----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 5 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 5 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 3 | |
----------------------------------------------
Ballots Received
----------------
RC25
RC33
RC18
RC19
RC12
Andrew
FTSC Election Coordinator
----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 5 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 5 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 3 | |
----------------------------------------------
I Vote for James Coyle 1:123/120, Dont if I can But Hey what the heck.
I know go look in the rules.
Sam
Helmut also voted, quite a long time ago:
"Please accept the Austrian (2:31) vote"
Helmut also voted, quite a long time ago:Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC. Can you have him repost?
"Please accept the Austrian (2:31) vote"
Helmut also voted, quite a long time ago:
"Please accept the Austrian (2:31) vote"
Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC. Can you have him
repost?
Sent him a Netmail.
This was his post:
==== Begin "helm" ====
= ftsc_public (2:310/31) ====================================================== Msg : 1936 of 1969 From : Helmut Renner 2:313/41 28 Feb 2022 00:35 To : Election Coordinator Subj : Vote ===========================================================================
==== @MSGID: 2:313/41 621c1972
Pleace accept the Austrian (2:31) vote
i can confirm that this post was received here on that date...
From: Helmut Renner
To: Election Coordinator
Subj: Vote
Date: 02/28/22 00:35
@MSGID: 2:313/41 621c1972
@PATH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 229/426
Pleace accept the Austrian (2:31) vote
----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No | |----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | X | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | X | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | X | |
----------------------------------------------
br
Helmut
--- FleetStreet 1.27.3.8d
* Origin: DonHelmi's Datendienst (2:313/41)
Hello Richard!
04 Mar 22 08:38, you wrote to me:
Helmut also voted, quite a long time ago:
"Please accept the Austrian (2:31) vote"
Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC. Can you have him repost?
Hello Sam!
NAK. You are not listed as an RC, and therefore are not an eligible voter.
Regards,
Hello Sam!
NAK. You are not listed as an RC, and therefore are not an eligible
voter.
Regards,
Well thats not no fun we should be able to vote also.
Rules need to be changed.
Sam
Bye for now...
Sam
--- Ezycom V3.00 01FB064B
* Origin: Deep Space Gateway BBS Running EZYCOM V3.0 (1:123/120)
Well thats not no fun we should be able to vote also.
Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.
Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.
Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound for me, because it still has not been received here. I searched my entire FTSC_PUBLIC
message base. I note that last year Helmut's ballot arrived a week after the
polls had closed, indicating that somewhere in the PATH between him and me there is an issue.
Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.
Being in the SEEN-BY doesn't prove anything. In the worst scenario, this may indicate a SEEN-BY lockout in transit due to some broken link.
Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound for
me, because it still has not been received here. I searched my entire FTSC_PUBLIC message base. I note that last year Helmut's ballot
arrived a week after the polls had closed, indicating that somewhere
in the PATH between him and me there is an issue.
Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound for
me, because it still has not been received here. I searched my entire FTSC_PUBLIC message base. I note that last year Helmut's ballot
arrived a week after the polls had closed, indicating that somewhere
in the PATH between him and me there is an issue.
Do you have relatives in the Netherlands?
The FTSC members require a level compentcy to do their work which is
why only RC's can vote as they are assumed to have a better level of compentcy to judge the canidates.
Having all of Fidonet being able to vote would just complicate the process. Your RC should have asked for opinions from the nodes in his Region just like mine did, but in the end it's his call.
Hello Ward!
06 Mar 22 20:53, you wrote to me:
Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.
Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.
Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound for me, because it still has not been received here. I searched my entire FTSC_PUBLIC message base. I note that last year Helmut's ballot
arrived a week after the polls had closed, indicating that somewhere in the PATH between him and me there is an issue.
Andrew
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20180707
* Origin: Phoenix BBS * phoenix.bnbbbs.net (1:320/219)
Being in the SEEN-BY doesn't prove anything. In the worst scenario,Do you have relatives in the Netherlands?
this may indicate a SEEN-BY lockout in transit due to some broken
link.
Which means that someone still has it sitting in their outbound
for me, because it still has not been received here. I searched
my entire FTSC_PUBLIC message base. I note that last year
Helmut's ballot arrived a week after the polls had closed,
indicating that somewhere in the PATH between him and me there is
an issue.
