• Changing Zones

    From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to All on Fri Jun 11 13:35:16 2021
    Hello Everybody,

    Michiel van der Vlist has a neato idea that would make Janis Kracht
    very, very happy -

    "I may add that The UK, or what will be left of it in the near future
    has been drifting west for a couple of decades already. So maybe net
    250 should be moved to Z1 anyway..."

    Whattaya think, Janis?

    If that is not a gift horse, I do not know what is.
    Better take it now before the Flying Dutchman changes his mind.

    Question is, what will Z2 get in return?

    If I may make a suggestion, returning Louisiana to France (which
    sold us off not once, but twice) would be a nice gesture to show your appreciation ...

    --Lee

    --
    Hey hey! Ho ho! Donald Trump has got to go!
    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Lee Lofaso on Fri Jun 11 07:10:00 2021
    Lee Lofaso wrote to All <=-


    "I may add that The UK, or what will be left of it in the near future
    has been drifting west for a couple of decades already. So maybe net
    250 should be moved to Z1 anyway..."

    I say, collapse all of the zones into one zone. We're small enough, we're using IP for most message traffic and don't need a zone structure.

    Fidonet, properly structured, would make an active Othernet.


    ... Abandon desire
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Carlos Navarro on Sun Jun 13 10:45:32 2021
    I say, collapse all of the zones into one zone. We're small enough, CN>KW> we're using IP for most message traffic and don't need a zone
    structure.

    I agree... as long as zone 2 is the chosen one. };-)

    Kurt will not like that.

    But the thing is, bumping everything into one zone will break so much that it probably would kill the network.

    I don't think that changing the nodelist structure would make Fidonet echomail more active, rather the contrary.

    Correct.

    Those suggestions over the years from people to bump all the zones together happen just because they haven't given it a second thought, and in some cases probably not even a first thought either.

    \%/@rd
    --- DB4 - Jun 02 2021
    * Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Kurt Weiske on Sun Jun 13 12:17:38 2021
    Hi Kurt,

    On 2021-06-11 07:10:00, you wrote to Lee Lofaso:

    I say, collapse all of the zones into one zone. We're small enough,
    we're using IP for most message traffic and don't need a zone
    structure.

    Could the sysops in Z1 live under, for instance, a Russion ZC?

    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Björn Felten@2:203/2 to Wilfred van Velzen on Sun Jun 13 16:34:36 2021
    Could the sysops in Z1 live under, for instance, a Russion ZC?

    Remember that there are 74 million Trumpsters in USA alone... 8-)



    ..
    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Kees van Eeten@2:280/5003.4 to Bj÷rn Felten on Sun Jun 13 16:48:42 2021
    Hello Björn!

    13 Jun 21 16:34, you wrote to Wilfred van Velzen:

    Could the sysops in Z1 live under, for instance, a Russion ZC?

    Remember that there are 74 million Trumpsters in USA alone... 8-)

    But not all of them are in Fidonet.

    Kees
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5--b20180707
    * Origin: As for me, all I know is that, I know nothing. (2:280/5003.4)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Björn Felten on Sun Jun 13 18:45:30 2021
    Could the sysops in Z1 live under, for instance, a Russion ZC?

    Remember that there are 74 million Trumpsters in USA alone... 8-)

    That's 1% of the world's population ...
    --- DB4 - Jun 02 2021
    * Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)
  • From Björn Felten@2:203/2 to Ward Dossche on Sun Jun 13 20:02:58 2021
    Could the sysops in Z1 live under, for instance, a Russian ZC?

    Remember that there are 74 million Trumpsters in USA alone... 8-)

    That's 1% of the world's population ...

    But the question at the top here, didn't concern the entire world.



    ..
    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Björn Felten@2:203/2 to Kees van Eeten on Sun Jun 13 20:06:00 2021
    Remember that there are 74 million Trumpsters in USA alone... 8-)

    But not all of them are in Fidonet.

    Maybe they are coming, now that they've been banned from all the major social media? We sure have a better platform to offer than the failed blog they were supposed to use.



    ..
    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.16) Gecko/20101125
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Carlos Navarro on Sun Jun 13 08:31:00 2021
    Carlos Navarro wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    I say, collapse all of the zones into one zone. We're small enough,
    we're using IP for most message traffic and don't need a zone
    structure.

    I agree... as long as zone 2 is the chosen one. };-)

    Of course... :)

    Even said in jest, that sentiment is exactly why it wouldn't work.

    Fidonet, properly structured, would make an active Othernet.

