Text 1469, 217 rader
Skriven 2012-07-29 11:35:25 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Janis Kracht (1:261/38)
Ärende: Ward's Z1 node number
=============================
Hello Janis,

On Saturday July 28 2012 23:25, you wrote to me:

 >> It was Ward's own idea.

 JK> That's true

So why accuse me of "pushing" him?

 JK> You and others though did not discourage him.

Why should I? It is my job to encourage people to apply for a node number, not
to discourage them. As I see it, Ward's application is fully legitimate.

I am sure that if I had actually discouraged someone from applying for a node
number, you'd  (plural) would be on an all out mission to condemn me for it.

 JK> Hmm.. lemme check my correspondences from web friends:

"Web spies" you mean...

 JK> ==================
 WD>> Maybe I should now have a node number in Z1 applications ... and
 WD>> given the only node in Montana would also suddenly RC status
 WD>> requests?
 JK> I would definitely do it! Displays hours of fun! To see them squirm
 JK> why that was not a good idea ... ;)

 JK> Granted this was not YOUR reply,

Indeed, those are not MY words. But whoever wrote that sure got it right! You
(plural) *ARE* wriggling like a worm on a hook to find an excuse to reject
Ward's request for a node number.

 JK> but you did reply to the above post according to web friends:

So? Sinds when does "replying" equate to "pushing"?

 JK> ===========
 JK> WD >> seen the only node in Montana would also suddenly RC status
 JK> WD >> applications?
 JK> Chorus

Your web spy is lifting things out of contect, twisting words and he is a bad
translator. Get yourself a new "web friend".

 JK> Shall I show more?

If the above is the best that you can come up with to show that I was "pushing"
Ward, you need not bother. You have already lost.

 >> Is it not in the job description of every *C to promote the growth of
 >> the network? Should we not al be happy when a new node is added to the
 >> nodelist? Should we not encourage every new potential sysop to join the
 >> network?

 JK> Give me a break.  If Ward _moves_ to the US, no problem and you know
 JK> it.

No, I do not know it. Ward HAS moved to the US. He walks there, he eats there,
he sleeps there, he shits there. More to the point, he is the sysop of a system
that is  physically located in the US and that system can send and receive
netmail.

 JK>  Several sysops have moved here and joined Zone 1.   Ward is
 JK> not ADDED to the nodelist in this case, he's already there :)

So? if you are trying to suggest he should give up his node number in Z2 first,
you will lose.

Firstly, I will not go along with his removal from the R28 part of the nodelist
as long as he has a system on-line that is physically located in R28.

Secondly, there is nothing that says one can only have a node number in one
zone at any time. There is plenty of precedence to the contrary. Pablo Kleinman
had a node in Spain and one in the US. Sometimes he was in Spain, sometimes he
was in the US, but he kept both systems running all the time. Nobody
complained.

 JK> But say Bob agrees to list him.. the man has to get an application in.

Hypothetical:

Would you not say that if a candidate sysop makes an error in the application,
that it is the duty of the *C in question to help the candidate to correct the
error and do everything in his/her power to help the candidate sysop to get
listed ASAP?

 >>>> But now that - by bringing it up - you admit knowing about Ward's
 >>>> application for a Z1 node number for the Fidonet system he has
 >>>> been running in Montana for well over a month now: why does it
 >>>> take so long?

 JK> Because Ward is a silly goose? :)

You think that is a valid reason to not process a request for a node number?

 >>>> Montana is in Z1, so he should have a number in Z1 for that system.
 >>>> Why has his application for a node number not been honoured yet?

 JK> 1 - He's got a node number.

Nowhere does it say one can not have node numbers in more than one zone. See
above, the precedent of Pablo Kleinman.

 JK>   2 - He doesn't live in Montana.

He walks there, eats there, sleeps there, shits there and possibly does a few
more things that people do when they live somewhere. I do not know if in the US
that legally qualifies as "living there". Here it does, but the US may be
different. It is irrelevant. The rules of Fidonet do not say one must "live
there" in the legal sense of the jurisdiction in question. The requirement is
that one is in control of a system that can send and receive netmail during
ZMH.

 JK> 3 - Perhaps he doesn't even know how to submit an application...

Bovine Excrement.

 JK> because Bob Seaborn told me to tell you:

 JK> "mikey- Ward has NOT applied for a z1 aka,

Ward did indeed not apply for a Z1 _AKA_. An AKA is a additional number for an
already listed system. Ward applied for a _new_ number for a _new_ system. A
system located in the US.

 JK> he simply inquired on how to go about it.  He was told how, and as of
 JK> right now, no application has been received."

Ah, it got lost in the mail.... yet another excuse...

 >> Auw, c'mon... you don't really want to make us believe that Ward with
 >> well ove two decades of FidoNet experience is unable to pass the
 >> application procedure?

 JK> Exactly.

This has no credibility.

 >> The requirement for joining Fidonet is to have an FTN compatible
 >> mailer on-lin that can send and receive netmail at least during ZMH.
 >> Nowhere does it say tha "to be considered a trouble maker" is cause
 >> for denying a node number.

 JK> 10.3  Case Histories

We all know that the so called "case histories" are fiction. They are made up,
they are not cases that actually occured. They set no precedent.

 JK> A patron of various local nodes had been roundly recognized by all
 JK> sysops as a twit.  The user obtained his own system, became a sysop,
 JK> and applied for a node number.  The Network Coordinator denied the
 JK> request.  No appeals were made.

Even if that really happened, which I very much doubt,  it does not mean that
next time any appeals can automatically be dismissed.

 >> Fidonet is and was always full of trouble makers. *Cs have been fired
 >> for refusing to accept e node "because he is considered a trouble
 >> maker".

 JK> He has a node number, your argument just fell apart.

On the contrary. That he already has a node number in another zone, is not a
valid reason for dismissal of a new application. See above.

 JK> If he _can_ get his application in, RC17 will consider his
 JK> application.  I have NOT told Bob or any *C not to process his
 JK> application.

But you have not told him to stop stalling and playing games either and to do
his job as RC and NC and list him in R17  ASAP.

 >> Suppose xxxCarol were to come to The Netherlands. For example to be
 >> stationed at the Navy yard in Den Helder.

 JK> i.e., she moved there.

Not necessarily. If she were to commute between the US and The Netherlands and
only was here during office hours, that would be fine with me. As long as she
had a system on-line that was in her control and that was physically located in
The Netherlands, that would be enough for me.

 >> Suppose she applied or a node number in net 280 and I refused on the
 >> ground that she is considered a trouble maker. Would you accept that?

 JK> If the proof was there (and it is present here), I would consider the
 JK> NC's or RC's case.

I don't believe you would 'consider" it. I predict you'd (plural) be all over
me, condemning me for refusing a node number for personal reasons.

 JK>   Wouldn't you?  she certainly would not have three nodenumbers :)

Why not? If someone runs three discrete systems, he/she can have three node
numbers. There is no shortage on node numbers, we do not have to share them
like IP(4) numbers

IIRC at one time she actually WAS listed simultaneously in two zones.

 >> I do not believe you do not know exactly what the reason for the
 >> delay is.

 JK> I do now.  I checked with Bob Seaborn.

I do not believe you did not know it before you wrote you were "just guessing".
You went through the trouble of alerting your spy network to surface the
contents of a Dutch closed group echomail area. Surely that was not your only
channel of information.


Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20110320
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)