It did arrive here. With the following Bath and Zeenby:
ZEEN+BY: 30/0 154/10 203/0 221/1 6 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001
8002 ZEEN+BY: 240/8005 280/464 5003 5006 5555 301/1 113 303/0 313/41 320/219 ZEEN+BY: 335/364 341/66 371/0 460/58 712/848 2432/390
2448/1021 2452/250 ZEEN+BY: 3634/12 5019/40 5020/545 1042 5053/58
5058/104
BATH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/5555
Not that you are in the Zeen-by. Plus that 301/1 is in the Bath...
Helmut's mail arrived here 3 times, with the following $een-by's and p@th's:
$EEN-BY: 203/0 221/1 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 8005 280/464 1203 $EEN-BY: 280/1208 2040 5003 5006 5555 301/1 303/0 313/41 335/364 371/0 $EEN-BY: 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 P@TH: 313/41
240/1120 280/5003
$EEN-BY: 30/0 221/1 6 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 8005
280/464 5003 $EEN-BY: 280/5555 301/1 113 303/0 313/41 335/364 341/66
371/0 460/58 2432/390 $EEN-BY: 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 5020/1042 5058/104 P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1
$EEN-BY: 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 5832 8001 8002 8005 280/464 5003
301/1 $EEN-BY: 303/0 313/41 335/364 371/0 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 2452/250
I don't see your node(s) in the $een-by's here... Maybe it helps to
solve the mystery. ;)
Good ${greeting_time}, Terry!
07 Mar 2022 12:36:58, you wrote to Sam Penwright:
The FTSC members require a level compentcy to do their work which is
why only RC's can vote as they are assumed to have a better level of
compentcy to judge the canidates.
Having all of Fidonet being able to vote would just complicate the
process. Your RC should have asked for opinions from the nodes in his
Region just like mine did, but in the end it's his call.
In general, the votes should have a weight based on both region size
and the sysops' opinions distribution (aggregated by RC).
For example, is one region has 100 sysops and another has 50, and they vote for 4 candidates with [-2, -1, 0, +1, +2] ballots (meaning "distrust", "not this time", "unsure", "let's see" and "full support", accordingly), the results may appear like this:
Candidate R1 R2 Total
A +0.23 +0.34 0.23*100+0.34*50 == 40
B +0.09 +0.08 0.09*100+0.08*50 == 13
C -0.17 +0.32 -0.17*100+0.32*50 == -1
D +0.11 +0.12 0.11*100+0.12*50 == 17
Obviously enough, the candidate C wouldn't pass.
--
Alexey V. Vissarionov aka Gremlin from Kremlin
gremlin.ru!gremlin; +vii-cmiii-ccxxix-lxxix-xlii
... god@universe:~ # cvs up && make world
--- /bin/vi
* Origin: ::1 (2:5020/545)
Do you have relatives in the Netherlands?
No.
I really want to drink a liter or two (or, possibly, three) of
beer with.
Looks like the FidoWeb had a failure.
Fidonet has never done this in the past and probably never will.
The present system ensures that each area (RC) gets a vote which means
bid areas can't dominate the vote, it's like the senate system in the US.
Helmut's mail arrived here 3 times, with the following $een-by's and
p@th's:
$EEN-BY: 203/0 221/1 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 8005 280/464
1203 $EEN-BY: 280/1208 2040 5003 5006 5555 301/1 303/0 313/41 335/364
371/0 $EEN-BY: 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 P@TH: 313/41
240/1120 280/5003
$EEN-BY: 30/0 221/1 6 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 8001 8002 8005
280/464 5003 $EEN-BY: 280/5555 301/1 113 303/0 313/41 335/364 341/66
371/0 460/58 2432/390 $EEN-BY: 2448/1021 2452/250 3634/12 5020/1042
5058/104 P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 301/1
$EEN-BY: 240/12 1120 1512 1634 1895 5832 8001 8002 8005 280/464 5003
301/1 $EEN-BY: 303/0 313/41 335/364 371/0 2432/390 2448/1021 2452/250
3634/12 P@TH: 313/41 240/1120 2452/250
I don't see your node(s) in the $een-by's here... Maybe it helps to
solve the mystery. ;)
Helmut's last messages that arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC came via this PATH:
313/41 240/1120 335/364 221/6 221/1 320/219
It would seem that Ulrich's system has forwarded the message on, so that leaves Fabio Bizzi and Tommi Koivula (x2) as potential bottlenecks. I am linked to 221/1 (AKA 221/0) and have connects there as recently as today.
