipwrecked on Hesperus in Columbia, Maryland. 01:19:02, 18 Sep 2019
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

--- Maximus/NT 3.01
* Origin: Owl's Anchor (1:261/1466)

On 2019 Sep 17 22:37:22, you wrote to me:

are they not dumped into the ZSEGS FDN for distribution? if not, that's
just crazy...

If you don't know what you're talking about, as it is in this case, you should say "In my opinion, that's just crazy" and not assuming you're the oracle of Delphi dispensing universal truths.

i assume no such thing...

Just because I'm such a nice guy ... let me explain.

ok...

They are still dumped in ZSEGS

if they are still dumped into ZSEGS then why do i not see them arriving here? i
did for a little while but then something changed and the flow stopped...

and other than a backboned-style operation, every ZC now links it to
every other ZC, that way there's no single point of failure when a ZC temporarily drops-out, the distribution does not go on its knees.

that's fine...

So why do I have a more recent ZONE4-file. Because Manuel hatched it
and sent it to me, Nick's nodenumber is in the seen-by so I will not forward it.

that's standard operation...

The problem here is that Manuel is not sending it to Nick probably thinking that Janis still is the ZC1.

what does that have to do with anything? are ZCs the only ones allowed access to zone segs? if true, why? i carried ZSEGS for years and then turned it off at
some point... i turned it on a few months ago and it flowed and then stopped... i'm pretty sure i saw a post from you about it just before the flow stopped here...

For more than 10 years I have been saying there's a problem there ... hopefully an IC could find a way out.

that's crazy... what is in the ZSEG files that could be problematic and need to
be restricted from general access? we get them all pasted together in the full
nodelist anyway...

)\/(ark

Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set
them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them. ... In a nuclear war, all men will be cremated equal.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

Hi Ward,

The problem here is that Manuel is not sending it to Nick probably thinking
that Janis still is the ZC1. For more than 10 years I have been saying there's
a problem there ...

hopefully an IC could find a way out.

I respectfully disagree - That will NOT make a difference, how could it??

I have told Manuel that I've retired as Z1C, _way back_ when I decided to step down.

He understands this, _I'm sure_, since he asked me why I was stepping down.

He does however still send his segments here every week, and I delete them since you decided to disclude me from forwarding his files to all of you.

Therefore, you either can let me forward the files he sends here, or you and Nick need to contact Manuel, preferably in Spanish, and set up a password for your systems to communicate and tranfer the files.

You told me long ago that you already had done this. Did you, or not?

Take care,
Janis

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
* Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)

Janis Kracht wrote to Ward Dossche <=-

The problem here is that Manuel is not sending it to Nick probably thinking
that Janis still is the ZC1. For more than 10 years I have been saying there's
a problem there ...

hopefully an IC could find a way out.

I respectfully disagree - That will NOT make a difference, how
could it??

I have told Manuel that I've retired as Z1C, _way back_ when I
decided to step down.

He understands this, _I'm sure_, since he asked me why I was
stepping down.

He does however still send his segments here every week, and I
delete them since you decided to disclude me from forwarding his
files to all of you.

Therefore, you either can let me forward the files he sends here,
or you and Nick need to contact Manuel, preferably in Spanish,
and set up a password for your systems to communicate and tranfer
the files.

Sounds to me like this 'Manuel' needs a boot put up his ass.

Fire him for fucks sake. Replace him. Whatever it takes to fix
the problem. Why does something like this go on for so long?



... To err is human, to forgive is against SysOp policy.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Hi Dan,

hopefully an IC could find a way out.

I respectfully disagree - That will NOT make a difference, how
could it??

I have told Manuel that I've retired as Z1C, _way back_ when I
decided to step down.

He understands this, _I'm sure_, since he asked me why I was
stepping down.

He does however still send his segments here every week, and I
delete them since you decided to disclude me from forwarding his
files to all of you.

Therefore, you either can let me forward the files he sends here,
or you and Nick need to contact Manuel, preferably in Spanish,
and set up a password for your systems to communicate and tranfer
the files.

