Hi Ward,

>So this discussion-item is now narrowed-down to the question what the value is
>of sending-in an article to the Fidonews-editor. Is there an explicit consent?
> Nope! Is there a written document? Nope!

There certainly is a document named Fidonews which requests submissions.

> Granted, it would look pretty ridiculous to make a submission and then refuse
> it to be distributed.

THAT is a major point, Ward.

> [...] It has become important to have the final say, every intervention by
>Shannon will meet with a rebuttal from Michiel, every such rebuttal will be me
>by a retaliation of Shannon ... having the final-word is too important because
> that would be equal to an implicit consent of defeat and we can't have that
> happen.

No, as Michiel has pointed out in his reply to you in this thread, even if
Shannon ( or _anyone_ ) doesn't say another word, Michiel will continue in
this manner because has he admitted to you, and to the world right here in
this echo that his argument ISN'T about copyright, it's all about Bjorn's
copyright issues and Bjorn's site.  That is complete nonsense.  Meanwhile
Michiel threatens fidonet members with lawsuits that he cannot follow
through on regarding Fidonews.  As I said a long while back, you should
have replied to Nathan that he has nothing to worry about in displaying
fidonews on his system because that is true.

> Now if both the protagonist and antagonist would do me and the rest in the
>nodelist the favour of shutting-up about this issue then I'd really appreciate
> that.

See above.

Take care,
Janis

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag-5