Text 3513, 90 rader
Skriven 2004-12-19 09:52:00 av Bob Seaborn (1:140/12)
   Kommentar till text 3505 av SHANNON TALLEY (1:275/311)
Ärende: Z1B <> EP1
==================
Shannon,

 >
 > Once, a very long time ago, the backstat.na file was up-to-date, and we

      You have things somewhat wrong and confused.

      BACKSTAT.NA is a weekly 'newsletter' that explains changes to what is
being transported on the North American Backbone.  The list of echos is known
as BACKBONE.NA.  It is by no means 'official anything'! Anyone involved in the
North American Backbone is free to transport, or not, any echo they wish,
whether listed in the BACKBONE.NA, elist, (or anything else), or not.


 > had
 > a list of echos which we considered to be "Fidonet" based echos.  They

      BACKBONE.NA is a list of echos that moderators have requested that the
North American Backbone distributes on their behalf.  Never has there been a
claim by the North American Backbone that these echos were anything but the
property of the individual moderators.  The North American Backbone uses the
elist, as well as anything else available, to determine who the moderator is
_before_ acting on a moderator's request to make changes to an echo's
distribution.

 > were
 > never completely definitive, but they were up-to-date.  One was never

      BACKBONE.NA is _still_ as up-to-date as individual moderators keep it.
The North American Backbone is *NOT* echopolice, never has been, never will be!

 > required to maintain a single item on the list to be considered a
 > Fidonet node, but rather, simply have a node number listed.

      Huh?  Aquiring and holding a Fidonet node number has *nothing* to do
with any echos being distributed.  Sorry but you seem quite confused over this
subject.

 >
 > I'm not advocating the requirement of sysops to carry anything. I'm
 > simply
 > suggesting that we have an up-to-date listing of echos which are
 > considered
 > FidoNet.  A "guide" to those echos which fall within "our" Fidonet
 > domain.

      There *never* has been such a thing, so why start now?

 >
 > As it stands right now, one can hub a series of newsgroups and call
 > themFidonet.  It's apples and oranges, and it's (imho) helping
 > Fidonet'scontinued fragmentation.

      You can call an orange an apple, but that wouldn't be correct.  Anybody
can call anything what they want, with the only result being that they could be
shown to be foolish or worse.

 >
 > From what I've been told, George Peace maintains the backstat.na, and it
 > has been a VERY long time since that list has been updated.


      George Peace NEVER maintained either BACKSTAT.NA nor BACKBONE.NA,
never! Also, fyi, George Peace has not been involved in Fidonet for close to 5
years now.

      Initially BACKBONE.NA and BACKSTAT.NA were maintained by John
Souvestre, but he ceased doing sometime before he left the North American
Backbone to form his own distribution system (all due to politics, not
technology).  The last issues he released was on 29 Nov 1998.

      I, with the help of some robot software known as the NAB Robot, have
been maintaining BACKSTAT.NA, and BACKBONE.NA since Dec 06, 1998, issuing an
updated issue every Sunday morning shortly after midnight Central Standard Time
since then.

      Now, there you go, the complete accurate history of the BACKSTAT.NA and
BACKBONE.NA.  Feel free to subscribe to the BACKBONE fileecho to receive your
very own weekly copy every week.





                       .....Bob

 * email - bob@fidonet.ca

--- GEcho/32 & IM 2.50
 * Origin: http://www.fidonet.ca (1:140/12)