I suppose you have multiple connections for FTSC_PUBLIC. So you should
have received it through other links as well. Michiel is one of them. He got it from 301/1, as did I, and you weren't in the seen-by's in the
packet I received from 301/1, ...
Looks like the FidoWeb had a failure.
Maybe it was in one of the badly addressed Star-PKT files which I hear about ...
\%/@rd
--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed
(2:292/854)
I suppose you have multiple connections for FTSC_PUBLIC. So you
should have received it through other links as well. Michiel is one
of them. He got it from 301/1, as did I, and you weren't in the
seen-by's in the packet I received from 301/1, ...
I'm beginning to have a knee-jerk reaction every time I see that 301/1 ... it's becoming so prominent everywhere and causing issues all over the place
that people should start seriously consider to de-link from it ... worldwide ...
Actually, it was introduced by IC-decree already a long time ago, never repealed but also never invoked. There were the times with a zone with only 1 sysop, a zone where the ZC did not understand english (that situation still exists, though it be a different zone), a zone with
hardly nodes which Carol desperately tried to salvage at the time when
Z2 had something like 7-8000 listed individual sysops.
That equality principle ensured that 50-60 sysops could grab the whole
of the nodelist in a strangle hold ...
The present system ensures that each area (RC) gets a vote which means TR>> bid areas can't dominate the vote, it's like the senate system in the
US.
Odd comparison because big areas do dominate the presidential vote ....
My 5 cents worth, I beleive it will never be invoked, probably why the
idea died at the time it was proposed. No Zone wars no problem.
Thhe US presidental vote is
completely different and a mystery to outsiders like me :)
Terry Roati wrote to Andrew Leary <=-
Looks like the FidoWeb had a failure.
On Mar 07, 2022 04:23am, Andrew Leary wrote to Ward Dossche:
Hello Ward!
06 Mar 22 20:53, you wrote to me:
Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.
Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.
In this case I'm saying 301/1 doesn't seem to be the cause of the problem!
In this case I'm saying 301/1 doesn't seem to be the cause of the
problem!
Well, I'm not so sure:
X-JAM-PATH2D: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2
NAK. You are not listed as an RC, and therefore are not an eligible
voter.
Well thats not no fun we should be able to vote also.
Rules need to be changed.
X-JAM-PATH2D: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2
There is nothing wrong with this path, and you got it. The problem is Andrew didn't get it.
X-JAM-PATH2D: 313/41 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2
There is nothing wrong with this path, and you got it. The problem is
Andrew didn't get it.
Rest assured, I'm not trying to point finger at anyone, I'm only curious. Every message I get from Andrew is the same:
X-JAM-PATH2D: 320/219 203/0 2
And almost the same from every other Fidoweb connected system, like e.g.
yours:
X-JAM-PATH2D: 280/464 203/0 2
So why does Helmut's path look like the above?
And the same for a Z1 node like Dan's:
X-JAM-PATH2D: 123/115 3634/12 240/1120 301/1 280/464 203/0 2
Why didn't I get that directly from Andrew?
Then we have the messages from Terry from down under:
X-JAM-PATH2D: 640/1321 1384 221/1 203/0 2
Yes, Tommi is often the fastest system in the Fidoweb, so no surprise that I get the message the fastest from his system. But I got it.
So, somewhere in our Fidoweb there seem to be a system that adds s-b lines without being properly connected to our Fidoweb.
Well, I guess only Andrew can properly investigate the reason that he
did not receive this (for once) important message. Maybe that
intermediate 240/1120 system is one of those rabid NAB systems, that refuse to handle the Fidoweb properly?
On 2022 Mar 06 21:06:04, you wrote to Andrew Leary:
you can voice your opinion to your RC and they can use it to decide on how they will vote...
)\/(ark
Q: Why do so many people object to top posting?
A: Writing your reply to a message above what you are referring to
rather than below it.
Q: What is "top posting"?
Terry Roati wrote to Andrew Leary <=-
Looks like the FidoWeb had a failure.
On Mar 07, 2022 04:23am, Andrew Leary wrote to Ward Dossche:
Hello Ward!
