Text 27994, 208 rader
Skriven 2015-09-07 12:38:37 av David Drummond (3:640/305)
  Kommentar till text 27984 av Bill McGarrity (20176.2fidonews)
Ärende: Z1C
===========
On 7/09/2015 9:47 AM, Bill McGarrity -> David Drummond wrote:

 DD>> I do not live in FIDO - FIDONET is just a set of technical specs. All
 DD>> else is personal equipment and personally financed data links.

 BM> Yet you play your games here... a presence.  Think of it as a virtual
 BM> reality and you ARE a member of this evil society!!

I don't have a membership card or a membership number. My computer has a node
number, just as it has an IP. I am not a member of the Internet either.
[...]
 DD>> Those are not internet rules - they are the laws of the country I live
 DD>> in. The Internet has no laws.

 BM> So you're admitting you have to follow rules regarding internet usage?
Mmmmm...
 BM> sounds alot like Fido.

Nope I obey (some of) the laws of the land. I don't get child porn via snail
mail either. I am not a member of Australia Post BTW.
[...]
 DD>> I didn't say that - I specified that I wasn't dependent on my NC to
 DD>> pass on my netmail. You are aware of the nodelist entry for a "mail
 DD>> host"?

 BM> Yes, and /your/ was wrong terminology.  In some way you, as well as I, are
 BM> dependent on the structure as used now.  Even if we get rid of all the
RC's
 BM> there will still be NC's that handle duties. Hell, even you are running
 BM> an NC flag. Why?  Thought they weren't needed?

We need nodelist clerks at the moment. If we could come up with a dynamic
system - like DHCP, then we wouldn't need them either. True democracy and
freedom - everyone with the same (lack of) power.

 BM>> Lots of them out there that have no idea you're even in the loop.

 DD>> They don't even know of me so why would they care?

 BM> They're caring people.  You may not see it... but there are a few in the
world.

Very few in Z1 Fidonet (going by the behaviour here)

 BM>>  How does one send you netmail?

 DD>> You send it routed I guess - same as you would any other PVT node. I
 DD>> have received netmails since I have been listed PVT so it must be
 DD>> possible.

 BM> My point.

We don't need a political layer of power mongers telling us what/how to do just
to get mail. Just the technical specs.


 BM>> I can't send it direct therefore it has to go through one of
 BM>> the *C's I'm connected to. That in itself blows your theory out of the
 BM>> water.

 DD>> Or you drop it at this net's mail host

 BM> Which is?

3:640/0 according to a nodelist 247 I collected from Janis yesterday. Are you
not seeing that?

But unless you want to make an international phone call, you cannot, he is POTS
only according to that list. I guess you're going to have to send it routed
from your end, or drop it at R54C - or Z3C. You could drop it anywhere in
Fidonet actually and it would find its way to me - assuming people have their
systems set up correctly.

Maybe better just to say what you want here.

 DD>> [...]
 BM>>> It seems it's still required in cases such as yourself.

 DD>>> Nope no LD costs for my node. - Just normal Internet expenses.

 BM>> I was talking about your internet expense as you pointed out
 BM> previously.

 DD>> That expense doesn't vary with the distance of the target node as it
 DD>> did when moving mail by POTS.

 BM> No one said it does... I'm stictly talking about today's FIdo.... not
 BM> the past.

Today's Fido does not exist as it did - just a bunch of us sending messages to
each other.
 DD>> [...]
 DD>>> Each node has a majority of one - the "net" concept is as outdated as
 DD>>> the zone concept. There is no need for hierarchical mail movement now.

 BM>> Again, your opinion but without them and their routing procedure how do I
 DD>> send you a netmail?

 DD>> You don't need your *Cs for that, you could drop it at someone in the
 DD>> structure here (if they're not PVT). Maybe at the mail host.
 DD>> [...]

 BM>> Do you call your elected officials in Oz uber lords?

 DD>> Just the Fidonet ones.

 BM> So you're saying Fido uber lords are elected? I see.  So either way,
you're
 BM> stuck without a vote.

Huh? I get to vote in Fidonet elections (that involve me)

 BM> Intersting.  I'd be more concerned with gaining the power of the ballot in
your country of residence rather than worrying about Fido,
 BM> which you stated many times you really don't give two shits about.  Why
put the effort into protesting IF you were aware or had a vote 25+ years ago?
 BM> You want a change.. call for it.

Australia has two major political parties. They only difference between them is
the colour of their ties.

 DD>>> Try one vote per node, and a central vote counting system - TRUE
 DD>>> democracy.

 BM>> Sorry to say you're living a dream...

 DD>> So.. true democracy in a group as small as ours is not possible? It
 DD>> certainly worked in the motorcycle group I used to belong to. All
 DD>> members got to vote on stuff.

 BM> You had 2,700+ bikers in your group?

No - about 600 at its height I think

 BM> Damn... must have taken a long time to get crosstown.

They never rode all together at one time - they were spread out over the whole
state. Think of an area about 1/5th the size of USA....
[...]

 BM>> Without the originators of Fido we wouldn't be having this discussion....
 BM>> respect your elders.. ;)

 DD>> Respect is not just given, it must be earned.

 BM> So by using this technology you're already given your respect.

Respect may need defining - to me it is to hold in high regard. I have no such
feelings for the FTN software authors - they just... are

 BM> No respect, don't use it...

I have entered in to no such agreement. have you been partaking of Joe's secret
"reading between the lines" book?
[...]
 DD>> Not dreams, facts.

 BM> Again, outside of the realm of our discussion...

I'm pointing out that I am not in Fidonet for the "power and glory"

 DD>> [...]

 DD>>> Others can communicate with me - simply send an netmail, or say
 DD>>> something in one of these echoes. my system resides behind NATs -
 DD>>> somewhat difficult to poll in.

 BM>> But God forbid... that would depend on a *C to route it to you.

 DD>> We do have a mail host in this net... My NC need not be involved!

 BM>>> Till then, you're at the mercy of your NC which,

 DD>>> My NC is a right utter bastard - I wouldn't leave myself at his mercy.
 DD>>> My node operates independent of him.

 BM>> Yet you're still here at his mercy whether you believe it or not.

 DD>> He will/can not do anything against me - I have control of him :)

 BM> But zero control over the other *C structure.... if they so desire.

We work in this region/zone by cooperation - we don't need rules to make us
obey.
[...]
 BM> We're all an island and as such we are all dependent on some sort of
 BM> /structure/ that allows conmunication.

Only the technical structure - we don't need any political layer of people who
think they run things.

 BM> Whether you can see that or not is not my issue... nor my monkeys... nor
my circus.

 BM> You're allowed to have your opinions as I am allowed... but you know what
they
 BM> say about opinions...

Everyone is entitled an opinion - and if they feel the need for one I'll give
them mine.

-- 

regards
David (Uber Lord)

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