Text 10246, 179 rader
Skriven 2004-12-08 11:40:50 av Philip Lozier (1:267/169)
   Kommentar till text 3034 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Science 1/2
===================
 >> the SysOps of any BBS would be under no obligation to deny a
 >> user access to an echo if the moderator didn't request directly
 >> that such access be denied.  A smart mod -would- (under the
 >> circumstances of those times) do as you described, however, that
 >> is the - moderators- job to do so.

 MvdV> OTOH, when there is such a obnoxious hopping user the
 MvdV> word usually quickly spreads around and a smart sysop
 MvdV> would refuse that hopping user access anyway, as he knows
 MvdV> that when he allows him to post in echomail, he /will/
 MvdV> get a message from the moderator.

A SysOp can only be a party to the word spreading around if they participate in
a particular echo where the problem is.

A SysOp can not be reasonably expected to know of occurances in areas they
never go into.

Lets say there was a user in an echo tagged "FIGNEWTONS" and a node in my
network recieves an echomail feed from an entirely different source than say 3
other nodes in the net, and I only have a secure session set with him for the
purpose of netmail, which we exchange maybe 4 times a year.

He doesn't participate in local net echoes but is happy interacting with his
BBS users and doing his thing in the fidonet echoes.

He gets a request for a feed cut from the moderator of FIGNEWTONS and honors
it.  His obligation is complete.

How is any other node in the network to know this occured if the node doesn't
feel it important enough to share it, and none of the other nodes like Fig
Newtons so they don;t go into FIGNEWTONS?

I -sometimes- (not htpothetical this time) go into an echo here
and there just to look, and don't recognize -any- of the names there...

If something happened in one of thse echoes, and a user was cut from the echo,
how would I ever know?  The guy could call my BBS, seem nice as could be, and I
wouldn;t know anything occured unless I got a moderator request if he repeated
the activity on my system.

Than can be no reasonable expectation that word will get out about any user to
an extent that SysOps know to not let a user access a certain echo... none at
all.

 >> the feed for FIDONEWS has already been offered.

 MvdV> And it would not surprise me if it was Björn himself that
 MvdV> did the offering...

It wasn't... although I bet if I requested it from him, there wouldn't be a
problem.

 MvdV> So we are heading for an interesting situation. In the
 MvdV> meantime it is Dec 8th, Jack can be back any minute.

 MvdV> I am fairly sure that no one outside Z1 will honour a
 MvdV> feed cut request by Jack, so if he really wants to go
 MvdV> through with this, he may end up with cutting (part of)
 MvdV> Z1 off from the rest of the world.

I doubt, but may be wrong, that my feed will honor the cut... or if he does,
that reasoning will restore it.

If he does honor the cut, there would be no hard feelings over it, as he is
entitled to his interpretation of who the moderator is according to which line
of practice he observes, if either, or if he uses his own judgement in right
and wrong in the moderator dispute... He has always seemed to
me to have more than just a little bit of noodles in the soup, so we'll see,
but like I said, I wouldn't get all bent out of shape if he honors a hijacker
based on Z1 principles... he is the most reliable and complete feed source I
have ever had, and I would still recommend his services to anybody, in any
zone.

 MvdV> OTOH, if he does nothing, he will lose the respect of
 MvdV> those that demanded moderator action.

But he's NOT the moderator other than in listing a tag when the rightful Z2
moderatorwas still active in the echo, and not only didn't state he was leaving
the echo, but has claimed that he still IS the moderator.

He has my respect in other regards, and will continue to, he does not however
have my recognition as moderator of this echo.

 MvdV> The ones "making their point" may get more than they
 MvdV> asked for... ;-)

 MvdV> Either way, it will be interesting to watch.

What I want really is for the inter-zonal disputes over some things to stop...
its pointless.  Some of it just has to do with differences in what people are
used to, and practices in places they're not from, but alot, ALOT, of it is
just some people naysaying ANYTHING that comes out of their zone, for no other
legitimate reason than it -is- out of their zone.

This is supposed to be FidoNet "INTERNATIONAL" after all.

 >> What the true -proper- resolution to the dispute of
 >> moderatorship of this echo would be is for Jack to publicly
 >> declare himself as the "tag holder" of the echo for mail
 >> moving purposes in Z1, but relinquishing all moderator
 >> rights and authority to Bjorn. That way the Z1 (some of Z1)
 >> requirement for an echo to be listed to be distributed is
 >> satisfied, the EList is satisfied with the submission, and
 >> moderator duties are placed properly where they belong.

 MvdV> There is just one little problem with this "solution".
 MvdV> The rightful moderator has chosen not to make use of the
 MvdV> elist for this echo. Having it listed anyway does not
 MvdV> respect his wish.

But it is a solution that would work for the purpose... Bjorn is declared the
moderator, and the echo is listed for the purposes of the remaining "stubborn"
Z1 mail movers.

There is also another solution... distros like the NAB don't include it in
their backbone.na file, so its not "officialy" carried by their distro and
subject to an SLA, but have it in a seperate file of "non-backboned" echoes...
I -DO- think last time I looked at a backbone file it did have a little section
like that included, but I can;t remember which one... I have no need to as I'm
not feeding from a backbone system... for my areas list I simply areafix a
request of available echoes, and whooops, there it is.

 >> ATT: The "notes" field. IMO this would be the proper
 >> solution, and parties involved should agree upon it.

 MvdV> "Should"?  Well, maybe they will, but I do not see why
 MvdV> they "should". This is a Z2 echo and if you stand by your
 MvdV> principle that an echo should be run according to the
 MvdV> rules and traditions of its zone of origin, then I do not
 MvdV> see why Björn has any obligation to agree to such an
 MvdV> arrangement.

Obligation is one thing, and compromise is another.  People ussually -should-
do the right thing, especially when it is for the benefit of all.

 >> A any particular party not agreeing on it would definately
 >> prove an agenda other than an honorable one.

 MvdV> The honourable thing would be for the Z1 community to
 MvdV> acknowledge that this is a Z2 echo with a Z2 moderator
 MvdV> and that they should refrain from telling what "should"
 MvdV> and what "should" not.

Actually... the honorable thing to do would be for all parties to admit the
true fact that this is an "INTERNATIONAL" echo that is under the moderatorship
of a Z2 node.

It is -not- a Z2 echo, nor a Z1 echo.  The practices of the moderator should be
honored by those not of his zone, however, in order for the echo to be
distributed internationaly as intended, the moderator should also not object to
steps taken by a party in a zone other than his to insure it will continue to
be distributed in his area... this is of course if that person does it in an
honorable way rather than an attempt at a hostile takeover... such actions
should also be taken with the aproval of the moderator, and, if honorable, the
moderator shouldn't object.

The real deal is wether or not this is a "cold war" between zones, or if the
parties have the best intents of the echo, and FidoNet, in mind... two stubborn
people don't often make for an equitable solution.

I think my proposal is proper...

Either Jack did what he did for the purposes of the flow of the echo, or he did
it with foul intent at stuffing it to Z2 ways... only -his- actions can dictate
that.

Either Bjorn would accept the idea of a "tag holder" for distribution purposes,
so long as his Z2 moderator ways were honored, and he wasn't obligated to take
part in the Z1 listing process himself (against the norm for Z2), or he would
reject it to piss on Z1 practices.

Each zone wants -their- ways respected, but neither wants to respect the others
ways.  Respect is a two way street.

Phil

--- FMail/Win32 1.60
 * Origin: (1:267/169)