• 2025 FTSC election

    From Rob Swindell@1:103/705 to Michiel van der Vlist on Mon Feb 17 16:12:52 2025
    Re: 2025 FTSC election
    By: Michiel van der Vlist to Nick Boel on Mon Feb 17 2025 10:14 pm

    It is the EC that created the conditions for this mess to incubate.

    Sure, I accept the blame. I'm not really into this "play government" stuff you guys seem so into. I'm just doing this because I was asked and I'm definitely not practiced or good at it. Next time, I'll just say no. But you're welcome anyway,

    -Rob
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Maurice Kinal on Mon Feb 17 19:56:33 2025
    Maurice Kinal wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Who's surprised?

    I am shocked and dismayed. Does that count?

    Yep, close enough.



    ... Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Rob Swindell on Wed Feb 19 23:53:43 2025
    Rob,

    Voting for FTSC standing members is open now, from
    Saturday, 15 Feb 2025, 20:00 UTC through Saturday, 08 Mar 2025, 20:00
    UTC.

    Have you reached-out to the RCs so they know they can vote?

    \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - 20230201
    * Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)
  • From Rob Swindell@1:103/705 to Ward Dossche on Wed Feb 19 15:14:59 2025
    Re: Re: 2025 FTSC election
    By: Ward Dossche to Rob Swindell on Wed Feb 19 2025 11:53 pm

    Rob,

    Voting for FTSC standing members is open now, from
    Saturday, 15 Feb 2025, 20:00 UTC through Saturday, 08 Mar 2025, 20:00 UTC.

    Have you reached-out to the RCs so they know they can vote?

    No, not yet. Any help you can offer there (e.g. name and address list) would be appreciated.
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Rob Swindell on Thu Feb 20 09:59:01 2025
    Hi Rob,

    On 2025-02-19 15:14:59, you wrote to Ward Dossche:

    Have you reached-out to the RCs so they know they can vote?

    No, not yet. Any help you can offer there (e.g. name and address list) would
    be appreciated.

    Have you heard about something called the nodelist? ;-)

    # grep 'Region,' NODELIST.045

    And use the output of that...


    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Rob Swindell on Thu Feb 20 11:51:40 2025
    Rob,

    Have you reached-out to the RCs so they know they can vote?

    No, not yet. Any help you can offer there (e.g. name and address list) would be appreciated.

    Hmmmm ... surely ... one of the best developers in Fidonet knows how to reach RCs ... ?

    \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - 20230201
    * Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Ward Dossche on Thu Feb 20 07:29:43 2025
    Ward Dossche wrote to Rob Swindell <=-

    Have you reached-out to the RCs so they know they can vote?

    No, not yet. Any help you can offer there (e.g. name and address list) would be appreciated.

    Hmmmm ... surely ... one of the best developers in Fidonet knows how to reach RCs ... ?

    To me, the real issue here is: Why would RCs need to be reminded that
    they can vote on this? Shouldn't every single RC already know that? If
    they actually don't know that, should they even be an RC?



    ... All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Rob Swindell@1:103/705 to Ward Dossche on Thu Feb 20 10:58:43 2025
    Re: Re: 2025 FTSC election
    By: Ward Dossche to Rob Swindell on Thu Feb 20 2025 11:51 am

    No, not yet. Any help you can offer there (e.g. name and address list) would be appreciated.

    Hmmmm ... surely ... one of the best developers in Fidonet knows how to reach RCs ... ?

    I've never had the need. Yes, they're totally discoverable, but getting and parsing a nodelist will have to wait behind the other things I have to do today.
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)
  • From Rob Swindell@1:103/705 to Wilfred van Velzen on Thu Feb 20 16:15:00 2025
    Re: Re: 2025 FTSC election
    By: Wilfred van Velzen to Rob Swindell on Thu Feb 20 2025 09:59 am

    Hi Rob,

    On 2025-02-19 15:14:59, you wrote to Ward Dossche:

    Have you reached-out to the RCs so they know they can vote?

    No, not yet. Any help you can offer there (e.g. name and address list) would
    be appreciated.

    Have you heard about something called the nodelist? ;-)

    Yeah, of course, though I haven't used one in over 20 years.

    # grep 'Region,' NODELIST.045

    And use the output of that...

    That produces 31 lines without complete addresses, e.g. Region,92,Panama,Pedasi_Panama,John_Dovey,-Unpublished-,300,CM,IBN:gatofuego.sy nchronetbbs.org,PING

    Not directly useful to me, but then I haven't found the nodelist to be useful to me in many years.

    Are there actually 31 RCs?

    Is each supposedly reachable via netmail at <zone>:<region>/1?

    -Rob
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)
  • From Terry Roati@3:712/1321 to Dan Clough on Fri Feb 21 10:41:46 2025

    On Feb 20, 2025 07:35am, Dan Clough wrote to Ward Dossche:

    To me, the real issue here is: Why would RCs need to be reminded that they can vote on this? Shouldn't every single RC already know that? If they actually don't know that, should they even be an RC?

    Very true but look at when the election is finished how many of the RC's actually voted.

    Terry

    ... Platinum Xpress & Wildcat!..... Nice!!!!
    --- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v7.0
    * Origin: The File Bank BBS! https://tfb-bbs.org (3:712/1321)
  • From Jason Bock@1:267/310 to Ward Dossche on Thu Feb 20 19:56:25 2025
    On <20 Feb, 11:51>, Ward Dossche wrote to Rob Swindell :

    Rob,

    Have you reached-out to the RCs so they know they can vote?

    No, not yet. Any help you can offer there (e.g. name and address list) would be appreciated.

    Hmmmm ... surely ... one of the best developers in Fidonet knows how to reach RCs ... ?

    \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - 20230201
    * Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)
    Ward,

    ouch, lol. That was a poke and a touch of kindness. lol

    -Jason

    --- ProBoard v2.32
    * Origin: ProBoard WHQ - SiliconUnderground - siliconu.com (1:267/310)
  • From Nick Boel@1:154/10 to Dan Clough on Thu Feb 20 19:12:58 2025
    Hey Dan!

    On Thu, Feb 20 2025 13:29:42 -0600, you wrote ..

    To me, the real issue here is: Why would RCs need to be reminded that
    they can vote on this? Shouldn't every single RC already know that?
    If they actually don't know that, should they even be an RC?

