Text 26108, 150 rader
Skriven 2006-03-03 20:06:42 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
  Kommentar till text 26081 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Elist
=============
 > Your opinion. It apparently isn't the opinion of the moderators
 > who use Thom's list.

 MvdV> That is not apparent at all since the moderators did not have a
 MvdV> free choice. 

michiel, the moderators of that time period had all the free choice that anyone
could ever want... they were able to list their echos with what ever list(s)
were available during that period... it is/was a classic VWYF (Vote With Your
Feet) situation handled in classic democratic/majority wins style... 

  1. thom's list was available, i'm not sure of the others
     but i know there were at least one or two others that
     died on the vine real quickly.
  2. many moderators listed their echos in thom's list.
  3. in the end, thom's list won simply by default.

what else do you need to fully understand how and why thom's elist is the
echolist used by many moderators in fidonet??

 MvdV>> If there are no checks and balances and something is run
 MvdV>> by a dictator, sooner or later there will be abuse.

 > That can also hold true with something that has checks and
 > balances, like Fidonet policy

 MvdV> Without checks and balances and a dictoator running the thing
 MvdV> abuse is guatanteed. With checks and balances it is just a
 MvdV> possibility. 

are you as good as your word? what checks and balances are there to keep you
true to your word? this is the same thing... at that time, thom was good to his
word and there was no evidence, complaints or whathaveyou that showed that he
was not...

[trim]

 >>> He listed the echo in the Z2 echolist...it may not have been required,

 MvdV>> It is not required. Period.

 > Maybe, maybe it was.

 MvdV> It is not required. Period.

ok... that is now... how about back then?? what absolute proof do you bring?

 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.

 MvdV> Nor would it have occured had you not had this Taliban system of
 MvdV> de facto compulsory e-listing.

what an interesting word to choose to describe it... some would say
"communist"... others would say "nazi"... i think "oppressive" is the real word
_you_ are wanting to use... many of those of us over here never saw it as
oppressive... i still don't... in fact, i see it as a form of those "checks and
balances" you speak of...

 MvdV> In retrospect I'd say Ward's error was in allowing the echo to be
 MvdV> distributed in Z1. Had he kept it restricted to Z2, none of this
 MvdV> would have happened and we in Z2 would still have the echo and
 MvdV> could have used its for the purpose it was intended.

the prupose, AIR, was to make messages from a private echo public... so how
would leaving out Z1 helped in that?? you'd rather keep Z1 in the dark and
suckerpunch them instead??

[trim]

 >>> 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> But that is not what he does. If a moderator chooses not to
 MvdV> submit a listing, the right thong to do would be to NOT have the
 MvdV> echo listed if the correct information is not available by other
 MvdV> meands. Instead it is listed with /someone else/ as moderator.

what other means do you propose?? a second list??

 MvdV>> It has to reflect reality, not create it.

 > It can only reflect what the moderators list there.

 MvdV> Then why does it not just list nothing if the moderator declines
 MvdV> to supply the information?

how do you propose to list nothing? for that matter, how do you propose to
gather the names of all echos and get them into the list if no one knows them
all??

 >>> 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.

 MvdV> Dump the e-list.

toss the baby with the bathwater? yeah, that's about your speed...

 >>> 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.

 MvdV> Your opinion. For me it has been a uselfull tool to help deal
 MvdV> with problems. 

but you don't even use it as it is written!

 > It's no different than the echomail policy that Souvestre proposed
 > for Z1, 15 years ago.

 MvdV> Possibly not as the echomail policy we use here was originally
 MvdV> written in and for Z1.

known public fact along with the known public fact that you freely ignore any
parts of it at any time that don't suit your purposes (generic "you" in
there)...

 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.

 MvdV> As long as the Z1 backbone required echos to be listed in order
 MvdV> to have them carried, it was not voluntary.

sure it was! if they didn't want to list their echos in the elist, then they
simply didn't get their echos carried on that backbone! what is so hard to
understand about that??

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)