Hello Phil.

16 Mar 03 23:22, you wrote to Michael Grant:

 PS> All I can say is "to each his own." 'nuff said.  :)

Mike basically mentioned one point that I have made many times in the past.
That people will not vote for a policy change because there are many who
are unfamilar as to what policy is.  Unless someone is hurt by policy they
are not likely to get involved.

When I first joined fidonet.  I stayed as far away as possible from debates
which centered around political issue or policy as possible.  I was so
worried that I might do something wrong and bring trouble I did not have
time for, or care for.  The easiest way to avoid that was to stay away from
the spotlight.

Most people who observe likely laugh at the bitching.  They may even think
these people argue like a bunch of old women.  Why get involved in all
that? It's not like they are in the position to change anything anyways. 
The echomail works (what little of it there is left) and they are along for
the ride.

I do believe policy needs to be reworked.  Mostly along the lines of
Internet standard and implementation.  My primary concern is that policy be
used as a hands-off form of administration primarily concerned with
technical or potential legal issues only.  In most cases, people are using
policy and they are unaware of it.

The problem as I see it is that there is one extreme or another.  One group
wants to keep a strict control over the network and the other group wants
no control whatsoever.  I believe that right down the middle to be best. 
Fidonet has operational standards and those standards should used otherwise
what is the point of fidonet?  How it is any different than any other
network?

Matt

---