Text 46363, 239 rader
Skriven 2007-01-02 00:22:00 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
  Kommentar till text 46294 av Matt Bedynek (1:106/1)
Ärende: Kindergarten
====================
Hello Matt!

On Monday January 01 2007 01:44, you wrote to me:

 MvdV>> That status quo you mention never existed but in part of
 MvdV>> Fidonet. Here in Z2 the moderator was never invincible. What
 MvdV>> Roy did was attempt to ban a user "just because he could".
 MvdV>> Here in Z2 no moderator would have gotten away with that.

 MB> The moderator is not invincible here either.  As a node, the moderator
 MB> is directly subject to policy and practice.

Echomail is not subject to policy. So how does that fly?

 MB> If a moderator is a bad one, he will create a situation where all the
 MB> users vacate the conference and start a new one that will likely be
 MB> far more sucessful.

So why is everyone whining how bad a moderator Björ is still here? Why have
they not created an alternate echo and moved there?

 MvdV>> The user would have appealed to the ZEC and the ZEC would have
 MvdV>> reversed the moderator's decision because the moderator
 MvdV>> was unable to show what rule had been violated.

 MB> Really? You have an active ZEC?  So, when people were booted from
 MB> fn_sysop, did they contact that ZEC?

The moderator did not reside on Z2 and therefore was not subject to EP1 or the
ZEC2 jurisdiction. So appelaing to the ZEC2 who have been of no use.

 MB> It seems to me you in Z2 say "we use echopol" but are actually using a
 MB> bastardized version of it.

You are entitled to have your "seemings". Does not mean you have it right.

 MB> You cannot claim to have used any of it in totality -- only parts that
 MB> are convenient.

That it contradicts with your perception does not mean we can not make that
claim.

 MvdV>> With increased interaction between the zones such a conflict
 MvdV>> was bound to occur sooner or later.

 MB> Especially with too many egoes involved.

That is a given.

 MvdV>> If it had been done maintaining the (Z1) status quo. The
 MvdV>> majority of participants choose another path. It s no use
 MvdV>> crying over spilled milk...

 MB> I will expect you to remain silent when people from this zone
 MB> complains about the moderator here. You lost the right to complain
 MB> when you endorsed such behavior in fn_sysop.

I did what I thought was right at the time. I do not see why that should lose
me the right to speak now. So I shall not remain silent.

 MvdV>> Your opinion. It was only your tradition....

 MB> It works far better than your bastardized use of echopol.

Your opinion to which you are entitled. I am of different opinion.

 MB> The moment your way was tested everything broke and it still is.

To which I could say that it was *your* way that was tested and that is what
broke it.

 MB> This conference and fn_sysop cannot be moderated even if the moderator
 MB> wanted to.   I venture to say that if push comes to shove, no others
 MB> can be either.

You got that right. When push comes to shove, no echo can be moderated. Not any
more. There was a time when it could, but the conditions that made it possible
no longer exists. It has little or nothing to do with "your method" or "my
method" but it is simply that the conditions that made it possible no longer
exist.

So.. what is left is to avoid letting push come to shove. ENET.SYSOP is still
working fine....

 MvdV>> No. Roy abused his power and made the error of doing it against
 MvdV>> a participant who had enough support to stand up against it.
 MvdV>> Roy overplayed his hand.

 MB> You just said half a dozen times in a dozen different messages that
 MB> the moderator has no power. If the moderator has no power, how can he
 MB> abuse it?

Playing word games eh?

Roy attempted to abuse his mandate.

 MvdV>> The lesson should be that someone who has been voted in can be
 MvdV>> voted out if he/she abuses the position.

 MB> Yes, next year, next election.

That is *your* system. In our system elected officials get voted out right away
if they losse the voters confidence or exceed their mandate.

 MB> If fn_sysop has a shitty moderator this year, as capable operators
 MB> (we probaly carry the conference already) switch to another.  Anything
 MB> less is simply children fighting over who can control the echotag and
 MB> get their way.

Your opinion to which you are entitled.

 MB>>>  Nobody forces you to remain a fidonet node.

 MvdV>> And nobody can force me to submit to rules I never was part in
 MvdV>> creating and never agreed to follow...

 MB> Nobody forced you to link in to and use fn_sysop.

Linking in does not mean I automatically submit to the Z1 set of rules. Hell I
have asked several times if FN_SYSOP was a Z1 echo before I linked. I was
assured that it was not a Z1 echo, but an international echo....

