I would like the FTSC to discuss some standard dealing with zone-independent node-numbers and other special technical entries in the nodelist.

For years for example when the FTSC-administrator was based in zone-2, he/she had the number "20", i.e. 2:2/20. This was never agreed upon throughout the different zones, but I think it would make sense in that spirit, if the next FTSC-administrator would be from another zone, he/she also would carry the same
z:z/20 AKA.

Expanding from there, we have to deal with the nodenumber of the Fidonews editor which was determined by the powers-that-be when they drafted P4 in their
infinite wisdom, decided it should be 1:1/1 never thinking a Fidonews-editor could be from a different zone.

***************************************************************************** 1.3 Definitions

1.3.1 FidoNews

Contributions are submitted to node 1:1/1; a file describing the format to be used is available from 1:1/1 and many other systems. *****************************************************************************

In the meantime there are several examples.

I think the FTSC could recommend that the Fidonews-editor is always z:z/z.

Even more expanding ... there are the numbers which have been used, without agreement, for

z:z/1000 IC
z:z/1001 Echolist coordinator
z:z/1002 fidonet.org administrator
z:z/1003 Zone pointlistkeeper

Where appropriate, it can be mentioned only one of these can be had in the entire world nodelist.

Maybe the FTSC could also bring some uniformity in the /99 /999 /9999 new node application forest.

There probably other suggestions possible in this area.

Ideas welcome.

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99 SR33
* Origin: A man's most proud moment is when he takes a shit (2:292/854)

On 11-13-18 13:23, Ward Dossche <=-
spoke to All about Ideas for a new standard <=-

Expanding from there, we have to deal with the nodenumber
of the Fidonews editor which was determined by the powers-
that-be when they drafted P4 in their infinite wisdom,
decided it should be 1:1/1 never thinking a Fidonews-editor
could be from a different zone.

As you recall, that was a reason for the previous attempt to amend P4.
Even such a simple change could not muster a passing vote. It is just something that has to be lived with, and ignored in practice.

Dale Shipp
fido_261_1466 (at) verizon (dot) net
(1:261/1466)


... Shipwrecked on Hesperus in Columbia, Maryland. 00:41:53, 14 Nov 2018
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

--- Maximus/NT 3.01
* Origin: Owl's Anchor (1:261/1466)

On 2018 Nov 14 00:39:04, you wrote to Ward Dossche:

Expanding from there, we have to deal with the nodenumber of the
Fidonews editor which was determined by the powers- that-be when they
drafted P4 in their infinite wisdom, decided it should be 1:1/1 never
thinking a Fidonews-editor could be from a different zone.

As you recall, that was a reason for the previous attempt to amend P4.

ummm... that was _one_ of the reasons for the previous attempt to change P4... there were two that got shoved together at that time... i tried to take steps to present both as individual changes as well as presenting both as one set of changes as per P4's change prodecures... we won't mention the problem of old software not being able to properly handle messages longer than their artifically restrictive buffers...

Even such a simple change could not muster a passing vote. It is just something that has to be lived with, and ignored in practice.

one step and one thing at the time...

)\/(ark

Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
... Cats' favorite game: Hah! Made you look!
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

On 11-14-18 08:39, Mark Lewis <=-
spoke to Dale Shipp about Ideas for a new stan <=-

As you recall, that was a reason for the previous attempt to amend P4.

ummm... that was _one_ of the reasons for the previous attempt to
change P4... there were two that got shoved together at that

To be fair -- it was the only reason for the first proposal made by the outgoing editor of fidonews. That proposal got no support and very
little publicity. Then we started a second proposal that included the amendment for fidonews editor plus attempting to add procedures that
would have allowed for an easier path to future revisions of policy.
That second proposal got much more traction and discussion. However,
when put for a vote before the then sitting RCs not even a quorum of the
RCs bothered to respond. Of those who did respond, the vote had more
yeas than nays -- but that did not matter and the proposal died.

Dale Shipp
fido_261_1466 (at) verizon (dot) net
(1:261/1466)


... Shipwrecked on Hesperus in Columbia, Maryland. 01:02:45, 15 Nov 2018
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

--- Maximus/NT 3.01
* Origin: Owl's Anchor (1:261/1466)

To be fair -- it was the only reason for the first proposal made by the outgoing editor of fidonews. That proposal got no support and very
little publicity. Then we started a second proposal that included the amendment for fidonews editor plus attempting to add procedures that
would have allowed for an easier path to future revisions of policy.
That second proposal got much more traction and discussion. However,
when put for a vote before the then sitting RCs not even a quorum of the
RCs bothered to respond. Of those who did respond, the vote had more
yeas than nays -- but that did not matter and the proposal died.

I knew there was an attempt to change policy that failed but I didn't know the reason why. That's really sad to learn that the RCs of Fidonet either didn't care or were to busy with other things.. :(

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-3
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757.1)

On 2018 Nov 15 03:50:24, you wrote to Dale Shipp:

I knew there was an attempt to change policy that failed but I didn't
know the reason why. That's really sad to learn that the RCs of
Fidonet either didn't care or were to busy with other things.. :(

it wasn't so much that they didn't care or were too* busy with other things... some got confused about which parts went with which documents... remember, some

tossers sort messages by subject line and that easily leads to sorting posts out of order... even when one takes specific steps to try to work around such limitations when posting a batch of related messages... there was also (reportedly) coercion involved with some RCs being told (aka ordered) to participate or be replaced... the biggest thing that aided in the confusion was

that the document had to be posted in parts... ideally RCs would have saved those parts and reassembled them into a single document so it could be read properly as dictated by policy... that can be hard to do with some older software...

)\/(ark

Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
... Okra is the zucchini of the South.
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)

there was also (reportedly) coercion involved with some RCs being told (aka ordered) to participate or be replaced...

I find that strange. The RCs are the ones who did / will do this (or not).

It's not a simple task so I understand their trepidation.. :)

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-3
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757.1)

On 2018 Nov 17 14:06:26, you wrote to me:

there was also (reportedly) coercion involved with some RCs being told
(aka ordered) to participate or be replaced...

I find that strange. The RCs are the ones who did / will do this (or not).

the RCs had to be gathered/notified about the process... apparently some do not

read the areas where the announcements were placed...

It's not a simple task so I understand their trepidation.. :)

it is more simple than one might think... read the document as a whole and decide... this is why each change is presented as a complete document...

)\/(ark

Always Mount a Scratch Monkey
Do you manage your own servers? If you are not running an IDS/IPS yer doin' it wrong...
... Where is the non-smoking lifeboat?
---
* Origin: (1:3634/12.73)