    1) There's 3 weeks to vote on this. There has been no discussions with any of the candidates, whatsoever. Michiel pointing out everyone else's flaws/mistakes comes with the territory, but doesn't count for anything. He's probably still mad he got voted out of the chair, after having sat on that hat for a very long time, while doing much of nothing.

    2) I'm sure most of the RCs know they can vote on this, but the real question is.. Do they want or care to vote on this? Either way, I'd say about 2/3-3/4 showed up last election and voted. Give it some time.

    The FTSC hasn't done fuck-all in years, not a single proposal raised to a standard (even though some have been in regular use for 20+ years), and the previous few times that proposals have been created and brought to people's attention, there's a small amount that beat on their chests and do everything they possibly can to shut it down.

    Is it worth it?

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... He who laughs last, thinks slowest.
    --- NeoMutt/20250113-dirty
    * Origin: The Pharcyde ~ telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)
  • From Jay Harris@1:12/0 to Nick Boel on Thu Feb 20 22:24:50 2025
    On Thursday February 20 2025, Nick Boel said the following...

    2) I'm sure most of the RCs know they can vote on this, but the real question is.. Do they want or care to vote on this? Either way, I'd
    say about 2/3-3/4 showed up last election and voted. Give it some
    time.

    I'll continue to participate though I understand why others don't.

    Is it worth it?

    I think this has been brought up in the past: Couldn't this be a wiki, open to anyone who wants to contribute?

    Find a typo or spelling mistake? Now you can fix it!
    Bored on a rainy Tuesday and want to start documenting something, have at it! Found something that someone started documenting but didn't finish, go nuts!


    Jay

    ... Let him who takes the plunge remember to return it by Tuesday
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20240309
    * Origin: Eastern Canada (1:12/0)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Terry Roati on Thu Feb 20 21:51:42 2025
    Terry Roati wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    On Feb 20, 2025 07:35am, Dan Clough wrote to Ward Dossche:

    To me, the real issue here is: Why would RCs need to be reminded that they can vote on this? Shouldn't every single RC already know that? If they actually don't know that, should they even be an RC?

    Very true but look at when the election is finished how many of the
    RC's actually voted.

    Yes, I know that many/most will not. As to why they don't, it would be
    one of the following reasons:

    1. They didn't know they could vote. (I find this unacceptable)
    2. They don't care enough to bother. (Likely the majority of them)
    3. Some care so little that they don't read this echo, and likely don't
    read ANY of the Fido administrative echos. Again I find that
    unacceptable for a person in that position.

    Another factor which would probably make many of them not vote is that
    they (the RCs) don't know anything about the candidates and therefore
    it's hard to know if you'd want them elected. I wish there was more conversations in here by both the prospective candidates and the RCs.

    It's all part of the continuing decline of FidoNet and isn't surprising,
    just disappointing.



    ... Cats remind us that not everything in Nature has purpose.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Nick Boel on Thu Feb 20 21:51:42 2025
    Nick Boel wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    To me, the real issue here is: Why would RCs need to be reminded that
    they can vote on this? Shouldn't every single RC already know that?
    If they actually don't know that, should they even be an RC?

    1) There's 3 weeks to vote on this. There has been no discussions with
    any of the candidates, whatsoever. Michiel pointing out everyone else's flaws/mistakes comes with the territory, but doesn't count for
    anything. He's probably still mad he got voted out of the chair, after having sat on that hat for a very long time, while doing much of
    nothing.

    Yes, very disappointing level of discussion, for sure. I know some of
    the history of Michiel... No surprise there.

    2) I'm sure most of the RCs know they can vote on this, but the real question is.. Do they want or care to vote on this? Either way, I'd say about 2/3-3/4 showed up last election and voted. Give it some time.

    Yep, I do know that most of them (that bother) will do so on the last
    day or two.

    The FTSC hasn't done fuck-all in years, not a single proposal raised to
    a standard (even though some have been in regular use for 20+ years),
    and the previous few times that proposals have been created and brought
    to people's attention, there's a small amount that beat on their chests and do everything they possibly can to shut it down.

    Yes, I understand all of this, and again it is very disappointing.

    Is it worth it?

    Not sure what you're asking about here... Is it worth it to vote? Yes,
    I think so. At least it demonstrates that one cared enough to do so,
    and maybe (hopefully) they did some research on candidates to make an
    informed choice on their vote. Probably my statement is more idealistic
    than realistic, but... one can hope. I wish folks would be more
    involved.

    On the other hand, if the FTSC is so far gone that it's actually dead,
    then why bother continuing the charade? Maybe that's what you were
    asking about "worth" there, and in that case I'd answer "probably not".
    Maybe it should just be disbanded and let anarchy take over. But I
    would hope that doesn't happen because it would likely hasten the end of FidoNet.



    ... Dewey, Cheetham, and Howe: Attorneys at Law
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Rob Swindell on Thu Feb 20 21:51:42 2025
    Rob Swindell wrote to Wilfred van Velzen <=-

    # grep 'Region,' NODELIST.045

    And use the output of that...

    That produces 31 lines without complete addresses, e.g. Region,92,Panama,Pedasi_Panama,John_Dovey,-Unpublished-,300,CM,IBN:gatof uego.synchronetbbs.org,PING

    Not directly useful to me, but then I haven't found the nodelist to be useful to me in many years.

    Are there actually 31 RCs?

    Yes, there are. The Euro-boys love having entire Regions with grand
    totals of 1-2 nodes in that region. There are 8 RCs in North America.

    Is each supposedly reachable via netmail at <zone>:<region>/1?

    Probably <zone>:<region>/0


    ... Honk if you love BBSing!
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to Nick Boel on Fri Feb 21 11:21:52 2025
    Hello Nick,

    On Thursday February 20 2025 19:12, you wrote to Dan Clough:

    1) There's 3 weeks to vote on this. There has been no discussions with
    any of the candidates, whatsoever. Michiel pointing out everyone
    else's flaws/mistakes comes with the territory, but doesn't count for anything. He's probably still mad he got voted out of the chair, after having sat on that hat for a very long time, while doing much of
    nothing.

    I can understand you not being one of my fans but if you engage in back stabbing please get your facts straight.

    As for me doing much of nothing, I invite everyone to check the author's name on the documents published during my watch. There are a substantial number with either my full name or "FTSC administrator" on it.

