Text 22661, 136 rader
Skriven 2011-10-25 00:21:54 av Richard Webb (1:116/901.0)
  Kommentar till text 22658 av Janis Kracht (1:261/38)
Ärende: FidoNews Vol. 28 No. 43 Editorial
=========================================
HI Janis,

On Mon 2011-Oct-24 17:43, Janis Kracht (1:261/38) wrote to Richard Webb:

<snip>
>> written - such as software that will allow people to pack up
>> messages on a web forum, reply offline, and upload them to the
>> source like qwk mail.  Vince Perellio was recently inquiring about
>> just that for a friend of his, in the the facebook fidonews group.

>YOu know that's so weird, we've had it for years, the usenet users use the sam
> nntp to transfer the articles they want
<snip>
> these web forum guys are starting to figure
> out that they need to reinvent a wheel we gave 'em 20 years
> ago!!!

JK> I'm not sure, I'd have to check but I think that these web based
JK> forums like PHbb don't have the threading that say a standard bbs
JK> does.  I could be wrong though.  Even usenet groups have some
JK> threading available..

Right, nntp does have, but as I understand it some web
forums are better at this than others.  The only one I used
to participate in when I had access before Katrina was
Prosoundweb and their threading wasn't existent at all.
That was a roll on the floor and bang head experience that I put myself through
because even then there were folks there
with some great knowledge that had migrated there from
usenet because they could get their own forums, and the
advertisers paid for it all.  I still preferred usenet and
FIdo though, but there were a couple of ongoing threads I'd
watch, or as close to threads as you can get with such a
forum.  IT was just so clunky to use, especially using a
screen reader <grumble>.

<snip again>
> My kids didn't get access to a vehicle to drive
> until they knew how to change a tire; check the oil; check
> tire pressure, etc. etc.  IT was a requirement.

JK> Right :)

>  IN fact, at times they'd ask
>my dad and I why we were that way about it, and tell us we were unfair.  tHeir
> statement "this is unfair dad."  My response, yes, it's unfair to the other
> youngsters that their parents don't teach them these things and instill some
> responsibility.

JK> No kidding.  That kind of knowledge save me more than once when on
JK> the road.. Dad made sure we all knew how to do those basic things -
JK> 5 girls and 1 boy in our family <grin>.  He knew the fact that 5 of
JK> us were women couldn't cut any excuses.

YEp, I had two daughters, and I insisted they understand
some basics about how it operated, and how to do basic stuff to keep it that
way.

<snip again>
<big snip>

> They prepare for the license examinations off a web site or
> in classes that work on the principle of rote memorization,
> whereas back in days of yore you had a mentor.  This as the
> ham radio world fragments into various interests.  BAck in
> the days when mentoring was the primary entry route
> everybody learned the same basic skill set, because it was
> required.  NOT so today.  There are folks who are interested in digital
> communications who may get licensed who never
> learn anything at all about the analog side, i.e. how to
> conduct themselves during organized network activity, etc.

JK> Ah, ok, I can see how that can be rough on the ham side of things. 

YEp, I used the digital thing as an example.  AT one time
everybody used the code, because that's what there was.
THere were few local links on vhf and uhf, so relaying
messages was vital, so you learned the skills of
transmitting radiograms, because that gave you the audit
trail (think seen-by and path lines) you learned some
technical basics.  NOw the tech heads who aren't interested
in operating but enjoy the experimenting learn their
compartment, the digital guys learn their thing, etc. etc.
YEs the licensing is supposed to test you on a smattering of knowledge in all
the basics, but it's very basic to all the
various facets.  What you actually get at the entry level is truly a learner's
permit.

> At a time when mentoring is most needed we have less of it.
> Fidonet is fortunate in that regard, if you're interested
> enough at all to get involved you have somebody to turn to
> which can help you understand what's happening.  Witness
> some of our recent discussions in fn_sysop and z1c with a
> fairly new sysop and nc and our working to get him up to
> speed on the history and culture that made FIdonet what it
> is.

JK> Yes, we certainly have a lot of folks around who can point people in
JK> the right direction for information.

Indeed, because the technical part one can learn, but some
of the cultural ramifications take some wrapping one's head
around.

>>> I have to admit though, I did love Richard's line about
>>> Scotty's transporter :) :) :)  (being a trekkie and all that
>>> <grin>)

>> YEah I know, I'm more like BOnes, I'm not sure I'd want my
>> atoms scattered around by that thing, maybe it wouldn't put
>> me back together correctly <grin>.

>> hahaha :)
> I can see it now, as it's trying to put the guy's lower half together it goes
> blue screen <g>.

JK> No no!  We don't want to see that splat :) :)

<rotfl>  YEah I can see it now.  I'm even leery of the car
that drives itself though should it come to pass.  IT would
appear on the surface to be a boon to somebody like me, but
I want that human judgment call when it's necessary.  IF the self propelled
self driven vehicle working with the aware
smart net which routes traffic ever crumps I want it to come to a screeching
halt at the first safe opportunity and do
nothing!  Also, if it's going to be self directed vehicles
as part of a smart network, that means I don't want grandpa
in his old RAmbler as part of it, I want everything to be
plugged into said network so that when the network crumps
because it can't reconcile its data everything comes to a
halt right here, right now!!!

Regards,
           Richard
---
 * Origin:  (1:116/901)