Text 5717, 93 rader
Skriven 2010-03-08 18:35:21 av David Drummond (3:640/305)
   Kommentar till text 5708 av Lee Lofaso (3:800/432.0)
Ärende: Using An Alias 4
========================
Lee Lofaso -> Stewart Arnett wrote:


 LL> The issue is, should all participants have the right/privilege to
 LL> use an alias/handle when posting messages?  Not if this, if that.
 LL> Either all participants should have the right/privilege to use an
 LL> alias/handle when posting messages, or not.

The fact of the matter is that the "participants" have no rights in Fidonet at
all.

The Sysops all have "obligations" to the rules/moderators of the echoes and if
they break with those they get cut off.

And there's not much any damned user can do about it except take his business
to another system. If he gets that Sysop in the shit and cut off, he (the user)
will soon find himself banned from logging in at participating systems.

Fidonet is NOT a democracy by any means - it is more of a theocracy.

 SA>> If those rule say "no alias" then using one is not allowed.

 LL> Such "real names only" rules are anti-democratic and should
 LL> be done away with.

Fidonet is not a democracy. The concept of "anti-democratic" means nothing
here.

 SA>> That is not a Fidonet policy but common courtesy of the
 SA>> echo you are using.

 LL> Common courtesy is not a one-way street.  Common courtesy is
 LL> exactly what the term implies.  Common to all.  And that means
 LL> sysops, moderators, and participants.

No such thing. The participating user has no more privileges here than any
sysop is prepared to afford him. And the sysop has responsibilities to Fidonet
co-ordinators and moderators.
[...]

 SA>> On my system I own the system, if I don't want you then there is
 SA>> nothing you can do about it, you do not enter.

 LL> The issue is should all participants have the right/privilege
 LL> to use an alias/handle when posting messages.  Not what you or
 LL> any other sysop chooses to do with his/her system.

Participants privileges are granted by the individual sysop. That gives that
sysop omnipotent power over the user. After all, the Sysop does own the system,
and is not obliged to let just anyone access it.

[...]
 SA>> The real fact is nothing more than manners, you come into
 SA>> my house and don't like the way I live then leave. You go
 SA>> into an echo and don't like the way the moderator runs it,
 SA>> then leave. Same thing, no argument.

 LL> That has absolutely nothing to do with the issue.  Should all
 LL> participants have the right/privilege to use an alias/handle when
 LL> posting messages?  Yes, or No?

NO!

That is up to the moderators of the echoes, and the echo rules. Most Fidonet
echoes have rules that forbid handles.

Don't like the rules? Don't participate in that echo!

 LL> [..]

 LL>>> If we (everyone in fido) want to preserve the free and open atmosphere
 LL>>> of fido, allowing all participants to use an alias/handle when posting
 LL>>> messages seems to be a harmless, very fun and effective tool of doing
 LL>>> so.  So why throw that tool away?  Better to use that tool, for all it
 LL>>> is worth, to create a better future fido for us all.

 SA>> Then go to an echo where an alias is allowed to be used.

 LL> That would be each and every echo in fido.

But it isn't!

When YOU own the systems then you will get to make the rules (just like at your
home).

-- 

regards

David

---
 * Origin: Jabberwocky  -27 28'15.48"  +153 1'38.77" (3:640/305)