AWL> Paul, you are indeed a pleasure to communicate with. That 
AWL> message would be invaluable if I were to take the 
AWL> Fido-sillyness to the HREOC. (Rod, have you noticed this?)

AWL> Nodelists other than FidoNet are mostly tiny circlejerks of 
AWL> loonies, or specialised tools like NBBNet and TWMBANet...

 PE> You can have tiny circlejerks of loonies within Fidonet 
 PE> too.  How far do you think FOURTH_REICH gets?  LOCUSER 
 PE> doesn't get much more coverage.  There is ABSOLUTELY NO 
 PE> REASON for these do-your-own nets to start up.  Fidonet is 
 PE> absolutely adequate.  Any echo being carried by another-net 
 PE> could be just as easily carried by the same people within 
 PE> fidonet.

P4:
- require legal/technical responsibility for all messages
- bans echo of encrypted messages (through normal channels)
- requires ZMH mailer

Fido-in-general
- nets defined geographically


AWL> There are a few largish ones, PODS AmigaNet etc, but they 
AWL> have nothing like the coverage of FidoNet... So Rod's go 
AWL> start your own line fall flat...

 PE> He was talking about starting your own fidonetinternet 
 PE> gateway if you don't like the way Michael is operating his.  

He was talking about setting up an OtherNet so I could have rules like
nodenumber=phonenumber and no ZMH etc...

 PE> You can do this, in fact Michael publicly asked for anyone 
 PE> in the entire Zone 3 to take over, because he is dropping 
 PE> it.  Now's your big chance, because there are ZERO 
 PE> competitors.  It will only cost you a few $K per year, and 
 PE> if you can afford to blow it on lawsuits, you can afford to 
 PE> spend it on gateways instead.  BFN.  Paul.

A gateway that would cost you "a few k a year" would probably
cost me 10 times as much. Also that is a recurring cost, our 10k is
probably going to be reusable (with a little luck we should get full costs
(if not we can survive the experience))

...Alex.
(Pagan & Proud)

---