06 Mar 22 20:53, you wrote to me:
Helmut's message never arrived here in FTSC_PUBLIC.
Yes it has, you're even in the seenby of the vote as it arrived here.
... Ignorance can be cured. Stupid is forever.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
Terry Roati wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Feel better now?
On Mar 07, 2022 08:01am, Dan Clough wrote to Terry Roati:
Q: Why do so many people object to top posting?
A: Writing your reply to a message above what you are referring to
rather than below it.
Q: What is "top posting"?
Terry Roati wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Feel better now?
On Mar 07, 2022 08:01am, Dan Clough wrote to Terry Roati:
Q: Why do so many people object to top posting?
A: Writing your reply to a message above what you are referring to
rather than below it.
Q: What is "top posting"?
Feel smarter now?
Don't act like a n00b. It makes you look ... ignorant.
... Nothing's foolproof - the idiots are too ingenious.
=== MultiMail/Linux v0.52
--- SBBSecho 3.14-Linux
* Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:123/115)
Maybe that intermediate 240/1120 system is one of those rabid NAB
systems, that refuse to handle the Fidoweb properly?
you can voice your opinion to your RC and they can use it to decide
on how they will vote...
Okay Then Send me you email please. 1:123/120
I have some other stuff to discuss with you.
Thanks Mark
Terry Roati wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Definitely smarter, maybe I am ignorant, get over it.
On Mar 07, 2022 08:09pm, Dan Clough wrote to Terry Roati:
Terry Roati wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Feel better now?
On Mar 07, 2022 08:01am, Dan Clough wrote to Terry Roati:
Q: Why do so many people object to top posting?
A: Writing your reply to a message above what you are referring to
rather than below it.
Q: What is "top posting"?
Feel smarter now?
Don't act like a n00b. It makes you look ... ignorant.
On 2022 Mar 07 14:18:10, you wrote to me:
you can voice your opinion to your RC and they can use it to decide
on how they will vote...
you should already have it since i'm also your NC... netmail to any of my addresses also works, ya know ;)
Thanks Markyou're welcome...
Andre Robitaille wrote to Dan Clough <=-
I realize what I'm doing is the equivilent to when people
reply-all telling people to stop replying-all, but...
Would you please be the bigger man and stop replying to him? It's
just clogging up the echo with nonsense, and he's certanly not
going to be the one to stop replying.
I suppose you have multiple connections for FTSC_PUBLIC. So you should have received it through other links as well. Michiel is one of them.
He got it from 301/1, as did I, and you weren't in the seen-by's in
the packet I received from 301/1, so it's very likely that was the
case for Michiel also, so his system should have sent it to yours...
Maybe it's a case of a false positive dupe detection on your system?
Do you have backups of all incoming pkt files? If yes, have you
Fidonet has never done this in the past and probably never will.
Please see my answer to Bjorn: there I've explained why the voting procedure should be revised and likely changed.
... let's how many of the RC's even bother to vote in the FTSC election.
Terry,
... let's how many of the RC's even bother to vote in the FTSC election.
I cannot even remember ever having seen a single vote from Z4 ...
Of course, I am at an age where it is a right to forget ... even a perk
I would say ...
\%/@rd
--- DB4 - 20220222
* Origin: Hou het veilig, hou vol. Het komt allemaal weer goed
(2:292/854)
I cannot even remember ever having seen a single vote from Z4 ...
I cannot even remember ever having seen a single vote from Z4 ...
Duty calls, here we are.
Not one, but two even ... Andrew will be sp happy ... 8-)
----------------------------------------------
| Name | Node nr | Yes| No |
|----------------------|-------------|----|----|
| | | | |
| Rob Swindell | 1:103/705 | 9 | |
| James Coyle | 1:129/215 | 9 | |
| Tim Schattkowsky | 2:2/29 | 7 | |
----------------------------------------------
Are the abstentions not being counted toward the total number of votes?
And if not, why? Also, why are the abstentions not being listed in these updates?
RTFM ... in this case the election rules ...
"Candidates must receive more "yes" than "no" votes to be elected."
So, from your POV 'not casting a vote' is an 'abstention' ?
Are the abstentions not being counted toward the total number of votes?
One can vote for, against or abstain (ie. not vote at all) per person.