    I shall not deny that some of the bumps and bruises I got during that period are still aching at times but me being mad about being voted out of the chair is fake news. I was not voted out of the chair, I resigned of my own initiative.

    As for my issue with Tim, it certainly does count. Him posting from a point number is just the tip of the elephant's trunk. Yes, thee is an elephant in the room and so far no one will mention it or even see it.


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: Nieuw Schnøørd (2:280/5555)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Rob Swindell on Fri Feb 21 11:56:32 2025
    Hi Rob,

    On 2025-02-20 16:15:00, you wrote to me:

    Have you heard about something called the nodelist? ;-)

    Yeah, of course, though I haven't used one in over 20 years.

    At all? Isn't synchronet/binkit able to use a nodelist?

    # grep 'Region,' NODELIST.045

    And use the output of that...

    That produces 31 lines without complete addresses, e.g.

    It's all you need to know.

    Region,92,Panama,Pedasi_Panama,John_Dovey,-Unpublished-,300,CM,IBN:gatofuego.s
    y nchronetbbs.org,PING

    You are using an old nodelist! Region,92 was removed from the nodelist on: 27 Nov 2024

    Not directly useful to me, but then I haven't found the nodelist to be useful to me in many years.

    Are there actually 31 RCs?

    Actually there are 30.

    Is each supposedly reachable via netmail at <zone>:<region>/1?

    No, it is: <zone>:<region>/0

    That should work unless their system is misconfigured. In which case it's questionable if they should be a RC. ;-)


    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Nick Boel on Fri Feb 21 12:11:13 2025
    Hi Nick,

    On 2025-02-20 19:12:58, you wrote to Dan Clough:

    To me, the real issue here is: Why would RCs need to be reminded that
    they can vote on this? Shouldn't every single RC already know that?
    If they actually don't know that, should they even be an RC?

    1) There's 3 weeks to vote on this. There has been no discussions with any of
    the candidates, whatsoever.

    I haven't seen you ask any questions to them...

    It's moot anyway as long as the list of candidates is in question.

    Michiel pointing out everyone else's flaws/mistakes comes with the territory, but doesn't count for anything. He's probably still mad he
    got voted out of the chair, after having sat on that hat for a very
    long time, while doing much of nothing.

    You are making stuff up! Michiel resigned as administrator, and didn't bother to get nominated as candidate member for the next election.

    And he is one of few members who actually wrote any documents/proposals at all in the last few decades!


    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Dan Clough on Fri Feb 21 12:17:57 2025
    Hi Dan,

    On 2025-02-20 21:51:42, you wrote to Nick Boel:

    Yes, very disappointing level of discussion, for sure.

    And how much did you contribute to that?


    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Dan Clough on Fri Feb 21 12:21:39 2025
    Hi Dan,

    On 2025-02-20 21:51:42, you wrote to Rob Swindell:

    Are there actually 31 RCs?

    Yes, there are.

    No there are 30.

    The Euro-boys love having entire Regions with grand totals of 1-2
    nodes in that region. There are 8 RCs in North America.

    Did you even bother to check the nodelist before making that claim? There is only one Region (Greece), with 2 nodes in Z2, the others are mostly way bigger. And it isn't like in Z1 where sometimes half to three quarters of the nodes in a region are ghost nodes that are not connectable.

    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to Dan Clough on Fri Feb 21 12:41:47 2025
    Hello Dan,

    On Thursday February 20 2025 21:51, you wrote to Nick Boel:

    On the other hand, if the FTSC is so far gone that it's actually dead,

    For all intents and purposes the FTSC is dead. The last document was published in 2022 and it was written by... me.

    Naybe there was nothing noteworthy to document or maybe they just did nothing, Anyweay...

    then why bother continuing the charade?

    Why indeed...

    Maybe that's what you were asking about "worth" there, and in that
    case I'd answer "probably not". Maybe it should just be disbanded and
    let anarchy take over.

    It alway has been anarchy. The FTSC alwas was a toothless tiger. It had a mandate to document "existing practise" - whatever that meant - but it had no means to see that documented standards were followed. And they aren't. There are no consequences for pig headed programmers and *Cs to deviate from FTSC standards. And now that these pig headed programmers have even invaded the FTSC (Rob Swindell, FTS-0009 and Tim Schattkowsky, FTS-5003) we may as abandon all hope.

    But I would hope that doesn't happen because it would likely hasten
    the end of FidoNet.

    Maybe, maybe not.


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: Nieuw Schnøørd (2:280/5555)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Wilfred van Velzen on Fri Feb 21 08:31:47 2025
    Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Yes, very disappointing level of discussion, for sure.

    And how much did you contribute to that?

    Well, nothing. My excuse is that I'm neither a Nominee nor an RC.

    Perhaps it's time that NCs were allowed to contribute/vote?

    Oh..... wait. That might eliminate the majority/control that Zone 2 has
    over the process, with the plethora of RCs located there, so we wouldn't
    want that, right?



    ... All hope abandon, ye who enter messages here.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Wilfred van Velzen on Fri Feb 21 08:31:47 2025
    Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Yes, there are.

    No there are 30.

    Okay... I didn't actually check, as I knew that number was close.

    The Euro-boys love having entire Regions with grand totals of 1-2
    nodes in that region. There are 8 RCs in North America.

    Did you even bother to check the nodelist before making that claim?

    I didn't, actually. But now that I have, I see *PLENTY* of Z2 Regions
    that have 12-15-ish nodes in them. My little Network (I'm the NC) has
    more than that.

    There is only one Region (Greece), with 2 nodes in Z2, the others are mostly way bigger.

    Some are way bigger, yes. Not sure "mostly" is accurate. So here's a question - does every little postage-stamp sized country need to be it's
    own region? In the USA we call those size plots "states", and there are multiple states in a Region.

    And it isn't like in Z1 where sometimes half to three quarters of
    the nodes in a region are ghost nodes that are not connectable.

    This is unfortunately true, and I'm no happier about that than you are.



    ... All the easy problems have been solved.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to Dan Clough on Fri Feb 21 16:54:56 2025
    Hello Dan,

    On Friday February 21 2025 08:31, you wrote to Wilfred van Velzen:

    So here's a question - does every little postage-stamp sized country
    need to be it's own region? In the USA we call those size plots
    "states", and there are multiple states in a Region.

