Yo! Troy:
Thursday July 03 1997 20:16, Troy H. Cheek wrote to Bill Cheek:
 BC>> To send mail was difficult until you got the hang of it....
 TC> I'm very familiar with the process.
Excellent.  Then you will understand that just as netmail is the engine of 
Fidonet, so too was e-mail the engine of the Internet.  Still is, for that 
matter.
 TC> Then what is the point?  The FACT is that this particular Fido-Internet
 TC> mail gateway no longer exists.  Claiming that its lack of continued
 TC> existance is the fault or choice of Fidonet (as opposed to a single man)
 TC> goes beyond the facts.
Claim?  You sure have a way with placing unsaid words into the bitstream.
 TC> You make it sound as if,
"Sound"?  I'm not making it sound anything.....
 TC> at some point, Fidonet as a whole up and said "Nope, we don't want to
 TC> be a part of Internet" and shut it down.
Is that how you construe what I said?  Wow.........
 TC> You also seem to attribute this lack of a gateway as a contributing
 TC> factor in the decline of the nodelist,
Not when perhaps the decline of the nodelist had as much to do with it as it 
had to do with the decline of the nodelist.  Who knows?  I don't.  The fact, 
as you observed it to be, certainly stands tall and brazen.  There is no more 
net-wide gateway to the Internet.  Fact.  Whether or not it is related to 
Fido's decline is a silly argument in view of the FACT that it IS one of the 
earmarks of present trends.
 TC> when the FACT is that some people never got it to work to begin with,
 TC> so it's just as much good to them now as it was before.
Well, some people can't get their BBS's to working; some can't get their 
tossers to toss mail; some this and some that........  so what?  Some people 
can't get their Eudora or MS Exchange to working, either.
 TC> You also stated that Fidonet used to be a viable part of the
 TC> Internet, when the FACT is that features regularly used by real
 TC> Internet users (interactive, real time messaging, FTP, WWW, etc) were
 TC> completely unavailable to Fidonet users.
Rubbish.  WWW is a johnny-come-lately on the Internet.  It is NOT the 
Internet, though it might seem so to the newbies.  Nevertheless, a number of 
other tributaries to the Internet didn't support all the clients either, to 
wit: BitNet; MCIMail; and several others that I forget right off...but which 
didn't permit FTP, IRC, or one thing or three of another.
And it didn't matter for FTP because there were a number of ways around it to 
use strictly e-mail for the same effect.
 BC>> One man does not take "action" in Fido.......
 TC> Yet the FACT is that one man set up the gateway, and the same one man 
shut
 TC> it down.  Another one man could start one up again.
Not one in his right mind........ and those who were capable are gone now.
 BC>> All of Fido is on the downswing and it will take a collective effort
 BC>> to turn it around.  It would be utterly imbecilic of me to sink time
 BC>> and resources into a falling star.  That's plumb dumb, Troy.  Hell,
 BC>> that's why Bert Juda bailed out...
 TC> I'm curious to know where you learned this FACT, as the mail I received
 TC> stated that the reason he was shutting down was due to so many idiots
 TC> forging mailing list subscriptions, sending mass mailings, and trying to
 TC> get around the limitations he put in place.
Yes?  A sign of the times?  Especially since there are a bunch of regional, 
net and echo coordinators.....so why not gateway coordinators?  If Fido were 
going somewhere other than to the birds in a handbasket, there would be 
people standing in line to take the job.
 TC> the mainframe access had stopped, leaving him to foot the bill.  I
 TC> don't remember anything at all mentioned by him or anyone else about
 TC> Fido's downsizing at that point.
  It WAS a facet of the downsize.  It happened...along with other 
things that happened.  Were they all related?  I doubt it.  But so what?  
Related or not, they're signs of the times.  Fido is on a falling star.... 
and when something breaks, nobody cares enough to fix it.
 BC>> It's also why the nodelist (the name of this thread) has been
 BC>> steadily shrinking from its peak in November, 1995.