    I don't think that changing the nodelist structure would make Fidonet echomail more active, rather the contrary.

    No, but removing the dead echoes and consolidating others would increase the ratio of messages to echoes. But, that's a thought for another day.
    ... Where are we now?
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Wilfred van Velzen on Sun Jun 13 08:32:00 2021
    Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    Could the sysops in Z1 live under, for instance, a Russion ZC?

    As long as he/she followed the rules as set forth by the body of sysops.


    ... Where are we now?
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kees van Eeten@2:280/5003.4 to Kurt Weiske on Sun Jun 13 21:26:56 2021
    Hello Kurt!

    13 Jun 21 08:31, you wrote to Carlos Navarro:

    No, but removing the dead echoes and consolidating others would increase the ratio of messages to echoes. But, that's a thought for another day.

    How do you know that an echo is dead?. Maybe, your corner is not
    connected to another corner, where the echo is alive and well.

    On my system Z1C is dead as a doornail.

    Kees

    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5--b20180707
    * Origin: As for me, all I know is that, I know nothing. (2:280/5003.4)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Kurt Weiske on Sun Jun 13 22:02:22 2021
    Hi Kurt,

    On 2021-06-13 08:32:00, you wrote to me:

    Could the sysops in Z1 live under, for instance, a Russion ZC?

    As long as he/she followed the rules as set forth by the body of sysops.

    Yeah, dream on... ;-)

    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.1.0.18-B20170815
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Ward Dossche on Sun Jun 13 22:47:50 2021
    Hello Ward,

    I say, collapse all of the zones into one zone. We're small enough,
    we're using IP for most message traffic and don't need a zone
    structure.

    I agree... as long as zone 2 is the chosen one. };-)

    Kurt will not like that.

    Fidonet, properly structured, will be a welcome change. Not only for
    Kurt, but also for most sysops in Fidonet. Not so much by a infinitely
    small number of sysops, who will not be named. But like somebody said
    a long time ago, you can't please everybody.

    But the thing is, bumping everything into one zone will break so much that it probably would kill the network.

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You almost killed me with that one! How many zones
    were there in Fidonet when it all began? Well, with only two sysops in,
    there could not have been many. And you know what? Everything worked
    find in Fidonet. For years. Until somebody by the name of Tom Jennings
    decided to be a dick. Which he already was. Decided it was necessary
    for Fidonet to have multiple zones. Nobody knows why. Except for Tom
    Jennings, whose excuse was 'technical reasons'. Not that he had any
    real reasons, as none existed.

    So now we have Ward Dossche's excuse. Not quite the same as Jennings'
    excuse, but amounting to the same thing.

    An unsupported and unsubstantiated claim, based on no evidence at all.

    I don't think that changing the nodelist structure would make CN>Fidonet
    echomail more active, rather the contrary.

    Correct.

    Based on what? Nonsense? Fidonet not needing multiple zones
    until Tom Jennings said so?

    Injecting or ingesting bleach will not cure anybody of stupidity.
    I am not even sure if there is a cure.

    Fidonet worked fine without zones for years. And Fidonet would
    work fine today without zones. So where is the need? The number
    of sysops in Fidonet has dropped hugely since the addition of
    zones. In fact, Fidonet has had to drop two zones due to lack
    of traffic, leaving only four zones left to play with. And we
    all know how little traffic there is in two of those zones.

    The argument for multiple zones his withered away to no argument
    at all. Time to ditch the zones. Move on to something better.

    Those suggestions over the years from people to bump all the zones together
    happen just because they haven't given it a second thought, and in some cases probably not even a first thought either.

    Fidonet, properly structured, is a good thing. Continuing the
    same structure at present is Fidonet suicide.

    --Lee

    --
    The people! Unite! Will never be defeated!
    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Carlos Navarro on Sun Jun 13 22:47:54 2021
    Hello Carlos,

    I say, collapse all of the zones into one zone. We're small enough,
    we're using IP for most message traffic and don't need a zone
    structure.

    I agree... as long as zone 2 is the chosen one. };-)

    "No zone. All zones. To be honest,I find the concept
    of zones is usually unhealthy." ~Doctor Who

    Fidonet worked fine for years without any zones. The addition of
    multiple zones was Tom Jennings idea. Not that he had any real reason
    to do so. His excuse was technical reasons. Never fully explained.
    IOW, he did it because he could.

    This was Tom Jennings' last act, before leaving Fidonet.

    E Pluribus Unum.

    That is my answer to Tom Jennings.

    Which should the same answer by all sysops in Fidonet.

