Text 29470, 128 rader
Skriven 2015-12-23 17:54:44 av mark lewis (1:3634/12.73)
  Kommentar till text 29433 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Rules of Echomail
=========================
23 Dec 15 21:22, you wrote to Joe Delahaye:

 MV>>> So you say. Saying it is so, does not make it so hwoever. If you
 MV>>> can't back it up with a quote from some recognised document it is
 MV>>> just your personal opinion, nothing more.

 JD>> No, it is common practice.  As I told David, it has been done that
 JD>> way since before any echo policy anywhere.

 MV> Not in this part of the world. It certainly was not "common practise"
 MV> here when I became involved in 1992. It was the cost sharing
 MV> organisations that ditributed the echomail. It was the cost sharing
 MV> organisations that decided which echos were distributed. It was not
 MV> possible to just "found an echo" and become the moderator. Moderators
 MV> were the executive force of the CSOs. They derived their mandate - and
 MV> their teeth - by proxy from the right of might of the CSOs.

damn... you guys got royally fucked over there... some tried that shit here and
were promptly routed around... no one has /ever/ had to be a member of /any/
cost sharing clique... every operator has been free to set up their own
connections with any other systems at any time and pull any echos they desired
regardless of those cost sharing groups... it has always been possible to
simply found an echo and start distributing it... the CSOs never had any say in
that...

 MV> That system collapsed with the coming of Fdio over IP when their no
 MV> longer was any cost to share and so the CSOs lost their right of
 MV> might. But then there was Echopol 1...

no wonder you guys have such problems... you were at least 10 years behind and
not even trying to follow along...

 JD>> You know, the common practice the FTSC writes documents about, except
 JD>> this is not technical.

 MV> The FTSC documents CURRENT practise. Something different.

errrrmmmm... current practise /is/ (a) common practise and vis a versa...

 MV>>>>> Really? How about the 2011 fidonews coup? The revolutionairs did
 MV>>>>> no seem to honour those rights....

 JD>>>> Since you know I was against that,

 MV>>> That didn't stop it from happening.

just like no CSO could stop you from pulling your mail from anywhere you wanted
to...

 JD>> No, it didn't

 MV> So what is your point?

 JD>>>> I will simply say that in that case, there were two echos with the
 JD>>>> same name.

 MV>>> Two echos with the same name? That is a situation that the echolist
 MV>>> was supposed to prevent. So either we have been lied to regarding
 MV>>> the echolist, or they were not two echos with the same name.

 JD>> If everyone used the echolist, then it could not have happened.

 MV> No? Those creating the second echo uswed the echolist. It happened anyway.

those in charge of the first echo should have used the echolist... but no...
"you" were too busy fighting battles that should never have been started in the
first place... battles that stemmed from the *ABUSE* "you" suffered at the
hands of "your" CSOs over there which was compounded by "your" own ignorance
and "your" fear of being shut out...

 JD>> If everyone used the echolist, then it could not have happened.

 MV> If everyone had used Echopol1 it could no have happend...

do you not yet understand that one of those folks that desired to control
everything was the main operator behind echopol1? why do you think it is so
strict as to how to create an echo and get it distributed???

 JD>> If everyone used the echolist, then it could not have happened.

 MV> Tough luck, we do not recognise the echolist.

as we don't recognize the pile of shit that echopol1 is...

 JD>> Just like the echo I am hearing about that Lee is started with the
 JD>> same name as an established one and thus getting people to crosslink

 MV> That woukld not have happened if everyone had recognised echopol'.

no, worse shit would have happened if echopol1 had been enforced...

 JD>>>> The FN Sysop Coup can also be referred to if you wish.  That was
 JD>>>> more of a coup then then the Fidonews one.

 MV>>> That's your opinion. What I see is an echo where two sysops claim to
 MV>>> be the moderator and post rules. Neither of them is the founder of
 MV>>> the echo, but one of them had the echo turn over to him by his
 MV>>> predecessor, the other just claims it.

 JD>> Go back a few more years.  When Roy was 'deposed'  Nobody was handed
 JD>> the reigns by the predecessor there.

 MV> And yet you claimed that it has always been "common practise" that the
 MV> mandate is handed down from successor to succesor.

in the majority of areas, yes... only a minor few had any elections...

 JD>> That is how Bjorn got to be moderator,

 MV> Which shows that the world changes. Yes, there was a revolt and Roy
 MV> was kicked out for abusing his power. That ended the "xommon practise"
 MV> that you claim always existed.

no... that only shows what one echo did... that action may have ended common
practise in that specific echo but it did not change all the other echos...
they still had/have their common practise and they still follow it today...

)\/(ark

"So let me ask you a question about this brave new world of yours. When you've
killed all the bad guys, and when it's all perfect, and just and fair, and when
you have finally got it exactly the way you want it, what are you going to do
with the people like you? The trouble makers. How are you going to protect your
glorious revolution from the next one?" - The twelfth Doctor

... Oh, don't be too hard on him. He's one of our oldest Echo Loons.
---
 * Origin:  (1:3634/12.73)