Text 4196, 60 rader
Skriven 2010-11-10 17:35:13 av Carol Shenkenberger (778.ftsc_pub)
   Kommentar till text 4195 av Alexey Vissarionov (2:5020/545)
Ärende: competence
==================
    
 >  >> 1. I say people had proven their technical competence if ((they
 >  >> participate software development or any other technical activities
 >  >> related to the Fidone AND ((the results of their work are widely
 >  >> used) OR (their work allow other people to provide more service to
 >  >> the community))).
 >  CS> You will note the current 5000 series documents include the Z2
 >  CS> structures for modem code reduction as used in Z2 before then.
 >  CS> I got them from Micheal before he was a member and worked with
 >  CS> the group to have them added.
 > 
 > Working with documents is related to FTSC activities, not to Fidonet in
 > general... Example: my writing of http://gremlin.ru/fido/ndl2dns and patchin
 > software were technical activities, but writing FSP-1035 wasn't.

We are discussing the FTSC here.  While many are or have in the past been
software developers it is not and never has been a requirement.  

 >  CS> If it we not for politics, 0000-0-0-0-0 would be the only string
 >  CS> allowed for ION's (some zones mandate it now) as a fully blockable
 >  CS> *known* string that allows even Z3 to handle it.
 > 
 > The only? Do you forget the "-Unpublished-"?
 > It is the only correct value to be used as a mark for POTS-incapable nodes.

Until the time when all ZC's convert to the new Makenl with full
functionality, that is not a universal answer.  I agree it is the better one
but for now the best we can do is have a correct standard in place. 
Currently 0000-0-0-0-0 is in use as zone policy here and there.

As an end user, you can edit/replace 0000-0-0-0-0 with -Unpublished- for your
own processing with no harm.  There are internal reasons in Z2 that have
prevented Ward from adapting the makenl so all can convert to -Unpublished-
at this time.  You will have to ask him but I am sure they are good reasons,
just internal to your own folks.

 >  CS> We also added a set of help files for new sysops to de-mystify various
 >  CS> things but I am not sure if many added to that set but me.
 > 
 > Are they still actual?

Probably pretty dated now.  That was some time back.  

Come to think of it, if Micheal would like to continue that, I've a darn good 
'FAQ' set I'd suggest the SCInet 'leader' submit and would be willing to help
him trim it.  Stumbled across it about 6 months ago again.  I'll ask later
and see if this is a path he wishes.  Note FAQ's aren't FSP's etc. 
Definately a lower level item but n interesting sideline Scott came up with.

 
 >  >> All possible coincidences are deliberate.
 >  CS> Can you tell me what you have done for the FTSC?

 > I do what I can for the Fidonet at whole, not only for FTSC.

I have too but the query was FTSC specific.  

   xxcarol
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS telnet://shenks.synchro.net (1:275/100)