Hello Rick.

10 Nov 02 09:33, you wrote to me:

 RR>>> That is pretty clear to me then that the FTSC is the authority
 RR>>> when it comes to nodelist flags.

 MG>> The Coordinators have /no/ say at all, eh...?

 RR> The ZC has to some extent. No other *C has.

The ZC is an elected position. Who elects the ZC's?

 MG>> The FTSC means /nothing/ if what they propose is not accepted
 MG>> by the *C's. The *C's are the final authority on what will and
 MG>> will not be used as a flag in the nodelist, and what each flag
 MG>> means.

 MG>> The *C's have the power to make any nodelist changes they want
 MG>> to, and the FTSC is relegated to recording what has been accepted
 MG>> by them. If the FTSC ignores the wishes of the Coordinators, they
 MG>> become useless to this network.

 MG>> Maybe this is at the root of the problem. Too many people have
 MG>> been putting the cart before the horse in this network for /way/
 MG>> too long a time. The FTSC may fancy itself some sort of
 MG>> "authority" based on some perceived techno-geeky intellectual
 MG>> hierarchy (read bovine scatology) expressed through the FTSC
 MG>> nomination and election process, but in reality they are far less
 MG>> important in the decision making process than the Coordinators,
 MG>> or even the end nodes, if enough of them protest loudly enough
 MG>> for a change.

 RR> See text at top of message.

See Carol Shenkenberger's message. She would know, having been a Regional
Coordinator. You place far too much faith in the FTSC as an authority. They
are (were) there to record what the *C's decide to use, and for no other
reason.


--- GoldED/386 3.0.1-dam3