Text 3778, 135 rader
Skriven 2004-12-20 11:19:30 av Philip Lozier (1:267/169)
   Kommentar till text 3754 av SHANNON TALLEY (1:275/311)
Ärende: Z1B <> EP1
==================
 ST> Z1/NAB echos are
 ST> mostly empty.  So, the new user sees all these discussion
 ST> areas (echos) and
 ST> with most of them dead, they simply become confused.
 ST> Based on polling
 ST> information I've received from users over the last few
 ST> months, "empty echos"
 ST> was number 2 on the list.

 ST> Lastly, I just don't see the point in hubbing or carrying
 ST> echos that haven't
 ST> had traffic in them for a year or longer... It just
 ST> doesn't make sense.

I'm going to agree with you whole heartedly on that... dead echoes present a
very, very bad image of the network as a whole.  Users browsing and finding
large numbers of dead weight are presented with a picture that FidoNet is
useless overall, and potential nodes who run BBS's view FidoNet as primarily
dead weight that isn't worth the time to set up on their systems when many can
hook right into QWK networks with traffic almost instantly, or some FTN
networks, without the agrivation, hassles, disputes, and headaches associated
with FidoNet.

It is not a new problem.  It has been going on for years, and is -one- of the
contributing factors to the state Fido is in now... not -the- factor, but
definately one of them.

Arguments go on about who owns echoes... evrybody wants to be in control in
some way or another, even the ones who say things shouldn;t be controled.

How so? The anti-control yellers blat "there should be no control over echoes
in FidoNet, I will do as I please with my echo"... they don't want control from
anybody else so -they- can control it.

Certain mail movers of the past, and present, scream that FidoNet has no
control over echomail distribution, then set terms for distributing echoes such
as e-list requirements, and proceedures for user/moderator disputes, and
"agreement" to SLA's so -they- can control it.

Me, me, me... look at me! I'm a honcho! The network couldn;t survive without
me!  *I* make it happen!

Everybody wants control, and those who want it the most are the ones who yell
the loudest about non-control.

What everybody has missed over the years should be real obvious... in order for
FidoNet to work effectively and in a productive nature, it has to operate as a
cooperative organization.  An organization needs to be organized.  Being
organized means that proceedures, guidelines, and structure (yup... for those
who don't get it... RULES) need to be in place. It very much lacks that right
now, and this, before ANYTHING else, is the primary reason FidoNet is failing
and falling by the wayside.

Not the internet causing it... the way FidoNet is mainly being distributed now
in many areas proves FidoNet works over the internet.

Newsgroups, which have also been around forever still generate a whole lot of
text based traffic, on that same glittery bells and flashing lights web hosting
system, the same internet being blamed for the demise of text based forum style
messaging, and believe
it or not, looking lately I notice that 80 or 90 or so of some 110 or 120 I
turned on recently just for observation purposes are -NOT- SPAM filled hate
spewing arenas as newsgroups have so often been protrayed and generate GOOD
traffic. They're being added for public access on my BBS this week. Nope... the
internet isn't killing text based forum style messaging... it is what is
keeping it going in venues outside of FidoNet.

Now... BBS's, networks, and the internet... sorry folks... the internet hasn;t
killed that yet either.  I am a regular on several internet based BBS's that
have active participation, and funny thing... some of these carry -multiple-
networks of that outdated text style forum based messaging, and they in some
ways put FidoNet to shame.  How? Well... first of all, they don;t have hundreds
upon hundreds of echoes taking up space and straining the eyes of users trying
to find areas of interest... WYSIWYG... you choose an area, and guess what?  Is
it possible?  Yup... you actually see current messages on the topic mentioned
in the description lines.  You don;t see people arguing about policy, voting,
and who owns areas and the like, because from what I've seen some of these
other networks there is no voting, the network determines what echoes are
distributed under their network name, and the governing body is who puts them
into place and distributes them.  Policy is unchangable other than by those who
formed and are in charge of the network, and you follow the rules or are gone.

In my oppinion, some of these other nets I have seen are much more attractive
and succesful than FidoNet is now... even with their small list of areas and
tiny nodelists compared to FidoNets counterparts, they are organized neatly and
present an image that doesn't make the public run for the hills, or another
network, to participate in, and the areas they -do- carry have traffic...
AND... (is *THIS* possible?) they have "USERS" posting in areas!  Holy cow! Is
that still possible?

I notice more and more BBS's carrying multiple networks, but absolutely no
FidoNet, and have asked some SysOps about joining... from the tone of some of
the responses I've gotten I can almost picture the looks of horror that went
onto their faces the second they saw the word "fidonet" typed in on their
system. FidoNet currently has a very, very bad reputation, and is avoided like
the plague by alot of
BBS SysOps.

Personaly, I look forward to the day when the nodelist has shrunk to a point
that only those serious about wanting to have FidoNet remain operational, and
succesful once again, remain.  It is then that the listing of echoes will be
reduced to a realistic point, traffic wise, and proportional to the number of
nodes and the traffic they produce, and it is then that the serious minded can
develop operational standards that are beneficial to "the network" as a whole,
rather
than the personal, political, or social beliefs of individuals factoring in an
area (operating a viable network) that such beliefs and oppinions have no place
influencing. The productive and continuing operation of the network outweighs
the social oppinions of the members.

People (nodes) try to aproach FidoNet as if it were a country, league of
nations, or some other form of social structure.  The only "social" aspect of
FidoNet is the interaction in the echoes.  Social issues do not belong on the
background operational level.  The issues at the level of how the network
operates and what makes it sucessful in its presentation and attractiveness to
users should be based purely upon what is best for the network itself, not what
social practices outside of the network are.

There is more I really want to say, but I've gone on enough about this for
now... I guess its time to start writing some of those articles I had ideas
about. To some, they may find whats been on my mind interesting... to others,
they will
"love" me even more than they do now ;>  I am sure that publicly it will be
those who will have ever growing "love" for me that will be spewing their
nonsense that has nothing to do with beneficial operations of the network as a
whole, and the others who I will be getting the more reasonable netmails I have
become familiar with on some of my thoughts... the second group are the smart
ones!  They talk to me in netmail about some concepts, shielded from the
comments of idiots who are too blind to understand the obvious, and where ideas
can be exchanged reasonably about the path that needs to be pursued.

Phil

--- FMail/Win32 1.60
 * Origin: (1:267/169)