    It is a relic of the past. As you can read in P4, it is based on "areas of convenient calling". In the POTS age calling across a national boundery cost a fortune. Not "convenient". That is why even small countries had their own region. Some still have or have again. Not all of them.

    And it isn't like in Z1 where sometimes half to three quarters
    of the nodes in a region are ghost nodes that are not
    connectable.

    This is unfortunately true, and I'm no happier about that than you
    are.

    I'd rather see aan accurate and up to date nodelist than a nodelist with dead wood. All the nodes listed in R28 are up and running. Contrary to many other regions...


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: Nieuw Schnøørd (2:280/5555)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Dan Clough on Fri Feb 21 16:46:00 2025
    Hi Dan,

    On 2025-02-21 08:31:47, you wrote to me:

    Yes, very disappointing level of discussion, for sure.

    And how much did you contribute to that?

    Well, nothing. My excuse is that I'm neither a Nominee nor an RC.

    Anyone can put questions to the nominees. So they can make a well informed advise for their RC how to vote...

    Perhaps it's time that NCs were allowed to contribute/vote?

    That is up to the FTSC and the RC's I suppose...

    Oh..... wait. That might eliminate the majority/control that Zone 2
    has over the process, with the plethora of RCs located there, so we wouldn't want that, right?

    There are more nodes in Z2, so?

    Anyway it probably wouldn't make a difference to the outcome of the elections...


    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Dan Clough on Fri Feb 21 17:06:00 2025
    Hi Dan,

    On 2025-02-21 08:31:47, you wrote to me:

    So here's a question - does every little postage-stamp sized country
    need to be it's own region?

    Well, yes and no. These regions were all very big in the past, so there was a good reason to create them. Merging them turns out to be a lot more difficult. There are big cultural and language differences between most of them, some are even at war with eachother. Scandinavia did a succesfull merge (so far). Region 28 and 29 tried it for a while, but the former Region 29 sysops weren't happy with the situation and decided to become their own Region again. And there is the catch all Region 56, with a number of small nets for different countries.

    In the USA we call those size plots "states", and there are multiple states in a Region.

    At least you all speak 1 language (mostly).


    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From August Abolins@2:221/1.58 to Michiel van der Vlist on Fri Feb 21 19:17:00 2025
    Hello Michiel van der Vlist!

    MvdV> For all intents and purposes the FTSC is dead. The last
    MvdV> document was published in 2022 and it was written by...
    MvdV> me.

    Which one is that?

    MvdV> [...] And now that these pig headed programmers have
    MvdV> even invaded the FTSC (Rob Swindell, FTS-0009 and Tim
    MvdV> Schattkowsky, FTS-5003) we may as abandon all hope.

    Outch.

    I don't see any updates in either fts above.

    --
    ../|ug

    --- OpenXP 5.0.64
    * Origin: (2:221/1.58)
  • From Nick Boel@1:154/10 to Dan Clough on Fri Feb 21 19:38:50 2025
    Hey Dan!

    On Fri, Feb 21 2025 03:51:42 -0600, you wrote:

    Is it worth it?

    On the other hand, if the FTSC is so far gone that it's actually
    dead, then why bother continuing the charade? Maybe that's what you
    were asking about "worth" there, and in that case I'd answer
    "probably not". Maybe it should just be disbanded and let anarchy
    take over. But I would hope that doesn't happen because it would
    likely hasten the end of FidoNet.

    Yes, most definitely was referring to this one. ;)

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... He who laughs last, thinks slowest.
    --- slrn/pre1.0.4-9 (Linux)
    * Origin: The Pharcyde ~ telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)
  • From Björn Felten@2:203/2 to Wilfred van Velzen on Sat Feb 22 03:07:41 2025
    Wilfred van Velzen -> Dan Clough skrev 2025-02-21 12:21:
    Are there actually 31 RCs?

    Yes, there are.

    No there are 30.

    I guess it's to difficult to just check the weekly report in our weekly newspaper.

    including 4 zones
    30 regions
    157 hosts
    59 hubs
    admin overhead 250 ( 30.60 %)

    It sure seems like a lot of admin overhead for 817 nodes. Maybe we need some Elon Musk and his DOGE here in Fidonet as well?

    --

    Everything happens for a reason. Sometimes the reason is you're stupid and make bad decisions.

    ..

    --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091121
    * Origin: news://eljaco.se:4119 (2:203/2)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to August Abolins on Sat Feb 22 10:18:20 2025
    Hello August,

    On Friday February 21 2025 19:17, you wrote to me:

    Hello Michiel van der Vlist!

    MvdV>> For all intents and purposes the FTSC is dead. The last
    MvdV>> document was published in 2022 and it was written by...
    MvdV>> me.

    Which one is that?

    FTS-4010.0001 dated 24 dec 2022.

    MvdV>> [...] And now that these pig headed programmers have
    MvdV>> even invaded the FTSC (Rob Swindell, FTS-0009 and Tim
    MvdV>> Schattkowsky, FTS-5003) we may as abandon all hope.

    Outch.

    I don't see any updates in either fts above.

    You missed the point. The messages of Rob Swindell violate FTS-0009. The messages of Tim Schattkowsky violate FTS-5003.

    If even (candidate) FTSC members refuse to follow FTSC standards....


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: Nieuw Schnøørd (2:280/5555)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Björn Felten on Sat Feb 22 11:19:07 2025
    Hi Bj”rn,

    On 2025-02-22 03:07:41, you wrote to me:

    No there are 30.

    I guess it's to difficult to just check the weekly report in our weekly newspaper.

    including 4 zones
    30 regions
    157 hosts
    59 hubs
    admin overhead 250 ( 30.60 %)

    It sure seems like a lot of admin overhead for 817 nodes. Maybe we
    need some Elon Musk and his DOGE here in Fidonet as well?

    There isn't a position in Fidonet that can enforce big changes. And if someone tried that probably just speed up the decline of Fidonet...


    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to Björn Felten on Sat Feb 22 11:52:02 2025
    Hello Björn,

    On Saturday February 22 2025 03:07, you wrote to Wilfred van Velzen:

    I guess it's to difficult to just check the weekly report in our
    weekly newspaper.

    including 4 zones
    30 regions
    157 hosts
    59 hubs
    admin overhead 250 ( 30.60 %)

    It sure seems like a lot of admin overhead for 817 nodes. Maybe we
    need some Elon Musk and his DOGE here in Fidonet as well?

