Text 1841, 143 rader
Skriven 2004-11-15 20:44:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
   Kommentar till text 1777 av Jack Yates (1:3613/1275)
Ärende: Science 1/2
===================
Hello Jack,

 >>> A two-way street would be lovely, but you have not supported that
 >>> idea in the past.

 >MV> Oh, but I have. I have conceded that the SCIENCE echo should be run
 >MV> according to Z1 rules.

 > I have no interest in the SCIENCE echo, don't bother to
 > bring that up.

I see. You accuse me of walking a one way street, but when I come up with a
counter example you are not interested....


 >>> On the rare occasion that I chose to act in the capacity of
 >>> Moderator, you were the first to exhibit defiance.

 >MV> You are not the moderator. So naturally you meet with defiance if you
 >MV> pose as such.

 > O but I am, you just do not choose to recognize me.

No, you are not. The moderator of this echo is Björn Felten. He became the
moderator when the previous moderator Frank vest handed it over to him.

 >MV> No and I won't. any attempts from your side to make me cease will be
 >MV> counter productive. You are not the moderator.

 > Denial...etc.

It is you who are in denial.

 > What I *would like* is cooperation among the zones; what I
 > *get* is refusals from you.

And as long as you keep claiming moderatorship of this echo that is what you
wil get from me.

 > There would have been no reason for this had the Fidonews
 > Editor relisted the echo in the echolist.

There would have been no need for this of you had respected the choice of a Z2
moderator to not make use of the services of the echolist.

 >>>MV> If everyone were to do what you preach: respect other zones
 >>>MV> rules and traditions, there would be no way the fidonews echo
 >>>MV> could be hijacked. The moderator of the FidoNews echo is the
 >>>MV> Fidonews editor who presently resides in Z2.

 > So you say; however, all the previous editors maintained
 > the echolist listing

So? IIRC this is the first time that there is a Z2 Fidonews editor.

 >>> hence this condition of chaos within the echo.

 >MV> I don't see chaos. If you think this echo is in chaos, you have the
 >MV> choice to stop participating.

 > Perhaps if you ceased, the rest of us could enjoy the echo?

No way. I *may* consider it if you drop your claim of moderator of this echo.
As long as you keep claiming you are the moderator of this echo you will meet
with my defiant side.

 >MV> If your only concern was to safeguard the distribution, you should
 >MV> have listed it in the name of "FidoNews Editor".

 > And just who are you to tell me what I SHOULD do?

A user of this echo.

 > I followed the rules of the echolist, that's all that matters.

Not to me it isn't.

 >>> The echolist is not exclusive to Fidonet and is not a part
 >>> of Fidonet; as such cannot be "governed" by Fidonet.

 >MV> Right. It is not part of FidoNet. So why should I /as a user of this
 >MV> echo/ consider it authoritative as to who the moderator is?

 > Of course you don't, but that's because I have permitted
 > you to continue posting in my echo.

It is not up to you to give or deny me permission to post in this echo. It is
not your echo.

 > If I told you to take a week to cool off, you would doubtless not
 > do so and redouble your postings and I know this.

Or I may remain silent for TWO weeks just to prove you'r wrong. Point is that
you have no power over me and until Björn Felten - the moderator of this echo -
asks me to do otherwise, I will do as I dammed well please.

 >>> Frankly, I don't care who's in charge of the Elist, if an
 >>> echo is dropped, I'm not going to distribute it.

 >MV> That is you choice. It is your system, you decide what echos you
 >MV> carry. If you decide not to carry echos that are not in the echolist
 >MV> that is your decision. It is a stupid decision, but it is your stupid
 >MV> decision.

 > Last week I dumped about 2000 echoes, all from Europe, most
 > non-english, and none with downlinks from my system.  I
 > didn't think it to be stupid, I thought it prudent.

If you dropped them because it served no purpose carrying them any more, that
was prudent. If you dropped them /just because/ they are not elisted, that was
stupid.

 >MV> You have no right to attempt to make others do the same.

 > You are in no position to tell me what rights I have; I
 > have every right to request that others do the same; I'm
 > the moderator.

No, you are not.

 > I could, and I have even considered pulling this echo from
 > distribution in Z1,

Frankly I doubt that you have that power. *maybe* you could have some of the
systenms that are ppart of this "backbone" drop it. But I doubt that you could
make *all* Z1 mail distributors drop it. I doubt that any of those that are
interested in this echo would not get it any more.

 > but all that would do is prove to the likes of you that I could;

Only if you were to be succesfull, which I doubt.

 > other than that it would be a dis-service to others.

Only to the worshippers of the echolist. IOW your own yea-sayers. For the non
worshippers it would be business as usual. They would simply fall back to
private distribution.


Cheers, Michiel

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