Hello Alex,

 AS>>> of protocols which use ip as transport (gopher /http/ftp/ICQ/
 AS>>> IRC/news/forums/chats etc) and I see fidonet also benefits from
 AS>>> this transport.

 MV>> Yes and so Binkp is just another protocol that is put on top of the
 MV>> TCP/IP structure of the InterNet.

 AS> I see it under the different angle. BinkP also is put on top of the
 AS> TCP/IP protocol as well as InterNet. TCP/IP is not a structure,

Semantics. Where does the 'I' in TCP/IP stand for?

 AS> it is just a transport protocol for global networks of ANY kind.

And the Binkp protocol is put on top of that as I said.

 MV>> When adding something one always has to ask "what is the
added value".
 MV>> So I ask you, what does Binkp offer that is not already offered to the
 MV>> InterNet user by http/ftp/ICQ/ etc?

 AS> BinkP  offers nothing to the InterNet users, it offers some
 AS> convinience to the FidoNet users.

FidoNet users that make use of the InterNet to transport their packets are
also Internet users.

 AS> I regard the FidoNet as a community and not as a set of
 AS> the protocols.

If you remove the bikes from a bikes club the community that forms it well
fall apart faster than a snowflake in hell.

 MV>> Because that is what you are talking about aren't you? You want to
 MV>> attract new users and the only place they can be found is the
 MV>> InterNet.  What has FidoNet to offer to /them/?

 AS> In general it offers more easy way to participate.

To participate in /what/?

 AS>>> I see here a common trend. I mean people need more than only
 AS>>> transport, they also need to be organised by some social mean.

 MV>> What is the social structure of FidoNet?

 AS> It is too complex concept to be described in two words.

Use as many words as you need. If it exists you must be able to describe it.

 MV>> Do you really think it will stay upright if we radiacally
 MV>> change technology? I doubt it.

 AS> No need to change all the technology, just to widen low transport
 AS> layer. Yes, I think that such a widening can serve as an upright.

Please provide the arguments for your assertion.

 MV>> Let's face it, the only thing the members of FidoNet have in
 MV>> common is that they play with mailers.

 AS> Sorry, I disagree. I have forgotten when I played with my
 AS> mailer last time,

You "play" with it every time you send a packet of messages.

 AS> I even have forgotten when I saw log file of my mailer last
 AS> time. I'm happy it works without a need for my attention to
 AS> be drawn to it.

Then why is it you write so many messages about how we should adapt the nodelist?

 MV>> The moment they don't need mailers anymore to communicate
 MV>> the social structure will collapse like a sand castle in
 MV>> the waves.

 AS> ip mailers are mailers too. And you also need router,
 AS> tosser and editor in any case.

No, I do not need that any more when I have a permanent InterNet connection
and cost is no longer an issue. I can use e-mail for private correspondence
and I can use web forums, mailing lists or usenet to share ideas across a
group.

 MV>> Fidonet was a success because it got so much out of that
 MV>> modem to modem technology. A technology that was the only
 MV>> one available at the time.

 AS> Yes, but now time has changed, you see.

Precisely my point. In pthe past we neededd to be economical width bandwith
and on line time. And that was were Fidonet had it;s strong points. Now
that that is shifting, the need for FidoNet is going too.

 AS> I guess it is not very hard to predict what will happen to
 AS> the fidonet in z2 looking at z1. In the West part it will
 AS> happen a little sooner, in the East one a little later.

That's hardly a prediction because it already HAS happened in the West. In
the high days we has 1200 listed nodes and 5600 listed points in The
Netherlands. And Lord knows how many users. Now the users are extinct and
there are some 50 sysops and 77 registred points left.

Of course the same will happen in Eastern Europe when InterNet becomes as
widely available as in the West.

 AS> Only China can help  :-)

No good to me. I don't speak Chinese...

 MV>> But when alternatives are readily available to everyone, why would
 MV>> anyone need FidoNet anymore? What is the added value?

 AS> So you still don't know ?

If I knew there would be no need to ask.

 AS> Fidonet is RPG in its core and people are players :-)

That's one way to look at it. ;-)

 AS> Well, It was half-joke (still the one which has some truth
 AS> in it).

But if it ios an RPG, one may ask why we have to uphold that shaky mix of
technology we call FidoNet upright to play it.

You know we had several role playing games going in FidoNet R28 here. I
participated in some of them. Now they have all moved to the InterNet to
play the games. So if I wanted to polay an RPG again why not go join them
instead of trying to get them to join us?

 AS> I don't know what makes people to join different p2p networks.

I know what made me join FidoNet. At the time I had a project going. It was
the Samsung KP206 Private branch exchange. mew and a couple of friends had
procured a batch of them cheaply because it could not meet Telcom specs for
connection to the public network. I dissassembled the programme and
extensively modified it. I also made a few changes to the hardware.

My friend Evert Bruinsma who was sysop of a local BBS made me a point and
crested an echomail area KP206 for me to exchange ideas about the KP206
with my friends....

Now if such a project would run today, I would use a mailing list for it...

 AS> It may be an interest to learn something new, friend's advice,
 AS> ambitions, interest to talk, interest to get info, interest to
 AS> share ideas.

