Text 3389, 50 rader
Skriven 2004-12-17 08:12:42 av Matt Bedynek (1:106/1)
   Kommentar till text 3385 av David Drummond (3:640/305)
Ärende: Z1B <> EP1
==================
David Drummond -> Matt Bedynek wrote:

 DD> I wasn't speaking of elsewhere, I was speaking of (International) Fidonet.

There is no such beast.  For example, I can disconnect this echo from the
normal links (those that would complain) and propagate my own version.  Nothing
in Fidonet prevents me from doing it except the honor code.  In fact, that is
the problem I see with the current system.  It is all based on the honor code
and some people that move mail today have none.  They do as they see fit and
claim that whatever touches their node is their property.  Those would be those
who defy moderation.

The questions are :

1.  Should we have a SOP (standard operating procedure) for echomail
distribution that would prevent "do as you like" practice?

2.  Are there a such thing as "fidonet echoes"?  Lets define this term as those
claiming to be exclusive to Fidonet.

3.  If exist #2 would it be feasable to define #1.

I see two schools of thought here.  Those who view the propagatation of
echomail as an anarchy and those who desire a more structured flow. Those who
desire structure tend to be the Echopol group.  Those who desire the anarchy
(free-for-all) approach are here in my zone.

Those who prefer the free-for-all approach do not want policy to be actionable
on echomail because it allows them to do as they please--get away with
anything.  Their interpretation that policy does not apply to echomail does not
make much sense since majority of the traffic and activity in Fidonet happens
in echomail.  So why did the creators of P4 make a policy that could not be
used 99% of the time?

Unfortuately, spliter groups have been moving off on tangents for so long now
that is virtually impossible for there ever to be some agreement.   My
statements are bold and I expect them to go no where.  I am merely pointing out
the fact that Fidonet suffers because there is no unification.  The very
definition of anarchy says there cannot be.

Lastly, I would like to point out that Fidonet in this zone did best during the
times of standardization and common practice.  Sure there were rotten apples
that abused under this system but there were also more people around to do the
abusing.  It appears that Z2, which its level of standardization has made
Fidonet sucessful there; especially the R50 people.  So, the further away this
zone moves from standardization to anarchy the further its membership is
depleted.

---
 * Origin: thunderdome server project - fido.thunderdome.us (1:106/1)