 MvdV>> When you look into their hearts, most people do not want to be
 MvdV>> moderated. Why else would so many have left for the anarchy of
 MvdV>> usenet?

 MB> I use internet msg boards (html) that are wholely owned by a single
 MB> individual or group of individuals.  They have no written policy or
 MB> agreement to their users.  They can boot you without any cause
 MB> whatsoever.

Yes, some boards operate like that. They can do that because the moderator has
physical control over the server.

 MB> And, ironically, any single one of those message boards are far more
 MB> active and lively than the whole of this side of fidonet.
 MB> When a user gets out of line and refuses to comply he is booted and
 MB> peace resumes.

They can afford that because they have an near infinite supply of potential
users.

 MB> A person like you would log in to the forums and say "I did not agree
 MB> to your rules.  Where did I sign?  This forum is on the internet I can
 MB> do what I want.  You cannot moderate me!"  Your system not only
 MB> promotes chaos and anarchy but encourages it.  You compare echomail
 MB> conferences and rogue moderators to living in a country.

I am not promoting anything. I am merely making observations. Shooting the
messenger never made the problem go away. I am not theone needing moderation.
It is those that are unwilling or unable to moderate themselves that are the
problem.

 MB> Your echopol system might work if even you all used it as it is
 MB> written but from where I am sitting it seems you only reference parts
 MB> of it to give validity to your actions.   No offense, but your
 MB> arguement is highly hypocritial, lacks logic, and is poorly
 MB> constructed.

Your opinion to which your are entitled.

The premise that we cherry pick echopol and use enforce  the parts that we like
is false.

 MvdV>> So why are you still here?

 MB> I'm a diehard.  I love the technology, fidonet gives me a chance to
 MB> keep my programming skills, as limited as they are, active and used.
 MB> I enjoyed fidonet from the moment I discovered it as a user.

So do I.

 MvdV>> Good question. OTOH, why are the echos with anarchy so popular?
 MvdV>> Remember FIDO_SYSOP? Created as an alternative for FN_SYSOP.
 MvdV>> In theory it is run exactly the way you and Jeff and the others
 MvdV>> who complain about the anarchy want. In practise... it is dead.
 MvdV>> So why is that?

 MB> fn_sysop, compared to past patterns, is essentially dead.  Why is
 MB> that?

It is not dead. It is just subject to interecho oscillation. Something that has
been going on for a couple of years now. Flow oscilates being a set of popular
echos. Flow here is high, and it FN_SYSOP we just had a low, but flow is rising
there again.

 MvdV>> That has been going on ever since most of the technicians left
 MvdV>> leaving the polictians in the driver's seat.

 MB> Even if all the technicians remained we would be no further ahead.  In
 MB> fact, the technicans really never left, we left the technicans.

Semantics.

 MB> They kept on going, developing new technology and we simply chose to
 MB> not follow.  Fidonet used to follow its technology, not the other way
 MB> around.

Used to. Until it met its limits and was overtaken by new technology. Like the
horse and carriage was overtaken by the motor vehicle.

 MvdV>> The echotag never was yours in the first place. That is your
 MvdV>> error. The consencus that a moderator "owns" and echo never was
 MvdV>> network wide.  It existed only in your part of the world. In
 MvdV>> other parts of Fidonet en echo is not "owned". On those other
 MvdV>> parts the moderator is a user tolerated care taker at best.

 MB> Sure, I can branch off fidonews and carry my own echo with that tag.

Tyat still does not make it your property.

 MB> But your statement proves my contention is that people only remain and
 MB> engage in such actions out of pride.  It is not "over simplification",
 MB> it is fact.

It is an oversimplification.

 MvdV>> As I see it you simply have failed to adapt to the reality of
 MvdV>> globalisation. ;-)

 MB> fn_sysop has been carried outside of the zone for longer than you
 MB> realize.

It was Z1 run and Z1 dominated until some five years ago. Like many other echos
btw. It was when the balance of Z1 domination shifted that the problems
began...

 MB> The globalization was already done and gone long before you attempted
 MB> to asset your idea of order.

It is not "my" idea of order and I think you are wrong in your assesment of the
time line of globalisation. The so called "international" echos. The ones with
tags without a dot in them, were mostly of Z1 origin and de facto Z1 echos with
"guests" from other zones. Were, past tense.

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20060315
 * Origin: http://www.van.der.vlist.org (2:280/5555)