On 15 Mar 2019 at 05:49a, Nick Andre pondered and said...
 
 NA> You are the ZC of a very popular network and everyone likes you, but
 NA> being ZC of Fidonet is a whole different ballgame of scrutiny,
 NA> micromanagement and inherent problems caused by years of bad decisions,
 NA> Napoleon individuals, totalitarian "star" systems, censorship, mind
 NA> games, fan clubs, bullshit.

There's a lot of history, yep, totally get that Nick and don't disagree with
you. And thanks for the kind words, can't say *everyone* likes me, but hey
that's nice of you to suggest it. I think you too are doing your best to give
to a role that by your own admission above is not easy given the legacy
stuff. So kudos to you too good sir. :)

 NA> Not one utopian proposal I've seen can solve the problem of Fidonet
 NA> being comprised mostly of keyboard-warriors ready to pounce and troll
 NA> *anything*. What good is a 21st-century network going to be if it is
 NA> comprised of test messages, America Sucks / Europe Sucks, moderator
 NA> rules for dead echoes and systems that cannot and will not be upgraded.

It's not a bright picture for the network that you paint. I appreciate the
point of view is born out of a lot of time and experience spent in Fidonet
and being part of the stuff you mention.

Nothing will change, nor happen for good/bad if people opt to remain inert
due to their beliefs that change will either be futile or engender potential
conflict between those looking for change and those not etc.

My reading of the thread suggests a split sentiment between posters over this
very issue. Is the network able to evolve/progress? Sure it is. Do those
involved in it want to do that? Perhaps not, perhaps yes. 

It seems that the more history something has the more there is to have to
hang on to and advocate needs protecting or retaining because as time goes by
it becomes more familiar, more comfortable. I get that. 

But on the other side of the coin, the longer people hang on to systems,
tools, methodologies of doing things etc.  the less likely and/or able they
are to perhaps look for different ways to improve or enhance process etc.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.. thinking. It's probably not broken per say.
The packets shift around, the fundamental workings of the system work. But
for those who are asking a wider question about could some parts or all of it
be looked at and/or approached differently in 2019? Their thinking is more
akin to 'how can we apply 2019 tools and current practices to Fidonet in
order to iterate it further? .. at least I think that might be the thinking?

Best, Paul

--- E:avon@bbs.nz ------ W:bbs.nz ---
--- K:keybase.io/avon --------------

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/03 (Windows/32)