Persons with more yes than no votes get in.
Why do you want to count an abstain as a vote??
Abstain simmply means that that person neither voted yes or no. (ie. because there were people for YES and also for NO in the region of that RC)
Abstaining is different from not voting.
At this point, though, I am wondering why this is so.
At this point, though, I am wondering why this is so.
Because then you’ve have to chase everybody down to vote or you’d never get people elected.
For things like a zone coordinator, definitely. Regional, maybe?
Standing member, especially if there aren’t enough standing members currently, no way. It’s not worth it.
FidoNet is made up of volunteers then put it less effort the lower you
go in the hierarchy. You’ve got to take what you can get from people that are willing to put in effort, even for something like voting.
I have no idea! But, as an outside observer, I can clearly see that yo are trying your level best to influence this proceeding. And that is exactly why I am wondering...
Wipe-off your spectacles then ...
This is the current composition of the FTSC with Deon George vacating his seat...
Name Node Term ends
--------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Leary 1:320/219 29 Mar 2023
mark lewis 1:3634/12 29 Mar 2023
Richard Menedetter 2:310/31 29 Mar 2023
Carol Shenkenberger 1:275/100 29 Mar 2023
Nick Andre 1:229/426 29 Mar 2023
Deon George 3:633/509 06 Jan 2022
Maurice Kinal 1:153/7001 29 Mar 2023
Dale Barnes 1:106/201 29 Mar 2023
7 remaining ... without the names put forward by the ZCC Nominating Committee there would be an empty election. Meaning if the ZCC doesn't move next year those 7 mandates will also expire ... that would mean the end of the FTSC according to its charter.
Yes, of course, the minumum required number can be lowered and there may be a few nominations just to fullfill that minimum requirement but I
doubt if people like Nick Andre, Andrew Leary, Dale Barnes ... can be motivated for another term of '2 years nothing' which in fact would make the complete concept of an FTSC useless.
You should not be questioning me for my motives to keep the FTSC as a functional body, instead you should be questioning all the RCs (minus Jay Harris) why they are sitting on their asses and not thinking about the continuity ...
2 weeks into the voting period of 3 weeks with the ballot closing like 7 days from now, Andrew recorded 16 votes out of 34 RCs listed. Isn't that worrysome? Some will still roll-in, but nevertheless ...
Remember, I do not run this election ... I'm an "interrested
bystander".
A little *too* interested, in my opinion...
"Daddy, what did you do during the war?"
I really think this particular discussion should take place via Netmai as I suggested. This is definitely straying far off the topic that I h brought up.
Not my monkey, not my circus. You started this. Write echomail, I will reply in echomail. Write netmail and ...
Ward Dossche wrote to Dan Clough <=-
While I won't disagree with your statement (per se) that not all RC's should be voting, I meant of course that some "regular" sysops may also have the ability to make an intelligent vote on the subject.
While I concur that probably quite a number of sysops even are
able to provide an intelligent vote on the subject, I don't think
that should materialise for the simple reasons that it's not a
popularity poll and this is a technical mandate only...
For the first time in many many FTSC-elections there are
competent candidates, nothing but competent candidates. In the
past there have been nominations for pure political reasons, or
to make certain there was a balance between Z1 and Z2 standing
members while that is totally irrelevant, or simply to upset or
annoy an opponent, etc... No political shit-show this time ...
Plus, a full nodelist-wide election (in my opnion) would make
this way too top-heavy for its intended purpose....
Does it take a change to P4 for such a change to actually happen?
The FTSC itself decides upon that "intra muros". Check
'www.ftsc.org' to find the procedures ...
(That's a serious question, I'd like to know).
Has your quest for knowledge been satisfied or do you need
Gandalf's number?
Shaun Buzza wrote to Dan Clough <=-
Does it take a change to P4 for such a change to actually happen?
(That's a serious question, I'd like to know).
As would I. I am very concerned about the way this document is
currently being interpreted.
Well thats not no fun we should be able to vote also.
You are. Well, if your RC does his job, that is...
..
| Sysop: | Coz |
|---|---|
| Location: | Anoka, MN |
| Users: | 2 |
| Nodes: | 4 (0 / 4) |
| Uptime: | 28:10:58 |
| Calls: | 97 |
| Files: | 4,642 |
| Messages: | 217,207 |