Text 3865, 199 rader
Skriven 2009-11-21 12:37:21 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
   Kommentar till text 3841 av Ross Cassell (1:123/456)
Ärende: Some thoughts after the election...
===========================================
Hello Ross,

On Wednesday November 18 2009 17:01, you wrote to me:

 MV>> Hmmm.. That would be a way to get rid of old farts that oppose
 MV>> all change by blocking the road with history books.....

 RC> Those whom disregard history are doomed to repeat it.

History does not repeat itself. It just looks that way to those with tunnel
vision. Other than that: all we learn from history is that we do not learn from
history.

 MV>> But I think it is a bad idea. It would force experienced people
 MV>> out.

 RC> But you already expressed concern over Ivory Towers..

In case FTSC members and only FTSC members may nominate and vote. When FTSC
members can not vote or nominate and they have to go through the election
process every x years, I see no danger of an ivory tower.

 MV>> Term limits are a typical American thing anyway. In Europe we
 MV>> generally do not have them. But then we can get rid of someone by
 MV>> a simple vote of no confidence. A system that prefer over being
 MV>> saddled with someone until the end of a four year term.

 RC> Fidonet is not just Europe or North America.

Almost. The rest has shrunk to a tiny fraction.

 MV>> A perfect example of what I as a scientist and technician abhor:
 MV>> a technical solution for a political problem.

 RC> It wasnt political...

The hell it was!

 RC> I had a node that was overusing existing flags within their specified
 RC> usages that broke nodelist processing and he very much wanted the
 RC> system name intact and offerred POTS, so the pots field was used..

 RC> IBN:<hishostname>:<port> and so on for all the other one million
 RC> protocols he offerred.

An idiot breaking the nodelist with such a stupid move is not a technical
problem. No more than puncturing a tyre with a knife is.

 RC> In fact I had to replace his hand picked NC over the matter.

 RC> But he wasnt the only one doing this, hence my suggestion that gained
 RC> some traction and whats more important, it works.

Are you sure that it works? Do you know how Irex handles the INA flag?

 MV>> A standard created by the *Cs and forced onto the network by the
 MV>> *C's using the nodelist as the weapon.

 RC> Would the result have changed if a non *C suggested it?

I know this: A previous proposal by Frank Vest to put the host name in the
location field, separated by a '#' from the geographical location, did not make
it.

 MV>> Putting the host name or IP address of an IP node in the system
 MV>> name field is a technically sound solution.

 RC> Whats wong with having other options and why do you think surrendering
 RC> the system name field will suffice just because you dont mind it?

What is wrong is that it breaks existing software and forces the few authors
that are still around to update their programs to support yet another way of
listing IP nodes.

What is wrong that to appease a relatively small group of whiners, it forces
EVERYONE ELSE to upgrade their software or be stuck with something that is
broken.

What is wrong is that it shows total disregard for the programmers. I once
suggested that everyone launching a new flag should first write a parser that
does something useful with it. That would stop the introduction of frivolous
ideas that put an undue burden on the authors of software. Didn't make it...

In the end I complied and adapted my software, But it was not a trivial matter.
the INA flag upset my carefully designed system of grouping flags into classes.
Modem capability flags, IP capability flags, e-mail flags, ect, etc. That way I
could specify what flags may carry what parameter ect, without having to hard
code the flags. But the INA flag screwed up that system, I had to introduce an
entire new class of flag: the IP address carrier flag. A flag that contrary to
normal IP capability flags MUST carry a host name, may NOT carry a port number
and may not be used by itself, but must be used in combination with one or more
IP capability flags. It could be done of course and it has been done, but it
was not an exercise in triviality. The INA flag set me to WORK! And for what?
So that politicians could appease a small group of whiners and so gain points
for the next popularity contest.

It would have been one thing had I been a paid employee. A job is a job isn't
it?  But to be forced to work as a volunteer is a different kettle of fish.

 RC> Let them all eat cake!

I associate that with a French queen that lived some 200 years ago. Ancient
history, I fail to see the link to Fidonet.

 MV>> The introduction of the INA flag is an example that illustrates
 MV>> why RCs and ZCs should NOT be in the FTSC. Thank you for poiting
 MV>> me to it.

 RC> I didnt "poit" you to anything, you didnt like the INA idea because
 RC> you felt every one had to sacrifice their system name because you dont
 RC> mind doing so for yourself.

No, I did not like it because it broke existing software, and showed total
disdain for the programmers.

I did not like it because to appease a relatively small group of whiners it
forced EVERYONE ELSE to do something. See above.

 MV>> Could it be that your position is jaded because you are still
 MV>> pissed off that when I rearranged the links for the private FTSC
 MV>> echo you were no longer in the path and could no longer secretly
 MV>> read what went on there?

 RC> On boy, yes Michiel, you stumbled upon it, I have been exposed, you
 RC> are discovering my secret plot to rule the universe for I am really
 RC> Ming The Merciless.. ;)

Hmmm.. seems I struck a nerve....

 MV>> Here is another item of culture. Nominating for such positions is
 MV>> a purely Anglo-Saxon thing. In what the British call the
 MV>> continent people who are interested just step forward and if they
 MV>> qualify they are put on the list of candidates. I know of no
 MV>> Dutch organisation or society where it is done different. I first
 MV>> heard about it when I moved to Cape Town and became a member of
 MV>> the local HAM society. I found it very odd and wondered why they
 MV>> they had this (in my eyes) needless complication.

 RC> and yet you coordinated an election that involved nominations,

When in Rome...

 RC> it must have been painful for you?

Not at all. I can live with having to play by rules that were not my first
choice had I been given the option to choose.

 RC> I didnt notice the inference you made to the way "the Dutch Do it"
 RC> either.. <wink> and you accuse me of insisting things be done the USA
 RC> way, heh!

I do NOT insist that things MUST be done the Dutch way. I was merely pointing
out to you that there are alternatives to a system that uses nomination.

 MV>> If that is such a good idea, why is there no limitation on the
 MV>> term of an RC? Or ZC? How long have you been RC? When will you
 MV>> step aside to make room for fresh blood? You keep harping Ward
 MV>> for being ZC for life, but Janis has been in the velvet seat for
 MV>> ages in my perception. When will the Z1 RC counsel tell here it
 MV>> is time for fresh blood?

 RC> You are the one whom expressed concern for the FTSC, I merely tossed a
 RC> suggestion.

You are avoiding the question. if limitations of terms is such a good idea, why
not start with the *Cs?

 RC> We could leave things as they are and people such as myself will agree
 RC> to withhold a vote for ourselves.

That still leaves the unequality that some candidates and/or FTSC members may
nominate and vote and others may not. I say when some may vote/nominate all
should be allowed to. When not all may vote/nominate none may.

I think Vince Coen did the righyt thing by submitting an all abstain vote. (But
he did it for the wrong reasons).

 MV>> As I see it, limitation of terms is much more needed for th *Cs
 MV>> than for FTSC members. Technicians that are around for a long
 MV>> time, just have their reflexes slow down and they become less
 MV>> productive. They just become old technicians, they do no harm.
 MV>> Politicians OTOH gain power and as we all know power corrupts.

 RC> Deja-Vu, you arent related to Lesley-Dee Dylan are you?

The Lesly-Dee Dylan affair illustrates the drawbacks of the incestious system
where RCs elect the ZCs and the ZC appoints the RCs. THAT is the kind of system
that gets you a ZC for life. Something that you have been harping on when it
pops up somewhere else...

 RC> But you know more about corrupting power than I, for didnt you
 RC> proclaim as policy something you never ran by the group?

Your statement is based on a false assumption and therefore false.

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)