 TC> I'm not denying that the nodelist is on the decline.  If that was all 
ou
 TC> were saying, we'd be in complete agreement and not having this 
discussion.
Well, that is the core of it.  The Nodelist *is* Fidonet.  It shrinks and 
Fido shrinks.  Everything that happens is contributory to the process.  Now 
don't you suppose quite a number of people bailed when e-mail was no longer 
available?  People who had come to depend on it?
 TC> What I disagree with are some of your personal interpretations as to
 TC> what causes are affecting the decline, what affects the decline are
 TC> causing, and what our responses should be.
Yeah, so?  Disagree is one thing.  Running a personal slant is another......
 BC>> And regardless of my interpretation....the facts stand on the
 BC>> numbers and speak for themselves.
 TC> As we say in the South, if the facts speak for themselves, let them.
 TC> FACT:  Fidonet is currently on a decline.
 TC> FACT:  Internet is currently on the rise.
Loud facts, too.  Loud enough that those who depend on Fido for their radio 
news and views might want to keep a closer eye to the trends and 
developments, and maybe get ready for the Internet.
 TC> Anything beyond that is a conclusion based on these facts, past
 TC> experience, personal preference, etc.
So what?  If you're on a hellbound train and can jump off before destination, 
ain't that cool?
 TC> You've concluded that Fidonet is no longer a viable method of
 TC> communication
There you go again.....putting the unsaid into my mouth.  I really resent 
that, Troy.  Don't do THAT.  Stick to the facts...including the FACTS of what 
was said.....and NOT what wasn't said.
 TC> and that you should jump wholeheartedly into the Internet.
Re-read what I said.  I dare you.
 TC> Please note that at no time have I ever disagreed with your
 TC> conclusion. What I have disagreed with is some of the statements
 TC> you've made while justifying your conclusion to the rest of us.  If
 TC> you consider disagreements of this type as making it personal, then
 TC> this will have to be my last public message on the subject.
Perhaps that will have to be then.  Let's take a look at just HOW you 
disagree. Here are the lines from your last message that I referred to as 
"personal":
  -TC> It apparently matters to you, else you wouldn't keep emphasizing
  -TC> that it's Fido's fault or Fido's choice that it's no longer a part
  -TC> of the Internet.
  -TC> Since you're the one using those words, apparently you do.
  -TC> take the action yourself.
  -TC> From what you've said, you appear to have the hardware and
  -TC> full-time,
Not only are these lines liberally sprinkled with "you" and derivatives of 
the pronoun, but the words "apparently" and "appear" are used three times.  
These lines do NOT deal with what I actually said.  Rather, they take aim at 
me.... and put words in my mouth in the process.
You can't do that.  Your disagreement is not legitimate when it's based on 
figments and "apparently's".  If you are confused by something I said, then 
quote exactly what I said and your specific problem with it.  Give me a 
chance to clarify it or to rephrase it for better meaning.
DON'T make like I said something that I didn't....and then construe an 
argument for it.
In conclusion and in summary.....my point was THE facts, even as you stated 
them, and a suggestion to those who don't want to get caught up in Fido's 
downfall with no recourse.  As a matter of fact, I have been approached 100 
or more times this past year by people whose local BBS's shut down leaving 
them high and dry for a Fido connection.  I was approached because I had 
played Fido up really big in my books and offered to help people find local 
Fido BBS's in their areas.  It is a significant issue when people are 
suddenly cut off from their connections to the outside world.
This has been happening at an alarming rate......and because of the sheer 
volume of my netmail and e-mail, as well as a few other things, I am uniquely 
positioned with a broad view of the networking scene.  And it is my duty to 
call the shots as I see them.
Being right or wrong is not a win-lose situation here; not when all I'm 
trying to do is point out a bridge from here to there for those who find 
themselves high and dry here.
THAT has been my point, and if you re-read what I've said, I'm sure you can't 
help but see that.
Bill Cheek ~ bcheek@san.rr.com
Windows 95 Juggernaut Team ~ Microsoft MVP
--- Hertzian Mail+
---------------