Kurt Weiske : August Abolins wrote:

> The last time this was discussed, someone in Zone 2 complained that they
> had more nodes and that everyone would need to move to it, instead of them
> moving to Zone 1. And the fun continues...

What Z number gets to be used in the Z:net/node position doesn't have to
preclude starting the project.  But "1" would make most sense.

It is probably quite normal human behaviour to resist and complain at first
about *anything* in many circumstances in life.  And then, a while later it
doesn't matter anymore.


> 1234 is nice, and has the benefit of pissing everyone off equally as
> we'd all need to renumber our configs. Makes me wonder how many nodes would
fall
> off in a renumbering because they were running on autopilot or dead listings?

I guess at one point the old NL would have to be replaced with NL 2.0 within a
certain number of days after "release".  But until then, NL 2.0 can get started
in creation and viewed/monitored by anyone interested to use it.

I wonder if this topic might be best in another echo. Would the exisiting
FUTURE4FIDO work?

--- Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)