Text 4541, 112 rader
Skriven 2007-07-16 12:30:20 av Jeff Smith (1:14/5)
   Kommentar till text 4515 av Björn Forsström (2:203/614.61)
Ärende: R&R exchanging insults
==============================
Hello Björn.

16 Jul 07 11:10, you wrote to me:

 BF>>> Can I come up with a proposal?
 BF>>> Why not let Jeff or Roger be the editor for a trial  period of
 BF>>> say 2 or 3 months and see what will happend? Isn't that a great
 BF>>> idea?

 JS>>      I don't think it would be a good idea and I will tell you
 JS>> why. The sole purpose would be to suggest whether Felten is
 JS>> responsible for the lack of articles. The purpose of the proposal
 JS>> would not be to benefit Fidonews but to hopefully for some
 JS>> benefit Felten. The primary purpose of the proposal should be I
 JS>> would think to benefit Fidonews and Fidonet and not an
 JS>> individual.

 BF> If you or Roger did a good job as an editor, why not let you keep it
 BF> and then take up the question about being a moderator at a later
 BF> point.

     Ok, first who would decide? Would this merely be a tactic to help in
the defense of Felten or would this really be an attept to make this echo
and Fidonews itself better? I know it sounds like I am totally, absolutely
against Felten. That really isn't the case. I would rather work with Felten
than insist that he leave. But he himself has made that next to impossible.


 JS>>      The lack of articles is IMHO due to a lack of interest in
 JS>> Fidonews and in things Fidonet. People have lost interest in
 JS>> writing and submitting articles. The editor can not publish
 JS>> articles that people do not write. But that then begs the
 JS>> question of why people are no longer interested in submitting
 JS>> articles.

 BF> So far I really haven't understood why you think that The Snooze is so
 BF> important? What good does it do?

     Now? Not nearly as much today but then look at the condition it is
in. The Fidonews is still important and is a historic part of Fidonet. The
Fidonews and the Fidonet nodelist of course are what defines what Fidonet
is. Yes, Fidonews is in disrepair but that can be changed given someone
with the willingness to try. Will results be immediate? Most likely not
but in time with sustained effort the Fidonews echo and the Fidonews can
once again be something to admire about Fidonet instead of somthing to just
ignore as is the case currently.

 BF>  Things can be discussed here without it and if you say that the rules
 BF> for FIDONEWS are like that, change the rules so it will fit to what it
 BF> is today.

     As moderator I would have no problem discussing things in this echo
that have been published in Fidonews. That is after all the intended purpose
of this echo. This echo should not be used to replace the Fidonews newsletter
but instead to augment the Fidonews and provide a forum for expansion and
discussion of ideas and thoughts raised in the Fidonews. This echo should
not be allowed to be a free-for-all where people's only purpose appears to be
to feed the chaos. I would not rule with and iron fist as I am sure some
would be likely to suggest. It would take time to earn the respect necessary
to be effective. But I would hope that when people see that they would get
treated the same if friend or foe. That they would accept moderations even if
they did not agree with me and/or the moderation. I am the first to admit that
I have flaws in both mind and attitude. A fact that I am sure would be pointed
out posthaste.


 BF>  Everything else around us changes and today when Fido is
 BF> shrinking we just have to adjust us to it and accept that Fido isn't
 BF> what it used to be.

     How effective has the attempts to make changes in Fidonet been? That
should not keep us from trying even though we know what an uphill fight it
would be.


 JS>> Could the fact that Felten has and continues to use
 JS>> this echo as his personal podium for the expression of his hate
 JS>> and prejustice be a factor? Could it be that people see how
 JS>> Felten acts and what he posts in this echo and decide not to
 JS>> submit articles while he remains editor? Could it be that Felten
 JS>> carries a large responsibility of why people either have lost
 JS>> interest or have decided not to post articles? The fault for the
 JS>> lack of articles is by no means all Felten's. But he does share
 JS>> in the responsibility of why the Snooze is almost always empty.
 JS>> People have stated that they refuse to submit articles while
 JS>> Felten remains editor. That should speak to his at least partial
 JS>> responsibility for the lack of articles. Does the Fidonews need
 JS>> an editor that makes people not want to post?

 BF> That's up to each and everyone but as we say here, if you want to
 BF> change something, do it within the system and not from the outside and
 BF> that mans that you should use the existing system to change it to
 BF> something better like submitting articles to the Snooze to start a
 BF> discussion within the system instead of standing on the outside
 BF> whining about the editor.

     But in this case the problem is the system. Or at least the person
controlling this part of the system. I submitted several articles speaking
to this very problem. The second submission as I recall was responded to
IN THE SAME PUBLICATION of the Fidonews by a Felten supporter. Course there
were denials made of providing submissions to others prior to publication.
It is this type of behavior that suggests that the process would not be
allowed to happen without manipulation.


 BF> ---
 BF>  * Origin: . (2:203/614.61)

Jeff

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: Twin_Cities_Metronet - region14.us (1:14/5)