Yes. But let's be realistic about this. The InterNet is a much more
suitablke place for that than FidoNet is. It provides for a MUCH wider
audience.

 MV>> The social aspect? Oh, come on. How long do you think FidoNet
 MV>> would last if the nodelist was converted into an InterNet
 MV>> mailing list?

 AS> What do you mean ?

Sharing ideas etc, need not be dependant on technology. We might just as
well need another medium to exchange our ideas. Such as a mailing list. So
take all the names from the FidoNet node list and use that to create a
mailing list. Stop distributing the nodelist, just distribute the mailing
list.

How long do you think it would be recognisable as the _FidoNet_ mailing list?

 MV>> If I have a permanent connection to the InterNet and so I do not have
 MV>> to worry about cost of on-line time, why do I need FidoNet anymore.
 MV>> The strenght of FTN is that it is so economical with on-line time.

 AS> I have completely priceless internet for my needs.

"Priceless" as in a price too high to calculate? I do not think
that is what you mean.

 AS> But I still have an interest in fidonet. Ask me why and I'll be
 AS> in trouble to answer. It's a many-years habit I cannot put it
 AS> up in easy way.

Yet I think these are valid questions. If we want to "save"
FidoNet, we should ask ourselves /why/ we want that. Knowing why always
helps when answering the question "how?"

 AS> Beside of that the half of my points are now ip.

In see none listed in the pointlist.

 AS> I don't know what makes them to be points having internet.

Well, ask them.

 MV>> Have you never wondered why pointing never became popular in Z1? Let
 MV>> me tell you; it is because local calls aren't metered in most cases.
 MV>> There is no pressure on the users to become a point to save money!

 AS> I never thought of this as of a money matter. I can easily
 AS> afford me a nodenumber. And my points are points not because of
 AS> saving, but because they don't want to observe ZMH.

This isn't about point versus node, this is about point versus on-line
user. It is the on-line users in Z1 that have no incentive to upgrade to
point.

 MV>> So what is the added value of using FTN when I have a permanent
 MV>> connection to the InterNet? Why should I put up with pig headed
 MV>> sysops of FidoNet distribution systems to send netmail to the
 MV>> other side op the world when I have free e-mail?

 AS> Netmail has lost its importance long ago.

I am not so sure there. For me netmail is still important.

 AS> The echoareas are the main interest of sysops nowadays.

Well, if you are right about the netmail, then we seem to have already
given up on what once was the corner stone of FidoNet.

 MV>> Why should I put up with all the nonsense of P4, moderators,
 MV>> coordinators and the like that were primarily put there to
 MV>> save cost when cost no longer is an issue?

 AS> I don't know. I even don't want to know, it is none of my
 AS> business :-)

Yet I think these are valid questions. If one wants to "sell" a
product one should be able to tell the potential customers what it's strong
points are and what makes it a better deal than what the competition has to
offer. InyterNet /is/ the competition you know.

 AS>>> So here is my main idea. We can save fidonet as a community
 AS>>> only in case we will benefit from the modern technical
 AS>>> possibilities.

 MV>> I don't think so. The FidoNet community as you see it, has no
 MV>> viability of it's own. FidoNet IS the technology. You can't separate
 MV>> the two.

 AS> FTN is technology, but Fidonet is community.

That is one way of looking at it. A community howver has some common factor
that makes it a community. And so I ask you again, what does this community
have that makes it a community other than that it's member use FTN to
communicate?

Mere sharing a technology does not a community make. Do FAX users form a
community? Do GSM users from a community? Do people that travel by train
form a community?

 AS>>> If we delay and keep for old-fashion technology, nothing will
 AS>>> save this community, it will die step by step because new people
 AS>>> don't join.

 MV>> New people won't join, period.

 AS> They are joining now (at least here).

Are they? Pr is it just points being promoted to sysop status?

 AS> And if there wasn't superstitions about pvt

Superstitions indeed. If these peole will not join the FidoNet community
because they have to carry a Pvt flag in order to het a node number, than
they join for the wrong reasons.

 AS> and 'utility for the net' we would have more joining.

I see, you ARE talking about promoting points to node status.

Sorry Alex, that is not new people joining. People that are points have
already joined. The may not be members as such, but they are participants.
Promoting then to sysops status does indeed nothing for the network as such
and is a cosmetic oparation that soves noting. What FidoNet needs is people
that write in echomail. The echomail flow is not going to be raised by one
bit by the cometic operation of promoting points to private nodes.

 MV>> There is still a place for horses in this world. There is a place for
 MV>> FidoNet too. But just like with the horse, the answer is not fitting
 MV>> the horse with wheels and get people to abandon their cars.

 AS> No need to abandon, these things can be combined. I spend a
 AS> lot of time in the internet looking for an information, but every
 AS> day I start my golded to read new echomail.

That is you. You are not new to FidoNet. You are not going to atract NEW
usres by that. And I mean new in the sense that they aren't already a user
or point. No NEW isres, people that have not participated in FidoNet before
in any way.

Cheers, Michiel

--- InterMail 2.29k