    If Jennings is unable to read Latin, here is a phrase in English
    he should have no problem reading and understanding -

    "United we stand, divided we fall."

    Tom Jennings does not want to be part of Fidonet. And he does not have
    to be. Those who want to be here will stay. Those who do not want to be
    here will leave. But all who have left are certainly welcome to return.
    That includes Tom Jennings.

    If he wants to answer to my critiques of what he has done, he is
    welcome to do so here. In this forum. Or better yet, write an article
    in the Fidonews. Before I beat him to it.

    Fidonet, properly structured, would make an active Othernet.

    I don't think that changing the nodelist structure would make Fidonet echomail more active, rather the contrary.

    Like I said, everything worked fine in Fidonet with no zones at
    all. In fact, it worked so much better.

    You know the old saying "If it ain't broke, why fix it?"

    Ditch the zones. Fidonet, properly structured, will do great.

    --Lee

    --
    I think they bought a Jeep
    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Kurt Weiske on Sun Jun 13 22:48:04 2021
    Hello Kurt,

    "I may add that The UK, or what will be left of it in the near future
    has been drifting west for a couple of decades already. So maybe net
    250 should be moved to Z1 anyway..."

    I say, collapse all of the zones into one zone.

    Back to the future! Before there were zones of any kind!

    We're small enough, we're using IP for most message traffic and don't need a
    zone structure.

    Neither did Tom Jennings, until he created them and left Fidonet
    for greener pastures, wherever that might have been.

    Fidonet, properly structured, would make an active Othernet.

    Then why do a small handful of sysops hang on to something
    that clearly does not work? Does Tom Jennings (who left Fidonet
    decades ago) have that much control over them, like our former
    president (who remains unemployed) does over his highly devoted
    followers?

    Fidonet has been described by some as "controlled anarchy".
    Perhaps those sysops are right. Or at least having the right
    concept of what Fidonet should be (or become).

    Having a rigid structure is not the way to achieve that.

    --Lee

    --
    We're Great In Bed
    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Daniel PATH@2:371/52 to Lee Lofaso on Sun Jun 13 22:08:22 2021
    for greener pastures, wherever that might have been.

    Fidonet, properly structured, would make an active Othernet.

    i don't know whats the problem here. fidonet IS working and it's structure should be well as it survived 40 years..
    :)




    --
    dp

    --- Maximus/2 3.01
    * Origin: Roon's BBS - Budapest, HUNGARY (2:371/52)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Kees van Eeten on Sun Jun 13 14:27:36 2021
    Re: Changing Zones
    By: Kees van Eeten to Kurt Weiske on Sun Jun 13 2021 09:26 pm

    How do you know that an echo is dead?. Maybe, your corner is not
    connected to another corner, where the echo is alive and well.

    Echo stats. Lots of people post them.
    --- SBBSecho 3.14-Win32
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Björn Felten on Mon Jun 14 12:42:58 2021
    Hello Bj”rn,

    Could the sysops in Z1 live under, for instance, a Russion ZC?

    Remember that there are 74 million Trumpsters in USA alone... 8-)

    And 91 million non-Trumpsters.

    Question is, which group do you want to recruit to become
    the next generation of Fidonetters?

    --Lee

    --
    You're fired, Donald!

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Kurt Weiske on Mon Jun 14 13:16:18 2021
    Could the sysops in Z1 live under, for instance, a Russion ZC?

    As long as he/she followed the rules as set forth by the body of sysops.

    You do realize, I hope, that the majority of sysops 'are' Russian ... ? :-)

    \%/@rd
    --- DB4 - Jun 02 2021
    * Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Lee Lofaso on Mon Jun 14 13:20:02 2021
    Continuing the same structure at present is Fidonet suicide.

    Still no nodenumber I see?

    \%/@rd
    --- DB4 - Jun 02 2021
    * Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Ward Dossche on Mon Jun 14 07:16:00 2021
    Ward Dossche wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    Could the sysops in Z1 live under, for instance, a Russion ZC?

    As long as he/she followed the rules as set forth by the body of sysops.

    You do realize, I hope, that the majority of sysops 'are' Russian ... ? :-)

    I don't care what nationality the ZC is, as long as there's some semblance
    of rules followed. At the end of the day, this is just a hobby.


    ... Accept advice
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Daniel PATH on Mon Jun 14 17:20:00 2021
    Hello Daniel,

    for greener pastures, wherever that might have been.