    If you go through your Fidonews archives you will find two aticles of mine. Each proposing to drop one level of hierarchie. One to drop the Region level and another to drop the zone level.

    I would not mind if you published them again.

    In its present state Fidonet could function very well with less hierarchie. Of course it is not going to happen....


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: Nieuw Schnøørd (2:280/5555)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Dan Clough on Sat Feb 22 14:00:08 2025
    Dan,

    To me, the real issue here is: Why would RCs need to be reminded that
    they can vote on this? Shouldn't every single RC already know that? If they actually don't know that, should they even be an RC?

    Interesting point and you are not really wrong, nor right either.

    Whatever happens, or not, in the FTSC is not a part of an RC-curriculum. One cannot bend the arm of an RC to vote, I once tried and it didn't work.

    So reminding them usually is a good approach. Some will act, some wont.

    The facts of Fido-life these days are that we already must be happy there is somebody willing to be an RC ... the scrapings of the barrel at some times are becoming thin.

    \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - 20230201
    * Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Jason Bock on Sat Feb 22 14:08:11 2025
    Jason,

    ouch, lol. That was a poke and a touch of kindness. lol

    There was no harm intended. As Rob said, he hasn't looked at a nodelist for ages. I appreciate his presence and involvement.

    A netmail to ...

    1:10/0
    1:11/0
    1:12/0
    1:13/0
    1:16/0
    1:17/0
    1:18/0
    1:19/0
    3:54/0
    3:57/0
    4:80/0
    4:88/0
    4:90/0
    4:93/0

    ... will do the trick... ('wink' to Rob)

    \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - 20230201
    * Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Nick Boel on Sat Feb 22 14:11:21 2025
    Nick,

    1) There's 3 weeks to vote on this. There has been no discussions with
    any of the candidates, whatsoever. Michiel pointing out everyone else's flaws/mistakes comes with the territory, but doesn't count for anything. He's probably still mad he got voted out of the chair, after having sat
    on that hat for a very long time, while doing much of nothing.

    1) Michiel was 'not' voted out of the FTSC-chair. He left by his own decision.

    2) Michiel was one of the best and productive FTSC-chairs ever.

    \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - 20230201
    * Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)
  • From Jason Bock@1:267/310 to Ward Dossche on Sat Feb 22 09:20:30 2025
    Jason,

    ouch, lol. That was a poke and a touch of kindness. lol

    There was no harm intended. As Rob said, he hasn't looked at a nodelist for ages. I appreciate his presence and involvement.

    A netmail to ...

    1:10/0
    1:11/0
    1:12/0
    1:13/0
    1:16/0
    1:17/0
    1:18/0
    1:19/0
    3:54/0
    3:57/0
    4:80/0
    4:88/0
    4:90/0
    4:93/0

    ... will do the trick... ('wink' to Rob)

    \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - 20230201
    * Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)

    Ward,
    I know that there is no harm at all. ;)

    I love the contributions to the BBS and related community that Rob has made.

    34 years ago (1991), I started my first BBS. I started with PCBoard then switched to RA, then T.A.G. because I had a friend, Alan Jurison that was a developer of T.A.G. BBS. I saw Synchronet come out and really wanted to run it. It was amazing way back in the 90's.

    I started StormNet with Alan Jurison and Phil Spevak, which helped me more understand Fidonet. We traversed many continents and had some noteable people involved as well.

    I have a strong passion for the BBS/Fidonet communities and respect everyone that has contributed over the years.

    -Jason

    --- ProBoard v2.32
    * Origin: ProBoard WHQ - SiliconUnderground - siliconu.com (1:267/310)
  • From Nicholas Boel@1:154/10 to Michiel van der Vlist on Sat Feb 22 08:08:18 2025
    Hey Michiel!

    On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 11:21:52 +0100, you wrote:

    I can understand you not being one of my fans but if you engage in back stabbing please get your facts straight.

    Only replying in kind, just as you would do (back stabbing, that is).

    As for me doing much of nothing, I invite everyone to check the author's name on the documents published during my watch. There are a substantial number with either my full name or "FTSC administrator" on it.

    You were once very active. Then things got pretty stale for many years. When I got to be a part of as well as witness documents and proposals brought to the table and some trying to be raised to standards (which is the actual job of the FTSC) get completely shot down by you and others, that was the nail in the coffin right there.

    I shall not deny that some of the bumps and bruises I got during that
    period are still aching at times but me being mad about being voted out
    of the chair is fake news. I was not voted out of the chair, I resigned
    of my own initiative.

    Ah, my bad. Must not have been important enough for me to remember. Was that about the time you held an election for yourself and got a bunch of flak for it? This is probably why this election someone you don't 'approve' of was asked to hold it, instead.. so history didn't repeat itself. ;)

    As for my issue with Tim, it certainly does count. Him posting from a
    point number is just the tip of the elephant's trunk. Yes, thee is an elephant in the room and so far no one will mention it or even see it.

    Tim is a current author of software being used in Fidonet, and quite a few people already know that.

    I don't care about your issues with Tim. What disgusted me, was that you most likely noticed this right away, and had the entire time of nominations to point it out, yet you didn't (and I suspect you did that on purpose to prove some kind of point that only you care about). I'm guessing since most people in this echo either know Tim, or know of his software, that where he posted from either went unnoticed or nobody cared (because they knew he has a valid Fidonet node).

    You had other motives, though.

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... He who laughs last, thinks slowest.
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20240309
    * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)
  • From Nicholas Boel@1:154/10 to Wilfred van Velzen on Sat Feb 22 08:20:50 2025
    Hey Wilfred!

    On Fri, 21 Feb 2025 12:11:12 +0100, you wrote:

    I haven't seen you ask any questions to them...

    I might not have any questions for them, just like you might not. However, maybe some RCs wait to see if anyone else asks anything or any other discussion goes on before jumping right into voting in the first few days?

    And he is one of few members who actually wrote any
    documents/proposals at all in the last few decades!

    You mean the only one that was able to push them through. He was also one of the few who stopped documents/proposals from getting through, too.. which was more recent than most of the other things done in the last few decades.