Sounds to me like this 'Manuel' needs a boot put up his ass.
Fire him for fucks sake. Replace him. Whatever it takes to fix
the problem. Why does something like this go on for so long?

I'm sure the better idea would be for Nick and Ward to each make arrangements with Manuel Adorni to simply send the file to each of them rather than here.

Take care,
Janis

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
* Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)

Dan,

Sounds to me like this 'Manuel' needs a boot put up his ass.

Fire him for fucks sake. Replace him. Whatever it takes to fix
the problem. Why does something like this go on for so long?

The onlyones that can fire him are the Z4 RCs ... all 2 of them ... of which he
is one.

I've found an English-capable node there, also technically competent, but he doesn't find it worth it to start any kind of process for a new ZC4.

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

Janis,

I respectfully disagree - That will NOT make a difference, how could it??

Good, like a true gentleman (without making it a gender thing).

He does however still send his segments here every week, and I delete
them since you decided to disclude me from forwarding his files to all of you.

Actually, the current ZC1 concurs. When a ZC steps down, he/she steps down and lets go ... not clinging-on with all 4s.

Therefore, you either can let me forward the files he sends here, or you and Nick need to contact Manuel, preferably in Spanish, and set up a password for your systems to communicate and tranfer the files.

That has been done quite some time ago, he has sent it once and not anymore after. ZCs now distribute their ZONEx-segments to every other ZC direct to counter shennannigans as for example the late Bob Seaborn did by deliberately delaying the ZONE2-segment for 48/72 hours in hopes it would arrive late elsewhere.

There is no need to approach Nick nor myself in such a condescending manner (also in your message to Dan Clough) as if we don't know what we are doing. The
anti-Nick campaign may stop, he is a very good ZC1, probably the best one I could ever work with, a partner to finally bring the Fido Zone Warz to an end ... he has no need for a war in order to be respected.

As you correctly indicate, Manuel needs to be addressed in Spanish which already is a big hint where the problem lies. He has confirmed requests but does not deal with them.

His last message dates for April 14th 2019 but his system says 1980 ... I'm certain your secret whisperings will soon reveal the truth ...

You told me long ago that you already had done this. Did you, or not?

Yups. He gets the ZONE2-segment like clockwork ...

+ 19 Sep 00:14:57 [5884] sending C:\DB\BINKD\4901\ZONE2.A62 as ZONE2.A62 (46886)
+ 19 Sep 00:14:58 [5884] sent: C:\DB\BINKD\4901\ZONE2.A62 (46886, 46886.00 CPS,
4:90/1@fidonet)

... never a ZONE4-file in return.

And you are going to claim here there is a problem with Nick and/or me ?

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

Janis Kracht wrote to Dan Clough <=-

hopefully an IC could find a way out.

I respectfully disagree - That will NOT make a difference, how
could it??

I have told Manuel that I've retired as Z1C, _way back_ when I
decided to step down.

He understands this, _I'm sure_, since he asked me why I was
stepping down.

He does however still send his segments here every week, and I
delete them since you decided to disclude me from forwarding his
files to all of you.

Therefore, you either can let me forward the files he sends here,
or you and Nick need to contact Manuel, preferably in Spanish,
and set up a password for your systems to communicate and tranfer
the files.

Sounds to me like this 'Manuel' needs a boot put up his ass.
Fire him for fucks sake. Replace him. Whatever it takes to fix
the problem. Why does something like this go on for so long?

I'm sure the better idea would be for Nick and Ward to each make arrangements with Manuel Adorni to simply send the file to each
of them rather than here.

Well, *YOU* may be sure of that, but who else is? You say above
that Manuel is aware of the ZC changes (you're "sure" of that,
too), and yet.... he continues to do things incorrectly. So what
is the conclusion from that? Either (1) he's incompetent and
doesn't know how to change things, or (2) he's willfully not
complying and purposely doing things wrong. To me, either one of
those is grounds for removal.

As also stated above, that may be reason enough for the appointing
of an IC. I would assume an IC could fire a ZC who isn't doing
the job. Doing *nothing* is clearly not going to solve anything.



... All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Sounds to me like this 'Manuel' needs a boot put up his ass.