    Fidonet, properly structured, would make an active Othernet.

    i don't know whats the problem here. fidonet IS working and it's structure should be well as it survived 40 years.. >:)

    Fidonet survived due to the many dedicated sysops who remained to
    maintain it after the masses left for the internet. Having multiple
    zones was more of a hindrance rather than an asset during those
    times, and should have been abandoned long ago. So why not return
    to basics and rebuild from there?

    --Lee

    --
    Why not enjoy the go?
    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Flavio Bessa@4:801/188 to Lee Lofaso on Mon Jun 14 12:54:30 2021
    On 14/06/21 12:20, Lee Lofaso -> Daniel PATH wrote:

    Fidonet survived due to the many dedicated sysops who remained to
    maintain it after the masses left for the internet. Having multiple
    zones was more of a hindrance rather than an asset during those
    times, and should have been abandoned long ago. So why not return
    to basics and rebuild from there?

    I don't see the hindrance that you mentioned.

    What would be the biggest benefit?


    --
    _
    ..-----________________--_ ________.--'-`--._____ Flavio Bessa \____==================_) \_'===================` 4:801/188
    _,--___.-|__|-.______|=====/ `---' fcbessa@gmail.com
    `---------._ ~~~~~| Rio de Janeiro
    `-._ - - - ,' Brasil
    \_____,-' Visit Zone4 Website at: https://fido.bbs.docksud.com.ar/wiki/doku.php?id=fidonet:nodos
    --- Thunderbird/MacOS 78.6.0
    * Origin: Andromeda - Saturn's Orbit NNTP Gateway, Brazil (4:801/188)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Flavio Bessa on Tue Jun 15 00:31:34 2021
    Flavio,

    I don't see the hindrance that you mentioned.

    What would be the biggest benefit?

    Don't feed the troll...

    \%/@rd
    --- DB4 - Jun 14 2021
    * Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Ward Dossche on Tue Jun 15 02:26:52 2021
    Hello Ward,

    Continuing the same structure at present is Fidonet suicide.

    Still no nodenumber I see?

    So?

    --Lee

    --
    Lock him up!

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/1.58 to Ward Dossche on Mon Jun 14 20:16:00 2021
    Hello Ward Dossche!

    ** On Monday 14.06.21 - 13:16, Ward Dossche wrote to Kurt Weiske:

    You do realize, I hope, that the majority of sysops 'are'
    Russian ... ? :-)

    But, can that be verified? It seems that the vast number of
    telnettable (verifiable) bbses are in North America as per the
    Geographical Distribution pie chart here:

    https://www.ipingthereforeiam.com/bbs/

    --
    ../|ug

    --- OpenXP 5.0.50
    * Origin: --> . <-- (2:221/1.58)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Lee Lofaso on Tue Jun 15 11:18:26 2021
    On 15/06/2021 01:20, 2203/2 wrote:

     DP>> i don't know whats the problem here. fidonet IS working and it's structure
     DP>> should be well as it survived 40 years.. >:)

    Fidonet survived due to the many dedicated sysops who remained to
    maintain it after the masses left for the internet. Having multiple
    zones was more of a hindrance rather than an asset during those
    times, and should have been abandoned long ago. So why not return
    to basics and rebuild from there?


    Do you know this personally or just from hear-say? What problems have YOU had with the multiple zones in Fidonet?

    --
    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbi
    * Origin: Bucca, QLD (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Lee Lofaso on Tue Jun 15 11:20:58 2021
    On 15/06/2021 10:26, 2203/2 wrote:

     LL>>> Continuing the same structure at present is Fidonet suicide.

     WD>> Still no nodenumber I see?

    So?

    All of your rhetoric, it's based on hear-say. You have no first hand experience to call on when making recommendations.

    --
    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbi
    * Origin: Bucca, QLD (3:640/305)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Flavio Bessa on Tue Jun 15 11:43:02 2021
    Hello Flavio,

    Fidonet survived due to the many dedicated sysops who remained to
    maintain it after the masses left for the internet. Having multiple
    zones was more of a hindrance rather than an asset during those
    times, and should have been abandoned long ago. So why not return
    to basics and rebuild from there?

    I don't see the hindrance that you mentioned.

    In the beginning, nothing hindered Fidonet. Not even zones.
    And then, the alleged "founder" of Fidonet created clones of
    the original, calling them "zones". Once he completed his
    work he left Fidonet, never to return.

    Sysops dropped like flies, going from a high of 34,000+ to
    less than 1,000. Lost two whole zones, with another two zones
    on the blink, leaving only two zones with a sizeable number
    of sysops remaining.