    Regards,
    Nick

    ... He who laughs last, thinks slowest.
    --- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20240309
    * Origin: _thePharcyde telnet://bbs.pharcyde.org (Wisconsin) (1:154/10)
  • From Wilfred van Velzen@2:280/464 to Nicholas Boel on Sat Feb 22 15:46:17 2025
    Hi Nicholas,

    On 2025-02-22 08:20:50, you wrote to me:

    And he is one of few members who actually wrote any
    documents/proposals at all in the last few decades!

    You mean the only one that was able to push them through. He was also one of
    the few who stopped documents/proposals from getting through, too..

    I was never part of the FTSC, so I don't know what went on there. But knowing Michiel a bit, I suspect there were very good reasons to stop those documents from getting through.


    Bye, Wilfred.

    --- FMail-lnx64 2.3.2.4-B20240523
    * Origin: FMail development HQ (2:280/464)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Dan Clough on Sat Feb 22 16:09:29 2025
    Dan,

    Oh..... wait. That might eliminate the majority/control that Zone 2 has over the process, with the plethora of RCs located there, so we wouldn't want that, right?

    It is total nonsense to believe that zonal balances have anything to do with the functioning of the FTSC. It is about technical competences and right now we have one competent active member and 4 competent candidates some of them (or all?) have already occupied a seat in the FTSC.

    So this election boils down to the question: do we let the FTSC fold or do we keep it intact?"

    So far 2 RCs have voted in favor of continuing.

    As for majority/control over the process ... people should get over this ridiculous idea that power is part of the process. If and when this election concludes, we probably will have 3 members from Z1, 1 from Z2 and 1 from Z3.

    There goes your Z2-majority control down the drain ...


     \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - 20230201
    * Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)
  • From Ward Dossche@2:292/854 to Michiel van der Vlist on Sat Feb 22 16:13:54 2025
    Michiel,

    There are no consequences for pig headed programmers and *Cs to
    deviate from FTSC standards. And now that these pig headed programmers
    have even invaded the FTSC (Rob Swindell, FTS-0009 and Tim Schattkowsky, FTS-5003) we may as abandon all hope.

    I have always found Rob to be very accomodating when I asked/suggested him something ... pig headed?

    Friendly adking helps...

    \%/@rd

    --- DB4 - 20230201
    * Origin: Many Glacier - Preserve / Protect / Conserve (2:292/854)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Björn Felten on Sat Feb 22 09:37:16 2025
    Bj”rn Felten wrote to Wilfred van Velzen <=-

    Are there actually 31 RCs?

    Yes, there are.

    No there are 30.

    I guess it's to difficult to just check the weekly report in our
    weekly newspaper.

    including 4 zones
    30 regions
    157 hosts
    59 hubs
    admin overhead 250 ( 30.60 %)

    Yeah...... nothing is ever inaccurate in the "newspaper"...

    Just don't look at the Fido Software section...

    <EYEROLL>



    ... Cats remind us that not everything in Nature has purpose.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/1 to Wilfred van Velzen on Sat Feb 22 08:16:30 2025
    Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Well, yes and no. These regions were all very big in the past, so there was a good reason to create them. Merging them turns out to be a lot
    more difficult.

    I always thought that most of the reason for regions/nets was to
    minimize telco tolls, but I suppose it was more of a function of
    making polls scale when you're doing dial-up at 2400 and have some
    boards not running CM.

    I suppose we could run Fido like a region - if there's someone to
    manage a net, they're welcome to do so. If not, I have an IP-only
    network that nodes from across two states participate in - an area rthe
    size of Sweden and Spain.



    --- MultiMail/Win v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/1)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/1 to Wilfred van Velzen on Sat Feb 22 08:16:30 2025
    Wilfred van Velzen wrote to Björn Felten <=-

    There isn't a position in Fidonet that can enforce big changes. And if someone tried that probably just speed up the decline of Fidonet...

    One thing I've been concerned about is if you make a sweeping change that requires a change from the downlinks, how many BBSes are running on
    autopilot, and how many sysops would choose to pull the plug instead of spending time on something they're effectively done with?

    I took over R10 in 2012, and even back then with more participation saw
    roughly 10% of the network that either dropped out or was already gone
    when we made the switch.

    Nowadays?

    Might not be a bad thing, since any board that's on auto-pilot probably
    isn't contributing to anything except the nodelist.

    Sweeping change isn't Fidonet's forte, though. I'd like to see some
    serious consolidation of echoes, but we still have people renewing dead
    echoes. Othernets actively foster new echoes and prune when needed, Fido
    seems to take the opposite approach.




    --- MultiMail/Win v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/1)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/1 to Michiel van der Vlist on Sat Feb 22 08:16:30 2025
    Michiel van der Vlist wrote to BjArn Felten <=-

    If you go through your Fidonews archives you will find two aticles of mine. Each proposing to drop one level of hierarchie. One to drop the Region level and another to drop the zone level.

    I would not mind if you published them again.

    I've posted the same thing - I thought you could get rid of the zone
    politics by making everything one zone, but then people complained about whether it'd be called Zone 1 or Zone 2. :)

    We're starting to see regional attrition, Z1C has consolidated zones
    recently when a RC retired. That might help with some of the
    complication.

    Separate IP-only legacy networks are the biggest complication, I'd think
    - why have a region with a handful of legacy nets with 1-2 nodes and no
    NC? When I first took over R10 I was NC for 5-6 legacy nets that had no separate NC. I took those and moved those into an IP-only net where I
    could (except for one net that's well advertised and nets where people
    wanted to be NC to manage their own net)

    That low-level consolidation cleared up a lot of the complication. If
    everyone did that, from the bottom-up, I think we'd get rid of a lot of
    that overhead.



    --- MultiMail/Win v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/1)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to Ward Dossche on Sat Feb 22 19:53:39 2025
    Hello Ward,

    On Saturday February 22 2025 16:13, you wrote to me:

    There are no consequences for pig headed programmers and *Cs to
    deviate from FTSC standards. And now that these pig headed
    programmers have even invaded the FTSC (Rob Swindell, FTS-0009 and
    Tim Schattkowsky, FTS-5003) we may as abandon all hope.

    I have always found Rob to be very accomodating when I asked/suggested
    him something ... pig headed?

    Yes.

    Friendly adking helps...

    Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. I have done my share of trying to keep the frogs in the wheel barrow. Now that I no longer have any function in Fidonet I can drop the "diplomatics" and just say what is on my mind.


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: Nieuw Schnøørd (2:280/5555)
  • From Nick Andre@1:229/426 to Michiel Van Der Vlist on Sat Feb 22 15:29:59 2025

    Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. I have done my share of trying keep the frogs in the wheel barrow. Now that I no longer have any function Fidonet I can drop the "diplomatics" and just say what is on my mind.

    Did those frogs include shoving hilarious inaccurate factoids about IPV6 in Canada down my throat years ago, establishing a nodelist gestapo because "you can" and the endless petulent whining about my zone... or FTSC... or anything?

    Whats on your mind now that we haven't heard already?

    Nick

    --- Renegade vY2Ka2
    * Origin: Joey, do you like movies about gladiators? (1:229/426)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Kurt Weiske on Sat Feb 22 15:12:59 2025
    Kurt Weiske wrote to Wilfred van Velzen <=-

    There isn't a position in Fidonet that can enforce big changes. And if someone tried that probably just speed up the decline of Fidonet...

    One thing I've been concerned about is if you make a sweeping change
    that requires a change from the downlinks, how many BBSes are running
    on autopilot, and how many sysops would choose to pull the plug instead
    of spending time on something they're effectively done with?

    Some would disappear, indeed. IMHO that's a good thing, and a way to
    cut out some deadwood. Autopilot == Deadwood, in my book.

    I took over R10 in 2012, and even back then with more participation saw roughly 10% of the network that either dropped out or was already gone when we made the switch.

    Nowadays?

    Yup, I would guess it might be closer to 20% that would be gone in the
    new nodelist. I'd rather have a valid/meaningful nodelist than one
    which is full of errors and bloat.

    Might not be a bad thing, since any board that's on auto-pilot probably isn't contributing to anything except the nodelist.

    Exactly.


    ... "He who is without oil, shall cast the first rod."-Compressions 8.7:1.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Kurt Weiske on Sat Feb 22 15:12:59 2025
    Kurt Weiske wrote to Michiel van der Vlist <=-

    If you go through your Fidonews archives you will find two aticles of mine. Each proposing to drop one level of hierarchie. One to drop the Region level and another to drop the zone level.
    I would not mind if you published them again.

    I've posted the same thing - I thought you could get rid of the zone politics by making everything one zone, but then people complained
    about whether it'd be called Zone 1 or Zone 2. :)

    We're starting to see regional attrition, Z1C has consolidated zones recently when a RC retired. That might help with some of the
    complication.

    It was two Regions that went away, because the RCs were on autopilot
    and/or braindead. Good riddance.

    Separate IP-only legacy networks are the biggest complication, I'd
    think - why have a region with a handful of legacy nets with 1-2 nodes
    and no NC? When I first took over R10 I was NC for 5-6 legacy nets that had no separate NC. I took those and moved those into an IP-only net
    where I could (except for one net that's well advertised and nets where people wanted to be NC to manage their own net)

    I think the term "IP-only" is a legacy thing, actually. Nearly the
    entire FidoNet is IP only now, and there's no reason to have some kind
    of special network for them, or for the few remaining POTS systems.
    That's what nodelist flags and fields are for.



    ... Just because it's dead doesn't mean it can't move.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Rob Swindell@1:103/705 to Wilfred van Velzen on Sat Feb 22 15:23:28 2025
    Re: Re: 2025 FTSC election
    By: Wilfred van Velzen to Rob Swindell on Fri Feb 21 2025 11:56 am

    Hi Rob,

    On 2025-02-20 16:15:00, you wrote to me:

    Have you heard about something called the nodelist? ;-)

    Yeah, of course, though I haven't used one in over 20 years.

    At all?

    Right (and in truth, it's been more than 20 years).

    Isn't synchronet/binkit able to use a nodelist?

    BinkIt does have that feature/option (to read hostnames and port numbers from a nodelist), but I don't use that feature (and I'm not the primary author of BinkIt).

    # grep 'Region,' NODELIST.045

    And use the output of that...

    That produces 31 lines without complete addresses, e.g.

    It's all you need to know.

    Region,92,Panama,Pedasi_Panama,John_Dovey,-Unpublished-,300,CM,IBN:gato fue go.s
    y nchronetbbs.org,PING

    You are using an old nodelist! Region,92 was removed from the nodelist on: 27 Nov 2024

    Confirmed, that was an old nodelist, the latest I have now reports:

    $ grep -c Region, NODELIST.052
    30

    Actually there are 30.

    Is each supposedly reachable via netmail at <zone>:<region>/1?

    No, it is: <zone>:<region>/0

    That should work unless their system is misconfigured. In which case it's questionable if they should be a RC. ;-)

    Thank you, I'll sending netmails post haste.
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)
  • From Jason Bock@1:267/310 to Rob Swindell on Sun Feb 23 19:27:11 2025
    On <23 Feb, 15:14>, Rob Swindell wrote to Michiel van der Vlist :

    Re: 2025 FTSC election
    By: Michiel van der Vlist to Dan Clough on Fri Feb 21 2025 12:41 pm

    FTSC standards. And now that these pig headed programmers have even
    invaded
    the FTSC (Rob Swindell, FTS-0009 and Tim Schattkowsky, FTS-5003) we
    may as
    abandon all hope.

    Invaded? I was *asked* to join this committee. And it's not like there's anything of value here to be had by "invading" it.

    The fact that we're all here using and toying with this arcane technology/network still today, decades after any relevancy, means that we're *all* stubborn (pig headed) to a degree, you included. If you meant that as an insult, you failed. This stuff is a hobby, a toy; and I can stubbornly play with my toy as long as I like and won't bullied away by the likes of you. So kindly, and I mean this with the most utmost due respect, go find another sandbox to piss in.

    -Rob
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)

    Rob,

    Well said!

    -Jason

    --- ProBoard v2.32
    * Origin: ProBoard WHQ - SiliconUnderground - siliconu.com (1:267/310)
  • From Rob Swindell@1:103/705 to Maurice Kinal on Mon Feb 24 16:54:34 2025
    Re: 2025 FTSC election
    By: Maurice Kinal to Rob Swindell on Mon Feb 24 2025 07:32 pm

    Hey Rob!

    Actually, I did. Maybe read it?

