Text 26069, 225 rader
Skriven 2006-03-02 14:26:46 av Roy Witt (1:1/22)
Kommentar till text 26061 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Elist
=============
02 Mar 06 20:09, Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Roy Witt:
MvdV>>> So it is the e-list keeper that decides who get listed and who
MvdV>>> doesn't.
>> Well, it is his list. He decides what can be listed and what
>> can't be listed. He decides how it is to be formatted, etc ...
MvdV> And that is exactly the problem.
I see no problem with that.
MvdV> He is a dictator accountable to no one. And that doesn't just apply
MvdV> to Thom's list, it applied to many other lists that we had in the
MvdV> past as well.
Your opinion. It apparently isn't the opinion of the moderators who use
Thom's list.
MvdV> If there are no checks and balances and something is run by a
MvdV> dictator, sooner or later there will be abuse.
That can also hold true with something that has checks and balances, like
Fidonet policy and certain people who file frivolous PCs, for instance.
>> example: at one time, in retaliation for your attempt to hi-jack
>> the HAM echo, I presented the elist with entrys for your echoes,
>> the ones you moderate in Holland.
MvdV> The Netherlands.
Yeah, Holland.
>> Because Thom reviews each listing before it gets to the robot,
>> your echoes were safe from being hijacked.
MvdV> There were never in danger of being hijacked.
No so.
MvdV> Had your attempt to have yourself listed in Thom's list, there
MvdV> would have been zero consequences. Everyone here knows I am the
MvdV> moderator, no one would have recognised you as moderator no matter
MvdV> what Thom's list says.
That didn't stop you when you wanted to hi-jack HAM.
>>>> because Ward Dossche failed to do so.
MvdV>>> There was no "failure" as there is no obligation for a moderator
MvdV>>> to take steps to get his echo listed in whatever e-list.
Ahh, but there was a failure. He knew that Adrian would be merging his
echolist with the Z2 list. He though his echo would be perfectly safe
there, in that situation. Had he used Adrian's list, Moravsik wouldn't
have had the opportunity, period.
>> Ward announced the echo's existance in Fidonews, January, 1998.
MvdV> Thereby letting the world know he was the creator and therefore the
MvdV> moderator.
Only per ZC echopol...that doesn't/didn't mean squat here.
>> He listed the echo in the Z2 echolist...it may not have been required,
MvdV> It is not required. Period.
Maybe, maybe it was.
>> but the echolist, as well as Fidonews, was and is a useful tool to
>> advertise the existance of the echo.
MvdV> "Useful" is in the eye of the beholder.
In this case, it was useful to Dossche, as he wanted everyone to know that
he'd be posting ZCC info. That info was never made public before.
MvdV>>>>> while it was clear that Ward as the creator of the echo had
MvdV>>>>> prior rights.
>>>> And in this case, the distribution systems in Z1 took care of
>>>> the problem by denying Moravsik's claim as moderator. It still
>>>> belonged to Ward.
MvdV>>> And so the distributors did the right thing.
>> Perhaps. I'd say that the person who created the echo had some
>> influence in their decision to ignore the Z1 elisting.
MvdV> Perhaps. OTOH, the problem may never have been arisen in the first
MvdV> place, had it not been a high profile person.
Nor would it have occured, had the echo's originator been made aware of
what could happen if he didn't list in in Z1.
>> That and the reputation of the listed moderator.
MvdV> That, I know nothing about.
I never had a problem with him, but I do have to admire some of the things
he did that gave a wake-up call to the *C structure. Too bad they couldn't
see beyond their own noses, into the future.
MvdV>>> That does not change the fact that the e-list was abused.
>> You'd have to talk to Adrian Walker about that. Knowing his
>> political ties, I'd say it had a lot to do with Fidonet politics
>> than anything else.
MvdV> I have no desire to talk to Afriam Walker. It is water under the
MvdV> bridge.
You'd have a hard time finding him anyway, he left Fidonet in 1998.
