Hello Björn,

On Sat Dec 16 2017 06:31:54, Björn Felten wrote to Nick Andre:

 NA>> Let me ask the non-technical people here. You know who you are.
 NA>> Tell me why we even need an FTSC anymore?

 BF>    I don't regard myself as non-technical, but just the same I want to
 BF> answer your question.

 BF>    With the present mandate, the FTSC is totally obsolete.

 BF>    The way to go is of course to give the FTSC the mandate to decide,
 BF> not to just document. We could easily collect the hundreds of present
 BF> documents and turn them all into one standard document.

Wait what? Give the FTSC more power? No. Sorry.

 BF>    But our hands are obviously tied. Ergo, hobby programmers all
 BF> around the world can happily invent all kinds of non-FTN stuff, and
 BF> then send them in to the FTSC and get the shit documented, if only
 BF> they have a few nodes (common practice) that are using their crappy
 BF> software.

Most programmers of the hobby these days DON'T send their shit in to get
documented. Nobody cares about the FTSC, especially in othernets. Hell, in the
othernet I run as well as the official Mystic BBS software othernet, there are
3 or more *NEW* BBS softwares currently being developed! Do you ever wonder why
their technology hasn't been brought here?

Makes you wonder. People avoid Fidonet because of the enforcing of "rules" and
"standards". Some people just want to do whatever the hell they want, and make
it work. THEN, and only then, do they have to worry about backwards
compatibility with the shit that's out there from the last few decades.

Regards,
Nick

... "Не знаю. Я здесь только работаю."
--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20170303