Text 10087, 80 rader
Skriven 2004-11-21 11:03:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
  Kommentar till text 10075 av Thom LaCosta (1:261/1352.0)
Ärende: Science 1/2
===================
 >  MvdV> By what rule that is binding to /him/ does the moderator
 >  MvdV> of this echo lose his moderator hat if he chooses to
 >  MvdV> have the listing expire?

 > I think you know the answer and are simply trying to build
 > yet another tortuous case.

Oh, I know the answer, I just wanted to check if you knew it too. And I think
you know it too, but you just refuse to acknowledge it: there is no such rule.

 > The echolist distribution systems, primarily in Zone1,

I think that should read "exclusively in Z1".

 > have looked to the echolist as a publication where anyone can
 > ascertain who is the moderator of an echo.

I very much doubt that there is a single sysop outside of Z1 that considers the
echolist as the the ultimate truth when it comes to resolving a conflict
however. Specifically I don't think anyone outside Z1 will accpet anyone but
Björn as moderator of this echo, no matter what your list says.

And even within Z1 there is no consensus.

 > Much as certain newspapers are regarded as the "paper of
 > record" the echolist can be viewed as the "official" registry
 > of echo tags.

Yes, we have that too here. "De Staatscourant" is the official papaer of record
in The Netherlands. It is so because the is what the law says. Wher is the
"FidoNet law" that makes your list the official registry of echo tags?

 > The moderator of any echo can choose not to list that echo
 > tag in the Echolist...and by doing that, he/she is open to
 > having someone else list the echo, or should he or she
 > request a feedcut, some echomail distributors may not
 > recognize the request if the person making it is not
 > moderator of record.

We keep hearing that from you and your supporters but others tell us different.
In fact when I brought up the Moravsik/ZCC_PUBLIC issue, lots of people told me
that the distributers recognised Ward Doscche as moderator despite the fact
that your list said different.

 > What rule is binding?  I suspect it's more a question of
 > whether or not the moderator accepts community standards
 > and practices.

Who's comunity standards and practises? Over here in Z3 - where the moderator
resides - it never was community standard that the distributors only
distributed listed echos. It was never community standard that an echolist was
the final authority on who is the modarator.

 > He or she doesn't have to...and then the community may or may not
 > decide to accept them as non-cooperative participants.

Frankly Thom, I think you are loading your plate with more than you can eat.
And by doing that you are damaging your own credibility. You insist that the
distributors will regard the listed moderator as the one authorised to ask for
feed cuts. But by allowing Jack Yates to continue to be listed as moderator of
this echo you are making them think twice.

I wonder how many in Z1 would honour a request from Jack Yates to cut my feed.
So far the only ones to sat thy would are Jack Ytes himself and Roy Witt.

OTOH, I have seen at least one NC who in no uncertain terms has said that he
would not honour feed cut requests form Jack Yates.

 > Each of us has a choice about how we participate in the
 > community....if we choose to rebel against the group, then
 > we may not be afforded the regard and goodwill that we
 > expect....but, it's really our choice.

I wonder who this group is that I supposedly rebel against. I can't shake the
impression that even in Z1 it is not a majority anymore.

Cheers, Michiel

--- InterMail 2.50
 * Origin: If privacy is outlawed, only outlaws have privacy. (2:280/5555)