Text 3156, 41 rader
Skriven 2004-12-11 01:07:10 av Matt Bedynek (1:106/1)
   Kommentar till text 3119 av SHANNON TALLEY (1:275/311)
Ärende: Z1B <> EP1
==================
Hello SHANNON.

09 Dec 04 20:00, you wrote to MARK LEWIS:

 ST> In regards to the conversation at hand, I've noticed a great deal of
 ST> chatter regarding what's left of the Z1B & the NAB.

 ST> Folks just start hooking up, creating echos at random, and carrying
 ST> them --  hubbing them -- haphazardly...  That isn't Fidonet, but
 ST> rather -- random internet message areas (in lieu of any other name).
 ST> When Fidonet was huge (you guys know the time frame I'm referring to),
 ST> rules were followed a little more closely (we used to have them).  Now
 ST> we all question the existence of them, and as a result, Fidonet is
 ST> just a hodge podge of different echos floating around different
 ST> systems.

 ST> I recently started to examine the backbone.na file a little more
 ST> closely and compare that against the Elist and what mail movers are
 ST> carrying.  None of the lists match the systems I ran them against,
 ST> including my own.

 ST> In order for there to "be" a "Fidonet", there has to be a list of
 ST> echos that are considered "FidoNet" echos.  Perhaps the Elist is the
 ST> answer, or perhaps it's not the answer.  Is there a better list that
 ST> is maintained somewhere?

 ST> If Fidonet is an organization, it needs some level of structure.
 ST> Without it, then it is truly disintegrated.

All we need is for a ZEC to publish a standard list of echoes.  Once people
start to use that list backbones become irrelevant and unnecessary.  I even
believe that we should not recognize people as "zone hubs" and such.  Titles
create nothing but problems.  Let people mesh and connect where they wish.  If
they create problems people will quickly learn to avoid linking with them.  :)

Matt

e-mail: matt [at] thunderdome.ws | icq: 16568532 | yahoo: mbedynek

---
 * Origin: ..::[ high speed feeds - http://fido.thunderdome.us/ ]::.. (1:106/1)