    What would be the biggest benefit?

    I'll give you the 1945 version of a popular children's
    nursery rhyme -

    Ten little Indian boys went out to dine;
    One choked his little self and then there were nine.

    Nine little Indian boys sat up very late;
    One overslept himself and then there were eight.

    Eight little Indian boys travelling in Devon;
    One said he'd stay there and then there were seven.

    Seven little Indian boys chopping up sticks;
    One chopped himself in halves and then there were six.

    Six little Indian boys playing with a hive;
    A bumblebee stung one of them and then there were five.

    Five little Indian boys going in for law;
    One got in Chancery and then there were four.

    Four little Indian boys going out to sea;
    A red herring swallowed one and then there were three.

    Three little Indian boys walking in the zoo;
    A big bear hugged one and then there were two.

    Two little Indian boys sitting in the sun;
    One got all frizzled up and then there was one.

    One little Indian boy left all alone;
    He went and hanged himself and then there were none.

    Having multiple zones is not going to entice others
    to join Fidonet. What is needed is for all sysops to
    encourage others to join Fidonet, making it possible
    for Fidonet to grow.

    Sysops and probationary sysops should be free to
    be sysops within the geographical location of their
    own choice, not where others might want them to be.
    With no zone, or one zone covering all geographical
    areas, makes all sysops responsible for their own
    actions, regardless of where they are located.

    Ditching zones is a win for everybody, sysops and
    participants alike. Ditto with elists ...

    --Lee

    --
    If PBS won't do it, who will?

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Kees van Eeten@2:280/5003.4 to Lee Lofaso on Tue Jun 15 14:13:28 2021
    Hello Lee!

    15 Jun 21 11:43, you wrote to Flavio Bessa:

    In the beginning, nothing hindered Fidonet. Not even zones.
    And then, the alleged "founder" of Fidonet created clones of
    the original, calling them "zones". Once he completed his
    work he left Fidonet, never to return.

    Your remarks do not match the history of Fidonet. You are advised to read
    the published copy of Fidonews from the period you are referring to.

    Moreover, I doubt you have the knowledge to judge the technical challenges
    that Fidonet had to meet at that time.

    Readup, show some technical competence by operating your own fidoneode,
    or just shut up.

    Kees

    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5--b20180707
    * Origin: As for me, all I know is that, I know nothing. (2:280/5003.4)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to David Drummond on Tue Jun 15 20:42:24 2021
    Hello David,

    i don't know whats the problem here. fidonet IS working and it's
    structure
    should be well as it survived 40 years.. >:)

    Fidonet survived due to the many dedicated sysops who remained to
    maintain it after the masses left for the internet. Having multiple
    zones was more of a hindrance rather than an asset during those
    times, and should have been abandoned long ago. So why not return
    to basics and rebuild from there?


    Do you know this personally or just from hear-say?

    I met a sysop. Once upon a time. He kicked me off his board.
    And then I never saw him again.

    What problems have YOU had with the multiple zones in Fidonet?

    Just one. But that problem has since been resolved, with the
    dissolution of his board.

    (This was back in the 90s ...)

    --Lee

    --
    Every Bottom Needs A Top

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to David Drummond on Tue Jun 15 20:42:30 2021
    Hello David,

    Continuing the same structure at present is Fidonet suicide.

    Still no nodenumber I see?

    So?

    All of your rhetoric, it's based on hear-say. You have no first hand experience to call on when making recommendations.

    That's right! My opinion is totally unbiased! The very best kind!

    --Lee

    --
    Work sets you free.

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Kees van Eeten on Tue Jun 15 21:18:48 2021
    Hello Kees,

    In the beginning, nothing hindered Fidonet. Not even zones.
    And then, the alleged "founder" of Fidonet created clones of
    the original, calling them "zones". Once he completed his
    work he left Fidonet, never to return.

    Your remarks do not match the history of Fidonet.

    Where is Tom Jennings? Not anywhere to be found in Fidonet.

    You are advised to read the published copy of Fidonews from the period you
    are referring to.

    "In the beginning" needs no cite. The only hindrance that could
    have existed being the imaginations of those who created Fidonet.
    Which also needed no cite.

    And everybody knows the alleged "founder" of Fidonet left the
    building, just like Elvis, never to return.

    Moreover, I doubt you have the knowledge to judge the technical challenges
    that Fidonet had to meet at that time.

    It doesn't take a rocket scientist to count to six.
    Or to subtract two from six. Not sure if anybody in
    Fidonet was capable of multiplication or division.