Fire him for fucks sake. Replace him. Whatever it takes to fix
the problem. Why does something like this go on for so long?

The onlyones that can fire him are the Z4 RCs ... all 2 of them
... of which he is one.

Or, as has been recently discussed, an IC. At least I would
assume that would be within the power of an IC to do. Perhaps you
ZC's should get this (appointing an IC) done. Enough
feet-dragging already.

I've found an English-capable node there, also technically
competent, but he doesn't find it worth it to start any kind of
process for a new ZC4.

Strange.


... Press any key to continue or any other key to quit
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

On 19 Sep 19 07:36:00, Dan Clough said the following to Ward Dossche:

The onlyones that can fire him are the Z4 RCs ... all 2 of them
... of which he is one.

Or, as has been recently discussed, an IC. At least I would
assume that would be within the power of an IC to do. Perhaps you
ZC's should get this (appointing an IC) done. Enough
feet-dragging already.

Already in progress...

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)

Nick Andre wrote to Dan Clough <=-

On 19 Sep 19 07:36:00, Dan Clough said the following to Ward
Dossche:

The onlyones that can fire him are the Z4 RCs ... all 2 of them
... of which he is one.

Or, as has been recently discussed, an IC. At least I would
assume that would be within the power of an IC to do. Perhaps you
ZC's should get this (appointing an IC) done. Enough
feet-dragging already.

Already in progress...

Good to hear that. Thanks!



... Pros are those who do their jobs well, even when they don't feel like it. === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

On 2019 Sep 19 07:33:00, you wrote to Janis Kracht:

As also stated above, that may be reason enough for the appointing
of an IC. I would assume an IC could fire a ZC who isn't doing
the job.

ummm... sorry, man... that's not how it works...

----- snip -----
1.2.4 Regions and Regional Coordinators

A region is a well-defined geographic area containing nodes which may or may not be combined into networks. A typical region will contain many nodes in networks, and a few independent nodes which are not a part of any network.

The Regional Coordinator maintains the list of independent nodes in the
region and accepts nodelists from the Network Coordinators in the region.
These are compiled to create a regional nodelist, which is then sent to the Zone Coordinator. A Regional Coordinator does not perform message-forwarding services for any nodes in the region.

Regional Coordinators are appointed by the Zone Coordinator.


1.2.5 Zones and Zone Coordinators

A zone is a large geographic area containing many regions, covering one or
more countries and/or continents.

The Zone Coordinator compiles the nodelists from all of the regions in the zone, and creates the master nodelist and difference file, which is then distributed over FidoNet in the zone. A Zone Coordinator does not perform message-forwarding services for any nodes in the zone.

Zone Coordinators are selected by the Regional Coordinators in that zone.


1.2.6 Zone Coordinator Council

In certain cases, the Zone Coordinators work as a council to provide advice
to the International Coordinator. The arrangement is similar to that between
a president and advisors. In particular, this council considers inter-zonal issues. This includes, but is not limited to: working out the details of nodelist production, mediating inter-zonal disputes, and such issues not addressed at a lower level of FidoNet.


1.2.7 International Coordinator

The International Coordinator is the "first among equals" Zone Coordinator,
and coordinates the joint production of the master nodelist by the Zone Coordinators.

The International Coordinator acts as the chair of the Zone Coordinator
Council and as the overseer of elections -- arranging the announcement of referenda, the collection and counting of the ballots, and announcing the results for those issues that affect FidoNet as a whole.

The International Coordinator is selected by the Zone Coordinators.


1.2.8 Top-down Organization. Checks and Balances.

These levels act to distribute the administration and control of FidoNet to
the lowest possible level, while still allowing for coordinated action over
the entire mail system. Administration is made possible by operating in a top-down manner. That is, a person at any given level is responsible to the level above, and responsible for the level below.

For example, a Regional Coordinator is responsible to the Zone Coordinator
for anything that happens in the region. From the point of view of the Zone Coordinator, the Regional Coordinator is completely responsible for the
smooth operation of the region. Likewise, from the point of view of the Regional Coordinator, the Network Coordinator is completely responsible for
the smooth operation of the network.

