Text 27618, 55 rader
Skriven 2015-09-03 17:43:58 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.73)
  Kommentar till text 27540 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Zone 1 Fidonews
=======================
03 Sep 15 12:58, you wrote to Matt Bedynek:

 MB>> You will still need zones because of the existence of othernets

 MV> "We" don't need othernets.

 MB>> but Fidonet need be only one zone comprised of nets.

 MV> Technically it could be one zone. But it will not happen, because
 MV> there will never be consencus about who will be the new Head Honcho.

how's this for an idea...

1. drop all zones except for zone 1... why zone 1? because 1 is the first
non-zero number (zone 0 doesn't make any sense) and since fidonet is the
initial base fidonet tech network, it is only natural that fidonet is zone 1...

2. keep the regions as they are... they are already extablished and
operational... why? to build #3 from...

3. instead of an IC or ZC, build a commitee of RCs as the ZCC... they act as
one body in the same vein as the current ZCC... what about the nodelist?? about
that... have one person or persons from each former zone maintain the nodelist
from their area... that or have each RC maintain the nodelist for their region
and build a complete nodelist...

yeah, the above cuts the zone out but we still need regions to a certain
point... that to provide top level administration as well as providing the
nodelist... in the first place, this will definitely wake folks up when a RC is
not doing their job... if they cannot perform then the ZCC (made of all RCs)
can take steps to make sure that a new RC is set up to take the fall for their
region...

this is the first/initial compromise i can think of in less than 5 minutes that
eliminates the zones and maybe that level of confrontational behavoir... it
won't stop the personal animosities, though... one or both parties leaving or
using some sort of artificial ""attitude management"" methods is the only way
to really stop that problem...

in any case, there's one idea... the real problem will be in implimenting it
because i do, like you, agree that we cannot just toss out current policy and
we should work within its boundaries to move forward... yes, that means working
up a new policy with the new divisions and methodlolgies defined and getting
the current load of RCs to pass it... that also means that the current load of
RCs should be ready and willing to step up to the additional nodelist building
methods... if they cannot, then adios one way or the other...

so... 4 (currently) chiefs to administer the network or a commitee of 29 RCs to
do the job?

)\/(ark

... I think oatmeal is erotic.
---
 * Origin:  (1:3634/12.73)