*** Answering a msg posted in area CARBON.COPY (Garden's Local Conferences).

Hi, Janis!

Wednesday September 15 2004 11:58, Janis Kracht told to Alex Shakhaylo:

 >> Yep, we have no business with fixing his problems, this is true, but
 JK> Thank you, that is correct.

 >> we cannot regard him as a valid fidonet sysop, and so we cannot
 >> accept his voice as valid and so we cannot accept the whole voting
 >> as valid.

 JK> You are being ridiculous and you know it.

No, I don't know it.

 JK> No matter how you count the
 JK> votes, Ward lost.

Hm .. strange approach. If it doesn't matter, then what for was all
that circus with the voting ? I thought it was to make a feeling of
legitimity ..

 JK> Once again, because YOU didn't get your way, you are trying to invent
 JK> a reason to make the vote invalid.

 JK> And it shows.  And it doesn't work.

In case it doesn't work what we are talking about ?

 >> P4 clearly states who can be regarded as a valid sysoip, this
 >> includes ZCs.

 JK> As I said, it wouldn't make a difference, Alex.  He still was voted
 JK> O-U-T. Ward was voted out by valid ZCs no matter how you count it.

You know, when a false start occured, the whole race should be
restarted.

 >> So he stuffed his nodelist entry ? (no ip connectivity, but only
 >> phone number, which caused us an extra expences when trying to call
 >> there).

 JK> You should have routed your message to him, you KNEW his system was
 JK> having problems.

Where could I know this from ? The only valid sourse of such information
is nodelist, and system in trouble should be marked 'hold' or 'down'.

Third-party persons are not a valid source, neither words in some
fields of a nodelist entry are (my mailer cannot read words, it can
only read flags and other _standard_ information).

And how can I be sure sending mail routed that it is actually him who
answers my mail ? It can be any 'man in the middle'.

 JK> I know you are an itelligent fellow.. if your ZC
 JK> says his system will be down on such and such a day, or week, or
 JK> month,  do you still attempt to dial him directly ?? I don't think so
 JK> :)

Yep, I can be cooperative, but I have not be. When I see 'dirty trics'
I don't have a smallest wish to be cooperative, I become very formal.

 >> Why should I we pay for this expencive international call when we
 >> could not send a mail ? Don't you think this is annoying behaviour
 >> of him ?

 JK> No, actually I think it is annoying behaviour on YOUR part :)  You
 JK> knew his system was having problems and still you attempted to dial
 JK> him direct.

your interpretation of P4 is very unusual. I would never think that
I could be annoying making direct call to a nodelisted system which
is not marked as 'hold' or 'down'. And well, it's me who could know
his system doesn't answer, but what about all the other nodelisted
sysops ?

===
2.1.8  Exclusivity of Zone Mail Hour

Zone Mail Hour is the heart of FidoNet, as this is when network mail is
passed between systems.  Any system which wishes to be a part of FidoNet must
be able to receive mail during this time using the protocol defined in the
current FidoNet Technical Standards Committee publication (FTS-0001 at this
writing).  It is permissible to have greater capability (for example, to
support additional protocols or extended mail hours), but the minimum
requirement is FTS-0001 capability during this one hour of the day.

This time is exclusively reserved for netmail.  Many phone systems charge on
a per-call basis, regardless of whether a connect, no connect, or busy signal
is encountered.  For this reason, any activity other than normal network mail
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
processing that ties up a system during ZMH is considered annoying behavior.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
===

Something wrong with my English ? You have your own interpretation of
these P4 lines ?

Bye, Sinc, Alex

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.3