>>>> According to the rules set up by the elist keeper, what happened
>>>> was within the rules.
MvdV>>> Then those rules are wrong as they allow abuse.
>> It's not the fault of an elist keeper if moderators don't keep
>> their listings current.
MvdV> It is the job of the echolist keeper to keep the list as accurate
MvdV> as he can.
He can only keep it as accurate as the moderators who list their echoes
with his list.
MvdV> It has to reflect reality, not create it.
It can only reflect what the moderators list there.
MvdV> There is no obligation for a moderator to do the job of the e-list
MvdV> keeper for him.
It's not Thom's obligation to tell a moderator what to do with his
listing. His job is to keep the list and no more.
MvdV> Not in Z1 and not in Z2.
>> Once the tag is dropped from the elist, it's free to be
>> used by anyone who so desires.
MvdV> And that is the flaw. It should not be possible to hijack an echo
MvdV> by hijacking the tag.
I'm waiting for your suggestion in how to fix that problem. So far, even
the software author hasn't come up with a way to fix it. If the tag isn't
in the list, then it's subject to being put there by anyone who desires to
do so.
>> That rule keeps moderators on their toes,
MvdV> In Z2 we have an echomail policy to take care of that.
I know. I've read it and it suckes. It's no different than the echomail
policy that Souvestre proposed for Z1, 15 years ago.
MvdV> In Z1 an e-list keeper that isn't even part of FidoNet has no
MvdV> bussines chasing moderators with a stick and a carrot.
His list is there for everyone who wants to use it, not for everyone who
needs to be chased down to use it. It's a voluntary list, not a mandated
Fidonet policy.
>> and it helps to keep the 'deadwood' out of the list. Deadwood
>> is one of the elist keepers pet peaves.
MvdV> There is a much simpler way of dealing with the dead wood: do away
MvdV> with the list alltogether.
Yeah, then all of the echoes are now deadwood.
MvdV>>> But... we all know the e-list keeper does not stick to his own
MvdV>>> rules.
>> That's the elist keepers main problem, he does stick to his
>> own rules.
MvdV> He does not. He refused Björn's entry because of an arbitrary rule
MvdV> that didn't exist before and was made up for the occasion.
He refused Felon's entry because Felon failed to follow the established
method and content rules that existed before the Felon had any inkling of
listing the echo. I used to have two listings with 'moderator emeritus' in
them. When Thom changed the rule, I complied with it. It's very easy to
list 'moderator emeritus' in the description or add them to your echo
rules. The Felon was just being obstinate and wanted to push the envelope
to show his own stupidity. He certainly did a good job of that, as this
echo has had an ongoing battle over 'who's the moderator' ever since.
MvdV>>> He manually reviews applications and refuses some that
MvdV>>> according to his own rules are ok.
>> None that I've ever seen.
MvdV> Then open your eyes.
They're wide open. Maybe you're imagining things. Seen any black
helicopters over your house lately?
>> The current Fidonews editor didn't try to list this echo
>> according to the elist rules and guess what, he's
>> not the elisted moderator because of it.
MvdV> He got fed up with Thom playing silly games and turned away from
MvdV> the e-list.
He got fed up because he wasn't smart enough to figure out how to list the
echo. Stupid is as stupid does.
>> And you and I have already agreed that anyone who can read for
>> comprehension can do amazing things after reading
>> the instructions.
MvdV> I have agreed to nothing like that.
You most certainly did...in another message about PGP, etc.
MvdV>>> The e-list keeper was biased.
>> Agreed, Adrian Walker was biased.
MvdV> And so is Thom.
I doubt that beating him over the head will get you any further than it
got the Felon.
MvdV>>>>> So now we have exchanged opinions. Again. Did it lead anywhere?
>>>> Yes. It made for more traffic in a dying fidonet.
MvdV>>> Hmmm... yes, ther is that...
>> We agree again...:o)
MvdV> ;-)
Roy
--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
* Origin: Hacienda de Rio de Guadalupe * South * Texas, USA * (1:1/22)
|