Text 1726, 136 rader
Skriven 2008-03-27 22:21:28 av Carol Shenkenberger (667.ftsc_pub)
   Kommentar till text 1693 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: MakeNl_Ng
=================
    
 >  >>  CS> P4 allows for Zone policies.
 >  >>
 >  >> That is politics. Has nothing to do with technicakl standards.
 > 
 >  CS> It's part of P4.
 > 
 > And has nothing to do with FTSC standards.

The FTSC has no allowance to contravene P4.  If a zone (such as Z2 had for a
long time) has a zone policy, FTSC has no right to overrule it.  They can
'suggest' it, but can not cancel it.

 >  CS> We arent talking regional bit zonal.
 > 
 > It is the only example of an officially approved local policy that I know of
 > There may be or have been other local policies on some level, but I am not
 > aware of any officially approved ones.

Talk to Ward on Z2 zone policy of the past.  It;s why you folks there among
other things, do not use 000- codes.

 >  CS>   Errflags is a zonal one.
 > 
 > Errflags is a tool to help produce a clean and technically correct nodelist.
 > is no more a (zonal) policy that MakeNl is. It is just a tool.

ERRFL:AGS is a program built around Z2 policy. Talk to Ward to get a copy.

 > Then provide me with an example of an officially approved zonal policy.

Talk to Ward.  Ask Janis what she approved for Z1.

 >  >>  CS> The zones split in mamy ways over a decade of no active IC.
 > 
 > The presence of an IC has never made much difference as no single zone ever
 > really wanted to cooperate with any IC doing any real interzonal coordinatio

Nice dive.  Facts: The zones do not operate the same and pretrnding so is
*why* the ZCC were asked to be in the FTSC echo.  To keep from mistakes the
FTSC might make that may potentially decimate a zone.

 >  >>  CS> Your job is just to be spokesman for the group when we need one.
 >  >>  CS> You do not have to right to dictate to FTSC members that they
 >  >>  CS> should not (or can not, or are 'wrong') to follow any policy
 >  >>  CS> in effect in their  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.
 > 
 >  CS> Loyal members?  IE:  agree with you on all things?
 > 
 > No, you can disagree if you want or feel the need. But I think it is reasona
 > to ask that FTSC members adhere to the documented and agreed upon standards.

No, you have specifically asked me to shift the nodelist of net275 in zone 1
to meet standards not in effect in Z1.  I have stated I will not do so.  My
ZC agrees I should stay with Z1 policy.

Were I in Z2, I would use Z2 standards for them.  I am not in Z2.  Werre I
in Z3, I would use Z3 policy for them.  I am not in Z3.  ETC.

 
 >  CS> This doesnt mean we are in agreement on all, nor should we be.  Your
 >  CS> recent stance since a non-vote on FTSC lead, is to take the position
 >  CS> to things it never was before and you are getting feedback that it
 >  CS> isnt all that well liked.
 > 
 > From non FTSC members....

From members too.

 > It is not my job to please everyone. It is my job to see that the FTSC can d
 > its assigned task. If that means stepping on some toes, so be it. It is not
 > something I like, but unfortunately it can not always be avoided.

I can respect that with no problem.  Can you accept that the zones do not
operate the aame and different patterns developed that are now embeded and
needed for operation of those zones other than your own?

As a spokesperson when we ask for your to post something, you are doing fine.
As a voice for all FTSC, you are not doing so fine and scare me.  I can
understand the difference in a personal 'ideal' and job related presentation
whern the jon related one has to have a wider view.

Personal, I'd like to get rid of all 000- listings totally.  Job, have to
recognize until proper things are in place, they are needed.

 
 >  CS> Granted Mark Lewis (lots of stress there stil I am sure) has been a
 >  CS> bit more 'rude' but you are being very pushy.
 > 
 > I am trying to point out that the FTSC is something more than a sandpit wher
 > bunchs of semi anarchist individuals each build there own castle. It is a te
 > and I think it is only fair to make the candidates and the voters aware of
 > this. There is - in addition to other qualities - the aspect of "fitting in
 > with the team". Perhaps some people should take some time to consider this
 > angle...

I believe you have made the voters quite aware of just where we all fit in.

 >  >> Then maybe you are caught in a situation where you try to serve two
 >  >> masters that want different things form you?
 > 
 >  CS> Classic sample of you just being wrong but not able to see it.
 > 
 > On the contrary, I think I hit the nail right on the head. I think it is you
 > who from the position of having two hats on top of your head - are unable to
 > see there really are two hats of different colour. You seem to be unable to 
 > it, or unwilling to admit it. That too is classic you know...

Belive what you wish, but you have no mandate to ever ask any FTSC member to
abrogate their zone policy.  You have asked me to do so.  For the record, I
refuse to abrogate Z1 policy.  I will privately work to get no 000- listings
in there, but for the time being, they are and I will follow the directions
of my zone on how to use them.

If that makes me unsuitable FTSC material by your eyes, so be it.  If I get
voted down for it, I accept it.

 >  CS> as they fear what would happen without a voice of sanity left on the
 >  CS> FTSC.  Think about it.  I'm not the one who caused the impression that
 >  CS> my leaving would leave the FTSC without a voice of sanity.
 > 
 > Some may have that impression. The fact that already some negative votes are
 > cast, illustrates that there are also some who feel the FTSC would function
 > better as a team if not every candidate were elected.

Some people think a unified team will get more done and there is some value
in that if the subject is the same across the board.  For me, I worry that Z4
and Z5 arent represented. I keep (and have since 1995) an eye as best as i
could on their nodelist concerns.
                  xxcarol
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
 * Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS telnet://shenks.synchro.net (1:275/100)