Hi Philip!

Wednesday May 03 2006, Philip Lozier wrote to Vladimir Donskoy:

 WD>>> 1) I will not be organising and therefor will not be chastised by
 WD>>> the RC's for attempting to violate P4

 VD>> But who must (or can) organising elections, if not you? And what
 VD>> will time of it?

 PL> The answer is simple my freind.

 PL> R50

To doubt... We have no this right. But I think that IC (Malkolm) can make it.

 PL> Whatever time you set.

 PL> Attempts have been made, and failed, because of anal retentive adherance
 PL> to bullshit.

 PL> Just keep in mind, if attempted, that there -are- those who would support
 PL> it even not from R50, and that anything set down should:

 1>: change the restrictive nature as it exists... and,

 2>: keep the rest of FidoNEt in mind, as well as,

 3>: Keep "ckecks and balances" in place as per the scope and
idea of the
 3>: outdated policy intended.

 PL> Updating to current needs is one thing, but changing the idea and intent
 PL> of the documentis another.

 PL> The document should never be made in a way to give
"power" to any one
 PL> segment.  IMO, your Z2 "GOD" and former (yet still claims
to be) IC has
 PL> that particular intent in mind, and your desires have already indicated
 PL> the need for the "break" due to that.

 PL> Pay close attention to the facts of my net as it stands... I am
 PL> sympathetic to your needs, as two nodes who are now NY residents are
 PL> former Russian nodes:

 1:267/69  Andrew Dolidov
 1:267/250 Sergey Zubkov

 PL> Both are fine gentlmen from the discussions I've had with them... educated
 PL> in presentation... fluent in english so there is no misunderstanding...
 PL> and because of my own background (not Russian, but Ukrainian on my mothers
 PL> side), I would have to say that you -DO- have advocates here.

But Sergey have "dyndns" IP-address... Can he receive cals from us?
What reliability of they stations?

 PL> YOUR region has the say, and the power to make that say be fact, being the
 PL> major majority in FidoNet itself.  YOUR REGION also seems to have a
 PL> problem with your ZC, a problem which ahs existed EVERYWHERE for some time
 PL> now when he -was- IC, and not just "claiming" to be by
-weight- based on
 PL> zone size in which it seems you fine Russian fellows had nothing to say in
 PL> at all.

 PL> I would suggest that before a "revolution" is staged, that some
 PL> consultation occurs with willing members from other zones, and within your
 PL> own outside of R50, and see of a plan of action can be established that
 PL> can be worked as a joint effort.

 PL> Two goals...

 PL> 1) The Russian segment of FidoNet being recognized as seperate from Z2 and
 PL> the totalatarian domination of the smaller segment of the zone, and having
 PL> your area being accorded it's rightful wish to having their own zone,
 PL> desirably in Z6 which was going to be abolished anyway to serve the
 PL> purpose of both giving your segmenet the zone you desire within FidoNet
 PL> set standards, and preventing the demise of a non populated zone.  (NO
 PL> need for a Zone 7)

 PL> 2) That with this newly established zone, and the break in the stalemate
 PL> that has existed, that the rest of FidoNEt can work together with your
 PL> zone (the willing ones) to rework policy into a more realistic document
 PL> for todays needs of FidoNet.  Desirably this would not be an entire
 PL> rewrite, but an updating... preserving the key parts of policy to reflect
 PL> the nature of the network, and only updating the parts to take into accord
 PL> the technologies opf today, yet preserving the structure of it which has
 PL> held it togethr in the first place despite the turmoil which has existed
 PL> for a deacde now.

 PL> An *ALL OUT* revolution is one thing... this is not what I propose. I have
 PL> a respect for the structure you all have set in your area, and only wish
 PL> the rest of Fido was in suit in this card game.

 PL> Think on it.  In the meantime, I'm forwarding this message via netmail to
 PL> the two nodes I metioned above that were former Russian nodes, and if you
 PL> wish, please feel free to pass this on in your regional echoes and
 PL> translate it if you have to.

I'm not agree with all of this mail so translate and distribute it by me is
incorrect.

 PL> I am open for comment on the whole idea here, or if you feel it better,
 PL> via netmail.  I will estblish a secure session with you if you wish.
 PL> Maybe better... keep 'em guessing.

 PL> My only desire is to keep FidoNet going, and (dare I say it?) maybe
 PL> attract new nodes.  The way things are -now-, it's hard to even think of
 PL> new nodes.  They'd run like the wind and not because of 'technology' but
 PL> by the pure overwhelming of bullshit.

 PL> BTW... I also respect the usage of "points" in your
region... soemthing
 PL> that was always 'overlooked' in Z1, and what I always thought could be a
 PL> powerful use of Fido.... you guys proved it is.

 PL> Well... at the risk of having some of my own zone hate my guts, and Z2
 PL> (which only a few actually "tolerate" me), I've put my hand out...

 PL> I look forward to your response.

I very much do not love revolution, and your offer very much is similar to
it. Actually you suggest to solve our problems a power method, pressing
through these decisions in "our weight". To me not on a shower
such approach, would be desirable to remain within the limits of legality.


Regards, Vladimir Donskoy

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20060326