-=> Quoting Rod Speed to John Tserkezis <=-

Hello Rod,

 RS> Its VERY far from clear that its possible to PC
 RS> someone who say has Paul as a USER on their BBS.
 
 JT> It is.

 RS> Nope, not if you just have them a say a user who can only read the
 RS> echomail. And as long as the moderator of an echo he posts in has on
 RS> complaint, its very far from clear that you can actually be PCed in
 RS> that case. 

 Under normal circumstances yes, but these are far from normal,  P4 is flexible
enough to cover ANY feed means when it comes to excommunicational rulings.  As
well as, it comes down on the hosting node that they are assisting an excommed
node.
 Whether or not it is officially allowed, I assure you DM *will* have something
to say about it.  Lemmi put it this way, paul is not even user on my system,
*MY* own name was on top of the message, AND *MY* origin line was at the
bottom, yet DM deemed it fit to threaten me with that PC, simply because paul's
initials were at the start of each line!

 JT> If someone (be it the moderator or otherwise) demands a
 JT> user is removed from an echo, then yes, this can be policed.

 RS> Thats not even a PC tho. And I was talking about enforcement of Pauls
 RS> excommunication. Very far from clear that anyone can PC the sysop of
 RS> a BBS that has Paul as a user, even if he has been denodelisted.

 It's in P4 that the sysop is resposible for their users.  If the user does
not comply with whatever, the sysop is requested to cut the feed, and if that
sysop does not comply, that sysop's feed is cut.  And so forth up the line
of this fascist political organisation.
 
 JT> Demanding that user NEVER to re-appear in
 JT> fido again OTOH, maybe a stretching it a bit.

 RS> I'm not even convinced that P4 has anything at all to say
 RS> about excommunication of users at all.

 It doesn't on users.  The "sysop is responsible for his/her
users" bit covers
that though.

 RS> If for example a moderator asked that a particular users feed be cut,
 RS> that certainly aint got a damned thing to do with any other echo.

 This is true, although in this case, an excommunication - a complete silence,
is not achieved if the said node finds another feed.
 
 JT> I've heard of a few cases of this happening, and the twit
 JT> user resorted to changing their name.  Didn't last long though.

 RS> I doubt you'd ever see a situation where there is universal agreement
 RS> that a particular person would never be accepted as a user by anyone.
 RS> No group of people is ever that unanimous about anything.

 Partially true, in that not ALL sysops know about twit users unless it is
mentioned in a sysop only echo.  This is not very common though.
 
 RS> He was DENODELISTED, which aint the same thing as excommunication.
 
 JT> I dunno.  An excommunication implies the complete removal of
 JT> the said person from all netmail and echomail, IE, all of fido.
 JT> A denodelisting is one of many ways to perform this task.

 RS> Nope, not if he becomes a user of someone elses BBS.

 Then that sysop wil be on the RX end of a PC, threatening to cut his/her feed
if the denodelisted "user" is not removed.  But that is
nit-picking on wording,
as far as the *Cs are concerned, DENODELISTING = EXCOMMUNICATION.
 Like it or lump it.
 
 JT> DM had the option of denodelisting Paul,
 JT> and as it turns out he used that option.

 RS> Even thats not completely clearcut unless that survives the appeal
 RS> system. 

 They have really stuffed that up then, DM steps down, he no longer has to
handle the case, then KM steps down, *he* doesn't have to handle it, DN has
publically mentioned he *doesn't* want to handle it.
 Paul's appeal is left in limbo.  Just as well, nobody wanted to handle it
anyway...

 JT> Another option would have been to ASK paul to tone the abuse down,
 JT> and to ASK *you* to tone down (it was another netmail at the same time).

 RS> From who ?

 David More.  It was at the same time as his original threat. I'll send you
the relavant files, they were posted in zone3sysop by paul, so you wouldn't
have seen them.  DM *is* trigger happy.
 Note that they are worded in the same threatening manner all his messages
are?  "Do it or else".

 JT> Hey! Hang on, I hate it when you're right!

 RS> Yeah, funny how lots of people say that to me |-)
 
 Just on one point, don't get too execited now boy. :-) 

 JT> Anyway, except he didn't, he demanded.  EXACTLY the same way
 JT> he demanded I do not post any more messages on behalf of paul.

 RS> Sure, I meant that its far from clear that P4 allows that.
 
 RS> There is NO provision in P4 to excommunicate someone completely,
 RS> so there is no way that anything stops him from being a USER.

 JT> Dunno, read this:
 
 P4> It is considered annoying behavior to assist a system which was
 P4> excommunicated in circumventing that removal from the nodelist.

 RS> But not necessarily EXCESSIVELY ANNOYING.

 Doesn't matter, ones "excessively annoying" is anothers'
"annoying", and
vice versa.  Annoying is very much a subjective term.
 
 P4> For example, if you decide to provide an echomail
 P4> feed to your friend who has been excommunicated,
 P4> it is likely that your listing will also be removed.

 RS> Yes, but thats a FEED, not a USER. You can see why they dont
 RS> want people to just say stick the denodelisted node in a private
 RS> nodelist supplement and carry on regardless just like it was
 RS> in the nodelist and he had you as his feed all along.

 Then they get you on not complying with P4, the origin line has a different
(non-fido) origin zone.
 And when you fix that, they say YOU were the feed for him.  Even when you win,
you lose.
 If he is merely a user, his posts have an origin line down the bottom, the
sysop of that node gets a "do it or else" message.  I guarantee it.

 JT> Bloody stupid if you ask me.  P4 NEEDS changing and the power hungry
 JT> war mongers are using the current Policy as an excuse not to change it.
 
 RS> Yeah, its a completely stupid document on that
 RS> basic stuff, absolutely guaranteed to attract the
 RS> control freaks and mindless fascists to *C positions.
 
 JT> Must be those gaping holes in it that are attracive.

 RS> Its not just the holes, some of them arent holes at all,
 RS> like the fact that you get no choice on which net you join.

 I believe that was put in to stop people from getting their mail from
elsewhere.  Happened to a net in zone1 where it left the NC paying his own
bills.  He didn't like that...

 JT> That's a moderator issue,

 RS> Not strictly on that one, you could actually PC on that one
 RS> because P4 is rather explicit about Fido being a collection
 RS> of hobbyists and has some stuff to say about commercial traffic.
 
 And even if it was non-commercial traffic, say just off-topic, it results in
the same thing.  Moderator intervention.  Except of course for zone3sysop,
where you are allowed to say anything. :-)

 JT> and the moderators in other echos are handling it
 JT> just fine.  Pity DN is STILL sitting on his hands,

 RS> Or maybe he didnt see that it was something that needed any action.

 So you *haven't* been reading zone3sysop have you?
 
 JT> and DM took it apon himself to take over.

 RS> I'm not convinced its that at all. It looks much
 RS> more like More had decided to piss off, and wanted
 RS> to cause as much damage as he could on the way out.

 Yes, I think it may have been "killing two birds with one stone", although
he didn't mention your PC at all in following messages.  Actually I think
he's rether pissed that you didn't lose your feed for any real appreciable
time.  :-)

 RS> Taint that uncommon, I know a couple of people
 RS> who have done that from a work situation too.

 RS> Can cause a bit of heartburn when you realise what a disgruntled
 RS> employee can do on the way out. I'm not at all surprised that some
 RS> choose to just change the lock on the door and arrange to have the
 RS> personal effect delivered to the employees home when they are sacked.

 Yep.  Same thing with "trial periods".  If an employee is found
to be a bit
shifty, they can say that employee did not fit the company's needs.  Otherwise
the (ex) employee yells unfair dismissal, and the company loses.  Has been
done many a time.

John Tserkezis, Sydney, Oz. Fidonet: 3:712/610  Internet: jt{at}suburbia.com.au

... The sign said WET FLOOR, so I did...
---