    Readup, show some technical competence by operating your own fidoneode, or just shut up.

    Why is it necessary to have zones in order to own a node number?
    Especially since no zone was needed in the beginning?

    You see, the way it worked in the beginning was really simple.
    First there was node number 1. Then there was node number 2 ...

    --Lee

    --
    Because not everyone likes licorice

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Lee Lofaso on Wed Jun 16 15:18:36 2021
    On 16/06/2021 04:42, 2203/2 wrote:

     LL>>>>> Continuing the same structure at present is Fidonet suicide.

     WD>>>> Still no nodenumber I see?

     LL>>> So?

     DD>> All of your rhetoric, it's based on hear-say. You have no first hand
     DD>> experience to call on when making recommendations.

    That's right! My opinion is totally unbiased! The very best kind!

    As unbiased as that may be, without a nodenumber you have no "voting rights" in the operation of Fidonet.

    --
    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbi
    * Origin: Bucca, QLD (3:640/305)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Nigel Reed on Wed Jun 16 15:20:22 2021
    On 16/06/2021 08:20, 1124/5016 wrote:

    I have a feeling that most sysops don't really care as long as echomail and
    netmail flows. The main problem faced by most sysops is a lack of users.

    Fidonet is pretty much set it and forget it if you do it properly. Personally, I don't care if there's 1 zone or 6 zones. I do care that my netmail will
    reach Inner Mongolia :)

    Since you first became node listed how many netmails have you had the urge to send to Inner Mongolia?

    --
    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbi
    * Origin: Bucca, QLD (3:640/305)
  • From Nigel Reed@1:124/5016 to Lee Lofaso on Tue Jun 15 17:17:22 2021
    Lee wrote:
    If I may make a suggestion, returning Louisiana to France (which
    sold us off not once, but twice) would be a nice gesture to show your appreciation ...

    You'll also have to take Kansas and Nebraska if you want Louisiana.
    --- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
    * Origin: End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com (1:124/5016)
  • From Nigel Reed@1:124/5016 to Lee Lofaso on Tue Jun 15 17:20:50 2021
    Lee wrote:
    Hello Ward,

    I say, collapse all of the zones into one zone. We're small enough,
    we're using IP for most message traffic and don't need a zone
    structure.

    I agree... as long as zone 2 is the chosen one. };-)

    Kurt will not like that.

    Fidonet, properly structured, will be a welcome change. Not only for
    Kurt, but also for most sysops in Fidonet. Not so much by a infinitely
    small number of sysops, who will not be named. But like somebody said
    a long time ago, you can't please everybody.

    I have a feeling that most sysops don't really care as long as echomail and netmail flows. The main problem faced by most sysops is a lack of users.

    Fidonet is pretty much set it and forget it if you do it properly. Personally, I don't care if there's 1 zone or 6 zones. I do care that my netmail will
    reach Inner Mongolia :)
    --- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
    * Origin: End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com (1:124/5016)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Nigel Reed on Thu Jun 17 01:21:36 2021
    Hello Nigel,

    I say, collapse all of the zones into one zone. We're small enough,
    we're using IP for most message traffic and don't need a zone
    structure.

    I agree... as long as zone 2 is the chosen one. };-)

    Kurt will not like that.

    Fidonet, properly structured, will be a welcome change. Not only for
    Kurt, but also for most sysops in Fidonet. Not so much by a infinitely
    small number of sysops, who will not be named. But like somebody said
    a long time ago, you can't please everybody.

    I have a feeling that most sysops don't really care as long as echomail and
    netmail flows. The main problem faced by most sysops is a lack of users.

    Why should they care? Its their board. They can do whatever they want
    with it. Being lord and master of their own board, nobody can tell them
    what to do or how to do it. As such, each individual sysop holds the
    key to making Fidonet a successful network.

    Fidonet is pretty much set it and forget it if you do it properly.

    Set by who? Or what? Fidonet has no organization structure. No
    constitution or set of bylaws. Not even P4 counts, as nobody was
    brave enough to sign their own John Hancock on it, and it was
    never passed and ratified by any zone. In fact, it was unanimously
    rejected by zone 2, the only zone that had held a sanctioned vote
    on the matter.

    So how do sysops go about structuring Fidonet "properly"?

    Personally, I don't care if there's 1 zone or 6 zones. I do care that my netmail will reach Inner Mongolia :)

    P4 was written by an extremely small number of people, who may or
    may not have been sysops. A handful of sysops within zone 1 tried
    to impose P4 on all zones, against the wishes of sysops in other
    zones (as shown by a sanctioned vote in zone 2).

