Text 1321, 102 rader
Skriven 2009-11-16 15:46:10 av Lee Lofaso (3:800/432.0)
   Kommentar till text 1254 av Mark Lewis (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: FidoNews 26:45 [01/0
============================
Hello Mark,

>LL>The recent "election" held by commissar Michiel is reminescent of
>LL>Soviet times.  Political appointees all.  There can be no appeal,
>LL>except perhaps to the commissar himself, assuming he allows it.

>ML>you are aware that the current election rules were in place
>ML>some 5 or 6 years (IIRC) /BEFORE/ the current administrator
>ML>was even politically nominated for a seat on the FTSC by
>ML>the one who is trying their damnedest to stir up trouble,
>ML>are you not??

>LL>The "rules" as originally put in place was for one Chief Dog to
>LL>appoint six Top Dogs, with each Top Dog appointing their own
>LL>Underlings, who in turn paid homage to the Top Dog who appointed
>LL>them, while also appointing Underlings below themselves, who in
>LL>turn paid homage to their Overlords.  Since then, the six Top Dogs
>LL>got together, had a pow wow, and got rid of the Chief, as well as
>LL>one of their own, leaving only five Top Dogs and no Chief.

ML>yes and no... you have the very beginning wrong...

You missed the entire point.  The way fido is set up, there are no
rules.  Except whatever whims a zone coordinator might have.

>LL>As a result, there is not one fido, but five separate fidos, each
>LL>fido headed by a Top Dog, with hand-picked Underlings, who in turn
>LL>have their own hand-picked Underlings.  Each Top Dog is an entity
>LL>unto himself/herself, and can do as he/she pleases.

ML>to a point, yes... but not totally and never has been...

By refusing to appoint/elect a new IC, the five ZC's have (in
effect) crowned themselves tin pot dictators of each zone.

It doesn't matter what others do in terms of documentation,
whether in regards to the FTSC or anything else.  It doesn't
matter what FTSC elections are held, or not held.  Or what
the qualifications are for said elections are, or may be.

The structure of fido is top-down.  Tom Jennings set it up that
way.  The principles of such a structure is based on anarchy.
Yes, Tom Jennings is, or was, an anarchist.  A gay anarchist,
according to some, but an anarchist nonetheless.

>LL>A Top Dog can fire any Underling, or all Underlings, with or
>LL>without reason.

ML>yup... the same as any boss can fire any of those working
ML>for them... so what??

Anarchists love that principle.  Especially the anarchist at the top.

>LL>Each Underling can fire any (or all) Underlings below him/her, with
>LL>or without reason.

ML>again, yup... the same as above... so what?

Anarchists love that principle.  Especially the anarchist at the top.

>LL>Although it may be technically possible for a group of Underlings
>LL>to fire a Top Dog (and name a replacement), the reality is such a
>LL>thing will never happen. After all, no Underling will bite the
>LL>hand that feeds them.

ML>then you have not seen fidonet's history and/or do not
ML>fully understand it... as far as the IC goes, the
ML>underlings DID fire their boss (bite the hand that feeds
ML>them) in a manner of speaking... however, they also chose
ML>to form a group of themselves to handle their activities in
ML>the same way that there are RC and NC level groups...

The former IC was stupid, allowing a group of anarchists to
remove him from power.  But once they had achieved their goal,
the anarchists went their separate ways, having tasted ultimate
power themselves.  As such, instead of fido having one tin god
ruling over all, there are five tin gods, each ruling over his
or her own fiefdom within the confines of a fragmented fido.

>LL>What does this all mean?  The FTSC elections are meaningless.
>LL>Totally meaningless.  Zone Coordinators (Top Dogs) do not listen to
>LL>anything put forward by the FTSC.  The only standard that exists is
>LL>whatever standard(s) put forth by each Top Dog.

ML>wrong... the FTSC documents the existing standards...

There is no standard (excepting whatever standard each tin god
sets forth for his/her own fiefdom).

ML>nothing is in place saying that others cannot create new
ML>standards...

Yeah.  Right.  Each and every one of us has his/her own standards.
Anarchy at its most fundamental level.

--Lee


 * SLMR 2.1a * Laisse les bons temps rouler!

--- Maximus 3.01
 * Origin: Xaragmata / Adelaide SA telnet://xaragmata.mooo.com (3:800/432)