Text 3592, 101 rader
Skriven 2004-12-19 16:35:28 av SHANNON TALLEY (1:275/311)
     Kommentar till en text av BOB SEABORN
Ärende: Re: Z1B <> EP1
======================
Hello Bob,

> > Once, a very long time ago, the backstat.na file was up-to-date, and we
>      You have things somewhat wrong and confused.
>      BACKSTAT.NA is a weekly 'newsletter' that explains changes to what is
> being transported on the North American Backbone.  The list of echos is 
> known
> as BACKBONE.NA.  It is by no means 'official anything'! Anyone involved in 
> the
> North American Backbone is free to transport, or not, any echo they wish,
> whether listed in the BACKBONE.NA, elist, (or anything else), or not.

First, I never stated the backbone.na was "official" anything...  I simply 
referred to it (as stated above) as a document that was once up-to-date.  It 
was a "guide" we used to determine which echos we wanted to carry.

>      BACKBONE.NA is a list of echos that moderators have requested that 
> the
> North American Backbone distributes on their behalf.  Never has there been 
> a
> claim by the North American Backbone that these echos were anything but 
> the
> property of the individual moderators.  The North American Backbone uses 
> the
> elist, as well as anything else available, to determine who the moderator 
> is
> _before_ acting on a moderator's request to make changes to an echo's
> distribution.

My discussion is regarding an echo list, not the moderatorship regarding the 
echos.  I could care less who owns what -- or how...  I'm a mail mover.

>      BACKBONE.NA is _still_ as up-to-date as individual moderators keep 
> it.
> The North American Backbone is *NOT* echopolice, never has been, never 
> will be!

I'm not suggesting that anyone hire any echo police Bob..... ???  (what's up 
with the negativity??)
The issue appears to that people haven't been updating it.  It doesn't 
accurately reflect the list of echos we hub in North America.

> > required to maintain a single item on the list to be considered a
> > Fidonet node, but rather, simply have a node number listed.
>      Huh?  Aquiring and holding a Fidonet node number has *nothing* to do
> with any echos being distributed.  Sorry but you seem quite confused over 
> this
> subject.

Actually, that's exactly what I meant by my statement, "One isn't required 
to maintain a single item on the (echo) list to be considered a Fidonet node 
number, but rather, simply have a node number listed".  This statement was 
made in response to someone else who made a comment that perhaps someone was 
intending to force people to carry echos (crazy talk).  Bob, I've been in 
this business since the early '90's.. I can assure you that I'm not 
confused, you simply misunderstood me -- or -- haven't been following the 
thread.

> > I'm not advocating the requirement of sysops to carry anything. I'm
> > simply
> > suggesting that we have an up-to-date listing of echos which are
> > considered
> > FidoNet.  A "guide" to those echos which fall within "our" Fidonet
> > domain.
>      There *never* has been such a thing, so why start now?

Uhmm.. The baskstat.na file?  Did you state that the backstat is a guide to 
echos in the NAB ??  I'm really not trying to sound condescending here Bob, 
but it's certainly blurting out that way.

> > From what I've been told, George Peace maintains the backstat.na, and it
> > has been a VERY long time since that list has been updated.
>      George Peace NEVER maintained either BACKSTAT.NA nor BACKBONE.NA,
> never! Also, fyi, George Peace has not been involved in Fidonet for close 
> to 5
> years now.

I haven't heard from him in at least that long, which explains why.  For the 
last 4 years I've been attached to a ship, and have been deploying around 
the world.  Fidonet politics haven't been very important to me.  I was 
incorrectly informed regarding who maintained the .na file, as you stated, 
it's you.  Thank you for that correction.

I do remember when John was maintaining it.  I was the Zone Four coordinator 
in the those days, and I did a great deal of mail work with John.  He helped 
us bring Mexican Link into the NAB.

I do receive a copy every week, and my mail tosser incorporates it. 
However, it lists echos that haven't had traffic in a very long time, and it 
doesn't list echos that do.  Like you said, I suppose it's up to the 
moderators to list them.

What about abandoned echos?  For instance, 12 Steps is listed -- but I 
haven't had traffic in there in (at least) 6 months (which is as long as I 
maintain any echo messages).

Warmest regards,
Shannon

--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a
 * Origin: FidoTel & QWK on the Web! www.fidotel.com (1:275/311)