Text 1537, 103 rader
Skriven 2012-07-29 21:58:04 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.0)
   Kommentar till text 1529 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Ward's Z1 node number
=============================
 MvdV>> No, I do not know it. Ward HAS moved to the US. He walks there,
 MvdV>> he eats there, he sleeps there, he shits there. More to the
 MvdV>> point, he is the sysop of a system that is  physically located
 MvdV>> in the US and that system can send and receive netmail.

 ml> 1. does he have a work visa in the US?
 ml> 2. does he pay income taxes in the US?
 ml> 3. does he pay rent or land taxes in the US?
 ml> 4. does he get paid to work in the US?

 MvdV> To all of the above: I don't know. Is it relevant regarding the
 MvdV> application of his Z1 node number?

it is as far as the statement of ward has "moved to the US" which we all know
is false... he is here on a temp basis like he has been doing for years... why
does he wait till now to attempt to file for a node number? it doesn't add
up... if he was serious about it, he would have done it years and years ago
when he first started coming over here instead of using a point number which he
has made obvious when he has been here... 

 MvdV>> Secondly, there is nothing that says one can only have a node
 MvdV>> number in one zone at any time. There is plenty of precedence
 MvdV>> to the contrary. Pablo Kleinman had a node in Spain and one in
 MvdV>> the US. Sometimes he was in Spain, sometimes he was in the US,
 MvdV>> but he kept both systems running all the time. Nobody
 MvdV>> complained.

 ml> good example... except that pablo left the network years and years
 ml> ago...

 MvdV> So? Is their an experation date on precedence?

that depends... especially when there have been others who have had multiple
AKAs in multiple zones...

 ml>  there are others, though, and there have been complaints about
 ml> them...

 MvdV> Were these complants honoured? Details please...

no... they were not honored... AFAIK, they were dismissed because those
complaints came from out of zone and they were none of any other zone's
business... just like this one which apparently hasn't shown up yet...

of course, it may be floundering in a non-secure directory... depending on the
*C's setup that it may have been sent to... one would assume that it was sent
to the *NC* covering said area and not an RC in an attempt to circumnavigate
around the established rules... you are one of those attempting to play by the
published policy rules right now... not only in this case but also in the case
of another system located outside your region (which makes it none of your
business, too)...

 ml> [trim]

 MvdV>> Ward did indeed not apply for a Z1 _AKA_. An AKA is a
 MvdV>> additional number for an already listed system. Ward applied
 MvdV>> for a _new_ number for a _new_ system. A system located in the
 MvdV>> US.

 ml> this argument is total political crap... AKA == address, period...

 MvdV> AKA = Also Known As...

yep... and many "civilians" with one address state "my AKA" when speaking of
their node number... especially newbies and even numerous old timers...

 JK>> he simply inquired on how to go about it.  He was told how, and
 JK>> as of right now, no application has been received."

 MvdV>> Ah, it got lost in the mail.... yet another excuse...

 ml> no one has said that it got lost...

 MvdV> Just pointing out that "lost in the mail" is a common excuse for
 MvdV> defaulting. 

it is still information not in evidence...

 ml> are you putting words in wards mouth?

 MvdV> Is that a leading question?

no... not at all... you seem to be putting words in ward's mouth and indicating
that he has actually sent an application to the *C covering that montana
area...

 MvdV>> We all know that the so called "case histories" are fiction.
 MvdV>> They are made up, they are not cases that actually occured.
 MvdV>> They set no precedent.

 ml> you have proof of this?

 MvdV> Have you proof that any of those actually happened?

i have the original policy documents... who are you to say that those published
cases didn't happen? they were before your time... and it would appear that you
are either trying to throw the baby out with the bath water or you are simply
(again) not playing by the published rules... you can't have it both ways...
either shit or get the fuck off the pot ;)

)\/(ark

 * Origin:  (1:3634/12)