    I've read it twice and still don't see where your document complies with;

    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    ^AMSGID: origaddr serialno

    The originating address should be specified in a form that
    constitutes a valid return address for the originating network. --------------------------------------------------------------------

    ^AMSGID: 32799.ftsc_pub@1:103/705 2c227caf
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    The above is not a valid return address that I've ever seen.

    1. That clause you quoted is not a requirement.

    2. That *is* a valid return addresss - send a netmail message to that address and I'll get it.
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (1:103/705)
  • From Jason Bock@1:267/310 to Vincent Coen on Mon Feb 24 20:00:22 2025

    Hello Jason!

    24 Feb 25 18:00, you wrote to Michiel van der Vlist:


    Keeping busy. Thank you to BBSing (since 5th grade) and Fidonet, I became passionate and knew I would love to work with computers. I had my first computer at 3 or 4 (1979/1980). I started with a Texas Instruments TI-99/4 then moved to a TI-994A with an expansion unit. I hada blast!

    I should look into doing more with IPv6 as it has been in the back of
    my mind for a while.

    My experience is a little earlier as my first computer was a IBM 1401 and a
    7094 around 1963 as an operator for both. Moved to programming around the same
    time programming in machine code -> Autocode -> Cobol before also playing with
    ICL 1501, 1900's and new range 29/39's and lots of others including Burroughs,
    Honeywell, Univac, Cray, DEC (8/11) Elliot 803 and the very first programmable
    computer available commercially the EE Leo 3 although technically the Leo 2
    was
    one as well but was not made available to purchase.

    There is a wee stack of systems I have missed here.

    My children played with computers in the early 80's with the oldest doing so
    around 1983/4 on two US imported very large kits, and built by me in the mid
    70's before I let them loose on Cromemco Z3 constellations running Cromix (*nix).

    Vincent


    --- Mageia Linux v9 X64/Mbse v1.1.0/GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20240309
    * Origin: Air Applewood, The Linux Gateway to the UK & Eire (2:250/1)

    Vincent,

    Very cool. Those were the good old days. ;)

    -Jason

    --- ProBoard v2.32
    * Origin: ProBoard WHQ - SiliconUnderground - siliconu.com (1:267/310)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to All on Mon Feb 24 21:01:14 2025
    Rob Swindell wrote to Maurice Kinal <=-

    Re: 2025 FTSC election
    By: Maurice Kinal to Rob Swindell on Mon Feb 24 2025 07:32 pm

    Actually, I did. Maybe read it?

    I've read it twice and still don't see where your document complies with;

    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    ^AMSGID: origaddr serialno

    The originating address should be specified in a form that
    constitutes a valid return address for the originating network. --------------------------------------------------------------------

    ^AMSGID: 32799.ftsc_pub@1:103/705 2c227caf
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    The above is not a valid return address that I've ever seen.

    1. That clause you quoted is not a requirement.

    2. That *is* a valid return addresss - send a netmail message to that address and I'll get it.


    Game. Set. Match.




    ... White dwarf seeks red giant for binary relationship.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555.1 to Rob Swindell on Tue Feb 25 09:31:24 2025
    Hello Rob,

    On Monday February 24 2025 11:20, you wrote to me:

    Yeah, that's been debunked:
    https://wiki.synchro.net/faq:misc#ftn_msgid

    You have published your arguments of why you believe your mnethod
    to be "better". You have not disproven my assesment that your
    method is in violation of FTS-0009.

    Actually, I did.

    So you say. Saying so does not make it so.

    Maybe read it?

    I have read it.


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20130111
    * Origin: Klein Schnøørd (2:280/5555.1)
  • From Michiel van der Vlist@2:280/5555 to August Abolins on Tue Feb 25 11:15:25 2025
    Hello August,

    On Monday February 24 2025 09:21, you wrote to me:

    Why is an operational node even required?

    Valid question but irrelevant regarding the election at hand. The rules presently in force require it. Period.

    Chenging the election rules during an election is a no-no. If you want to change that rule, you have to wait until after the current election.


    Cheers, Michiel

    --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20170303
    * Origin: Nieuw Schnøørd (2:280/5555)
  • From Kurt Weiske@1:218/1 to Dan Clough on Wed Feb 26 06:06:41 2025
    Dan Clough wrote to Kurt Weiske <=-

    Probably true, as long as the RCs were competent and kept on top of things.

    That's one thing I wish we had - more consistency at the RC level. It's
    a volunteer position, and response times and responses vary. I've helped
    a couple of people when their RC didn't respond to requests, and I know
    Z1C actively assists new and prospective sysops.

    One area of Fidonet structure that's archaic are separate echomail coordinators, it seems like that's a hat most RCs wear now.



    --- MultiMail/Win v0.52
    * Origin: http://realitycheckbbs.org | tomorrow's retro tech (1:218/1)
  • From Dan Clough@1:135/115 to Kurt Weiske on Wed Feb 26 11:07:32 2025
    Kurt Weiske wrote to Dan Clough <=-

    Probably true, as long as the RCs were competent and kept on top of things.

    That's one thing I wish we had - more consistency at the RC level. It's
    a volunteer position, and response times and responses vary. I've
    helped a couple of people when their RC didn't respond to requests, and
    I know Z1C actively assists new and prospective sysops.

    Yes, agreed.

    One area of Fidonet structure that's archaic are separate echomail coordinators, it seems like that's a hat most RCs wear now.

    Not sure I can even remember seeing a "NEC" in the nodelist recently...
    Yeah, doesn't seem like it's needed any more.


    ... Gone crazy, be back later, please leave message.
    === MultiMail/Linux v0.52
    --- SBBSecho 3.23-Linux
    * Origin: Palantir * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL * (1:135/115)
  • From Tim Schattkowsky@2:2/29 to Michiel van der Vlist on Thu Feb 27 03:46:11 2025
    //Hello Michiel,//

    on *23.02.2025* at *9:59:08* You wrote in Area *FTSC_PUBLIC*
    to *Nicholas Boel* about *"2025 FTSC election"*.

    Was that about the time you held an election for yourself and got a
    bunch of flak for it?
    MvdV> Have you stopped beating your wife?

    Thanks for the information. I dont think I want to continue to talk to you.

    Regards,
    Tim

    --- WinPoint 415.0
    * Origin: Original WinPoint Origin! (2:2/29)