Hello Nick,

 HD>> Not necessarrily. I know Points in the past, and even today, who know
 NA> bette
 HD>> how FidoNet works in all its merits, than many SysOp's and even RC's
 NA> did/do
 HD>> So being NodeListed is not any garantee ;-(.

 NA> I'm well aware of points in Zone 2... let me re-phrase.

 NA> Its hard to take any criticism seriously when such person does not have a
 NA> node number or the now apparent mental capacity to obtain one?

The issue of having/not having a node number is not the issue.
The issue of having/not having the mental capacity to obtain a node
number is also not the issue.
The issue of being able/not being able to debate the issues, rather
than the person, most definitely does seem to be an issue.
So please, debate the issues, rather than the person.

 NA> If such person dislikes the apparent ZC1 Secret Society so much, why not
 NA> participate in elections and processes and do something about it?

It is not the person, but the issue(s).

From P4 -

2.2 How to obtain a node number

[..]

| You must indicate that you have read, and agree to abide by, this
| document and all the current policies of FidoNet.

You do understand the problem with this one line in P4?
It is a "loyalty oath" - meant to force any and all applicants
to do the bidding of the Z1C - whatever that happens to be.

P4 was written by the regional nodelist coordinators (apparently
all from Zone 1).  Yet, nobody was willing to sign their own
John Hancock on the document.  Imagine that.  All who wrote the
document were too chickenshit to sign their own names.

The signees of the Declaration of Independence were not chickenshit.
The signees of the US Constitution were not chickenshit.
But the persons who wrote FidoNet Policy 4 sure the hell were.

P4 was never passed and ratified by any zone, since the only "vote"
taken was system-wide with not all sysops even being aware of such a
vote taking place.  How embarrassing!  Not only were those who wrote
it too chickenshit to sign their own names onto it, they did not
have the balls to introduce it to a proper vote among sysops from
each zone!

To make matters worse, not all sysops were allowed to vote.
Only RC's and above.  The lower ranks did not count, and were
left out of the loop.  A one-time vote, by a limited number
of sysops, system-wide, without regard to zone.  Even tin-horn
dictators could have run a better election, making sure it
was at least valid.

No vote was taken in any individual zone.  No signatures by any
party.  Therefore not valid and enforceable.  Quite easily ignored.
Which is exactly what most sysops, especially those outside of
Zone 1, do.

A contract, to be valid and enforceable, must contain the signatures
of both parties.  Whoever heard of a contract not signed by anyone as
being valid?  Who would be stupid enough to even try to enforce it?

Where are the signatures of those who wrote P4?  Please.  Show me.
If you can.  Where are the signatures of those in Zone 1?   Please.
Show me.  If you can.  Since no vote by sysops in Zone 1 was taken,
there are no signatures by any sysops in that zone.  Ditto with all
other zones.  IOW, P4 is a total sham.

All documents, not only legally binding contracts, demand for an
individual's signature.  You have a will?  A will must be signed -
and dated = by the person who made it.  IOW, your signature is
required to sign the deal.

P4 is not legally binding because it does not have the signatures
of each party.  Please do correct me if I am wrong.

Zone 2 has taken a vote on P4, and it was rejected unanimously.
Not a single sysop in Zone 2 voted in favor.  This vote is the only
valid vote ever taken on P4.  With the blessing of the Z2C.  At a
EUROCON event.

No vote at all was taken in Zone 1.

How come sysops in all zones outside of Zone 1 are not obliged
to sign/recite the "loyalty oath" in P4?  Because P4 is not part
of their deal to become a sysop in FidoNet.

As Z1C, are you willing to renounce this "loyalty oath"?
Are you willing to admit P4 is not binding on any sysop in FidoNet?

The document (P4) is in plain site for all to read.

Debate the facts, rather than the person.  Learn the truth.
The version that makes the only kind of sense.

--Lee

-- 
I Take A Sheet In The Pool

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb