Hello Roy.

01 Jun 06 14:53, you wrote to me:

 MvdV>>>> P4 was written with little or no concern for the situation
 MvdV>>>> outside Z1 period.

 RW>>> I'm sure that it wasn't, but then, there's been too many
 RW>>> interpretations that are in error from Z2.

 MvdV>> Who is to judge what interpretations are in error?

 RW> Those who's knowledge of the English language is superior to those

And who is to judge that?

 RW> who's knowledge is second hand, interpreted into, let's say; Dutch. To
 RW> interpret that which you claim is not your native tongue makes you the
 RW> lasser interpretator.

You have given me that argument before. You forget that US Americans are
not the only ones who have Enlish as their native language. Native English
speakers can be found in Europe as well. As in other parts of the world.
And some of them support what you call erroneous interpretations from Z2.
Plus that ever so often you disagree among yourself about the correct
interpretation of P4. If you intetpretaing skiulls were so superior you
would more often agree among yourselfves than you do with outsiders. The
facts do not seem to support that.

 MvdV>> We have no independent judges and the original writers have all
 MvdV>> left.

 RW> I'm still here.

You are not an independent judge.

 MvdV>>>> For one it tacitly assumes local calls are free.

 RW>>> And they are.

 MvdV>> In most parts of the US and Canada. In most other parts of the
 MvdV>> world local calls are not free.

 RW> So says you. Only in urope

It is spelled "Europe".

 RW> do they charge you for a long distance call across the street.

Only if that street marks a national boundery. A situation not limited to Europw BTW.

 RW>>> It's been my experience that a host will require those sysops
 RW>>> under it to fetch their own mail from the host or hub.

 MvdV>> A requirement that is outside policy and therefore falls under
 MvdV>> the header of a dictatorial decree.

 RW> Wrong.

Right. P4 says that local policies may not impose additional restriction on
Sysops. A decree to poll the host or hub at regular intervals is such an
additional restriction.

 RW> Your interpretation isn't what P4 says,

 P4> These local policies may not place additinal restrictions on members
 P4> of FidoNet beyond those included in this document, other than
 P4> enforcement of local mail periods.

Verbatum qoute from policy, no interpretation.

 RW> nor what happens in reality.

There is a lot happening in reality that is in violation of P4.

 MvdV>>>> In Z2 local calls are *not* free and so it does matter who
 MvdV>>>> calls who. That is just one example, there are many others.

 RW>>> As I described it above.

 MvdV>> Dictatorship....

 RW> Wrong.

Right, A *C decreeing polls ate regular intervals is dictatorial.

 MvdV>>>> Actually in the past when FidoNet was run by the technicians,
 MvdV>>>> the *C's ever so often *did* know best.

 RW>>> Ummmm, those were the dictators I pointed out above.

 MvdV>> A dictatorship *can* be an effective way to run something. It
 MvdV>> has proven to be the best way to run a ship...

 RW> And urope.

And merika

 RW>>> It is only lately that things have been freed up.

 MvdV>> Unfortunately in most cases the dictatorships were replaced by
 MvdV>> anarchie.

 RW> Archie who? Oh, you meant anarchy...see what I mean about English
 RW> skills?

No. I made a spelling error. So do you ever so often. Spelling and typing
errors have no bearing on reading comprehension. It it were so, you would
have been disqualified long ago.

 MvdV>> Which got us from the fire into the frying pan.

 RW> But, we were already in the frying pan.

Whatever.

 RW>>> I find the network is operating smoother than it has in the
 RW>>> past.

 MvdV>> Really?

 RW> Yes.

 MvdV>> It has become a free for all.

 RW> How so?

See below.

 MvdV>> The nodelist is a mess and does not reflect reality,

 RW> Not many people these days pay much attention to the nodelist.

If that is true it is another sign of decay. The nodelist is the glue that
holds us together.

 MvdV>>  routing ever so often leads into a black hole,

 RW> Due to the mess in the nodelist, no doubt.

Possibly. Or maybe the *Cs not doing their jobs.

 MvdV>>  *Cs are asleep with their system on autopilot,

 RW> I know two who have been asleep for years and yet their nets and
 RW> regions don't miss them.

But the nodelist is a mess and routing ends up in black holes...

 RW> Ever wonder how it would be like to want to contact an RC with your
 RW> modem and their phone number is not listed?

Another sign of decay... :-(

 RW> Look up RC10 and RC15 sometime. I know RC10 is there because I Binked
 RW> his node for two months before he finally passworded me out

RCs passwording out, Another sign of decay... :-(

 RW> (I probably woke him up one day). RC15, well, I have a session
 RW> password with her system, but I'll bet she doesn't know I'm still
 RW> connecting there.

Your point?

 MvdV>>  universal connectivity is down the drain.

 RW> We have nodes outside the planet?

You are asking my opinion?

 MvdV>>  I think the network is on the verge of collaps.

 RW> Not as long as there are two nodes passing mail.

Two nodes do not majke a network.

 RW>>> Nobody is enforcing ZMH, for instance.

 MvdV>> And that, is not an improvement. Ignoring ZMH is detrimental to
 MvdV>> connectivity IMNSHO.

 RW> For an ION node, it isn't necessary.

What is the point of being in the nodelist if one is not on-line during the
agreed times?

 RW> That was proven by an RC when she declared that all RINs and NCs must
 RW> connect with her system at least once a week, or be excommed from the
 RW> nodelist.

That only proves the dictatorial aspirations of that RC.

 RW>>>  Well, maybe in Z2.

 MvdV>> Hardly. In the past NCs used to do regular checks to see if the
 MvdV>> nodes were still on-line. Now many are afraid for what they
 MvdV>> will find: black holes. So now they refrain from checking lest they
 MvdV>> would have to strike half the nodes from their nodelist segment....
 MvdV>> :-(

 RW> Ahh, so that's why the Z2 segment looks stuffed...

There is a difference between deliberately adding ghost nodes (stuffing)
and allowing dead wood to remain by neglect. It looks negelcted.

Yes there is dead wood in the Z2 part of the nodelist. But there is little
reason to suspect the percentage is significantly higher than in other
zones. I would not be surprised if the dead wood in the global nodelist is
over 30%.

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20060315