23 May 06 09:42, Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Roy Witt:

 MvdV> Hello Roy.

 MvdV> 22 May 06 09:02, you wrote to Vladimir Donskoy:

 VD>>> For international document it is not correct: it must have
 VD>>> understand by _any_ people!

 RW>> I don't think that was of concern when it was written. Fidonet had
 RW>> barely spread to Z2.

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

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

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

And they are.

 MvdV> So it does not matter who calls who when it comes to the host's
 MvdV> obligation of delivering incoming routed mail.

The host isn't obligated to deliver routed mail, only coordinate it's
delivery or pickup. It's been my experience that a host will require those
sysops under it to fetch their own mail from the host or hub.

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

As I described it above.

 VD>>> And Policy not include many things for procedures and methods.
 VD>>> And many things stated "*Cs know best, common sense..."

 RW>> Of course, but many of them didn't know best and they had no common
 RW>> sense. Many of them ran their nets and regions like a
 RW>> dictatorship...

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

Ummmm, those were the dictators I pointed out above. It is only lately
that things have been freed up.

 MvdV> Now that the technicians have left and the politicians have taken
 MvdV> over, it has become a free for all with little or no regard for
 MvdV> what once was called "the smooth operation of the network" .....

I find the network is operating smoother than it has in the past. Nobody
is enforcing ZMH, for instance. Well, maybe in Z2.


Roy
--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000