If a person at any level above sysop is unable to properly perform their duties, the person at the next level may replace them. For example, if a Regional Coordinator fails to perform, the Zone Coordinator can replace him.

To provide for checks and balances at the highest level of FidoNet, there are two exceptions to this top-down organization. Zone Coordinators and the International Coordinator are selected by a majority vote of the coordinators at the level below. Similarly, decisions made by the International Coordina- tor can be reversed by the Zone Coordinator Council, and decisions made by a Zone Coordinator can be reversed by the Regional Coordinators. See sections
6 and 7 for details. Decisions made by other coordinators are not subject to reversal by a vote of the lower level, but instead are subject to the appeal process described in section 9.5.
----- snip -----

the last paragraph is important... the only ones who can replace Z4C are the Z4RCs... the IC cannot just boot a ZC out... this is different from NCs and RCs
which are appointed by the level above them...

and while there are RCCs in similar fashion to the ZCC, they are not official entities and do not have the same power to overturn the ZC like the ZCC can overturn the IC... i've never heard of any NCCs to oversee RCs...

i hope this has been helpful...

)\/(ark

Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set
them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them. ... Never let a machine know you're in a hurry.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

Hi Mark,

As also stated above, that may be reason enough for the appointing
of an IC. I would assume an IC could fire a ZC who isn't doing
the job.

ummm... sorry, man... that's not how it works...

[...]

Exactly true... Thanks for taking the time to post the detail here.

Take care,
Janis

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
* Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)

the last paragraph is important... the only ones who can replace Z4C are the Z4RCs...

... in which case they are fucked because there are only 2 RCs and the unresponsive ZC is one of them, which means there is no solution possible.

The problem is too many keyboard-warriors parotting why it can't be done but nobody with a real proposal to move forward.

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

mark lewis wrote to Dan Clough <=-

As also stated above, that may be reason enough for the appointing
of an IC. I would assume an IC could fire a ZC who isn't doing
the job.

ummm... sorry, man... that's not how it works...

<SNIP> (sections of P4)

the last paragraph is important... the only ones who can replace
Z4C are the Z4RCs... the IC cannot just boot a ZC out... this is
different from NCs and RCs which are appointed by the level above
them...

Yes, I see that now. A look at the Zone 4 nodelist shows 3 RCs,
one of which is the "problem child". So the other two RCs would
be a majority if they were to both vote for removal of the ZC.
All of this is described in section 8.7 of P4.

So if the Z4C needs to be removed, perhaps these two RCs should be contacted/interviewed/whatever... and see if they want to remove
him. Maybe one of them would like to move up.

i hope this has been helpful...

It has, and it got me to look through P4 again, which should
probably be done by all, once in a while. ;-)



... He's dead, Jim. Grab his tricorder. I'll get his wallet.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Ward Dossche wrote to mark lewis <=-

the last paragraph is important... the only ones who can replace Z4C are the Z4RCs...

... in which case they are fucked because there are only 2 RCs
and the unresponsive ZC is one of them, which means there is no
solution possible.

I see 3 RCs in nodelist.256. See my other reply to ML...

The problem is too many keyboard-warriors parotting why it can't
be done but nobody with a real proposal to move forward.

I think it's just a matter of contacting those other two RCs and
seeing if they want to move forward...



... She kept saying I didn't listen to her, or something like that.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Hello Dan!

18 Sep 19 18:45, you wrote to Janis Kracht:

Sounds to me like this 'Manuel' needs a boot put up his ass.

Fire him for fucks sake. Replace him. Whatever it takes to fix
the problem. Why does something like this go on for so long?

The ZC is selected by the RCs in the Zone. There are 3 RCs listed in Z4, ZC4 being one of the 3. There is some question as to whether the other 2 RCs in Z4 are actually participating in FidoNet, or their systems have been left on auto-pilot.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Yes, I see that now. A look at the Zone 4 nodelist shows 3 RCs,

No it doesn't, there are only 2 RCs ...

Region,80,Brasil,Recife_PE,Ioram_Sette
Region,90,Argentina,Argentina,Manuel_Adorni

If you have 3 then you are using a wrong nodelist.

