Text 27914, 72 rader
Skriven 2015-09-06 10:34:14 av David Drummond (3:640/305)
  Kommentar till text 27911 av Bill McGarrity (20104.2fidonews)
Ärende: Z1C
===========
On 6/09/2015 9:22 AM, Bill McGarrity -> David Drummond wrote:

 DD>> Yes - laws that are set to provide me with safety, security and
 DD>> services.

 BM> Yet if you don't like any one of the three they provide you're shit out of
 BM> luck.

That's the price one pays for accepting their services, securoty and safety.
[...]
 DD>> Policy 4 is telling me what to do with MY equipment and MY data feeds,
 DD>> all paid for with MY dollar. Nothing is provided by the Fidonet *C
 DD>> structure - why would I kowtow to them?

 BM> OK... I can deal with that.

 BM>> Touch of irony here or can it be the problem back
 BM>> then was the *C structure of Z3 not informing you as they should?

 DD>> You might think that - I don't. The political layer in Fidonet is
 DD>> entirely unnecessary these days,

 BM> Yet you complain no one contacted you regarding the radification election
of P4.

That was then - this is now. Now we don't need them.

When Fidonet was POTS only system more cohesion was required for the
hierarchical node to node transition of mail. Now we just reach out across the
Internet and drop it at the target node (or near to it). No-one has to wear the
 long distance cost etc.

 BM>> Intersting dilemma.

 BM>> BTW, just so you know, the Net I belong to has a very active echo where
any
 BM>> information the /grunts/ should know about is cheerfully shared by the *C
 BM>> structure.

 DD>> Your terminology reinforces the appearance of the priestly sect lording
 DD>> it over the masses.

 BM> Nope.. not all all.  My NC asks for feedback and he gets it from whoever
wants
 BM> to give it im my net. It's more like we're telling him what to do.

How is that you don't get a vote in your own right? You rely on someone else to
represent you - and like real word politicians they rarely do, they support
whomever has bought and paid for them. Fidonet is small enough for node level
plebiscites to be held.

 DD>> It's all about a select few having CONTROL over the rest.

 BM> You seem to confuse communication with control.

They control your answer returned up the line - or not at their whim.

 BM> That's all right. You've lost your control in Oz... one more shouldn't be
a big deal... especially in a hobby.

I never had any control of Australia.....

I do however get to control the network/Internet access of over 25,000 users
world-wide (even some in USA *gasp*). That really gives me a woody I'm sure.

-- 

regards
David

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
 * Origin: The Free World (3:640/305)