Text 28322, 76 rader
Skriven 2015-09-21 18:02:12 av Lee Lofaso (2:203/2)
     Kommentar till en text av Kurt Weiske
Ärende: Echolist Kontrol
========================
Hello Kurt,

Although your intentions may have been noble, there are
some problems you may not have considered.  Here is your
message, in its entirety, unedited, for reference -

                   -=quote=-

All this "discussion" about the echolist brought one question to
mind...

Why don't the systems participating in the Fidoweb and complaining
about the validity of the Echolist in the first place start their
own?

Voting with your Feet has been an integral part of Fidonet for as long
as I've been involved in it, and it seems that would solve many of the
problems and many of the complaints being voiced here.

Someone could host the web-echolist, you could mirror the current
echolist and add your own echoes as you see fit, to be distributed to
other systems on the Fidoweb.

otherwise, complaining about who did what to the echolist and who
should or shouldn't be in charge seems like a waste of time.

                 -=end quote=-

No echolist, private or public, has any official status in fidonet.
Nor should any future echolist be granted any official status.

Fidonet is supposed to be a free association of sysops from around
the world.  Imposing or declaring an echolist is an infringement of
that freedom, as such an echolist would be a form of kontrol.

Who has right to impose an echolist on anyone?  Sure, anybody
can create an echolist.  I can do that on my own easily enough.
So can Forrest Gump.  Since anybody and everybody can create an
echolist of their own, it is impossible to determine which, if
any, are accurate.

In order for there to be an echolist, rather than mulitiple
echolists that sysops could freely choose from, somebody will
have to decide for sysops which echolist will be the one that
all sysops will be forced to use as THE ECHOLIST.

In addition -

For any echolist, there would need to be someone or some group
to maintain that echolist.  And those who maintain the echolist
could abuse it (as is the current echolist).  And that means
somebody is going to have to keep watch over those who maintain
the echolist.  And who is going to watch the watchers?  Whose
rules are you going to play by?

Those who maintain the echolist might have one standard, others
might have a far different standard.  Who is going to write the
rules?  Who is going to interpret the rules?  Who is going to
enforce the rules?

Nah.  Better not to have an echolist at all.  Too many things
can go wrong.  Horribly wrong.  Like abusing the echolist in
order to keep certain individuals from participating in fidonet.

Tim Richardson found out first hand how that works.  So have
a few others - all in Zone 1.  All thanks to an echolist, which
is worshipped and adored by admirers of an Ice Queen.

Censorship is alive and well in Zone 1.  The free world, led by
Björn Felten, Michiel van der Vlist, and a band of brothers from
all corners, has wisely chosen not to follow in those footsteps.

--Lee

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
 * Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)