So if the Z4C needs to be removed, perhaps these two RCs should be contacted/interviewed/whatever... and see if they want to remove him.

This is something that is not done ... one zone does not actively pursue the removal of another zone's ZC.

Interventionist politics do not work ... not in real life, note in Fido.

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

I see 3 RCs in nodelist.256. See my other reply to ML...

Then use nodelist.263 please ...

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

Andrew,

The ZC is selected by the RCs in the Zone. There are 3 RCs listed in Z4, ZC4 being one of the 3. There is some question as to whether the other 2 RCs in Z4 are actually participating in FidoNet, or their systems have AL>

been left on auto-pilot.

1) As I wrote to others and elsewhere, there are only 2 RCs in Z4. Nick has
received the most recent ZONE4-segment and is using it as demonstrated by
postings in the Z1DAILY echo.

2) The other RC recently had left his system unattended to go study in the
USA. He's back, I think, but I know of no activity.

3) The ZONE4 sysop-echo is dead most of the time. The problem has been high-
lighted in English and in Spanish with nobody responding. There's only
so much you can do.

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

On 20/09/2019 08:12, Ward Dossche -> Dan Clough wrote:

Yes, I see that now. A look at the Zone 4 nodelist shows 3 RCs,

No it doesn't, there are only 2 RCs ...

Region,80,Brasil,Recife_PE,Ioram_Sette
Region,90,Argentina,Argentina,Manuel_Adorni

If you have 3 then you are using a wrong nodelist.

So if the Z4C needs to be removed, perhaps these two RCs should be
contacted/interviewed/whatever... and see if they want to remove him.

This is something that is not done ... one zone does not actively pursue the removal of another zone's ZC.

Interventionist politics do not work ... not in real life, note in Fido.

What does it matter to the nodes of Z1-3 if the node segment for Z4 is not recent? Is someone having issue directly connecting with a Z4 node?

Or are some people just being bloody minded - trying to impose their will on others?

--

Regards
David

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.8.0
* Origin: Straylia Mate (3:640/305)

Hello Ward!

20 Sep 19 08:12, you wrote to Dan Clough:

Yes, I see that now. A look at the Zone 4 nodelist shows 3 RCs,

No it doesn't, there are only 2 RCs ...

Region,80,Brasil,Recife_PE,Ioram_Sette
Region,90,Argentina,Argentina,Manuel_Adorni

If you have 3 then you are using a wrong nodelist.

Until very recently, the Zone 4 segment included in the Zone 1 nodelist showed 3 RCs for Zone 4.

I realize that is probably related to the fact that Manuel was/still is sending segments to the former ZC1, instead of where they should be going.

Andrew

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)

Andrew,

I realize that is probably related to the fact that Manuel was/still is sending segments to the former ZC1, instead of where they should be
going.

That would be an accurate statement.

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Yes, I see that now. A look at the Zone 4 nodelist shows 3 RCs,

No it doesn't, there are only 2 RCs ...

Region,80,Brasil,Recife_PE,Ioram_Sette
Region,90,Argentina,Argentina,Manuel_Adorni

If you have 3 then you are using a wrong nodelist.

I sent the above message on Sept 19th. The current nodelist on
that day was the one I used (nodelist.256). It showed 3 regions:

Region,88,Chile,Chile,Patricio_Rodriguez,000-0-0-0-0,300,ICM,XW,IBN:mastodontbb s.hopto.org:2323,BND

So if the Z4C needs to be removed, perhaps these two RCs should be contacted/interviewed/whatever... and see if they want to remove him.

This is something that is not done ... one zone does not actively
pursue the removal of another zone's ZC.

If you say so.

Interventionist politics do not work ... not in real life, note
in Fido.

It's got nothing to do with politics. It has to do with keeping
Fidonet (and the nodelist) working properly.


... Pros are those who do their jobs well, even when they don't feel like it. === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Clough <=-

I see 3 RCs in nodelist.256. See my other reply to ML...

Then use nodelist.263 please ...

Yes, I have now received and looked at 263, and yes there are only
two RCs in it for Z4.

