Text 1662, 89 rader
Skriven 2008-03-26 22:05:11 av Carol Shenkenberger (602.ftsc_pub)
   Kommentar till text 1631 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: MakeNl_Ng
=================
    
 >  >> It is my understanding that Janis is running the new MakeNl. As is
 >  >> Russell. Malcolm has been ready for years. The only one that has
 >  >> not got the new Make running is Ward.
 > 
 >  CS> Ok, how many of them have the keywords set to allow 'allowunpub' to
 >  CS> pass?
 > 
 > For the regular distribution: probably none. When all they have to do is fli
 > that bit, I'd say they are "ready" wouldn you?

Dunno.  Ward says he needs a little time.  Perhaps a plan to adapt from?  I
dont mind drfting up something that I think might work and sending it off to
them to look over.  They can fine tune what I missed then use the results as
they see fit.

 > Ward has a lot more to do then just flio that bit, hence we are wating for h

I know.  Thats what I've been saying.

 >  CS> P4 allows for Zone policies.
 > 
 > That is politics. Has nothing to do with technicakl standards.


It's part of P4.

 
 >  CS> Did you think no other zone also had such?
 > 
 > The only official IC approved regional policy I know of the R24REGPOL
 > http://www.vlist.eu/downloads/policys/regp100.024


We arent talking regional bit zonal.  Errflags is a zonal one.

 
 > There may have been more.
 > 
 >  CS> I assure you they do.  The zones split in mamy ways over a decade of
 >  CS> no active IC. Pretending that doesnt exist is a non-starting point.
 > 
 > That does not mean that I can not have a problem with zones going there own 
 > and arbitraily give their own meaning to documented standards.

Well, it happened starting around 1990.

 > Why do you want to be a part of the FTSC team if you do bot want to uphold i
 > standards?

 >  >> What I am trying to convey is that FTSC members should set a good
 >  >> example in correctly living up to the documented FSTC standards.
 > 
 >  CS> Your job is just to be spokesman for the group when we need one.  You
 >  CS> do not have to right to dictate to FTSC members that they should not
 >  CS> (or can not, or are 'wrong') to follow any policy in effect in their
 >  CS> zone.
 > 
 > I am not dictating anything. I am just pointing out that one can expect from
 > loyal member of the team to set the good example and adhere to documeted
 > standards.

Loyal members?  IE:  agree with you on all things?  Well, I can and have worke 
d with you many a time.  I even got the modem redundancy set into the FTSC
docs before you were a member by getting the data from you and some
translations of things i didnt know.

This doesnt mean we are in agreement on all, nor should we be.  Your recent
stance since a non-vote on FTSC lead, is to take the position to things it
never was before and you are getting feedback that it isnt all that well
liked. Granted Mark Lewis (lots of stress there stil I am sure) has been a
bit more 'rude' but you are being very pushy.

 >  CS>   Janis has posted at least twice in here that I am not to shift
 >  CS> my nodes outside Z1 normal methods.
 > 
 > Then maybe you are caught in a situation where you try to serve two masters
 > that want different things form you?

Classic sample of you just being wrong but not able to see it.  I highly
suspect you just want me to quit.  Your actions and words definately lead
there.  ON the other hand, I'm getting lots of netmails from others asking me
not to, as they fear what would happen without a voice of sanity left on the
FTSC.  Think about it.  I'm not the one who caused the impression that my
leaving would leave the FTSC without a voice of sanity.
                  xxcarol
         
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS telnet://shenks.synchro.net (1:275/100)