Text 2809, 119 rader
Skriven 2007-06-13 08:40:06 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
   Kommentar till text 2799 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: This Echo
=================
13 Jun 07 00:05, Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Roy Witt:

 MvdV>>> In the beginning - 1994 when he was first elected ZC - there
 MvdV>>> was no way of knowing how things would develop. Most if not all
 MvdV>>> the things that went wrong happened after the last ZC2
 MvdV>>> election. Over five years ago IIRC.

 RW>> Oh yeah, about the same time of the FN_SYSOP fiasco that he started.

 MvdV> Don't pin me down on the time line. It could have been a bit more
 MvdV> than 5 years...

OK.

 MvdV>>> If we had a Russian ZC, we would not be obstructed in settling
 MvdV>>> our local affairs ourselves, for the simple reason that he/she
 MvdV>>> would not even be aware of us doing it.

 RW>> Someone would feed the echo to the rusky as well. Nothing is secure
 RW>> and you don't know who can be trusted.

 MvdV> I am well aware of that. During  the CSO wars, I read sysop echos
 MvdV> from all sides. Though they were supposed to be limited
 MvdV> distribution.

As did others.

 MvdV> But there is one thing you overlook: the language barrier. Our
 MvdV> local echos are in Dutch. In practise that is Pretty Good
 MvdV> Protection against a ZC's prying eyes. Except when that ZC is Dutch
 MvdV> speaking himself of course...

Or the ZC has a Dutch speaking friend who isn't necessarily yours.

 RW>> R19 planted certain messages at certain BBS's to help them figure
 RW>> out where I was getting their local echoes. It didn't work of
 RW>> course, but it could have.

 MvdV> But they would not even have attempted had they had no clue you
 MvdV> were reading them in the first place. First rule is not to give
 MvdV> that away. F.e. by spouting knowledge you could only have obtained
 MvdV> by reading those echos you were not supposed to read.

Diversion was the intended factor there. The message 'gatherer', who also
compared message bases with the others he collected, pointed out the
different messages from each source and I only commented on the 'planted'
messages. i.e. my source seemed to be from everywhere in R19, while in
reality it was from only one.

 MvdV>>> As I pointed out before, there is more to the smooth operation
 MvdV>>> of the network than just following P4.

 RW>> Actually ignoring it sometimes works out better. i.e. passworded
 RW>> log-ons.

 MvdV> Yes....

 RW>>>> In fact, it does state that a ZC will appoint an RC of the ZC's
 RW>>>> choice.

 MvdV>>> There is nothing stopping him/her from letting the winner of an
 MvdV>>> election be his choice.

 RW>> Perhaps he's afraid of what might transpire if you became RC.

 MvdV> I think that is part of the problem. I am ... eh.. insufficiently
 MvdV> servile. I can not be trusted to follow the party line at all
 MvdV> times. I am not afraid to speak up against the master when I think
 MvdV> something is wrong. I am too much of an independent, unsuitable for
 MvdV> a lackey.

Yes, I can believe that. In our own way, we're alike in that.

 MvdV>>> Point is that we had an elected RC in R28 for over 15 years. It
 MvdV>>> is what we in our culture refer to as an acquired right.

 RW>> RC12 had elected RCs in thier region for years too. Then one day,
 RW>> they elected a person

 MvdV> Well, at least there was an election...

Region 12, 13 and others have a region policy that provids for elections
to RC. That policy was/is approved by the ZC, so the elections are
recognized as legal and the ZC appoints the winner, except in that one
case.

 RW>> that the ZC felt she couldn't work with, fired her and appointed the
 RW>> runner-up in that same election to RC.

 MvdV> Lesly Dee Dylan and Tony Summerfelt (sp?). Yes, I remember that.

Yeup. That caused a lot of havoc here and we lost a very good sysop over
it.

 RW>>>> It doesn't say anything about one region or zone giving another
 RW>>>> asylum from such a *C and in fact, has been done in Z1. R12 gave
 RW>>>> asylum to an entire net formerly of R10, by merging their
 RW>>>> segment into R12's and assigning it a R12 net number. Public
 RW>>>> opinion kept it there in spite of what the then ZC said about
 RW>>>> it. In this case, the ZCC may decide to stand behind such a move.

 MvdV>>> TTMBOK it has never happened in Z2 and it surely would set a
 MvdV>>> precedent....

 RW>> Might even upset the apple cart and make life bearable.

 MvdV> I don't think we are ready for that yet and I hope we will never
 MvdV> have to be. Qui sera, sera.

That's probably the best for now.

                R\%/itt


"Beware the lollipop of mediocrity! Lick it once and you'll suck
forever..."

--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
 * Origin: SATX Alamo Area Net * South * Texas, USA * (1:397/22)