As stated in my other message to you a moment ago, the PREVIOUS
nodelist (256) only ONE WEEK OLD, showed three RCs.

So..................... who made the change to remove R88 sometime
during this past week???

Isn't the Z4 the one doing that? If he didn't do it (because he
doesn't respond to anything allegedly), WHO DID?



... Behind every great man is an amazed mother-in-law!
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

Andrew Leary wrote to Dan Clough <=-

Hello Dan!

18 Sep 19 18:45, you wrote to Janis Kracht:

Sounds to me like this 'Manuel' needs a boot put up his ass.
Fire him for fucks sake. Replace him. Whatever it takes to fix
the problem. Why does something like this go on for so long?

The ZC is selected by the RCs in the Zone. There are 3 RCs
listed in Z4, ZC4 being one of the 3. There is some question as
to whether the other 2 RCs in Z4 are actually participating in
FidoNet, or their systems have been left on auto-pilot.

Well, as Ward was so kind to point out to me, the current nodelist
as of TODAY (.263) shows only 2 RCs in Z4, one of which is ZC4.

The prior week's nodelist (.256) showed three RCs - sometime
during this past week, R88 was removed (by somebody).

The whole thing is a dumpster fire apparently. <SHRUG>


... A woman drove me to drink, and I never had the courtesy to thank her.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)

On 2019 Sep 19 22:03:24, you wrote to me:

the last paragraph is important... the only ones who can replace Z4C
are the Z4RCs...

... in which case they are fucked because there are only 2 RCs and the unresponsive ZC is one of them, which means there is no solution
possible.

you have no faith...

The problem is too many keyboard-warriors parotting why it can't be
done but nobody with a real proposal to move forward.

no, that's another problem, altogether...

one solution would be (or would have been) for all ZCs to hatch their zsegs into the ZSEGS FDN and let any who want to carry it do so... since all ZCs would be connected, all would get what the others hatch... when nick became Z1C, he mearly needed to connect and he'd be getting the zsegs like everyone else... doing this fidoweb-style would also eliminate a ZC being connected to only one other ZC system... personally, i'd almost say that all ZCs should be fully interconnected for at least ZSEGS anyway...

no one has yet answered my previous question about why ZSEGS is now a closed FDN and/or that previous ZCs are not allowed access as well as other systems...

)\/(ark

Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set
them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them. ... Beans in chili is still a criminal offense in Texas.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

On 2019 Sep 20 16:35:46, you wrote to Ward Dossche:

What does it matter to the nodes of Z1-3 if the node segment for Z4 is
not recent? Is someone having issue directly connecting with a Z4
node?

that's one of the things i've been wondering about, too... i remember it being almost a year before our system showed up in the Z2 nodelist back when P4 was introduced... no one bitched that some system wasn't in the nodelist and so wasn't allowed to post to some echo like we see today... no one bitched about other zones nodelist management schedules... no one bitched about how other zones were maintained... then connectivity got a lot better and [...]

Or are some people just being bloody minded - trying to impose their
will on others?

[...] here we are...

)\/(ark

Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set
them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them. ... Torontonians don't plan vacations around a gun-n-knife show.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

On 20 Sep 19 20:26:48, Mark Lewis said the following to Ward Dossche:

would be connected, all would get what the others hatch... when nick became Z1C, he mearly needed to connect and he'd be getting the zsegs like everyon else... doing this fidoweb-style would also eliminate a ZC being connected

I'm not quite sure I understand your statement as I've been connected to ZSEGS since I was elected.

no one has yet answered my previous question about why ZSEGS is now a close FDN and/or that previous ZCs are not allowed access as well as other system

Probably because there is no compelling logical reason to open it up?

Even if there was... I will politely state that there are two types of
Sysops. Those that like to "tinker", and those that like things to "just work". I am of the latter catagory for several logical personal reasons.

If the Zone 1 Nodelist satisfies the self-appointed Nodelist Police, then I consider my job to be done in that department. More time for me to enjoy trading banter with others, less time spent in a command-prompt babysitting tech stuff.

Make sense?

Nick

--- Renegade vY2Ka2
* Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)