PC>> Fido and charging $$$:

RS> Thats entirely your prerogative, and you are free to never go near
RS> a system like that. And others who think its acceptible can use it.

PC> I think of all the sysops who poll at long-distance
PC> rates to provide their community with a link to the
PC> world freely cos that's the spirit of fido.

RS> I dont believe you can declaim thats the only
RS> viable approach. And if you feel that, you are perfectly
RS> welcome to only use systems which agree with you on that.

PC> It's not a matter of "use systems which you agree with".

Fraid so.

PC> I could poll off a system, whether i agreed with their
PC> bbs-use charges or not. I don't call my uplinks' BBS
PC> really, so i wouldnt know what goes on there, they could
PC> be using it to fund a right-wing militia for all i know..

I meant agree with on the question of only allowing paying
users of their BBS to read fido mail. You are free to never
use a system like that if you dont like that approach.

PC> I would pay uplinks if the situation deemed it necessary,
PC> but in the city it's unecessary as most links are local.

Yes, and if a commercial BBS chooses to make fido mail
available, thats entirely their choice, and yours to
never use their BBS if you dont like that approach.

PC> Yes, i can keep clear of uplinks via commercial boards,

You are mangling the story considerably now, we were actually
talking about commercial BBSs offering fidomail to their users.
Not mail feeds between BBSs, some of which may be commercial.

I dont see any problem whatever with a BBS getting a free mail feed
from a commercial BBS. And if you hold your nose about commercial BBSs
in general, you are perfectly free to get your feed from someone else.

PC> but if their incentive was based only on
PC> profit, i doubt they'd allow downlinks anyway..

You can doubt that if you like, some have done precisely that.

PC> I'm not gonna put down any one's approach,

Thats precisely what you were doing with commercial BBSs offering fidomail.

PC> My real disagreement is with the double-standards arising
PC> out of some host's defending their own commercial interests
PC> by using the hierarchy to oust competition.

You havent even established that they ARE using the hierarchy to oust
competition, let alone any double standards. If they choose to have a
commercial BBS and offer fidomail to their users, they cant possibly 'oust
competition' when there are free BBSs that users can get their fidomail from.

The users get to choose if they think the amount they pay is worth it,
for say a reliable BBS or a very big collection of echoes or a very deep
collection of messages in time or you hardly ever get a busy line or whatever.

PC> Either they should stick to policy

Policy allows a commercial BBS to offer fidomail to its users.

PC> or allow others the same allowances as they give themselves..

God knows what you are trying to say here.

PC> I, personally, don't have any commercial interests, well
PC> none that have anything to do with BBS's/ FIDO/MODEMs etc,

Thats entirely your choice, you get to choose how to do your BBS.

PC> but I have seen nodes lose their FIDO link due to pressure
PC> from competitors, even just because of simple disagreements,

Yes, you can get quite a bit of backbiting and general bitchy
behaviour. Says nothing very useful about the general question
of commercial BBSs offering fidomail to their users tho.

PC> and i've only been a node for a short amount of time.

All voluntary groups are like that, they can be remarkably petty
and bitchy and can at times implode in insane political civil war.

PC> I've even seen a "PAY BOARD" node in Sydney charging
PC> local downlinks for the privilage at $90 for the
PC> basic start-up link, plus a monthly fee on top..

And you have the choice of thinking that stinks, or doesnt appeal
to you and getting your feed elsewhere. Or even choosing to offer
that sort of hub service yourself if you know what you are doing.

PC> The downlinks don't have a choice to hold their nose because fido
PC> policy says that downlinks must become a node under their
"AREA's" HUB..

Nope, you are confusing the hierarchy of the nodes with
where you get your mail feed from. They aint the same at all.

PC> Sure they could poll from anywhere else,

Funny that.

PC> but they have to become a node under that HOST
PC> unless they phisically move to another suburb...

Yes, but that says nothing about mail feed or the charges for mail feed.
You can never be forced to pay to be part of a net, as opposed to your feed.

PC> I'm not gonna winge to you, cos such matters are a global problem.

They arent actually a problem at all. You just think they are.

PC> The "hierarchy" structure of fidonet sounded good at the time,

You have confused the geographical net structure with the question
of where you get your feed from. They are completely separate issues.

The worst that the net structure can do is get you stuck with
an NC you detest or something. Nothing to do with fees for feeds.

PC> and i'm sure Tom Jennings didn't think that somewhere in the
PC> middle of the pacific a few assholes would abuse their position
PC> as a HOST/HUB and re-write the policy to suit themselves..

True, but then you havent actually established they have
done that on the question of the cost of your feed. Let
alone being forced to pay a commercial BBS for your feed.

PC> Yes FIDO has changed since it's origional concept,

In fact its changed radically since its original concept and in
many ways its remarkable how viable it is given the massive change.

PC> and i'm not a stickler for rules anyway.

True, particularly in hobby operations. I wont even choose to work
in that sort of environment of mindless hairsplitting on rules.

PC> I just hope, AND THIS IS NOT AIMED TOWARDS ANYONE IN PARTICULAR,

(Continued to next message)

--- PQWK202