    Bottom line, structuring Fidonet "properly" is like herding cats.

    --Lee

    --
    Pork. The One You Love.

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to David Drummond on Thu Jun 17 01:21:44 2021
    Hello David,

    Continuing the same structure at present is Fidonet suicide.

    Still no nodenumber I see?

    So?

    All of your rhetoric, it's based on hear-say. You have no first hand
    experience to call on when making recommendations.

    That's right! My opinion is totally unbiased! The very best kind!

    As unbiased as that may be, without a nodenumber you have no "voting rights"
    in the operation of Fidonet.

    Sysops who sponsor me on their boards have all the "voting rights"
    they could ever want or need, and are welcome to speak for or against
    me without prejudice.

    Of course, they can do that anyway even without sponsoring me on
    their boards ...

    --Lee

    --
    What can brown do for you?

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Carlos Navarro on Wed Jun 16 06:51:00 2021
    Carlos Navarro wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    I agree... as long as zone 2 is the chosen one. };-)

    Of course... :)

    Even said in jest, that sentiment is exactly why it wouldn't work.

    I was joking, of course.

    What sentiment you mean?

    The last time I brought this up, the debate didn't get past whether to use Zone 1 or Zone 2 as the number of Fidonet's zone in a unified structure.

    Ok, so you agree that merging/changing zones is not -currently- a good idea.

    On the contrary, but I'm being naive. Removing the zone structure wouldn't remove long-standing geographic feuds, which gets tiresome. Those feuds
    would continue unabated.

    As for the echos -- maybe, as long as /consolidating/ does not mean renaming active echos... };-)

    I'm also concerned that there are Fido BBSes running on auto-pilot. I could envision making a zone or echolist change that would require a change to the BBSes, and having a fraction of the current BBSes drop off, or the sysop
    pull the plug because it was fine running as-is but didn't merit putting any time into the BBS.

    If I now had a BBS (or another kind of user-interface) I would probably "hide" to users the dead echos, giving better visibility to those that
    are more or less active.

    I do that now, but it requires work to look through posts in the STATS echo
    to see if an echo that I didn't have visible picked up in traffic. It'd be easier and less apt to miss message traffic to have fewer echoes available
    on many systems.


    ... Abandon desire
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to David Drummond on Wed Jun 16 07:36:00 2021
    David Drummond wrote to Nigel Reed <=-

    Since you first became node listed how many netmails have you had the
    urge to send to Inner Mongolia?

    Part of what compelled me to join Fidonet back in 1992 was being able to
    route email around the world on a hobbyist network run by dedicated
    volunteers using nothing more than DOS boxes with dial-up modems.

    That I could turn the same hardware that ran a single-user desktop
    environment for me into a community system that could reach Inner Mongolia with a phone call was pretty heady stuff, indeed.

    I'd like to find a hobby nowadays that provided that same sense of wonder. Until then, a network of crappy, cast-off boxes connecting people around the world is still pretty nifty.


    ... No appropriate tagline.
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)
  • From Kees van Eeten@2:280/5003.4 to Carlos Navarro on Sat Jun 19 10:46:28 2021
    Hello Carlos!

    19 Jun 21 09:57, you wrote to Kurt Weiske:

    But back to your zone merge suggestion. What would be gain from that change, other than having only one ZC? (be it Belgian, Canadian, Russian or whatever...)

    What makes you think, that merging Zones is viable, in a network, where
    merging nets seems almost impossible, although it is suggested in policy.


    Kees

    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5--b20180707
    * Origin: As for me, all I know is that, I know nothing. (2:280/5003.4)
  • From Oli@2:280/464.47 to Anna Christina Nass on Sat Jun 19 15:50:54 2021
    Anna wrote (2021-06-16):

    You see, the way it worked in the beginning was really simple.
    First there was node number 1. Then there was node number 2 ...

    Then, why are networks/regions neccessary?

    for the dumbfucks to rule over their little digital kingdom. fidonet was always about status and power and was killed by it ...

    ---
    * Origin: . (2:280/464.47)
  • From Oli@2:280/464.47 to Kurt Weiske on Sat Jun 19 15:53:00 2021
    Kurt wrote (2021-06-14):

    You do realize, I hope, that the majority of sysops 'are' Russian
    ... ? :-)

    I don't care what nationality the ZC is, as long as there's some semblance of rules followed. At the end of the day, this is just a hobby.

    what rules?

    ---
    * Origin: . (2:280/464.47)
  • From David Drummond@3:640/305 to Oli on Sun Jun 20 09:54:34 2021
    On 20/06/2021 00:50, 2280/464.47 wrote:

     ACN>> Then, why are networks/regions neccessary?

    for the dumbfucks to rule over their little digital kingdom. fidonet was always about status and power and was killed by it ...

    I'm not dead yet.

    --
    Regards
    David

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbi
    * Origin: Bucca, QLD (3:640/305)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Oli on Sun Jun 20 12:24:12 2021
    Then, why are networks/regions neccessary?

    for the dumbfucks to rule over their little digital kingdom. fidonet was always about status and power and was killed by it ...

    Power? ?? ???

    Which power? 220V?

    \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - Jun 14 2021
    * Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed (2:292/854)
  • From Nigel Reed@1:124/5016 to David Drummond on Sun Jun 20 07:57:12 2021
    David wrote:
    On 16/06/2021 08:20, 1124/5016 wrote:

    I have a feeling that most sysops don't really care as long as echomail and
    netmail flows. The main problem faced by most sysops is a lack of users.

    Fidonet is pretty much set it and forget it if you do it properly. Personally, I don't care if there's 1 zone or 6 zones. I do care that my netmail will
    reach Inner Mongolia :)

    Since you first became node listed how many netmails have you had the urge to send to Inner Mongolia?

    The urge is always there, the lack of destination hampers any attempt,
    however.
    --- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
    * Origin: End Of The Line BBS - endofthelinebbs.com (1:124/5016)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Kees van Eeten on Sun Jun 20 17:58:10 2021
    Hello Kees,

    But back to your zone merge suggestion. What would be gain from that
    change, other than having only one ZC? (be it Belgian, Canadian, Russian
    or whatever...)

    What makes you think, that merging Zones is viable, in a network, where merging nets seems almost impossible, although it is suggested in policy.

    I dunno. But then, I'm not Carlos.

    --Lee

    --
    No justice! No peace!

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Oli on Sun Jun 20 17:58:30 2021
    Hello Oli,

    You see, the way it worked in the beginning was really simple.
    First there was node number 1. Then there was node number 2 ...

    Then, why are networks/regions neccessary?

    for the dumbfucks to rule over their little digital kingdom. fidonet was always about status and power and was killed by it ...

    +1

    --Lee

    --
    NO MASKS REQUIRED. THIS IS A NO-FEAR ZONE.

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to Oli on Sun Jun 20 17:58:38 2021
    Hello Oli,

    You do realize, I hope, that the majority of sysops 'are' Russian
    ... ? :-)

    I don't care what nationality the ZC is, as long as there's some
    semblance
    of rules followed. At the end of the day, this is just a hobby.

    what rules?

    There are no rules.

    --Lee

    --
    I won't fan the flames of hate, ~Joe Biden

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Lee Lofaso@2:203/2 to David Drummond on Sun Jun 20 17:58:46 2021
    Hello David,

    Then, why are networks/regions neccessary?

    for the dumbfucks to rule over their little digital kingdom. fidonet was
    always about status and power and was killed by it ...

    I'm not dead yet.

    Not to worry. You'll get your turn.

    --Lee

    --
    Pork: the other white meat

    --- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se (2:203/2)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/700 to Carlos Navarro on Sat Jun 19 07:32:00 2021
    Carlos Navarro wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    Can you remember when and in what echo was this discussed? I'd like to read that if I can find it somewhere.

    It might have been this one.

    Ok, so you agree that merging/changing zones is not -currently- a
    good idea.

    No, I think it's a good idea, but I think it's an uphill battle to
    implement.

    I'd like to see a Fidonet with active nodes, a simpler structure reflective
    of the smaller size and lack of need for dialup to move packets and an echolist where dead echoes are dropped or consolidated into other echoes to create fewer echoes with more message traffic.

    On the contrary, but I'm being naive. Removing the zone structure
    wouldn't remove long-standing geographic feuds, which gets tiresome.
    Those feuds would continue unabated.

    I thought that was a thing of the past. AFAIK we don't have those in
    zone 2 (though I don't know for sure).

    There's still a lot of sniping between zones, maybe not so much within
    zones.







    But back to your zone merge suggestion. What would be gain from that change, other than having only one ZC? (be it Belgian, Canadian,
    Russian or whatever...)

    Carlos
    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20180707
    * Origin: Costa Blanca, Spain (2:341/234.1)

    ... Where are we? When are we? Is this now?
    --- MultiMail/DOS v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/700)